Opinion As supporters, what can we do??

[tribey]

Although we are a traditional club, in terms of our structure we're more akin to Adelaide, Freo, WCE.

We're worse aren't we? The SANFL and AFL have a level of control over our books and strategic direction than either of those three.

This is why we'll give Primus and Rohde another year, can't upset the masters again like we did with sacking Williams.

 

[b0ydman]

We need to make a stand I can't stand by anymore and watch the club I love end up like fitzroy, the time for talking is over, we need to take action... Now is the time

not enough people who played for the club prepared to mke noise sdly

we're just members.

but i can 10% assure that no one in my family will be buying any memberships next year, myself included. not even the cheap ar*e interstate ones

do we cripple the club so that it_has_to listen?

hmm. no. sadly

although if it goes under the AFl will re-issue it to a new consortium based at alberton. thats a thought

what to do????

if you know and old time players tell them they simply HAVE to put their name on the piece of paper and stand by it

 

[Eric Blair]

We're worse aren't we? The SANFL and AFL have a level of control over our books and strategic direction than either of those three.

This is why we'll give Primus and Rohde another year, can't upset the masters again like we did with sacking Williams.

In terms of finances and strategic direction, then yes yes we are. The key difference between us and say Adelaide, Fremantle and WCE is that we as supporters believe that we are still a traditional club, even if structurally we're far from it.

That's why even if very very unlikely, consitutional change is critical. Its a way of bringing the "Club member" (absolutely hate that term) to the forefront of the PAFC, and its a way of exposing for better or worse where the club is at. As fully fledged members, we can have documents disclosed, the books opened up etc. We can also have the affiliation agreement between the AFL and SANFL disclosed in theory which I would love to see.

 

[Eric Blair]

not enough people who played for the club prepared to mke noise sdly

we're just members.

but i can 10% assure that no one in my family will be buying any memberships next year, myself included. not even the cheap ar*e interstate ones

do we cripple the club so that it_has_to listen?

hmm. no. sadly

although if it goes under the AFl will re-issue it to a new consortium based at alberton. thats a thought

what to do????

if you know and old time players tell them they simply HAVE to put their name on the piece of paper and stand by it

the nuclear option there as highlighted in bold would be for the club to go into voluntary administration, however that really would bring the house down and would probably make 1990 look like a picnic.

However, the only way for that to happen is if the Board decides it (wont happen, SANFL controls half the board), or if a creditor or the auditor of the books applies for it.

 

[b0ydman]

the nuclear option there as highlighted in bold would be for the club to go into voluntary administration, however that really would bring the house down and would probably make 1990 look like a picnic.

However, the only way for that to happen is if the Board decides it (wont happen, SANFL controls half the board), or if a creditor or the auditor of the books applies for it.

thanks to TV deals the AFl needs us

I dont think GWS will make it, nor GC

One might be left on life support

Adelaide needs 2 teams for no other reason to make the ground viable.

i dont believe they will have supporters if they "split" the SANFL in2.

there will always be a port. i really do hope it goes under and the AFL can take our license back

I dont beleive we will be relocated to Tassie

 

[tribey]

I dont think GWS will make it, nor GC

It took nearly 20 years for Sydney to be viable and nearly 15 for Brisbane. The AFL have committed to years of losses with GWS and GCS to get those markets off the deck.

Secondly, the AFL don't need 'us' per se. They need a second team.

We don't currently hold that licence and there's a reason why the SANFL are waiting until at least 2014 and one year of AO before they sell it.

Basically, if we don't pull crowds to the new ground we're ****ed as it won't take much convincing to have us rebranded at best, wound up and replaced by a brand new composite at worst.

 

[Natman]

I tend to agree, however it leads back to the title of the thread, as supporters what can we do??

Although we are a traditional club, in terms of our structure we're more akin to Adelaide, Freo, WCE. As supporters, we've all asked questions and had our doubts on the direction of this club. We've also asked how did the club get to this position, what was the board and the SANFL as the licence holder doing as the PAFC's position deteriorated? We as "Club members" at the very least need a forum to vent our frustration and ask some questions, and you cant have that in a club that has 10 actual members. If we are demanding accountability on the field, then we should demand it off the field.

As a 'formal' BF PAFC group we do make a real financial contribution to the club, my suggestion would be, through a number of contacts that some of us actually do have, if to have a formal set of questions described and vetted for logic and sensibility and presented to the club for answers - in a private manner - if that is possible.

I agree somewhat with the 'Godwin' theory - we are largely reacting 'emotionally' which is expected of PAFC supporters - without any direct access to what is really going on behind closed doors. It would be great to have an inside look, without the possibility of the info gained being used as a detriment to the club.

Supporters going down the board member/constitution path are really on a dangerous road to nowhere.

Now is the time to stick thick and do things in a sensible, non-emotional, but demanding manner.

 

[PowerKat]

Some of you will probably think I'm off the deep end here, but I'm convinced that we're being destroyed from within - similar to simba's post in the "I'm bored" thread.

Nice idea to get a board nominee, but I'm guessing we'd be dreaming for the SANFL to actually approve said nominee. Good luck with that... it's a dream like getting our licence to ourselves is (and even if we or AFL did 'own' the licence, would this change anything within our current board or business structure?).

All this "we are port adelaide" stuff is a smokescreen. A well-spent Pickard 'allocation to marketing' - it's the only thing we've done well in recent memory. The harsh reality is that we have an 'owner' whose aim is to keep us on life support - to use the income we generate for anything but furthering the club in any capacity. They dgaf about changing anything and care nought for ongoing issues we face. It's become clear to me that we're exactly where they want us to be and plan(ned) for us to be.

We also have a playing group who are brainwashed into believing in some planned 'journey' they are all on - it's corporate w***ery that doesn't align with the club's history, creed or mission statement. They are not a 'team' in the true sense of the word -they are there for the 'fun of it' - they get by doing bare minimums, or less - they don't live the creed - they fail on every count. If this was pointed out directly to them, I don't believe any one of them would really care. As per another thread, there's about 4 players to keep on our list in all reality. They have some pride and commitment in themselves, but can't have a significant influence on the group.

We've been fooled by "port supporting board members" appointed by the sanfl, where the willingness of these people to be bent over, combined with their general ineptness, would be celebrated by the licence owner with every 'internal review' that says "everything's just fine"; every s**t decision made that has contributed to a deteriorated business model and on-field performance; every non-contested board position; every noose and general handcuffery that they preside over. Those 'in charge' (lol) have stood by and contributed to the deterioration and destruction of the club to the point that it's unfathomable that the best interests of the PAFC mean anything to them whatsoever and the only conclusion to be drawn is that this is their agenda. Now we have a CEO who couldn't give less of a * about the PAFC being successful - believing he does is actually, UNBELIEVABLE - think about it!! - all he cares about is his own career and doing the bidding of the sanfl who put him there to peddle a message and hold the keys. The most recent message of 'don't question the club' flies in the face of what the club was built on.

I've come to the sad conclusion now that We Are NOT Port Adelaide. There's little, if anything we can do about it. Someone will be very hard pressed to prove otherwise to me on both counts.

 

[Eric Blair]

In that case PK, the question is where do we go from here? If it doesn't get any better then what is the point of it all?

Ultimately, as much as we blame the SANFL, the board etc etc, the club is made up of us, the paying members. Ultimately, it comes down to the thread title, as supporters what can we do? The way I see it, if we are going to go down, we may as well go kicking and screaming.

As a side, issue, the SANFL usually, in fact always approves elected nominees to the board. There would be serious questions to be asked if they decided not to all of a sudden

 

[ploppy]

It took nearly 20 years for Sydney to be viable and nearly 15 for Brisbane. The AFL have committed to years of losses with GWS and GCS to get those markets off the deck.

Secondly, the AFL don't need 'us' per se. They need a second team.

We don't currently hold that licence and there's a reason why the SANFL are waiting until at least 2014 and one year of AO before they sell it.

Basically, if we don't pull crowds to the new ground we're ****ed as it won't take much convincing to have us rebranded at best, wound up and replaced by a brand new composite at worst.

i cant see a rebrand or another composite working as who would support it...not port supporters and crows supporters wont switch to the new team..so we are still the best option.

 

[tribey]

i cant see a rebrand or another composite working as who would support it...not port supporters and crows supporters wont switch to the new team..so we are still the best option.

I completely agree and have argued this toss numerous times over the decade [] I've wasted here, but you've got to think as Leigh Whicker, John Olsen, Ken Cunningham and all the other twats who will come after us like a Terminator if we only average 18000-23000 at the revamped Adelaide Oval and subsequently bleed money just as bad as we do now.

There will be a groundswell of rebrand/liquidation calls and we already have a termite as CEO.

 

[Janus]

I hate to say it, but it feels like this club is already dead, and any signs of movement are simply the maggots crawling around inside. The only way the corpse is gonna resurrect itself is if certain people put their hands up and say "I don't put the club's interests before my own" and then resign or get fired.

I wonder how many people would be left. Not many I would suspect.

 

[ploppy]

Some of you will probably think I'm off the deep end here, but I'm convinced that we're being destroyed from within - similar to simba's post in the "I'm bored" thread.

Nice idea to get a board nominee, but I'm guessing we'd be dreaming for the SANFL to actually approve said nominee. Good luck with that... it's a dream like getting our licence to ourselves is (and even if we or AFL did 'own' the licence, would this change anything within our current board or business structure?).

I think getting a supporter based board member is quite doable. As TSW says Alex Panos is up for re-election this year why not run against him. Does anyone know Panos? Maybe he is doing his best..we should try and talk to him. Does anyone know any board members It would be good to hear from them. You would think Abernethy is doing everything he possibly could to bring us success but of the others we need to know which ones are SANFL stooges.

 

[bomberclifford]

However, that does not mean the Board as a whole or individually should not be accountable at all times.

They are accountable, just not to us.

 

[El_Scorcho]

The fact that the SANFL okays every board selection is horrible for us.

When we are finally given our license back, we need to really, really push the fact that we are free from SANFL control and probably actively attack the SANFL for what they did to us in order to win a bit of respect back from whatever is left of our supporter base.

Hell, sack the entire board and put them all up for re-election. Make sure people know that anyone elected to the board now was elected because of the members and the members only.

Lets just say if I was in charge of the PR on gaining our license, i'd be losing any friends I had at the SANFL.

 

[Northalives]

What do you want? What do some of you want??

How in ****'s name can we become a premiership team tomorrow by replacing Primus, Thomas, wah, wah, wah ......?

We are here, may I remind some of you wonderful Port people, because when that megalomaniac Williams was trashing our club and ****ing of our traditions and principles, some of you were defending that fella at the expense of our own club.

The **** went defensive in a final against our biggest foe so we wouldn't lose by much but still people defended him. He was in charge the day we were humiliated in a grand final but people defended him. He let pricks like C.Cornes denigrate and insult ex-players and others publicly and allowed factions to develop within the playing group, gave out gold passes and didn't give a **** when our blokes didn't sing the club song after beating the opposition, he alienated people, Port Adelaide people, until they left the club that they and their families have supported for generations and made a mockery of the principle that no one person is bigger than the club and still, some of you backed him even on the day he was finally given the arse.

We are where we are because of that period in our history and now some of you want to **** off a coach who is upholding the principles that our club once held as being sacrosanct and for what, a fairy god-mother who is going to come along and wave her magic wand and make everything better.

A lot of the players we have are s**t but they are being treated as equals whilst they are at our club with no excuses accepted for slacking off or doing what is not in the best interests of our team. Every player is expected to fight to the death, no matter how much they are being outclassed which is light years better than what we had under Williams. This fellow Primus is getting us back to what are the minimum requirements for a footballer regardless of their talent yet some of you want to dump him. This bloke will instil Port values to our players which will flow on throughout our club and when all the pretenders and spivs have been ****ed off and when we are an indomitable club once again, then, if Primus cannot take us to a flag, then he will be replaced by someone that will but for ****'s sake, lets get our playing ethos in place first before we start to agitate for change.

You'd all be better off, we'd all be better off, if we all went out the front of our club holding banners and placards with the our creed emblazoned across them, proclaiming our unabashed support for our club and what it stands for and any ****er that dares not follow our dogma will be run out of our club: not holding up signs saying, "sack the coach, we want to be Richmond" or "Primus out, fairy god-mother in".

 

[ctpower]

Email KT
just spam him, i email him all the time 2/3 times a week really

Make a Banner that says something like sack Primus, it will get airtime and create the ball moving

3 cut off your ties finacially and hope that the club doesn't think you will jump back on for Adelaide Oval without any change

Does he reply to your emails. if so how often.
Not trying to be clever. I am genuinely interested.

 

[Jonts]

Does he reply to your emails. if so how often.
Not trying to be clever. I am genuinely interested.

He responded to the first 2, and now he responds to at least 1 a week, i've slowed down think i'm slowly stopping to care, last 3 weeks i've only sent one, cbf sending one this week

Hopefully he gets the message

 

[ctpower]

He responded to the first 2, and now he responds to at least 1 a week, i've slowed down think i'm slowly stopping to care, last 3 weeks i've only sent one, cbf sending one this week

Hopefully he gets the message

Thanks Jonts

 

[ploppy]

He responded to the first 2, and now he responds to at least 1 a week, i've slowed down think i'm slowly stopping to care, last 3 weeks i've only sent one, cbf sending one this week

Hopefully he gets the message

He has replied to mine as well. He agreed with me that we have some problems but didnt go into specifics of what he is going to do. We need to give him a chance he hasnt been there long.

 

[tribey]

What do you want? What do some of you want??

How in ****'s name can we become a premiership team tomorrow by replacing Primus, Thomas, wah, wah, wah ......?

We are here, may I remind some of you wonderful Port people, because when that megalomaniac Williams was trashing our club and ****ing of our traditions and principles, some of you were defending that fella at the expense of our own club.

The **** went defensive in a final against our biggest foe so we wouldn't lose by much but still people defended him. He was in charge the day we were humiliated in a grand final but people defended him. He let pricks like C.Cornes denigrate and insult ex-players and others publicly and allowed factions to develop within the playing group, gave out gold passes and didn't give a **** when our blokes didn't sing the club song after beating the opposition, he alienated people, Port Adelaide people, until they left the club that they and their families have supported for generations and made a mockery of the principle that no one person is bigger than the club and still, some of you backed him even on the day he was finally given the arse.

We are where we are because of that period in our history and now some of you want to **** off a coach who is upholding the principles that our club once held as being sacrosanct and for what, a fairy god-mother who is going to come along and wave her magic wand and make everything better.

A lot of the players we have are s**t but they are being treated as equals whilst they are at our club with no excuses accepted for slacking off or doing what is not in the best interests of our team. Every player is expected to fight to the death, no matter how much they are being outclassed which is light years better than what we had under Williams. This fellow Primus is getting us back to what are the minimum requirements for a footballer regardless of their talent yet some of you want to dump him. This bloke will instil Port values to our players which will flow on throughout our club and when all the pretenders and spivs have been ****ed off and when we are an indomitable club once again, then, if Primus cannot take us to a flag, then he will be replaced by someone that will but for ****'s sake, lets get our playing ethos in place first before we start to agitate for change.

You'd all be better off, we'd all be better off, if we all went out the front of our club holding banners and placards with the our creed emblazoned across them, proclaiming our unabashed support for our club and what it stands for and any ****er that dares not follow our dogma will be run out of our club: not holding up signs saying, "sack the coach, we want to be Richmond" or "Primus out, fairy god-mother in".

And Primus aided and abetted him by white-anting Tredrea's captaincy and any semblance of our Premiership defence in 2005 before settling in at his right hand for 4 years, being, I dunno, privately annoyed(?) at best. Then he puts his hand up for the senior job off the back of one good win against Hawthorn and presides over 8 wins in 39 - half of which have come against GCS, Melbourne and Richmond.

Wowee!

 

[El_Scorcho]

"minimum requirements for a footballer"?

I really, really fail to see how Primus is helping to get anyone to that level.

Hell, half of the players on our list have regressed in terms of skills and decision making, and none of them were ever strong, fast or particularly fit.

We are the furthest away from "minimum requirements for a footballer" of any club in the league, 2 full years into Primus's reign, and players who clearly, clearly don't satisfy "minimum requirements" by any stretch of the imagination and who don't have any scope for improvement continue to get a game.

I'll give you the playing group being united. It finally feels that way after over a decade.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Cheers REH, that was pretty sobering reading TBH.

Have clauses 4 & 9 been in the constitution since we entered the AFL, or was that one of the changes to the constitution that Rucci wrote about last year?

Also, where can I get my hands on the PAFC constitution? I tried searching for it on the PAFC website and couldnt find it so if anyone can answer that I would be grateful (the ex lawyer in me loves reading that stuff)

Ok 3rd go at trying to answer this. Give me back the big old footy. My computer doesn't like the new one.

The constitution has only been changed once since we played our first AFLgame in 1997. Rucci is full of s**t and makes stuff up.

Actually it’s twice, the first time was when the Corporation Law 1990 ended and was replaced with the Corporations Act 2001 and the Memorandum and Articles of Association were replaced with the Constitution and Rules. The Memorandum and Articles of Association were effectively the company’s constitution and rules but the new law said you had to officially have a constitution.

In 2008 we changed our board structure from 5 member elected directors and 5 SANFL appointees who up until 2009 were all solid Port Adelaide people to 4 + 4 + 2 others the board can appoint because of expertise. That was changed in October 2008 and didn’t require a vote by the club members.

I have a copy of the Constitution dated October 2008 after the amendment which is posted below. I got my copy in 2010 from Steve Weinert who was the Chief Finance Officer and Company Secretary at the time. Steve Smith is the new company secretary according to last year’s annual report.

I have been a member since late 2001 and have only voted on 2 constitutional changes to The Port Club ( Port Adelaide football and community clun inc). One in 2003 and the other in 2010 when the Power bought out the Magpies 25% share.

There has never been a constitutional amendment where the members have had the right to vote for the change as claimed by Rucci. He was in Italy when the AGM was held in 2008 and I didn’t attend as I lived in Sydney at the time but I never received any voting papers and if you read our 2008 annual report you will see there is no agenda item to deal with a constitutional change matter.

Rucci should have spent $50 and done a company search at ASIC and he would have found that out. He has his copy of the Constitution dated October 2008 and then made it up that the members approved the handing over of power.

When the SANFL got the licence for the crows the controlling body of Australian Football – the old Australian National Football Council was wound up over a couple of years and the AFL became the custodian of the game. I think it formally happened when the Crawford Report was approved in 1993. With that SA and WA footy had their rights and obligations under the old ANFC system transferred to the AFL system and the AFL signed Affiliation Agreements with the SANFL and WAFC . Part of the rights of the SANFL was the right to administer and control football in SA. So from day 1 of winning the licence the SANFL had ultimate control of our club and the constitution would have reflected that. It is a bit like the Queen/Governor General having ultimate power and the day to day power stays with the government. But when the s**t hits the fan like in 1975 when Kerr dismissed Whitlam government that ultimate power can be exercised. But the SANFL has had a lot more influence over our club the Queen/GG has over the Australian government eg Stadium deal, splitting Port up, stopping the merger, allowing it but under certain circumstances etc.

The board and Bucky in 1994 sold it to us that our club would go into the AFL. It was only part true, because we were not allowed to be 100% independent like pre AFLdays. But as I keep saying, the majority of us took the Richard Colless approach ie the WAFC commissioner who negotiated a WA club to enter the VFL and saw the entry fee go from $400k/yr x 10 years, to $4mil upfront payable in 30 days, a bad deal that got us in, was better than waiting on the sidelines waiting for theoretical good deal to get us in.

The 2008 Constitutional amendment

15A. ADDITIONAL DIRECTORS

15A.1 In the event that the Board of Directors is of the opinion that specialist or technical
expertise is required for the proper consideration of matters, the Board may by special
resolution nominate up to two candidates to the League Commission for appointment as
Additional Directors.

15A.2 The League Commission shall, in its absolute discretion, be entitled to appoint any
candidates nominated under clause 15A.1 as Additional Directors.

15A.3 The appointment of an Additional Director pursuant to clause 15A.2 shall expire on the earlier of:
15A.3.1 the date specified in the appointment of the Additional Director under clause
15A.2 (up to a maximum of 3 years); or
15A.3.2 the League Commission removing the Additional Director under clause 11.1.

15A.4 An Additional Director so appointed shall, subject to this clause 15A, for all purposes of the Act and this Constitution be treated as a Director and shall possess all powers of such
a Director.

 

[Peck]

Turn up to the games and support the boys.

 

[Enviable Tradition]

REH how did they amend the constitution in 2008 without a vote of the members?

Surely there is required to be a vote to amend the constitution?