Crows Members Meeting

[jenny61_99]

I can give an example of an opportunity I took with Craig. Furthermore I've had face to face disagreements with Crows officials in the past, serious ones at that. You're right, I didnt attend the AGM. Obviously there's no possible reason for my non attendance other than cowardice.

How does any of this relate to you insulting people on this board though? Got the intention of doing it face to face? If not, are you not being more than a tad hypocritical?

As I pointed out to Alex, I never commented on those that couldn't go. I made no such judgement on you.

As for "insulting" people to their face - absolutely would have no problem having a chat with you all when I come to Adelaide next (two weeks time - lets all meet up) and telling you how I feel. By the way, I am not insulting people, I'm calling them out, there is a huge difference. If they are insulted, perhaps there is a reason? Besides which, if THEY are insulted, they can discuss it with me. They don't need you to champion their cause.

I'm not sure which is worse, your knowledge of history or your understanding of our electoral system.

Misguided blind loyalty and patriotism is a far more significant historical cause of atrocity than population cowardice. However- you seemingly miss the point. The exact reason to have secret ballot is to avoid the intimidation of voters and possible retribution. It protects the ability of the population to vote unfettered. Insisting that all criticisms must come in the form of face to face conflict is both irrational and immature. Basically, you're avoiding dealing with the merits of any criticism and simply hurling personal attacks at those who raise it. Its strange, but I actually thought that breached the rules of our board. Guess I'm wrong.

My knowledge of history? Please kind sir, avail me of your superior intellect.

Secret ballots also have a dark side - I'm surprised someone of your intellect has not considered that aspect. By voting secretly, you can tell people one thing, and do another. Thus keeping in favour with both sides. A way to have your cake and eat it to, so to speak. I'd rather support people who have the courage of their convictions. Honesty is way underrated these days IMO.

Face to face does not always have to be conflict either. It is also known as a "conversation", where ideas and thoughts are shared and discussed.

I love that you, personally, don't come on the board as often as you used to, but when you do, you seemingly search out my posts and take it on yourself to try and find some way that I've breached the rules of our board. Is that a form of cyber stalking?

 

[cmndstab]

So you're saying it was a deliberate action from the club??

What exactly did you expect Chapman to do Stabby. In all seriousness he has just backed his CEO as has the board. Are you suggesting that because some people aren't happy he would do an about face.....yep sorry Steven some people don't like you so Ive charged my mind you no longer are the CEO at the Crows.

I'm not saying that the club should have done any different. Let me clarify that - I don't believe they should have backed Trigg in, but given that they did choose to back him in, then they needed to coordinate to ensure there was a united front at the members meeting. Anything else would have been incompetent.

I'm just saying that it's unreasonable to expect people to make a song and dance at such an event. To then repeatedly rub their noses in the fact that they didn't as though it invalidates their concerns is missing the point. How many people who support the actions of the club's administrators would stand up in a room full of angry people with an extremely anti-administration environment and ask a dissenting question? It's one thing to be willing to raise them one-on-one or even in a small group, but in a room that is clearly full of people who are passionately, diametrically, opposed to your viewpoint? All that's likely to happen is that you're going to get howled down by the crowd and then receive the polite, dismissive canned response from the guys on the stage.

If people want to let the Crows know that they are dissatisfied with what has happened, there are times and places where it can be done effectively. A members meeting full of die-hards who will spontaneously applaud someone simply because they are attached to the Crows is not one of them.

 

[jenny61_99]

I'm not saying that the club should have done any different. Let me clarify that - I don't believe they should have backed Trigg in, but given that they did choose to back him in, then they needed to coordinate to ensure there was a united front at the members meeting. Anything else would have been incompetent.

I'm just saying that it's unreasonable to expect people to make a song and dance at such an event. To then repeatedly rub their noses in the fact that they didn't as though it invalidates their concerns is missing the point. How many people who support the actions of the club's administrators would stand up in a room full of angry people with an extremely anti-administration environment and ask a dissenting question? It's one thing to be willing to raise them one-on-one or even in a small group, but in a room that is clearly full of people who are passionately, diametrically, opposed to your viewpoint? All that's likely to happen is that you're going to get howled down by the crowd and then receive the polite, dismissive canned response from the guys on the stage.

If people want to let the Crows know that they are dissatisfied with what has happened, there are times and places where it can be done effectively. A members meeting full of die-hards who will spontaneously applaud someone simply because they are attached to the Crows is not one of them.

Maybe stabbie, but in this case, this thread was created by someone who was trying to get numbers of members to take a stand at the AGM.

 

[cmndstab]

Sure, and that one person probably deserves to have been called out on it (once or twice would have been often enough, mind you ). But I don't think your comments were really aimed at that poster alone.

 

[*PAF]

... Full member voting rights, well I've made my point about that in my previous post.
Well I agree that some parts could be better for supporters to have a say but how is it structured and to what extent??
...

Well you mentioned Melbourne but it was only thanks to the Hawthorn supporters and their ability to vote that both Melbourne and Hawthorn exist today.
You also mentioned Eddie, but you failed to mention that if Collingwood wasn't a members run club the chances of him having become president of the club would have been next to zilch. It is only thanks to Eddie McGuire that Collingwood has become the powerhouse it is today. At the time it was an unsuccessful joke both on and off the field. It had trouble getting sponsors, trouble obtaining good time slots, was nearly broke, bottom of the ladder etc etc.

Freo also went from a joke to a reasonably run and wealthy club once the members put the boot up the WAFL's arse.

 

[Sanders]

Secret ballots also have a dark side - I'm surprised someone of your intellect has not considered that aspect. By voting secretly, you can tell people one thing, and do another.

That's not a dark side its a misrepresentation of democratic process.

All that matters is how people vote:

Significance:
Vote 100%
Chat 0%

 

[Big Gazoongas]

Well you mentioned Melbourne but it was only thanks to the Hawthorn supporters and their ability to vote that both Melbourne and Hawthorn exist today.
You also mentioned Eddie, but you failed to mention that if Collingwood wasn't a members run club the chances of him having become president of the club would have been next to zilch. It is only thanks to Eddie McGuire that Collingwood has become the powerhouse it is today. At the time it was an unsuccessful joke both on and off the field. It had trouble getting sponsors, trouble obtaining good time slots, was nearly broke, bottom of the ladder etc etc.

Freo also went from a joke to a reasonably run and wealthy club once the members put the boot up the WAFL's arse.

Whilst you acknowledge the members having a say in the existence of the clubs today, you conveniently ignore the fact and the point I make and that is, Melbourne a club where its members have voting rights has been a basket case for years....and a fat lot of good that's done the Demons over a long period of time.
Hawthorn has got it's house in order but they have also been the beneficiaries of a number of early first round draft picks which is a major reason why they are a powerful club on the field.
Clubs aren't successful just because its members have voting rights.

Yes Eddie has had a major influence at the pies, but again you ignore the fact, like Hawthorn, they have had a number of early first round draft picks and the benefit of having a coach like Malthouse. And then you go on about sponsors, well the club has also been the major benefactor of prime time footy slots and that in itself is going to attract sponsors which in turn will help on the membership front. North Melbourne were the pioneers in Friday night footy and they were given the boot because they simply can't attract a crowd or a big viewing audience.
Collingwood didn't get prime time footy slots because Eddie is their president, it got them because of their supporter base and their ability to attract a big viewing audience. And don't forget Collingwood were successful before Eddie.
And the last I checked the Crows haven't had issues attracting sponsors, their major sponsor Toyota has been with them for how long??

Sure, I acknowledge that members having a say is a good thing, however the point I make is that its not always good, so for every Collingwood there is a Melbourne, St Kilda, Richmond, Bulldogs.

And lastly, how lovely that Freo are now a reasonably well run club....sorry I missed and wealthy.............but more importantly, how many Cups do they have??
I'll take the Crows with all their faults over Freo anyday!!

 

[Sanders]

And lastly, how lovely that Freo are now a reasonably well run club....sorry I missed and wealthy.............but more importantly, how many Cups do they have??
I'll take the Crows with all their faults over Freo anyday!!

That probably says it all if you have missed how radically Freo have gotten their house in order.

They have wodges of cash, great admin, onfield success, and a very tidy list.

They are an example to follow not mock

 

[Hank93]

I'm not saying that the club should have done any different. Let me clarify that - I don't believe they should have backed Trigg in, but given that they did choose to back him in, then they needed to coordinate to ensure there was a united front at the members meeting. Anything else would have been incompetent.

I'm just saying that it's unreasonable to expect people to make a song and dance at such an event. To then repeatedly rub their noses in the fact that they didn't as though it invalidates their concerns is missing the point. How many people who support the actions of the club's administrators would stand up in a room full of angry people with an extremely anti-administration environment and ask a dissenting question? It's one thing to be willing to raise them one-on-one or even in a small group, but in a room that is clearly full of people who are passionately, diametrically, opposed to your viewpoint? All that's likely to happen is that you're going to get howled down by the crowd and then receive the polite, dismissive canned response from the guys on the stage.

If people want to let the Crows know that they are dissatisfied with what has happened, there are times and places where it can be done effectively. A members meeting full of die-hards who will spontaneously applaud someone simply because they are attached to the Crows is not one of them.

This is a good point.

I think it may have been some community cabinet style meeting, with huge vitriol directed at the government over a particular issue (carbon tax, water rights, mining tax etc). There was this one person who supported what the government was doing, in a room of 500 angry, fired up people, and it got nasty.

There was abuse hurled towards this one person, and it wasn't nice at all to see.

I can't remember exactly what it was, but I remember seeing it on the TV.

I can imagine this is what the crows members meeting would have been like, but in a complete reverse. I think its good to make your feelings towards the club known, especially if your passionate about a particular issue (Like the KT saga), but you have to be a brave bugger to stand up in that room and go completely against the mood of the room, for very little (if any at all) gain.

I must say Stabby you always seem to be voice of reason on any discussion on this board

 

[Big Gazoongas]

This is a good point.

I think it may have been some community cabinet style meeting, with huge vitriol directed at the government over a particular issue (carbon tax, water rights, mining tax etc). There was this one person who supported what the government was doing, in a room of 500 angry, fired up people, and it got nasty.

There was abuse hurled towards this one person, and it wasn't nice at all to see.

I can't remember exactly what it was, but I remember seeing it on the TV.

I can imagine this is what the crows members meeting would have been like, but in a complete reverse. I think its good to make your feelings towards the club known, especially if your passionate about a particular issue (Like the KT saga), but you have to be a brave bugger to stand up in that room and go completely against the mood of the room, for very little (if any at all) gain.

I must say Stabby you always seem to be voice of reason on any discussion on this board

Well I refer you to post 131 by AFGM, this should give you some insight into the type of people that turned up...little hint "old" also makes reference to Jenny's grandparents so again the hint is "old"
Then read post 137 by Geoffa32....90% of those were Trigg Fan club and aged over 60
Post 146 again by AFGM referring to an "old" woman who made her point that she wasn't happy about the club and its ethics.

So by all this I assume the majority of the Pro Trigg supporters were elderly people.......It must have been extremely terrifying and traumatic to stand up and make a point on how you feel against these ferocious Pro Trigg supporters!!!!!!

 

[cmndstab]

So you'd be willing to cause a scene if they were all elderly, but not if they were young and fit enough to beat you up in the carpark?

I assume this is the point you are making? Not really sure, to be honest.

 

[Sanders]

Well I refer you to post 131 by AFGM, this should give you some insight into the type of people that turned up...little hint "old" also makes reference to Jenny's grandparents so again the hint is "old"
Then read post 137 by Geoffa32....90% of those were Trigg Fan club and aged over 60
Post 146 again by AFGM referring to an "old" woman who made her point that she wasn't happy about the club and its ethics.

So by all this I assume the majority of the Pro Trigg supporters were elderly people.......It must have been extremely terrifying and traumatic to stand up and make a point on how you feel against these ferocious Pro Trigg supporters!!!!!!

You seem confused holding onto your own narrative

 

[jenny61_99]

So you'd be willing to cause a scene if they were all elderly, but not if they were young and fit enough to beat you up in the carpark?

I assume this is the point you are making? Not really sure, to be honest.

Who was asking for a scene to caused? You could have stood up and read a prepared statement if you aren't confident with public speaking. Calmly, no childish tantrum. But you'd get your point across and you'd get other people thinking. but most of all, the club would absolutely know. There could be no hiding behind secret ballots or emails that may or may not be read. It would be the elephant in the room.

 

[Southerntakeover]

As I pointed out to Alex, I never commented on those that couldn't go. I made no such judgement on you.

As for "insulting" people to their face - absolutely would have no problem having a chat with you all when I come to Adelaide next (two weeks time - lets all meet up) and telling you how I feel. By the way, I am not insulting people, I'm calling them out, there is a huge difference. If they are insulted, perhaps there is a reason? Besides which, if THEY are insulted, they can discuss it with me. They don't need you to champion their cause.

You've been drawing an inference all over the place. If you want to meet whilst your in Adelaide, i'll likely be available. If you choose to insult me at that meeting, or 'call me out' thats your perogative.

My knowledge of history? Please kind sir, avail me of your superior intellect.

Secret ballots also have a dark side - I'm surprised someone of your intellect has not considered that aspect. By voting secretly, you can tell people one thing, and do another. Thus keeping in favour with both sides. A way to have your cake and eat it to, so to speak. I'd rather support people who have the courage of their convictions. Honesty is way underrated these days IMO.

Well, when you try to make points like this you can stop the 'superior intellect' lines. Its high school legal studies.

Secret ballot is integral to democracy. I probably shouldnt be suprised that you dont support it- fits very much in with the pattern.

Face to face does not always have to be conflict either. It is also known as a "conversation", where ideas and thoughts are shared and discussed.

Ideas are being shared here. What difference does it being in person make other than the thought that in person you believe posters would be intimidated out of sharing their beliefs and views?

I love that you, personally, don't come on the board as often as you used to, but when you do, you seemingly search out my posts and take it on yourself to try and find some way that I've breached the rules of our board. Is that a form of cyber stalking?

I dont come on the board as much as I used to because my circumstances have changed. I have far less free time.

That I seemingly end up having to disagree with you time and time again is a function of what you post, and how frequently. If you hadnt been carrying on disgracefully in this thread, I wouldnt have posted anything in your direction.

That you seemingly get away with breaching rules which others have been driven from the board for again and again is a source of frustration. I oft point it out in the hope that the mods will do something about it- its a better alternative than me getting drawn into a flaming war with you. Something I've gone out my way to avoid thus far despite your best efforts.

 

[Southerntakeover]

Who was asking for a scene to caused? You could have stood up and read a prepared statement if you aren't confident with public speaking. Calmly, no childish tantrum. But you'd get your point across and you'd get other people thinking. but most of all, the club would absolutely know. There could be no hiding behind secret ballots or emails that may or may not be read. It would be the elephant in the room.

See, here you go again.

'Hiding' behind secret ballot. So, if someone is genuinely intimidated you believe that either the points they make are invalid, or they lose their right to a vote.

What a ridiculous thuggish suggestion.

 

[Big Gazoongas]

That probably says it all if you have missed how radically Freo have gotten their house in order.

They have wodges of cash, great admin, onfield success, and a very tidy list.

They are an example to follow not mock

Well since Freo have been a perennial basket case there is only one direction they could possibly take, and yet they still haven't got a premiership. Happy for you to worship Freo.
I'll stick with the Crows

 

[Big Gazoongas]

So you'd be willing to cause a scene if they were all elderly, but not if they were young and fit enough to beat you up in the carpark?

I assume this is the point you are making? Not really sure, to be honest.

The point I am making is that we both agree that getting up in a forum like an AGM or member meetings can be intimidating, but applying that logic to the age demographic of those that attended the Crows meeting is laughable.
You also pointed out to Jenny that it doesn't invalidate the opinions of those that attended but chose to say nothing, and yes you are right (however I don't think that was the point Jenny was making), but what it does invalidate is their commitment and desire to have a say directly to the leadership.

This thread was started in order to get people to go to the meeting and have their say. There were a number that attended and some of those chest beating gorillas turned into custard tarts when push came to shove and all we have heard since are excuses.

If you make the commitment to go, bloody well say something and if you don't, don't come back here with excuses as to why you didn't. I don't buy the "it was a pro Trigg crowd", "it wouldn't matter what we say" blah blah blah.

FGS see post 146 by AFGM, even a little old lady had the courage to have her say.

 

[Wright Away]

The point I am making is that we both agree that getting up in a forum like an AGM or member meetings can be intimidating, but applying that logic to the age demographic of those that attended the Crows meeting is laughable.
You also pointed out to Jenny that it doesn't invalidate the opinions of those that attended but chose to say nothing, and yes you are right (however I don't think that was the point Jenny was making), but what it does invalidate is their commitment and desire to have a say directly to the leadership.

This thread was started in order to get people to go to the meeting and have their say. There were a number that attended and some of those chest beating gorillas turned into custard tarts when push came to shove and all we have heard since are excuses.

If you make the commitment to go, bloody well say something and if you don't, don't come back here with excuses as to why you didn't. I don't buy the "it was a pro Trigg crowd", "it wouldn't matter what we say" blah blah blah.

FGS see post 146 by AFGM, even a little old lady had the courage to have her say.

U mad bro you so mad, LOL

 

[Big Gazoongas]

That probably says it all if you have missed how radically Freo have gotten their house in order.

They have wodges of cash, great admin, onfield success, and a very tidy list.

They are an example to follow not mock

Yes wodes of cash
Sure they may have a great admin
Onfield success........oh please stop the bull. Please compare them against the Crows and tell us who is in front. You may have also missed a few results this year.
A tidy list yes, but we also have a bloody good list or have you missed that as well

 

[Geoffa32]

Well I refer you to post 131 by AFGM, this should give you some insight into the type of people that turned up...little hint "old" also makes reference to Jenny's grandparents so again the hint is "old"
Then read post 137 by Geoffa32....90% of those were Trigg Fan club and aged over 60
Post 146 again by AFGM referring to an "old" woman who made her point that she wasn't happy about the club and its ethics.

So by all this I assume the majority of the Pro Trigg supporters were elderly people.......It must have been extremely terrifying and traumatic to stand up and make a point on how you feel against these ferocious Pro Trigg supporters!!!!!!

The point I am making is that we both agree that getting up in a forum like an AGM or member meetings can be intimidating, but applying that logic to the age demographic of those that attended the Crows meeting is laughable.
You also pointed out to Jenny that it doesn't invalidate the opinions of those that attended but chose to say nothing, and yes you are right (however I don't think that was the point Jenny was making), but what it does invalidate is their commitment and desire to have a say directly to the leadership.

This thread was started in order to get people to go to the meeting and have their say. There were a number that attended and some of those chest beating gorillas turned into custard tarts when push came to shove and all we have heard since are excuses.

If you make the commitment to go, bloody well say something and if you don't, don't come back here with excuses as to why you didn't. I don't buy the "it was a pro Trigg crowd", "it wouldn't matter what we say" blah blah blah.

FGS see post 146 by AFGM, even a little old lady had the courage to have her say.

One of the comments of the night, came from an elderly lady who felt some shame in the way the club has acted.


So not all of the elderly were pro Trigg. Just most of the Pro Trigg club seemed elderly.



I personally went to see how many who were quite vocal against Trigg/Board would say something. And to see if any real debate would occur. I did think about asking a question, but it was more about how we plan to take ownership of our move to Adelaide Oval. And what real benefits we will see. Which I think was answered (as much as it will be) anyway through the night.

Personally I am over it. I have little faith in the admin other than whatever they are doing is allowing us quality coaches/fitness staff to produce good enough players to compete at AFL level. So I am a bit blase in my dislike of the board. I have always seen the board/admin as a "boys club", as it is at many other organisations.

 

[Geoffa32]

Yes wodges of cash
Sure they may have a great admin
Onfield success........oh please stop the bull. Please compare them against the Crows and tell us who is in front. You may have also missed a few results this year.
A tidy list yes, but we also have a bloody good list or have you missed that as well.

Freo have rode the booming economy in WA well, as has the rest of Australia.

They also benefit from the set up in WA, where the WAFC owns the two AFL licences. However both clubs only pay a dividend to them if they are profitable, and the rent on Subiaco is paid on an annual basis and it is a clean stadium. The WAFC has little involvement in their clubs other than collect a dividend and the annual rent on Subi. I can't see why we can't adapt that model.

There are also a few people who switched to Freo once WCE's season ticket allocation was exhausted. WCE have a multiple year wait list (as we did).

They don't know how to put a good bunch of players on the park and be competitive. But can make money....woohoo.



If we had the same relationship with the SANFL as the WAFC has with Freo and WCE, our club would be an AFL financial powerhouse.

 

[Big Gazoongas]

Freo have rode the booming economy in WA well, as has the rest of Australia.

They also benefit from the set up in WA, where the WAFC owns the two AFL licences. However both clubs only pay a dividend to them if they are profitable, and the rent on Subiaco is paid on an annual basis and it is a clean stadium. The WAFC has little involvement in their clubs other than collect a dividend and the annual rent on Subi. I can't see why we can't adapt that model.

There are also a few people who switched to Freo once WCE's season ticket allocation was exhausted. WCE have a multiple year wait list (as we did).

They don't know how to put a good bunch of players on the park and be competitive. But can make money....woohoo.



If we had the same relationship with the SANFL as the WAFC has with Freo and WCE, our club would be an AFL financial powerhouse.

I like what you have posted here Geoffa. Do you know how the clubs are structured and what rights members have or don't have? Do they have a commission that has some interest in the clubs like we have here?

 

[Geoffa32]

I like what you have posted here Geoffa. Do you know how the clubs are structured and what rights members have or don't have? Do they have a commission that has some interest in the clubs like we have here?

The WAFC owns the Dockers and Eagles

The WAFC's role includes ownership of the State's two AFL teams - West Coast Eagles and Fremantle Football Club (Dockers)

Is also interesting that they manage Subiaco,

acting as the manager of Patersons Stadium.

http://www.wafootball.com.au/wafc/about-us

Org Chart
http://www.wafootball.com.au/wafc/organisational-chart



From what I can gather Freo do have voting rights at club elections

http://membership.fremantlefc.com.au/packages-prices/reserved-seating


I don't think they elect the entire board though. These seem to suggest they have a distinction between member elected and WAFC appointed board members.

http://mm.afl.com.au/Portals/0/freo_docs/Member_Elected_Directors_Advert_2009.pdf
http://mm.afl.com.au/Portals/0/frem...-Elected-Directors-Explanation-Paper-2012.pdf


But it does appear that this person is appointed to the board if they get the highest number of member votes. Not at the discretion of the WAFC after the vote. As is the case with us and the SANFL.

 

[Geoffa32]

The main differences between us and the WA clubs, from what I can gather, is no so much the governance of the clubs/football commissions (both set ups are similar), but in the way the football commissions collect revenues from the AFL clubs via distributions and rent/stadium deal.

 

[Big Gazoongas]

The WAFC owns the Dockers and Eagles



Is also interesting that they manage Subiaco,



http://www.wafootball.com.au/wafc/about-us

Org Chart
http://www.wafootball.com.au/wafc/organisational-chart



From what I can gather Freo do have voting rights at club elections

http://membership.fremantlefc.com.au/packages-prices/reserved-seating


I don't think they elect the entire board though. These seem to suggest they have a distinction between member elected and WAFC appointed board members.

http://mm.afl.com.au/Portals/0/freo_docs/Member_Elected_Directors_Advert_2009.pdf
http://mm.afl.com.au/Portals/0/frem...-Elected-Directors-Explanation-Paper-2012.pdf


But it does appear that this person is appointed to the board if they get the highest number of member votes. Not at the discretion of the WAFC after the vote. As is the case with us and the SANFL.

Thanks for the links Geoffa, interesting set up.