Strategy Regaining Control of our Club

[El_Scorcho]

Today's Hinkley extension has laid bare that the board of the footy club aren't really in step with rank and file members on what it takes to make a football club successful. I don't believe for a second that Koch is trying to make us a poor club, I think he's absolutely trying his best, but I can't abide his care bear, low accountability philosophy and I think it hampers our ability to be successful and win a flag. I think he's done a decent job overall off-field, but onfield we've been really, really poor across his tenure.

As members of the Port Adelaide Football Club, it's my understanding that we are responsible for appointing 2 members, with the rest of the board appointed by the AFL.

IF the members had the power to appoint the entire board or the majority of it, and to oust Koch at an AGM, there would absolutely be a campaign against him and he'd likely have been removed by now, OR changed his approach to fit more in line with establish Port Adelaide philosophies regarding success.

Koch isn't answerable to anyone. The AFL don't care as long as we're solvent. The only way we can hold Koch accountable is by withholding memberships and attendance at games, and the second we start doing that, we get branded as traitors and accused of putting the future of the club in danger (as well as actually potentially putting the future of the club in danger). Koch's lack of accountability permeates through our club, and is THE primary reason we've failed to win a flag during his tenure.

I don't think the problem is just Koch, either. I think the system which doesn't hold the board accountable means that the board will never really hold anyone below them accountable. Not to the required level.

So I guess my question is, how do we get control of our club back? It doesn't seem like we really have an avenue to do so outside of a long campaign external to the club, which probably needs to be backed by a group of major Port Adelaide figures who would then place themselves at-odds with club leadership.

 

[RossFC]

As members of the Port Adelaide Football Club, it's my understanding that we are responsible for appointing 2 members, with the rest of the board appointed by the AFL.

Who are the 2? Wanganeen and?

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Who are the 2? Wanganeen and?

Trevor Thiele. Trevor in late 2011 replaced John Firth who was the Magpies President in 2009-10 and helped drive the One Club initiative. Trevor was on the Magpies board when the One Club stuff was happening.

John was elected in December 2010 along with Darryl Wakelin by the members under the old Constitution which had 4 member elected directors + 4 SANFL appointed, with the provision for the board to nominate 2 'experts' to the SANFL for their appointment. It had been 5+5 but was changed around 2008.

John resigned because Duncanson played some BS conflict of interest card on him when we were trying to find a pokies venue in the northern suburbs that Gordon Pickard was going to help finance. Xenophon's pokie coalition changes to pokie rules re only using coins, ended that option.

Trevor was unopposed in December 2013 so there was no election as no one nominated.

With the new 2013 Constitution, for some reason he got a 4 year term and ran in December 2017 / Jan 2018 as AGM date was changed from around 6-12th December period to 31st January to 15th February period. Fishing Rick stood against Trevor 3 years ago.

 

[TeeKray]

If it were up to the AFL, they'd hold every club's licence like they do our licence (see how they set up the SUNS and Giants franchises). More control, less chance of hostile board challenges. And if anything actually is going seriously wrong in their view, they can do the dirty work themselves. Zero chance of us ever seeing more member elected board members.

 

[raptalia]

About the only way we are going to regain control is to have a street rally and a speaker to stir the mob up so that we storm the citadel and occupy the Chairman's chair. Maybe we could make up some fake news and get the crowd angry? Make Port Great Again, hmmm has a nice ring to it.

 

[PA88]

Past players and major Port figureheads coming together is the only way I reckon. By design, members are toothless nowadays. I can't believe that the Port Adelaide that pushed against the odds to join the AFL has a community that is now so passive.

 

[VineValerian]

If it were up to the AFL, they'd hold every club's licence like they do our licence (see how they set up the SUNS and Giants franchises). More control, less chance of hostile board challenges. And if anything actually is going seriously wrong in their view, they can do the dirty work themselves. Zero chance of us ever seeing more member elected board members.

Sadly true.

 

[El_Scorcho]

If it were up to the AFL, they'd hold every club's licence like they do our licence (see how they set up the SUNS and Giants franchises). More control, less chance of hostile board challenges. And if anything actually is going seriously wrong in their view, they can do the dirty work themselves. Zero chance of us ever seeing more member elected board members.

I'd be content enough with AFL oversight, maybe even veto power for certain board members. But at least give us some control back.

I don't think i've ever felt less like the club is being run for the members than I did today waking up to see that Ken had been extended.

 

[Grave Danger]

About the only way we are going to regain control is to have a street rally and a speaker to stir the mob up so that we storm the citadel and occupy the Chairman's chair. Maybe we could make up some fake news and get the crowd angry? Make Port Great Again, hmmm has a nice ring to it.

 

[raptalia]

View attachment 1040042

You have excelled yourself GD. Do you think you could do a flag as well?

 

[Grave Danger]

You have excelled yourself GD. Do you think you could do a flag as well?

 

[Interstater]

Seeing Trumpism suggested as a solution to regaining ownership of our club nauseates me.

 

[bomberclifford]

 

[bomberclifford]

So I guess my question is, how do we get control of our club back?

Short answer: we don't.

It doesn't seem like we really have an avenue to do so outside of a long campaign external to the club, which probably needs to be backed by a group of major Port Adelaide figures who would then place themselves at-odds with club leadership.

Long answer: You've literally described the BBTB campaign. It is the best vehicle for drawing mass supporter backing for holding the club accountable because it was always about much more than the guernsey.

We need to keep the fight going and expand the scope of the campaign.

Bars = PAFC of Old
Bring Back The Bars = Bring Back The PAFC of Old.

The campaign is already aiming to hold the club accountable to our old standards.
Supporter unrest and angst got the co-captains decision reversed.
There is power in union and a common goal.

BBTB is the way to do it.

 

[1954]

Past players and major Port figureheads coming together is the only way I reckon. By design, members are toothless nowadays. I can't believe that the Port Adelaide that pushed against the odds to join the AFL has a community that is now so passive.

Agreed, particularly the passive bit, I suspect that even if a high powered mover and shaker nominated as a members' representative most would take the easy way out and vote for a `softer ' option.
Hence we get blokes like Wanganeen, great footballer and probably a great bloke as well, but he appears to be an absolute non event as a director.

 

[simba_]

Long answer: You've literally described the BBTB campaign.

but the BBTB campaign was hijacked and lead by PAFC internally. even that slipped out of supporter control and was modified to wearing them in Showdowns instead of all the time. regaining control would be about putting a truly independent person on the board at least (ideally both positions) who won't bow down to "collaborating" with the club on hard issues to get an AFL friendly result. those people would have to infest and influence the people around them to cleanse out the softness that has crept in.

 

[El_Scorcho]

Agreed, particularly the passive bit, I suspect that even if a high powered mover and shaker nominated as a members' representative most would take the easy way out and vote for a `softer ' option.
Hence we get blokes like Wanganeen, great footballer and probably a great bloke as well, but he appears to be an absolute non event as a director.

Actually we probably could work a bit harder at getting the right sort of representation with the board members we do control.

Wanganeen replacing Fiacchi is really a disaster for this sort of thing. Gav certainly has the best interests of the club at heart but he's not the hard nosed strong personality type that could and did push the case for his constituents like George was.

The issue is, we could have a brilliant person lined up who ticks all our boxes but if Koch wheels out a club great in opposition to them, policy positions go out the window and the masses vote for the familiar face.

I'm not having a crack at Thiele or Wanganeen, I just don't really know what they stand for at all. AGM elections don't appear to really be a big thing. Maybe it's time they were. I want to know what i'm voting for and ideally get more involved in the election and campaign process.

 

[El_Scorcho]

Short answer: we don't.




Long answer: You've literally described the BBTB campaign. It is the best vehicle for drawing mass supporter backing for holding the club accountable because it was always about much more than the guernsey.

We need to keep the fight going and expand the scope of the campaign.

Bars = PAFC of Old
Bring Back The Bars = Bring Back The PAFC of Old.

The campaign is already aiming to hold the club accountable to our old standards.
Supporter unrest and angst got the co-captains decision reversed.
There is power in union and a common goal.

BBTB is the way to do it.

I think you're right, and I know both you and Chiwigi have talked about a Supporters Trust type of body to actually organise the masses a bit and better get across what we want. Obviously having that sort of organisation will lead to a bit of control over the electable board positions anyway.

I have no idea how we push for something like that but i'm fully supportive of it. I just want to feel like the decision makers at the club have any interest whatsoever in what the rank and file are feeling, and it's been a long time since I felt like that. Last year was pretty good with Richo - who had actively engaged with supporters - being elevated to CEO, but that momentum has been cut off at the knees by the contract extension, completely out of line with where I felt we were finally heading in terms of accountability.

 

[PA88]

What does the first step look.like for expanding the scope of the BBTB campaign to bring awareness to members that this campaign is stretching to include winning more member elected board of directors?

 

[bomberclifford]

but the BBTB campaign was hijacked and lead by PAFC internally. even that slipped out of supporter control and was modified to wearing them in Showdowns instead of all the time.

The bold bit just isn't true. The second bit is what the club is pushing for publicly, not what BBTB is pushing for.

 

[PA88]

but the BBTB campaign was hijacked and lead by PAFC internally. even that slipped out of supporter control and was modified to wearing them in Showdowns instead of all the time. regaining control would be about putting a truly independent person on the board at least (ideally both positions) who won't bow down to "collaborating" with the club on hard issues to get an AFL friendly result. those people would have to infest and influence the people around them to cleanse out the softness that has crept in.

True but it did take the petition from 10k to over 30k.

It's why I think that a significant past players need to be the face of a campaign.

 

[Interstater]

So with a month left until trial games start, how is that BBTB meeting with the AFL coming along, or are they too busy now planning for 2021?

 

[simba_]

The bold bit just isn't true. The second bit is what the club is pushing for publicly, not what BBTB is pushing for.

i mean we abandoned our initial petition at 11k signatures and went with the official one, to me that is letting the club take over what was an external thing. and yes we do believe in a glass-half-full way that the club has intentions long term to wear it full-time but that remains to be seen.

 

[Enviable Tradition]

I think you're right, and I know both you and Chiwigi have talked about a Supporters Trust type of body to actually organise the masses a bit and better get across what we want. Obviously having that sort of organisation will lead to a bit of control over the electable board positions anyway.

I have no idea how we push for something like that but i'm fully supportive of it. I just want to feel like the decision makers at the club have any interest whatsoever in what the rank and file are feeling, and it's been a long time since I felt like that. Last year was pretty good with Richo - who had actively engaged with supporters - being elevated to CEO, but that momentum has been cut off at the knees by the contract extension, completely out of line with where I felt we were finally heading in terms of accountability.

Perhaps it could end up being an independent PAFC members association.

 

[Interstater]

Its funny how we fork out $10-15 million bucks a year to be members of this club but have no real say in it.

Its not funny.