Its time to go Trigg!!!!

[1970crow]

Could Chapoy be backing Triggy publicly knowing that the AFL will call for Triggy's head regardless

Wouldn't bee too smart a move for mine. Having a CEO screw up so royally under your watch is bad enough. Being seen to mis-read the situation to such an extent could result in the spotlight changing direction after triggy goes. Ive always thought that he had chosen his path when he didn't suspend with pay pending the outcome. In hindsight, triggy perhaps should have taken leave as I doubt he's been doing much of his CEO duties during this period. Not going to that conference speaks volumes as to where his priorities lay.

 

[swanfan]

Wouldn't bee too smart a move for mine. Having a CEO screw up so royally under your watch is bad enough. Being seen to mis-read the situation to such an extent could result in the spotlight changing direction after triggy goes. Ive always thought that he had chosen his path when he didn't suspend with pay pending the outcome. In hindsight, triggy perhaps should have taken leave as I doubt he's been doing much of his CEO duties during this period. Not going to that conference speaks volumes as to where his priorities lay.

He did. He flew to Paris.

 

[boffo]

....triggy perhaps should have taken leave as I doubt he's been doing much of his CEO duties during this period. Not going to that conference speaks volumes as to where his priorities lay.

Fair point about the conference, but the best thing Triggy can do for the club right now is to fight the charges with 100% of his effort. The more Trigg can exonerate himself the more the club is exonerated. This is far more important than a routine CEO meeting (at which we were represented by somebody else who could report back).

 

[Cap]

Fair point about the conference, but the best thing Triggy can do for the club right now is to fight the charges with 100% of his effort. The more Trigg can exonerate himself the more the club is exonerated. This is far more important than a routine CEO meeting (at which we were represented by somebody else who could report back).

I agree, in reality, had he rocked up, people would be criticising him for not taking the charges seriously.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Surely at the moment Trigg has to worry about Trigg, not the AFC. It's his livelihood, his family after all.

 

[ManInTheArena]

Surely at the moment Trigg has to worry about Trigg, not the AFC. It's his livelihood, his family after all.

I would hope not, unless he is going to get the ass. It's his ship to sail if he's not going to get sacked.

 

[cmndstab]

From what Chapman is saying, it appears Steven will be the CEO for as far as the eye can see.

I hope you're right, for your sake - going on past history, this should see him unceremoniously dumped within months

 

[AFC1990]

I have been an AFC member since inception, and a club sponsor for the past 8 years.
From a sponsor perspective, S Trigg has provided outstanding service, leadership and direction. His integrity, work ethic and devotion to this club has never been questioned, which makes this current scenario (as portrayed in the media to date) harder to fathom. This is an opinion gleaned from repeated, close interactions with the club over an extended period, and I, for one, will find it difficult to continue our working association with the club if S Trigg loses his role. Most especially if it is an AFL dictate.
It is nauseating to read some of the ill informed rubbish on this topic, the naivety and lack of understanding of even the basics, such as that of the role of a CEO (as opposed to a Chairman or President) is at times painful. Can we at least wait until the facts, not innuendo and rumour, have been laid bare before passing judgement? I know I don't have to read the tripe, but often you get some good stories here.
Some of you guys would make great firemen, but you could never prevent a single bushfire starting.

 

[wetalkinboutpractice]

Surely at the moment Trigg has to worry about Trigg, not the AFC. It's his livelihood, his family after all.

You'd imagine so.

The remaining 'role' as CEO is just a formality until it's all been finalized

 

[johnnypanther]

I have been an AFC member since inception, and a club sponsor for the past 8 years.
From a sponsor perspective, S Trigg has provided outstanding service, leadership and direction. His integrity, work ethic and devotion to this club has never been questioned, which makes this current scenario (as portrayed in the media to date) harder to fathom. This is an opinion gleaned from repeated, close interactions with the club over an extended period, and I, for one, will find it difficult to continue our working association with the club if S Trigg loses his role. Most especially if it is an AFL dictate.
It is nauseating to read some of the ill informed rubbish on this topic, the naivety and lack of understanding of even the basics, such as that of the role of a CEO (as opposed to a Chairman or President) is at times painful. Can we at least wait until the facts, not innuendo and rumour, have been laid bare before passing judgement? I know I don't have to read the tripe, but often you get some good stories here.
Some of you guys would make great firemen, but you could never prevent a single bushfire starting.

On a somewhat related issue, I would add that this whole process , in particular many supporter opinions, comments and (media too) both on the forums and on talk-back radio are a verry good example of and illustrate to me why a crows board elected (or majority elected) by members only is not the best way to run a club.
Instability, knee-jerk reactions, uninformed commentary, and the "shock-jock"mentality would reign.

Nevertheless, i do believe that the AFC should at least have a minority member elected reps on the board and also to be much more transparent with members in their dealings.

 

[boffo]

I, for one, will find it difficult to continue our working association with the club if S Trigg loses his role. Most especially if it is an AFL dictate.

Regardless of what he has done?

You respect Trigg, fair enough. But I find it hard to reconcile the above with your plea to wait for the facts.

 

[sworc36]

I have been an AFC member since inception, and a club sponsor for the past 8 years.
From a sponsor perspective, S Trigg has provided outstanding service, leadership and direction. His integrity, work ethic and devotion to this club has never been questioned, which makes this current scenario (as portrayed in the media to date) harder to fathom. This is an opinion gleaned from repeated, close interactions with the club over an extended period, and I, for one, will find it difficult to continue our working association with the club if S Trigg loses his role. Most especially if it is an AFL dictate.
It is nauseating to read some of the ill informed rubbish on this topic, the naivety and lack of understanding of even the basics, such as that of the role of a CEO (as opposed to a Chairman or President) is at times painful. Can we at least wait until the facts, not innuendo and rumour, have been laid bare before passing judgement? I know I don't have to read the tripe, but often you get some good stories here.
Some of you guys would make great firemen, but you could never prevent a single bushfire starting.

Would be interesting to see how many other sponsors would feel the same?

 

[Wood_Duck]

Would be interesting to see how many other sponsors would feel the same?

I don't think there is any doubt. Trigg is extremely well liked by sponsors and the general football community.

 

[craig crowing]

Trigg has been in charge and responsible for Crows greatest shame and he will go as has no other choice .
This Chapman charade is to make Trigg resignation when it comes as to be shown as taking a bullet for club This way club gets whats required and no blood on hands and Trigg goes with some dignity.
People keeping talking as though not guilty which already admitted we are and can only get worse and if we end up with losing more draft picks then I will vex my anger not only with AFL but Crows heads and hope Trigg etc get to pay some of the fine we will receive.

 

[craig crowing]

I don't think there is any doubt. Trigg is extremely well liked by sponsors and the general football community.

Remember we liked Rendell as well and surely you compare what Trigg etc have done to tarnish clubs name as tenfold greater than he did.
What would you prefer a $500 K fine or 10 K sponsor . Let them go to Port as they need there fickle support.

 

[bjn1960]

I have been an AFC member since inception, and a club sponsor for the past 8 years.
From a sponsor perspective, S Trigg has provided outstanding service, leadership and direction. His integrity, work ethic and devotion to this club has never been questioned, which makes this current scenario (as portrayed in the media to date) harder to fathom. This is an opinion gleaned from repeated, close interactions with the club over an extended period, and I, for one, will find it difficult to continue our working association with the club if S Trigg loses his role. Most especially if it is an AFL dictate.
It is nauseating to read some of the ill informed rubbish on this topic, the naivety and lack of understanding of even the basics, such as that of the role of a CEO (as opposed to a Chairman or President) is at times painful. Can we at least wait until the facts, not innuendo and rumour, have been laid bare before passing judgement? I know I don't have to read the tripe, but often you get some good stories here.
Some of you guys would make great firemen, but you could never prevent a single bushfire starting.

AFC1990 - I'm intrigued as to when your opinion of "...find it difficult to continue our working association with the
club if S Trigg loses his role..." may alter? What level of responsibility does S Trigg have to be accountable for and what level of reprocusssions given to the club does his position become untenable from your (sponsor) point of view?

 

[Wood_Duck]

What would you prefer a $500 K fine or 10 K sponsor . Let them go to Port as they need there fickle support.

Thats a kind of strange thing to say. If we get a 500K fine we will need every 10K sponsor we can get.

 

[sworc36]

Remember we liked Rendell as well and surely you compare what Trigg etc have done to tarnish clubs name as tenfold greater than he did.
What would you prefer a $500 K fine or 10 K sponsor . Let them go to Port as they need there fickle support.

I dont know how many of these sponsors would have had dealings with Rendell. A hell of a lot would have with Trigg tho..How would you feel if Toyota decided to pull the plug if Trigg is sacked?

 

[Wood_Duck]

I dont know how many of these sponsors would have had dealings with Rendell. A hell of a lot would have with Trigg tho..How would you feel if Toyota decided to pull the plug if Trigg is sacked?

Dont need em.

 

[Crow-eater]

Stuff his involvement in all this crap.

He deserves to be sacked on approving the murder of crows design alone.

 

[Smoooothy]

wheres the proof he approved the murder of crows design?

for what it's worth, i want trigg gone as much as the next guy, but apart from internet inuendo there has been nothing to say that he has actually approved it..

 

[Crow-eater]

wheres the proof he approved the murder of crows design?

Look in the clothing apparel thread

 

[Smoooothy]

Look in the clothing apparel thread

are you ******* kidding me?????

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

I have been an AFC member since inception, and a club sponsor for the past 8 years.
From a sponsor perspective, S Trigg has provided outstanding service, leadership and direction. His integrity, work ethic and devotion to this club has never been questioned, which makes this current scenario (as portrayed in the media to date) harder to fathom. This is an opinion gleaned from repeated, close interactions with the club over an extended period, and I, for one, will find it difficult to continue our working association with the club if S Trigg loses his role. Most especially if it is an AFL dictate.
It is nauseating to read some of the ill informed rubbish on this topic, the naivety and lack of understanding of even the basics, such as that of the role of a CEO (as opposed to a Chairman or President) is at times painful. Can we at least wait until the facts, not innuendo and rumour, have been laid bare before passing judgement? I know I don't have to read the tripe, but often you get some good stories here.
Some of you guys would make great firemen, but you could never prevent a single bushfire starting.

I have no doubt from a sponsor viewpoint Trigg has been outstanding & we should hold off any specific judgement til they front up to the AFL.

However, how would you company feel if your CEO presided over losing it's best asset for nothing, giving away another asset & the rights to 2 other assets for 2 lower value ones? Further, the CEO kept the full truth from you board, until it became blatantly obvious to all that it could no longer be covered up. Then because of this, your company is likely to receive a massive fine for breaking industry rules. Would your CEO keep their job?

I appreciate Trigg has generally been a strong administrator for AFC, but he has presided & known about the illegal Tippett contract. This is not a small mistake - this is a major stuff up, which will have both significant short & longer term impacts on the club - at a time when we are in the race for the flag, we are giving away an advantage to our competitors. The CEO is ultimately accountable. Most senior managers would be normally be removed for much less.

If your organisation really supports AFC (as opposed to Trigg), then you would support them through thick & thin, which shouldn't change if Trigg is removed for being responsible for this mess.

 

[IddyBiddy]

Stuff his involvement in all this crap.

He deserves to be sacked on approving the murder of crows design alone.

Yup, I 'm supportive of waiting and seeing the outcome of the Commission's investigation before calling for Triggs head...but that murder of crows design...seriously...