Strategy A vote of no confidence

Remove this Banner Ad

RussellEbertHandball said:
George Fiacchi has started


Port Adelaide hall of famer George Fiacchi says Power should have waited on Hinkley contract​

One of Port Adelaide’s most famous names has questioned the club’s decision to re-sign Ken Hinkley before the finals series, after their dismal semi-final loss to the Giants at home.

Port Adelaide hall of famer George Fiacchi says the club should have waited until season’s end before re-signing coach Ken Hinkley, even if it ultimately decided to extend his contract.
The seven-time premiership player doesn‘t believe Power fans calling for Hinkley’s position to be re-examined are in the majority but urged the club to “stop promising the world and start delivering”.
The Power extended Hinkley‘s contract in August off the back of a stunning second half of the season where his side went on a 13 game winning streak but Fiacchi, who was also a Port Adelaide board member, it was a “strange decision” given the Power’s recent finals performances.
Pressure is set to mount once more at Alberton with Hinkley forced to defend his side‘s finals record with the loss to GWS on Saturday night their fifth sudden-death final defeat under Hinkley since 2014........
Click to expand...

Jojay said:
So George has now publicly said it. Timmy has said it live on Radio. Tredders obviously.

Common denominator: all winners.
Click to expand...
Not that it will achieve anything, but we have to build on this and pile on the pressure.
People must lose their jobs over this with changes at all levels from the board right across the football department.
 
RussellEbertHandball said:
George Fiacchi has started


Port Adelaide hall of famer George Fiacchi says Power should have waited on Hinkley contract​

One of Port Adelaide’s most famous names has questioned the club’s decision to re-sign Ken Hinkley before the finals series, after their dismal semi-final loss to the Giants at home.

Port Adelaide hall of famer George Fiacchi says the club should have waited until season’s end before re-signing coach Ken Hinkley, even if it ultimately decided to extend his contract.
The seven-time premiership player doesn‘t believe Power fans calling for Hinkley’s position to be re-examined are in the majority but urged the club to “stop promising the world and start delivering”.
The Power extended Hinkley‘s contract in August off the back of a stunning second half of the season where his side went on a 13 game winning streak but Fiacchi, who was also a Port Adelaide board member, it was a “strange decision” given the Power’s recent finals performances.
Pressure is set to mount once more at Alberton with Hinkley forced to defend his side‘s finals record with the loss to GWS on Saturday night their fifth sudden-death final defeat under Hinkley since 2014........
Click to expand...
I know George chucked it in for a bit of diplomacy, but how can supporters who want Hinkley out are not the majority? If you believe Hinkley should remain as coach you are effectively a brainless dIckhead. Are the majority brainless d1ckheads? Maybe.
 
Papa G said:
I know George chucked it in for a bit of diplomacy, but how can supporters who want Hinkley out are not the majority? If you believe Hinkley should remain as coach you are effectively a brainless dIckhead. Are the majority brainless d1ckheads? Maybe.
Click to expand...
If you read a lot of Facebook posts, yes, the majority are brain dead dickheads.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

manureid said:
If you read a lot of Facebook posts, yes, the majority are brain dead dickheads.
Click to expand...
I follow 1 Port Adelaide centric page on FB when I opened FB about 30 mins ago there was a happy clapper drinking the kool aid post at the top of my news feed. There was a comment calling her out for the happy clapping BS and he got lambasted by some others. FMD!!
 
RussellEbertHandball said:
George Fiacchi has started


Port Adelaide hall of famer George Fiacchi says Power should have waited on Hinkley contract​

One of Port Adelaide’s most famous names has questioned the club’s decision to re-sign Ken Hinkley before the finals series, after their dismal semi-final loss to the Giants at home.

Port Adelaide hall of famer George Fiacchi says the club should have waited until season’s end before re-signing coach Ken Hinkley, even if it ultimately decided to extend his contract.
The seven-time premiership player doesn‘t believe Power fans calling for Hinkley’s position to be re-examined are in the majority but urged the club to “stop promising the world and start delivering”.
The Power extended Hinkley‘s contract in August off the back of a stunning second half of the season where his side went on a 13 game winning streak but Fiacchi, who was also a Port Adelaide board member, it was a “strange decision” given the Power’s recent finals performances.
Pressure is set to mount once more at Alberton with Hinkley forced to defend his side‘s finals record with the loss to GWS on Saturday night their fifth sudden-death final defeat under Hinkley since 2014........
Click to expand...
Now we know why Koch white anted him off the board

On SM-G975F using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
manureid said:
If you read a lot of Facebook posts, yes, the majority are brain dead dickheads.
Click to expand...
Are there all that many people that are specifically pro-Hinkley, as opposed to "you gotta support da team no matter what" happy clappers though? If we sacked him, they'd move onto supporting whoever else we put in charge. It's another reason why it's bafflingly short sighted to stick with him.
 
Cam1870 said:
If anyone understands whatever mechanisms may be in place to do something about it this (other than not buying a membership) I'd love to hear about it
Click to expand...

There is no formal mechanism.

REH has definitely posted before about how the AFL controls our board appointments, and the club's constitution is publicly available and pretty clear on this. Even our "member elected" board members are really only "member nominated". Winning the member vote nominates the candidate to the AFL for approval (I believe the league is yet to block anyone who has won a vote, but they have the power to do so).

REH (or perhaps someone else, apologies) has spoken to our chairman about Adelaide's constitution setting out a date after which they will revert to member control. Our constitution has no such provision. When asked, our chairman was supposedly not aware of this provision in Adelaide's constitution. It's not clear if he was genuinely unaware of it, or if the slimy prick just has no interest in amending our constitution similarly and said whatever he thought would get the questioner to go away.

Ramping up public pressure may be an effective informal mechanism, but it's possible that those of us who want change really have been reduced to a vocal minority. We may not be able to make enough noise.

It's even possible that voting with our feet and wallets would be counter productive. If Port Adelaide is financially weak or vulnerable, is the AFL likely to relinquish control?

It's absolutely f***ing grim.

The best path forward might be an insurgent public pressure campaign about returning member control. Force it onto our board's agenda, and go from there. That could take a decade.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

The seven-time premiership player doesn‘t believe Power fans calling for Hinkley’s position to be re-examined are in the majority but urged the club to “stop promising the world and start delivering”.

The first bit is probably not George's words.
 
agmsy said:
There is no formal mechanism.

REH has definitely posted before about how the AFL controls our board appointments, and the club's constitution is publicly available and pretty clear on this. Even our "member elected" board members are really only "member nominated". Winning the member vote nominates the candidate to the AFL for approval (I believe the league is yet to block anyone who has won a vote, but they have the power to do so).

REH (or perhaps someone else, apologies) has spoken to our chairman about Adelaide's constitution setting out a date after which they will revert to member control. Our constitution has no such provision. When asked, our chairman was supposedly not aware of this provision in Adelaide's constitution. It's not clear if he was genuinely unaware of it, or if the slimy prick just has no interest in amending our constitution similarly and said whatever he thought would get the questioner to go away.

Ramping up public pressure may be an effective informal mechanism, but it's possible that those of us who want change really have been reduced to a vocal minority. We may not be able to make enough noise.

It's even possible that voting with our feet and wallets would be counter productive. If Port Adelaide is financially weak or vulnerable, is the AFL likely to relinquish control?

It's absolutely f***ing grim.

The best path forward might be an insurgent public pressure campaign about returning member control. Force it onto our board's agenda, and go from there. That could take a decade.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the post. If it takes a decade so be it. I'll be a port supporter long after these clowns have extracted the most they can from the club and left.
 
agmsy said:
There is no formal mechanism.

REH has definitely posted before about how the AFL controls our board appointments, and the club's constitution is publicly available and pretty clear on this. Even our "member elected" board members are really only "member nominated". Winning the member vote nominates the candidate to the AFL for approval (I believe the league is yet to block anyone who has won a vote, but they have the power to do so).

REH (or perhaps someone else, apologies) has spoken to our chairman about Adelaide's constitution setting out a date after which they will revert to member control. Our constitution has no such provision. When asked, our chairman was supposedly not aware of this provision in Adelaide's constitution. It's not clear if he was genuinely unaware of it, or if the slimy prick just has no interest in amending our constitution similarly and said whatever he thought would get the questioner to go away.

Ramping up public pressure may be an effective informal mechanism, but it's possible that those of us who want change really have been reduced to a vocal minority. We may not be able to make enough noise.

It's even possible that voting with our feet and wallets would be counter productive. If Port Adelaide is financially weak or vulnerable, is the AFL likely to relinquish control?

It's absolutely f***ing grim.

The best path forward might be an insurgent public pressure campaign about returning member control. Force it onto our board's agenda, and go from there. That could take a decade.
Click to expand...

How does the matter of a 'member elect' board get forced onto the board's agenda? Is it raised at the next agm where it is likely fobbed if raised by one person only? Or is it best to have some campaign like the BBTB where it can collect the numbers and then it is forwarded to the board for it to be raised at an agm?
 
PA88 said:
How does the matter of a 'member elect' board get forced onto the board's agenda? Is it raised at the next agm where it is likely fobbed if raised by one person only? Or is it best to have some campaign like the BBTB where it can collect the numbers and then it is forwarded to the board for it to be raised at an agm?
Click to expand...

I don't know. What I do know is that the AFL can veto any amendment to our constitution proposed by the board, and they can remove any board member they want with minimal fuss.

If Tredrea or Fiacchi or a similarly amenable club figure is elected to the board, they would probably be a useful person within the club to lobby or to build a consensus behind.
 
manureid said:
If you read a lot of Facebook posts, yes, the majority are brain dead dickheads.
Click to expand...
Facebook posts are a self selecting group. A lot of people I know who want Hinkley gone tend to apply that logical, reasoned thought process to social media and generally avoid getting caught up in it. I've seen 100's of posts that I've felt like replying to, I reckon I've done it once and regretted it almost immediately. Like eating a large amount of junk food, the satisfaction is fleeting. If they had any semblance of logic or reason they wouldn't be posting that shite in the first place.

My only hope is the fickle dickheads that make up the 'football media's now find an easy target in the "Should Port have waited?" storyline and we become a meme. I've seen and heard from plenty of opposition supporters having a laugh who were the same ones saying "Yeah you know... What do you want? He's a good coach" a few weeks ago.
 
Long live PAFC said:
Some options:

1) Media
  • letter to the advertiser, herald sun and the Age
2) letter to the AFL

3) letter to the club
Click to expand...

I'm going to send a telegram from my log cabin. Or perhaps a papyrus scroll in a claypot via my local viking longboat courier.
 
JUSTWORK said:
They need to stop saying these things privately, band together and demand change.
Click to expand...

Darren is in a precarious position because Jack still is at the Club in various ambassadorial roles. Doesn't want to put out his dad and Jack is mindful of who breads his butter.

Same thing goes for Peter Burgoyne. Peter can't stand Hinkley but you'll never hear it publicly because of Jase and Shaun's positions at the Club.

Ditto Darren Mead.

I think you will find more of the SANFL players from the 1990-96 period will speak out in coming weeks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

RossFC
MVP Votes R6 vs Collingwood
Replies
19
Views
443
Peninsula Boy
Peninsula Boy
RossFC
MVP Votes R5 vs Fremantle
Replies
23
Views
582
Rash
Rash
RossFC
MVP Votes R4 vs Essendon
2
Replies
26
Views
845
RussellEbertHandball
RussellEbertHandball
RossFC
MVP Votes R7 vs St Kilda
Replies
15
Views
260
longdonkey
longdonkey
RossFC
MVP Votes R3 vs Melbourne
Replies
12
Views
458
Macca_1870
Macca_1870
RossFC
MVP Votes R2 vs Richmond
Replies
20
Views
682
Mutha F
Mutha F
Ralph Lorenz
MVP Votes Round 1 vs West Coast
Replies
23
Views
658
Vic_Vinegar
Vic_Vinegar

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top