News Dr Bridie O'Donnell elected to the board

[The Royal Sampler]

do we really want board members having a say in recruitment decisions, or who to keep on a list? I would have thought that one thing that we have learnt is that the board appoints the best CEO and footy manager to make those decisions.

There is no transparency as to what extent this has been the case. Did Ned Guy pay a king’s ransom for Beams off his own bat, or was there pressure from the board? The whole board, or just Ed? Same question regarding the Grundy extension...

While the new appointments appear to be predominantly business-minded people brought in to run the business and improve engagement and the external perception of the club, there is little to hang one’s hat on in terms of acumen in overseeing a football club specifically. However perhaps we never had that to begin with, and have really lost nothing?!

 

[domus]

"Who are you playing on the weekend, Bridie?" she was asked.

Response: "Women or men? The wheelchair team or the netball team? The AFLW is not currently being played yet she thinks we should care as much about a game against Darebin in the VFLW as much as we do the men's senior team and worries about the women feeling marginalized or less important. If we are going to be on about inclusivity and equal status to everyone at the club why is the only team she failed to mention the men's VFL team? Imagine how belittled and irrelevant they must feel in the eyes of this new board member. Surely people with intelligence would understand their place in the pecking order whether it be in a sports club or the workplace. I would be surprised to hear Lynchy was furious about his lack of exposure in the media and his financial remuneration in comparison to our other ruckman, Brodie Grundy.

The fact of the matter is most of the Collingwood supporters -male and female, young and old only care about the success of our male senior team. There is nothing wrong with this. It doesn't need fixing. We don't need to be re-educated to understand that our wheelchair team's success is every bit as important as our male football team's success. Yet this seems to be part of her agenda. In time , there may well be people who are more invested in the week to week trials and successes of the women's team and that will be great, but for her to suggest we should be equally invested in the netball and any other team the club decides to create in the coming years is nonsense. There has been a stand alone national netball competition which is well supported and popular. The fact that we entered a team in the top league in 2016 doesn't mean all Collingwood footy fans should be emotionally invested in their progress. Bridie thinks we should and her aim is to get us there.

I am so saddened by the direction our club is taking. Its south on the ladder and woke city straight ahead for the administration. I am yet to hear anyone say thank you to the men who play in the AFL or the men in charge of the AFL who have thrown their support and millions of dollars into getting a woman's league up and running. Can anyone point me to an official statement of gratitude from any female player or coach for the way in which the women's game is being held together and financed by the money the AFL has accrued due to the blood, sweat and tears of men who played the game for decades with almost no financial reward?

All I hear is veiled digs about it taking so long, demands for more games and more money for the female payers even though their competition is still being subsidized by the men and is yet to bring a cent into the AFL's coffers. Where is the humility? Where is the acknowledgement that the hard yards were done by thousands of men who worked in full time jobs, often physically back breaking and then played on the Saturday for a pittance in front of huge crowds? I saw a AFLW North Melbourne player complaining about the fact that the women in the AFLW have to balance their training and match day commitments with a job, In her case, a part-time three day a week job! She spoke as if she really believed the men have always been on the gravy train and this horrific expectation that she do some part time work as well as train and play was something inflicted upon the women's competition because ... well because they are women and men are misogynists.

The whole article was written in an angry tone, intent on showing just how misogynistic and unfair our game is-men getting paid big bucks while the women are on around between $14K to $26K supplementing their other work. Not bad money for a comp that was being played before non paying customers.

There are players in suburban comps training just as hard and often as the AFLW players and getting far less. If you love the game surely step one is to be overjoyed by the fact you are representing an AFL club and getting enormous exposure on television and in the media.

The article and her attitude showed a complete lack of knowledge about the history of our game and what the men who first played it did to make it the greatest game on earth. Some perspective and gratitude would not be out of place.

I loved the idea of a woman's competition. I am excited by the thought my granddaughters could play for Collingwood. But my enthusiasm has been dampened by the endless politicization of this new competition. The girls are clearly getting more skilled and athletic with each passing season and will naturally draw bigger crowds as the quality of their game improves and there would be natural evolution. The money they can make through sponsors and advertising along with the player payments would grow.

It seems no matter what male sporting competitions do the accusation of misogyny is never far from the lips of the woke brigade. Players and competitions have raised millions of dollars to help fight female specific diseases like breast cancer-even at suburban level yet this never seems to register with some people. Listening to Bridie made me feel she is another person recruited to make our club a progressive, social issue embracing institution rather than a football club with the primary aim of winning premierships and being the most successful, powerful football club in the country. I think Bridie would view that goal as a relic from our Neanderthal past and of little interest to our club as it moves forward.

If so, she is out of step with the vast majority of the Collingwood tribe she has so recently decided to join.

 

[Kappa]

Not a bizarre tangent at all. Just pointing out that rubbish gets posted on here, including by some who are now outraged by the tweets of our new board member. I’m not saying her tweets are ‘fine’. I’m pointing out what I see as hypocrisy.

How on earth is it hypocrisy? Do you think random people on Bigfooty should be held to the same standard as BOARD MEMBERS???

That's the same as saying "We'll it's hypocrisy for people to get outraged over Donald Trump when they said outrageous things too"... but he's the goddam President?

 

[Vicky Park]

How on earth is it hypocrisy? Do you think random people on Bigfooty should be held to the same standard as BOARD MEMBERS???

That's the same as saying "We'll it's hypocrisy for people to get outraged over Donald Trump when they said outrageous things too"... but he's the goddam President?

Seems to be a new dimension we’ve entered lately, where we are now holding Collingwood board members to a ‘standard’. I don’t recall this much analysis of the performance of board members during most of Edie’s rule.

Saying that, a new level of scrutiny is good, as long as it’s applied fairly. Korda rightfully is being scrutinised now, and he’s been on our board for 15? years.

Bridie joined the board yesterday. She made some tweets in the past which are being questioned. I’m prepared to give her some time before applying the blow torch.

 

[BringouttheGimp]

"Who are you playing on the weekend, Bridie?" she was asked.

Response: "Women or men? The wheelchair team or the netball team? The AFLW is not currently being played yet she thinks we should care as much about a game against Darebin in the VFLW as much as we do the men's senior team and worries about the women feeling marginalized or less important. If we are going to be on about inclusivity and equal status to everyone at the club why is the only team she failed to mention the men's VFL team? Imagine how belittled and irrelevant they must feel in the eyes of this new board member. Surely people with intelligence would understand their place in the pecking order whether it be in a sports club or the workplace. I would be surprised to hear Lynchy was furious about his lack of exposure in the media and his financial remuneration in comparison to our other ruckman, Brodie Grundy?

The fact of the matter is most of the Collingwood supporters -male and female, young and old only care about the success of our male senior team. There is nothing wrong with this. It doesn't need fixing. We don't need to be re-educated to understand that our wheelchair team's success is every bit as important as our male football team's success. Yet this seems to be part of her agenda. In time , there may well be people who are more invested in the week to week trials and successes of the women's team and that will be great, but for her to suggest we should be equally invested in the netball and any other team the club decides to create in the coming years is nonsense. There has been a stand alone national netball competition which is well supported and popular. The fact that we entered a team in the top league in 2016 doesn't mean all Collingwood footy fans should be emotionally invested in their progress. Bridie thinks we should and her aim is to get us there.

I am so saddened by the direction our club is taking. Its south on the ladder and woke city straight ahead for the administration. I am yet to hear anyone say thank you to the men who play in the AFL or the men in charge of the AFL who have thrown their support and millions of dollars into getting a woman's league up and running. Can anyone point me to an official statement of gratitude from any female player or coach for the way in which the women's game is being held together and financed by the money the AFL has accrued due to the blood, sweat and tears of men who played the game for decades with almost no financial reward?

All I hear is veiled digs about it taking so long, demands for more games and more money for the female payers even though their competition is still being subsidized by the men and is yet to bring a cent into the AFL's coffers. Where is the humility? Where is the acknowledgement that the hard yards were done by thousands of men who worked in full time jobs, often physically back breaking and then played on the Saturday for a pittance in front of huge crowds? I saw a AFLW North Melbourne player complaining about the fact that the women in the AFLW have to balance their training and match day commitments with a job, In her case, a part-time three day a week job! She spoke as if she really believed the men have always ben on the gravy train and this horrific expectation that she do some part time work as well as train and play was something inflicted upon the women's competition because ... well because they are women and men are misogynists.

The whole article was written in an angry tone, intent on showing just how misogynistic and unfair our game is-men getting paid big bucks while the women are on around between $14K to $26K supplementing their other work. Not bad money for a comp that was being played before non paying customers.

There are players in suburban comps training just as hard and often as the AFLW players and getting far less. If you love the game surely step one is to be overjoyed by the fact you are representing an AFL club and getting enormous exposure on television and in the media.

The article and her attitude showed a complete lack of knowledge about the history of our game and what the men who first played it did to make it the greatest game on earth. Some perspective and gratitude would not be out of place.

I loved the idea of a woman's competition. I am excited by the thought my granddaughters could play for Collingwood. But my enthusiasm has been dampened by the endless politicization of this new competition. The girls are clearly getting more skilled and athletic with each passing season and will naturally draw bigger crowds as the quality of their game improves and there would be natural evolution. The money they can make through sponsors and advertising along with the player payments would grow.

It seems no matter what male sporting competitions do the accusation of misogyny is never far from the lips of the woke brigade. Players and competitions have raised millions of dollars to help fight female specific diseases like breast cancer-even at suburban level yet this never seems to register with some people. Listening to Bridie made me feel she is another person recruited to make our club a progressive, social issue embracing institution rather than a football club with the primary aim of winning premierships and being the most successful, powerful football club in the country. I think Bridie would view that goal as a relic from our Neanderthal past and of little interest to our club as it moves forward.

If so, she is out of step with the vast majority of the Collingwood tribe she has so recently decided to join.

I just say it.. in 50 shades of sexy.. maaaan.

 

[sr36]

1: She has been a Collingwood hater for all her adult life and now wants to sacrifice her time in an unpaid position to be a custodian of our club, why?

2: Do you think it's appropriate for the board to come out and say that Gender was a key criteria in selecting a new board member? Do you think it's fair to the majority of the applicants who were male, for them to get overlooked because of their gender?

3: Do you think it's strange she randomly becomes a Collingwood member after hating Collingwood right before she gets elected to the board? Just a PURE COINCIDENCE I guess... That an anti-Collingwood person would just one day wake up and decide to abandon their own club to support Collingwood, then join up as a member then get elected to the board almost instantly... One big coincidence right?

Oh.. but turns out she's friends with Christine Holgate... hmmm... Totally nothing odd going on there

1. No idea
2. Yes I think it's appropriate. All companies look for a balance in such things, so that companies can more fairly represent social demographics. Is it fair to individual male applicants - no, but there is no such thing as fair selection criteria as they contain biases that are unfair to some applicants.
3. No I don't think it's strange and I don't think being a Collingwood supporter is any benefit in terms of the role of a board of directors.

A few questions for you:
1. What is the role of a board member?
2. How do you think being a Collingwood supporter will help with this role?
3. What makes you think that Bridie wasn't the best person for the job, regardless of any gender bias in the selection criteria.

By all means argue against preferential hiring practices, as they're always going to be controversial, but stop railing against an appointed individual when you know nothing about her or other applications. She's well credentialed and there's no reason for us to think that she is going to contribute to us going down an inappropriate path.

 

[neilk]

Whilst that is true, it is less of a team sport for the protected rider, and more of a team sport for everyone else!

I see it more like the FF kicking a goal off the good teamwork further own the field.

 

[JB1975]

Seems to be a new dimension we’ve entered lately, where we are now holding Collingwood board members to a ‘standard’. I don’t recall this much analysis of the performance of board members during most of Edie’s rule.

Saying that, a new level of scrutiny is good, as long as it’s applied fairly. Korda rightfully is being scrutinised now, and he’s been on our board for 15? years.

Bridie joined the board yesterday. She made some tweets in the past which are being questioned. I’m prepared to give her some time before applying the blow torch.

Hard not to be struck by the sudden frenzy of attention. Quite curious.

 

[Kappa]

Seems to be a new dimension we’ve entered lately, where we are now holding Collingwood board members to a ‘standard’. I don’t recall this much analysis of the performance of board members during most of Edie’s rule.

Saying that, a new level of scrutiny is good, as long as it’s applied fairly. Korda rightfully is being scrutinised now, and he’s been on our board for 15? years.

Bridie joined the board yesterday. She made some tweets in the past which are being questioned. I’m prepared to give her some time before applying the blow torch.

You love to dodge and deflect every single question, and I think we both know why.

I think not being ANTI-COLLINGWOOD is a pretty ******* fair "standard" for a Collingwood board member to meet, don't you?

You don't think it's one big cooincidence she decided to abandon the club she's supporter her whole life, randomly wake up 1 morning and become a Collingwood member then get elected to the board? She's friends with Christine Holgate too, but I'm sure it's all one big 1 in 10 billion chance coincidence..

Do you also think it's fair for the board to mandate that a board position should be given to a certain gender?

 

[Kappa]

Hard not to be struck by the sudden frenzy of attention. Quite curious.

Yes, a board member who openly hated Collingwood joins our board in an unpaid position and it gains attention, truly ******* bizarre.

 

[Markfs]

There is no transparency as to what extent this has been the case. Did Ned Guy pay a king’s ransom for Beams off his own bat, or was there pressure from the board? The whole board, or just Ed? Same question regarding the Grundy extension...

While the new appointments appear to be predominantly business-minded people brought in to run the business and improve engagement and the external perception of the club, there is little to hang one’s hat on in terms of acumen in overseeing a football club specifically. However perhaps we never had that to begin with, and have really lost nothing?!

well you can only put partial belief in the rumours. If Ned took the decision about beams with consultation from the coaches and the footy manager, then he should wear the questionable decision. I suppose my point is that people are indicating that Korda an/or the board should be actively involved in determining the coach, or even naming the coach.

It seems that paul licuria is taking more of a role in footy oversight..... which is probably a good compromise solution to a situation where the board is intervening.

 

[Vicky Park]

You love to dodge and deflect every single question, and I think we both know why.

If you know why, then you‘ve got your answer.

 

[MyManLynch]

Warning to everyone...do not join Collingwood Board, Football Department, Administration or playing group.
The welcoming committee are waiting...

 

[The Royal Sampler]

I see it more like the FF kicking a goal off the good teamwork further own the field.

Fair enough... but I don’t think many FFs in this day and age would get away with treating the mids like team leaders treat their domestiques. I mean, even the title “domestique” is a dead giveaway.

 

[Markfs]

Yes Marky Mark. But that relates to casual vacancies in the Honorary Officers - defined in Clause 31. That's filling the Prez and 2 VPs from the Board.

Keep trying, you will get me eventually. Just not this time.

well sidey sidey.... look at 32(b) as a standalone..... 32(a) is independent of it and relates only to honorary officers.

"The Board shall have the power at any time to fill a casual vacancy occurring within the Board. Any person so appointed must satisfy the qualification for Board membership as required by Clause 30 and shall hold office only during such period as the Board may direct provided that such period shall in no event exceed the remainder of the term of his predecessor.

 

[JB1975]

Yes, a board member who openly hated Collingwood joins our board in an unpaid position and it gains attention, truly ******* bizarre.

I didn't say 'bizarre'. Bizarre would have an element of wonder to it, some mysterious charm, and the criticisms of O'Donnell in this thread have none of that.

But you've called me out, so let's talk about the anti-Collingwood thing...or the ANTI-COLLINGWOOD thing as you would have it.

In short, you've overplayed the significance of it. Her lack of support for Collingwood has been given a Kappa-sized dose (overdose) of melodrama, so that anyone reading your posts might think that the woman had spent the previous 20 years of her life plotting the downfall of the club.

She made a few social media posts against Collingwood, because she didn't support the team, but there is nothing really noteworthy about her comments in those posts. The anti-Collingwood sentiment was of a banal and playful nature, not hateful at all, the sort of banter which almost comes with its own script and which she --as an interstater making her way in Melbourne-- dutifully read.

Again, there was no genuine hostility in her comments. It is warped to think otherwise.

Continue without me.

 

[sideswipe]

well sidey sidey.... look at 32(b) as a standalone..... 32(a) is independent of it and relates only to honorary officers.

"The Board shall have the power at any time to fill a casual vacancy occurring within the Board. Any person so appointed must satisfy the qualification for Board membership as required by Clause 30 and shall hold office only during such period as the Board may direct provided that such period shall in no event exceed the remainder of the term of his predecessor.

Meh, 32(b) just goes back to clause 30. 30(b) is the important sub-clause and I read it as allowing for an appointment now, then a ratification at the next AGM. But it is poorly worded. That'a what you get by allowing Eugene Arocca to use Maurice Blackburn to draft a commercial document instead of chase ambulances.

 

[mikedaicos35]

obviously the board of Qantas have never flown another airline. They ONLY choose big Qantas fans because thats what truly matters.

 

[sr36]

Warning to everyone...do not join Collingwood Board, Football Department, Administration or playing group.
The welcoming committee are waiting...
View attachment 1131619

I hate scum sucking unpaid volunteers.

 

[Markfs]

Meh, 32(b) just goes back to clause 30. 30(b) is the important sub-clause and I read it as allowing for an appointment now, then a ratification at the next AGM. But it is poorly worded. That'a what you get by allowing Eugene Arocca to use Maurice Blackburn to draft a commercial document instead of chase ambulances.

maybe you got your law qualification a long time ago and you've got rusty on the process of reading legislation and similar documents.....but

(b) The Club in general meeting may pass an ordinary resolution waiving compliance with paragraph (a) in respect of a particular member, and if such a resolution is passed, the member shall be qualified for election as a member of the Board.

The club wasnt in general meeting at the May board meeting. The waiving of compliance can only happen at a general meeting.

 

[sr36]

obviously the board of Qantas have never flown another airline. They ONLY choose big Qantas fans because thats what truly matters.

Their ceo who sits on the board used to barrack for Ansett. It's a disgrace. No wonder their international flights are grounded.

 

[sideswipe]

maybe you got your law qualification a long time ago and you've got rusty on the process of reading legislation and similar documents.....but

(b) The Club in general meeting may pass an ordinary resolution waiving compliance with paragraph (a) in respect of a particular member, and if such a resolution is passed, the member shall be qualified for election as a member of the Board.

The club wasnt in general meeting at the May board meeting. The waiving of compliance can only happen at a general meeting.

My reading is that clause allows that the waiver can be retrospective - appointment now, ratification next GM. But like I say, it is poorly worded. That there is even the possibility of this being allowed by the clause and the clause not actually stating it with certainty shows the shittyness of the drafting.

 

[Kappa]

obviously the board of Qantas have never flown another airline. They ONLY choose big Qantas fans because thats what truly matters.

Yes because that's an accurate analogy. This is actually primary school level logic

 

[Albert Parker]

As someone who is pretty familiar with Bridie, I think she is a fantastic appointment to the Board. Intimidatingly bright (one of the sharpest people I have met), knowledge of a broad range of sports given her Gov't role, is professionally well connected, high personal integrity, elite professional sporting background as an athlete incl world record performances, multiple titles. Terrific media performer, author and presenter as well. Has had more than a passing interest in Collingwood FC dating back prior to officially joining as a member too, despite wearing the Dogs jumper on her Insta post. Adds obvious gender diversity to the board as well. Lots of ticks from me as a life long Collingwood supporter and long time member.

 

[Markfs]

My reading is that clause allows that the waiver can be retrospective - appointment now, ratification next GM. But like I say, it is poorly worded. That there is even the possibility of this being allowed by the clause and the clause not actually stating it with certainty shows the shittyness of the drafting.

well i'm sure you're more acquainted than me about how smart lawyers can manipulate simple wording for their own ends. It should be remembered that clause 30(a) states that a person doesnt even qualify for the election unless they are a board member.

the simple interpretation of these two clauses is that no one should serve on the board unless they have been a member for two years or have got the waiver...... dr bridie has neither.

considering the board received 80 applicants and there were probably 20 or 30 women among them...and that at least some of them might have been collingwood members for more than 2 years... you would think it's rather "interesting" that a board would choose to place a person who might not be technically able to fill the position...to take that risk of instability.....

you might have to ask your mate alex to come back for a few more months