Butterss must stay

Joined
Mar 16, 2007
Posts
6,580
Likes
10,193
Location
@BigFootyBrian
AFL Club
St Kilda
Thread starter #1
Surely you Saints fans arent as dumb as the guys on Sainsational and West of Moorabbin, Rod MUST stay. Read the article below please and comment.


Westaway must fall on his sword

Comment by Patrick Smith
September 14, 2007
<DIV id=storybody>THE first casualty in the battle for power at St Kilda must be the man who leads the rebel group. Greg Westaway must resign immediately or the Footy First push has no integrity.
Just two days after announcing his leadership of the rebel group, Westaway is now a liability. Presumably buoyed by his barely scrutinised campaign launch, Westaway must be held to account for his disappointing comments made about the St Kilda board led by Rod Butterss.
Westaway is now shrinking from his verbal assault on the club. But we suspect he is being disingenuous, and so are all the other rebel members who seek to justify his remarks.
On the night of the launch of the Footy First group, Westaway told the Herald-Sun: "A board of a football club has to lead by example and we will be adhering to that - that there will be no illicit or illegal drugs taken by any board member. Our members will also sign a policy that they not be intoxicated at board meetings, or club functions or in front of players."
Westaway said it was based on nothing more than "innuendo and talk, and that's all it is, innuendo". Unfortunately, the public saw it as a direct slap at St Kilda board members, inferring they use illicit drugs and appear boozed at board meetings.
Butterss was furious and immediately asked his solicitor to examine whether Westaway had defamed him or the board. Westaway compounded matters when he said people offended by his remarks were thin-skinned. The comments drove talkback radio.
Westaway has since clarified and corrected his comments, saying they were just a reflection on the football community and the issue of drugs in sport. However, to think they could have been construed any other way than a slight on the board is either naive or stupid. We must take him at his word that the comments were not a personal attack, but great damage has been done.
He has no alternative but to apologise in full and personally to the St Kilda board, then step away permanently from the Footy First group. If he doesn't, the rest of his rebel group will be stained by the smear.
Would-be board members Nathan Burke and John Gdanski have attempted to water down the impact of Westaway's remarks but have failed. Gdanski also offered the fact that as all the rebel board wore the same ties and suits, this was an indelible sign that the board was united. Does this mean Butterss could have bought the loyalty of Gdanski and the other breakaway board member, Ross Levin, with a couple of matching ties? This is not the behaviour of an alternative board but a group of boys lining up for a school photograph. The ties that bind.
On the drugs and alcohol slur, this is what Westaway would have you believe happened. He hand-picked his board of six, selecting those of impeccable character, business and football acumen. A fine group, he says. Yet ultimately Westaway thought so little of them he had to sit his would-be board down and say: "By the way, I don't want any of you pissed as newts at board meetings or ripped to shreds on amphetamines when discussing budgets." Does Westaway treats everybody as idiots?
Butterss and his board, who have delivered financial security and appealing competitiveness on the field, made the right and proper response to Footy First's launch. Individually they are suing for defamation and collectively they asked Westaway's group to provide hard evidence that they can deliver on their platitudes.
If Footy First's strategies for St Kilda's future were passed by the AFL - which deals with club budgets on a daily basis - then Butterss and his board would walk away and the transition would be smooth and the club saved an extraordinary general meeting and as much as $100,000.
When Westaway contacted the AFL, chief executive Andrew Demetriou encouraged him to submit his plan. The Footy First chief opted not to. If only Westaway had shut his mouth as quickly as he closed his books. In truth, Footy First wants the fruits of other men's labour.
So this will be an election in the dusk. Butterss' record is there to see. Debt retired, successive million-dollar profits, two preliminary finals, meticulous review of fitness and medical protocols, extra spending on football resources. Against nothing but a man clumsy with his words, an undefined business plan and the fanciful claim that a couple of former footballers guarantee profitability. Run that last bit by Carlton.
Not to mention one of those former players is presumably still being paid by the board he seeks to oust. An intolerable conflict. Andrew Thompson has shown poor judgment.
If Footy First is to have any credibility, any chance of taking power at St Kilda, then it must tell us that, as of today, Westaway went thataway.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Joined
Mar 4, 2006
Posts
2,471
Likes
4
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
St Kilda
#3
Patrick Smith said:
THE first casualty in the battle for power at St Kilda must be the man who leads the rebel group. Greg Westaway must resign immediately or the Footy First push has no integrity.
Just two days after announcing his leadership of the rebel group, Westaway is now a liability. Presumably buoyed by his barely scrutinised campaign launch, Westaway must be held to account for his disappointing comments made about the St Kilda board led by Rod Butterss.
How is he a liability? He made some poorly-worded comments in the media.

On that basis, Rod Butterss is the biggest liability I have seen in my life. His media performance, highlighted by his bizzarre comments about GT earlier in the year, have disgraced the club.

Barely scrutinised campaign launch? Stop whinging Pat, it's your own fault if it's barely scrutinised. It's the media's job to put stuff under the spotlight.

Patrick Smith said:
Westaway is now shrinking from his verbal assault on the club. But we suspect he is being disingenuous, and so are all the other rebel members who seek to justify his remarks.
"verbal assault". Geez Pat, don't make it sound as if he has gone out to destroy the spirit of the club and wreck the place.

Emotive language? No way ... :rolleyes:

Patrick Smith said:
On the night of the launch of the Footy First group, Westaway told the Herald-Sun: "A board of a football club has to lead by example and we will be adhering to that - that there will be no illicit or illegal drugs taken by any board member. Our members will also sign a policy that they not be intoxicated at board meetings, or club functions or in front of players."
Fair enough. It's the policy of every company board that I know of ... except the current St Kilda one.

Funny that.

Don't mind a bit of professionalism ... find me a publicly listed company who doesn't have exactly the same policy.

Patrick Smith said:
Westaway said it was based on nothing more than "innuendo and talk, and that's all it is, innuendo". Unfortunately, the public saw it as a direct slap at St Kilda board members, inferring they use illicit drugs and appear boozed at board meetings.
No Pat, he didn't say that "it was based on ...".

He said that there had been "rumour and innuendo" and that it "was nothing more than rumour and innuendo".

Mis-interpretation Pat. But hey, when it suits your argument, go right ahead ...

Patrick Smith said:
Butterss was furious and immediately asked his solicitor to examine whether Westaway had defamed him or the board. Westaway compounded matters when he said people offended by his remarks were thin-skinned. The comments drove talkback radio.
Know what Butterss solicitor said to him? Line up and have a crack?

I have no idea ... it's a legal matter.

Hypothetically speaking, what if Westaway's allegations had a basis in truth? A truth that was (hypothetically of course) an open secret in the football world?

Patrick Smith said:
Westaway has since clarified and corrected his comments, saying they were just a reflection on the football community and the issue of drugs in sport. However, to think they could have been construed any other way than a slight on the board is either naive or stupid. We must take him at his word that the comments were not a personal attack, but great damage has been done.
Fair enough ... his comments were poorly timed.

A slight on the board? What, by setting a higher standard than the board? Of course that's a slight.

It's like your editor demanding that you write something insightful Pat.

Higher standards are useful ... you'd double your readership to 2 (Kevin Bartlett and my dog).


"We must take him on his word, BUT ..."

Not something you're fond of, eh Pat? Taking someone at their word? Can't wait for everyone to lie so you can pretend to infer something?

Patrick Smith said:
He has no alternative but to apologise in full and personally to the St Kilda board, then step away permanently from the Footy First group. If he doesn't, the rest of his rebel group will be stained by the smear.
"No alternative ... to step away".

Why Pat? Because he made some miscalculated statements in the media?

Not nearly as worse as the miscalculated statements your hero Rod made earlier in the year, which badly damaged the playing group and coaching staff, and the morale of the staff at the club.

Patrick Smith said:
Would-be board members Nathan Burke and John Gdanski have attempted to water down the impact of Westaway's remarks but have failed. Gdanski also offered the fact that as all the rebel board wore the same ties and suits, this was an indelible sign that the board was united. Does this mean Butterss could have bought the loyalty of Gdanski and the other breakaway board member, Ross Levin, with a couple of matching ties? This is not the behaviour of an alternative board but a group of boys lining up for a school photograph. The ties that bind.
"water down the impact". Where Pat? Where is the evidence of that? Any quotes? Or merely your own mistaken perception.

Perhaps Burke and Gdanski were merely re-stating exactly what Westaway's policy was.

Suits and ties as a sign of loyalty.

Please Pat, stick to the issue. The proposed board is concerned about really unimportant stuff like football department spending, revenue and sponsorship. You know, the little stuff.

But you are quite happy to focus on the suits and ties Pat.

Kinda reflects the quality of your journalism ... schoolboy standard.

Patrick Smith said:
On the drugs and alcohol slur, this is what Westaway would have you believe happened. He hand-picked his board of six, selecting those of impeccable character, business and football acumen. A fine group, he says. Yet ultimately Westaway thought so little of them he had to sit his would-be board down and say: "By the way, I don't want any of you pissed as newts at board meetings or ripped to shreds on amphetamines when discussing budgets." Does Westaway treats everybody as idiots?
Settle down Pat, don't get too emotional. Worried that your only contact at St Kilda (Rod) might be on the way out?

BTW Pat, find me evidence that Westaway expressed himself in those terms? Or do you just put words in his mouth to suit your own agenda?

Same policy as every public company Pat, and one that Westaway re-iterated at the end of a board meeting.


Patrick Smith said:
Butterss and his board, who have delivered financial security and appealing competitiveness on the field, made the right and proper response to Footy First's launch. Individually they are suing for defamation and collectively they asked Westaway's group to provide hard evidence that they can deliver on their platitudes.
"Financial security". What, off the lowest revenue base in the AFL? By spending the least of any club on the football department? By the lowest spending on injury management and recovery of any club in the AFL?

All well and good if million dollar profits are your objective, but there is such thing as balance.

We are a football club and we want to win a premiership.

"appealing competitiveness".

WTF does that mean Pat? That they sometimes turn up to play? That they slipped from 3rd in 2005 to 8th in 2006 and 9th in 2007? That on-field the players are going backwards through lack of resources?

Patrick Smith said:
If Footy First's strategies for St Kilda's future were passed by the AFL - which deals with club budgets on a daily basis - then Butterss and his board would walk away and the transition would be smooth and the club saved an extraordinary general meeting and as much as $100,000.
That's great from Rod. Yeah, let's completely cut the members out of the process. Don't give the passionate and loyal Saints fans a say, but let Butterss' best mate (Demetriou) have the final say.

Great work Pat. Real supporter of democracy aren't you? Really understand the desire of the average Saints fan?

Patrick Smith said:
When Westaway contacted the AFL, chief executive Andrew Demetriou encouraged him to submit his plan. The Footy First chief opted not to. If only Westaway had shut his mouth as quickly as he closed his books. In truth, Footy First wants the fruits of other men's labour.
More mindless accusations? This is getting boring Pat. You are losing readers fast.

From the Herald Sun:

"They said, 'If you put it up to the AFL and they tick off on it and we think it's better than ours, then we'll step down'," Westaway said.
"Well, give us a break. That's a bit of joke isn't it?
"I've spoken to (AFL chief executive) Andrew Demetriou and said, 'Would you take away the right of the members of St Kilda to call the shots themselves and vote'?
"He said, 'No, I certainly wouldn't do that'."

Westaway didn't close his books ... according to the Club constitution, he can't see the books for another 18 days, so he can't submit a detailed financial plan until then.

"fruits of other men's labour". No Pat ... he taking those fruits and putting where they belong. In the football department to win a premiership. Not on the bottom line.

Patrick Smith said:
So this will be an election in the dusk.
Logically Pat. After all, the EGM is at night.

Any more insightful comments?

Patrick Smith said:
Butterss' record is there to see. Debt retired, successive million-dollar profits, two preliminary finals, meticulous review of fitness and medical protocols, extra spending on football resources.
"debt retired" - great ... although most successful and growing businesses have debt Pat. Or did you miss that part of Commerce 101?

"Successive million-dollar profits" - nice to have a healthy bottom line, but those hamstrings keep snapping, the membership is falling, the club keeps losing its best staff (Friend, Waldron, Watts et. al.), our recruiting budget is the lowest and .....

Eh, Pat, here's a story for you. Without the extra TV money this year, the Saints would have made a 200k loss.

Really rosy :rolleyes:

"two Preliminary finals" - exactly. No premiership. Let's be content with two Prelims that happened 3 years ago ... and let's watch those clubs which spend money on their football departments win a flag.

"meticulous view of medical protocols" - yes Pat. After having the worst-soft tissue record in the AFL for four years running. How about doing something sooner Rod??


Patrick Smith said:
Against nothing but a man clumsy with his words, an undefined business plan and the fanciful claim that a couple of former footballers guarantee profitability. Run that last bit by Carlton.
"clumsy with his words". Sorry Pat, is that Rod you're talking about?

"unrefined business plan". He can't see the books for 18 days Pat, or are you too lazy to read the club's Constitution? Or perhaps consider that the Footy First ticket has only been around for 4 days ... give them time Pat. The same amount of time you've given Rod.

"former footballers guarantee profitability".

No Pat. Greg Westaway, Chairman of Gregorys Transport Pty Ltd, Dana Nelso, Managing Director of North Delware Ltd ($165m business) and Chris Brandt, CFO of Transurban and former managing partner of Deloittes Asia Pacific .....

They are the people to guarantee financial success.

BTW Pat ... have you asked Nathan Burke how successful he is in business at the moment? I suggest you do. You might be in for a suprise.

Have you also asked Andrew Thompson what his three years with ABN Amro have been like? Or is that business experience neglected too?

Patrick Smith said:
Not to mention one of those former players is presumably still being paid by the board he seeks to oust. An intolerable conflict. Andrew Thompson has shown poor judgment.
Or maybe he reflects the attitudes of the playing group towards the board, and bleeds red, white and black after 220 games for the club and a B&F.

Patrick Smith said:
If Footy First is to have any credibility, any chance of taking power at St Kilda, then it must tell us that, as of today, Westaway went thataway.
Nice little rhyme there Pat.

About as cute as the rest of the article.
 

dan warna

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Oct 13, 2003
Posts
20,557
Likes
190
Location
melbourne
AFL Club
St Kilda
#5
1. patrick smith has his first friend at a club in rod butterss after attacking st kilda for decade and being escorted off our grounds less than 18 months ago

2. PS was shown the door at the age and now works at the australian where he doesn't even have a desk, works from home and the australian newspaper values AFL for comedy value. He has NO friends at any club and hasn't broken a story in 10 years till he became butterrs best friend.

PS is a joke.

3. greg westaway started gregories transport 25 years ago and built it into a several hundred million dollar business employing over a 1000 people which he owns solely, sounds like a successful person to me. as CEO and owner of such an enormous entity he doesn't really need the stress of running a football club for no remuneration.

4. Nathan burke and AT are successful outside AFL and dont need the stress of AFL running.

5. 2 of the current board have defected

6. Danny frawley has switched to endorsing the rival ticket.

7. Fox a business opponent of westaway has endorsed his ticket

should the rival ticket be successful both caroline wilson and Patrick Smith lose their inside contacts at st kilda. They have no advantage in the rival ticket succeeding.

RB has been a highly efficient and effective manager of st kilda and I applaude what he has done. with the lowest turnover of almost anyclub he has returned million dollar profits. However his big mouth and attitude of archie fraser has cost st kilda staff and sponsors. Like elliot at carlton RB needs st kilda, not that st kilda needs RB.

RB has also let his personal emotions dictate decisions made for the club, that would suggest he is failing his duties as a director.

that in itself suggests its time for RB to move on.

anyone who takes patrick smiths articles ever as gospel, a reflection of truth and anything other than an editorial is naive in itself.
 

sasaint

Premium Platinum
Joined
Dec 16, 2006
Posts
325
Likes
588
Location
Houston
AFL Club
St Kilda
#7
Yep, Patrick is a real friend of St Kilda:eek: Remember that really balanced article about Baker after the Freemantle game? Crucified him with NO evidence and demanded the book be thrown at him. Patrick got his way and secured his position with Fonz and Rod Buttass along the way.

Free Baker :mad:
 

rusdid24

Club Legend
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Posts
1,371
Likes
4
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Aus, Chelsea, KC Chiefs
#8
Maybe it's not my place to say, but I feel really sorry for all you Saints supporters. You've got a gun list and all this in-fighting off the field?
Can I pose a few questions for you to answer if you feel like it?

1. I can't believe the statement that RB would have greenlighted everything GT needed re: football department needs? You guys have a fair bit of cash, but you aren't spending it. Surely, this is RB's fault, because I don't believe that GT would not have wanted to make changes, especially in the last years of his reign when their relationship was 'fractured'? Your thoughts?

2. I have no doubt everyone has heard about RB's extra-curricular activities? Is this the man you want running your club? Let's just say I wouldn't want Eddie McGuire doing that in his spare time. From an outsider looking in's point of view, I've always thought he looked like a pretty slippery character. Your views?

3. I really do think Footy First, including Gdanski and Levin (who I have a lot of respect for for sticking up for their beliefs, even though you can just imagine the heat they would be getting from the current board) would be better for your club. Even though I have natural distrust towards all election promises, you really do need to concentrate on the football department, rather than just stockpiling your profits for a rainy day. You can't afford to fall too far behind clubs such as Collingwood, West Coast, Freo etc. when it comes to facilities, access to technology etc.
Your thoughts on this point?

I hope not too much blood is spilt and we can all get on with playing footy.
 

carntheroos4eva

Brownlow Medallist
Suspended
Joined
Oct 24, 2005
Posts
16,618
Likes
31
Location
Mount Pleasant
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Geelong and Socceroos
#9
Butterss must go. He is way too arrogant and is very rude to everyone around the saints. He is a money waster as well.
He will take anyone to court over just about anything.
 

bozza1980

Team Captain
Joined
Jan 27, 2005
Posts
585
Likes
16
Other Teams
Saints
#10
Westaway must fall on his sword

Comment by Patrick Smith
September 14, 2007
Westaway told the Herald-Sun: "A board of a football club has to lead by example and we will be adhering to that - that there will be no illicit or illegal drugs taken by any board member. Our members will also sign a policy that they not be intoxicated at board meetings, or club functions or in front of players."
This is a stupid comment, no more no less. If people that make stupid public comments were barred from being president of a footy club, many a current president would be out of their positions!!

If Footy First's strategies for St Kilda's future were passed by the AFL - which deals with club budgets on a daily basis - then Butterss and his board would walk away and the transition would be smooth and the club saved an extraordinary general meeting and as much as $100,000.
This is cheap point scoring.

As for the saving of $100,000, my understanding was that SFF were going to challenge at the AGM.

Not to mention one of those former players is presumably still being paid by the board he seeks to oust. An intolerable conflict. Andrew Thompson has shown poor judgment.
This is cheeky Patrick, it is tantamount to saying that Kevin Rudd has an intolerable conflict because he is being paid by the Australian Government and yet seeks to oust it.

There is no argument that Rod Butterss has given fantastic service to the St Kilda Football Club. His influence on the club will not be forgotten, I just have a feeling that it is time that the club moved in a new direction. Something the board itself thought last year when they decided to re-structure the football department.
 

sauce_head

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Posts
7,042
Likes
3,668
AFL Club
St Kilda
#11
1. patrick smith has his first friend at a club in rod butterss after attacking st kilda for decade and being escorted off our grounds less than 18 months ago

2. PS was shown the door at the age and now works at the australian where he doesn't even have a desk, works from home and the australian newspaper values AFL for comedy value. He has NO friends at any club and hasn't broken a story in 10 years till he became butterrs best friend.

PS is a joke.

3. greg westaway started gregories transport 25 years ago and built it into a several hundred million dollar business employing over a 1000 people which he owns solely, sounds like a successful person to me. as CEO and owner of such an enormous entity he doesn't really need the stress of running a football club for no remuneration.

4. Nathan burke and AT are successful outside AFL and dont need the stress of AFL running.

5. 2 of the current board have defected

6. Danny frawley has switched to endorsing the rival ticket.

7. Fox a business opponent of westaway has endorsed his ticket

should the rival ticket be successful both caroline wilson and Patrick Smith lose their inside contacts at st kilda. They have no advantage in the rival ticket succeeding.

RB has been a highly efficient and effective manager of st kilda and I applaude what he has done. with the lowest turnover of almost anyclub he has returned million dollar profits. However his big mouth and attitude of archie fraser has cost st kilda staff and sponsors. Like elliot at carlton RB needs st kilda, not that st kilda needs RB.

RB has also let his personal emotions dictate decisions made for the club, that would suggest he is failing his duties as a director.

that in itself suggests its time for RB to move on.

anyone who takes patrick smiths articles ever as gospel, a reflection of truth and anything other than an editorial is naive in itself.
1. He was escorted off by the current regieme, yet supports them. Why?

2. No evidence of "comedy value", and I am fairly sure he changed to have more journalistic freedom, thus more personal opinion without the need to write to sell papers.

3. No remuneration is invalid, no pres gets paid. Transport is NOT like an AFL club, irelevant comment as RB is successful as well, excetpt he has run a successful club recently as well, which is why we can even debate spending extra cash on the footy department.

4. I am not sure they are running the AFL, but at least Burke has been employed by the AFL to work for them. Hardly a neutral endorsement. NB, quite self centred as well, as evidenced by the timing of his retirement when compared to Loewe. Thomo is unknown, but is in need of a job...

5. Where is the FF consistency if they want to overhall the current board. Is this a new board, or just a replacement of president? Some form of clarity, please!

6. No opinion on Frawley, but is he in the running for football operations manager, or is he totally neutral?

7. Fox = Grant Thomas. Does that speak stability to anyone, or is it back room board room deals and disruption of sponsors?

In closing, the majority of the new ticket are StKilda old boys with no track recrd or depth of experience. Where will the new ideas come from, such as Thomo? Lets keep a bredth of knowledge instead of distilling on our own, unsuccessful, past.

Vote to keep us in the black. Vote to have a choice of whether to spend more on the footy department. Vote survival and premiership chances. Do not vote on the roll of the die. Vote for Rod.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Joined
Mar 4, 2006
Posts
2,471
Likes
4
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
St Kilda
#12
3. No remuneration is invalid, no pres gets paid. Transport is NOT like an AFL club, irelevant comment as RB is successful as well, excetpt he has run a successful club recently as well, which is why we can even debate spending extra cash on the footy department.
Westaway is a more successful businessman that Butterss is/was ...

4. I am not sure they are running the AFL, but at least Burke has been employed by the AFL to work for them. Hardly a neutral endorsement. NB, quite self centred as well, as evidenced by the timing of his retirement when compared to Loewe. Thomo is unknown, but is in need of a job...
Nathan Burke self centred? That's a disgrace and a slur on our former captain.

Thompson has had a part-time job for the past 3 years with ABN Amro, and is already working in a full-time position.

He is hardly in need of a job, and directors don't get paid anyway.

5. Where is the FF consistency if they want to overhall the current board. Is this a new board, or just a replacement of president? Some form of clarity, please!
Clearly you can't read.

SFF want to replace the whole board with the exception of one director who is not up for re-election (Ross Levin).


6. No opinion on Frawley, but is he in the running for football operations manager, or is he totally neutral?
Frawley has nothing to do with the new ticket.

7. Fox = Grant Thomas. Does that speak stability to anyone, or is it back room board room deals and disruption of sponsors?
Lindsay Fox is not involved with SFF at all. Geez, him and Westaway are direct competitors in the same industry. Fox doesn't like Butterss and would prefer Westaway, but he isn't exactly rapt at the alternative ticket either.

In closing, the majority of the new ticket are StKilda old boys with no track recrd or depth of experience. Where will the new ideas come from, such as Thomo? Lets keep a bredth of knowledge instead of distilling on our own, unsuccessful, past.
Majority old boys? What, 2 out of 9? 20% was never a majority.

"no track record" - Burke has been brought on the board specifically for his experience in the football area; he played under six coaches, was an assistant for two years and has worked in the corporate leadership area with great success.

From the current board, you have 5 blokes who have all worked with and for each other at some stage ... hardly a "breadth of knowledge".

Kellet, Butterss, King and Bassett were essentially in the employment/recruitment industry together. They were basically all from the same area of expertise.

Compared with SFF, who have a transport industry boss, head of a catering and management company (Delware North), owner of a law firm, managing director of a finance company and a former head of an accounting firm.

Much more breadth of knowledge if you ask me.
 

garth p

Club Legend
Joined
Jul 28, 2003
Posts
2,741
Likes
3
Location
australia
AFL Club
St Kilda
Other Teams
st kilda
#13
We have all heard the rumours about Rod... Its a shame, but he needs to go

Yep, he has run his race and dropped the ball. Patrick Smith is an absolute disgrace and him backing the current board just helps me make up my mind to throw in with the Footy First group.

They will get my proxy tomorrow.:D:D

Roll on November.:thumbsu:
 

garth p

Club Legend
Joined
Jul 28, 2003
Posts
2,741
Likes
3
Location
australia
AFL Club
St Kilda
Other Teams
st kilda
#14
Maybe it's not my place to say, but I feel really sorry for all you Saints supporters. You've got a gun list and all this in-fighting off the field?
Can I pose a few questions for you to answer if you feel like it?

1. I can't believe the statement that RB would have greenlighted everything GT needed re: football department needs? You guys have a fair bit of cash, but you aren't spending it. Surely, this is RB's fault, because I don't believe that GT would not have wanted to make changes, especially in the last years of his reign when their relationship was 'fractured'? Your thoughts?

2. I have no doubt everyone has heard about RB's extra-curricular activities? Is this the man you want running your club? Let's just say I wouldn't want Eddie McGuire doing that in his spare time. From an outsider looking in's point of view, I've always thought he looked like a pretty slippery character. Your views?

3. I really do think Footy First, including Gdanski and Levin (who I have a lot of respect for for sticking up for their beliefs, even though you can just imagine the heat they would be getting from the current board) would be better for your club. Even though I have natural distrust towards all election promises, you really do need to concentrate on the football department, rather than just stockpiling your profits for a rainy day. You can't afford to fall too far behind clubs such as Collingwood, West Coast, Freo etc. when it comes to facilities, access to technology etc.
Your thoughts on this point?

I hope not too much blood is spilt and we can all get on with playing footy.
Me too mate. Butterss should pack his bags and p!ss off.:D:thumbsu:
 

sainter

ENGLISH PREMIER LEAGUE
Joined
Mar 5, 2000
Posts
14,466
Likes
33
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
St Kilda
Other Teams
Southampton,Victory,Storm
#17
Surely you Saints fans arent as dumb as the guys on Sainsational and West of Moorabbin, Rod MUST stay. Read the article below please and comment.
It's great that we can all have our say and we encourage everybody to do that but one thing we don't need is petty name calling if somebody doesn't subscribe to your opinion.
 

The Punter

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
May 12, 2006
Posts
8,321
Likes
8,411
Location
Lal Lal
AFL Club
St Kilda
Other Teams
Elsternwick AFC
#18
Another great article by Patrick Smith. He is just a paid opinion. "Hey Patrick, here is an important issue, pick a side and piss some people off."

The bigger issue here is the media's reporting of the new ticket. While no one will suggest that Westaway didn't make a significant mistake with the drug annoucement and subsequent comments, the media reporting of this has almost entirely been one way. Add to that the performance of the James Brayshaw, Garry Lyon, Sam Newman and Craig Hutchinson on The Footy Show on Thursday night when they interviewed Nathan Burke.

It is just me, or does the footy media appear to be acting as like they have a vested interest in the status quo. Board rumblings make for great copy and many column inches, but almost without exception all the opinions in the media seem to be anti-Board elections and challenges. Does the media really prefer to avoid Board challenges? Or it just hopelessly conflicted personalities like James Brayshaw?

Anyway, I would hope that some balance would be applied to the public reporting of this topic, but it is hard with confirmed St Kilda haters like Patrick Smith & Damien Barrett reporting on the issue.
 

fossman

Team Captain
Joined
Aug 21, 2007
Posts
305
Likes
17
Location
footscray
AFL Club
Collingwood
#19
A

The bigger issue here is the media's reporting of the new ticket. While no one will suggest that Westaway didn't make a significant mistake with the drug annoucement and subsequent comments, the media reporting of this has almost entirely been one way. Add to that the performance of the James Brayshaw, Garry Lyon, Sam Newman and Craig Hutchinson on The Footy Show on Thursday night when they interviewed Nathan Burke.


That is how it seems from the outside. Craig Hutchison carried on like an angry school boy sticking up for RB, I thought he was gonna cry on FC.


The media aren't asking any real questions of RB. The fact that St. Kilda have the lowest revenue of the AFL clubs is a massive inditment on RB and the Board. The job of any business is to grow revenue and RB has failed, Burke tried to make this point the other night on The Footy Show but no one was listening.
It seems like RBs cronies in the media will try to ensure he keeps his position, with no concern about what is best for the St. Kilda FC.
 
Joined
Sep 10, 2007
Posts
138
Likes
0
Location
London
AFL Club
Richmond
#20
We have all heard the rumours about Rod... Its a shame, but he needs to go
Which rumours are they? Anything to do with Lindsay Fox's sons wifes sister? Or the text to Grant thomas suggesting a night on the powder??? Rod butterss is a moron and you blokes would be better off without him. Getting rid of thomas was the start of his downfall.
 

Fehring

Club Legend
Joined
Aug 9, 2006
Posts
2,696
Likes
3,092
Location
Level 2 Bar, Coventry End
AFL Club
St Kilda
Other Teams
Packers, Detroit Tigers
#21
The media aren't asking any real questions of RB. The fact that St. Kilda have the lowest revenue of the AFL clubs is a massive inditment on RB and the Board. The job of any business is to grow revenue and RB has failed, Burke tried to make this point the other night on The Footy Show but no one was listening.
It seems like RBs cronies in the media will try to ensure he keeps his position, with no concern about what is best for the St. Kilda FC.
1. What about some questions of Westaway. I can't believe you people want to elect him based on "i'll earn more and spend more". it just beggars belief.

2. Three clubs earn more than us simply because they get AFL handouts. There are also four clubs which sell games interstate, thereby massively boosting their coffers. This drivel that we have the lowest revenue is just that - drivel.
 

The Punter

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
May 12, 2006
Posts
8,321
Likes
8,411
Location
Lal Lal
AFL Club
St Kilda
Other Teams
Elsternwick AFC
#22
Fehring, your above reply makes it look like I said what is in the quote. I did not. Could you or the mods amend this reply to reflect which person actually made this quote?
 

Fehring

Club Legend
Joined
Aug 9, 2006
Posts
2,696
Likes
3,092
Location
Level 2 Bar, Coventry End
AFL Club
St Kilda
Other Teams
Packers, Detroit Tigers
#25
Rebels already have 5000 proxy's and the EAGM is being brought forward to October 23
5000 people have handed over their votes to a group of people whose sum total of policy is "vote for us we'll spend more money on stuff". That is seriously not an exaggeration. That's their policy platform.

I am simply cannot believe that so many people would file lemming-like into the abyss. It is interesting to note that those intending to vote for Westaway are almost all doing it because of the issues they have with Butterss. None of them can tell you why they are voting for Fairy Floss First.
 
Top Bottom