Opinion Jeff Kennett News, Media etc.

[Dipper]

Just had a phone call from Hawks for Change and he did not say who to vote for in the 2nd spot so i asked about my vote going for someone that Jeff had put there and that being counter productive. His opinion was to give the second vote to Holdstock (again only his opinion) and that Shearer could continue to do his fundraiser for Dingley work on the finance sub committee.

The trouble with forcing people to cast 2 votes when there are only 3 candidates for 2 positions is that it becomes possible that the candidate with the most support doesn't get elected due to a degree of second guessing around the tactical element of the 2nd vote.

It wouldn't be an issue if there were still 6 candidates.

It's still unlikely but it does open up the possibility. If 1st preference and second preference votes were weighted then once again it wouldn't be an issue, but on every ballot that is cast only 1 candidate won't receive a vote, and you're giving your second choice candidate as much of a vote as your first. The candidate that 'receives' the most non votes may very well be the candidate that was first choice for the largest number of people and then you're hoping that the latter outweighs the former.

You could have 2 candidates running on similar establishment status quo tickets, and 40% of the members vote for both of them, the 3rd, upsetting the apple cart, candidate has 60% of the support but all those people have to cast a vote for one of the other stooges and if those votes were split fairly evenly then your revolutionary finds themself still on the outer.


It's illogical, hopefully by stupidity rather than design.

Sent from my SM-A326B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[eldorado]

The trouble with forcing people to cast 2 votes when there are only 3 candidates for 2 positions is that it becomes possible that the candidate with the most support doesn't get elected due to a degree of second guessing around the tactical element of the 2nd vote.

It wouldn't be an issue if there were still 6 candidates.

It's still unlikely but it does open up the possibility. If 1st preference and second preference votes were weighted then once again it wouldn't be an issue, but on every ballot that is cast only 1 candidate won't receive a vote, and you're giving your second choice candidate as much of a vote as your first. The candidate that 'receives' the most non votes may very well be the candidate that was first choice for the largest number of people and then you're hoping that the latter outweighs the former.

You could have 2 candidates running on similar establishment status quo tickets, and 40% of the members vote for both of them, the 3rd, upsetting the apple cart, candidate has 60% of the support but all those people have to cast a vote for one of the other stooges and if those votes were split fairly evenly then your revolutionary finds themself still on the outer.


It's illogical, hopefully by stupidity rather than design.

Sent from my SM-A326B using BigFooty.com mobile app

I reckon you're overthinking.

The two people who are voted for most often will get in.

That's it.

If people want the revolutionary, they will get in. If they don't, they won't

 

[KermitJagger]

Just had a phone call from Hawks for Change and he did not say who to vote for in the 2nd spot so i asked about my vote going for someone that Jeff had put there and that being counter productive. His opinion was to give the second vote to Holdstock (again only his opinion) and that Shearer could continue to do his fundraiser for Dingley work on the finance sub committee.

Shearer could perform his role without being a board member, but when is the last time you saw anyone be fine with "oh we're pretty much demoting you but we're expecting you to do the same amount of work".

 

[Dipper]

I reckon you're overthinking.

The two people who are voted for most often will get in.

That's it.

If people want the revolutionary, they will get in. If they don't, they won't

Maybe there is a degree of overthinking but it still doesn't make any sense. Logic is our friend in these matters.

When it's 2 from 3, just have people cast 1 vote and then you'll get the 2 most popular candidates. No dramas.





Sent from my SM-A326B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Just had a phone call from Hawks for Change and he did not say who to vote for in the 2nd spot so i asked about my vote going for someone that Jeff had put there and that being counter productive. His opinion was to give the second vote to Holdstock (again only his opinion) and that Shearer could continue to do his fundraiser for Dingley work on the finance sub committee.

Yikes. Has anyone asked Shearer if he's willing to do that, because if our fundraising stalls for Dingley.....then what?

 

[Mississippi]

“and Ian who recently retired from the leadership of Australian Super.” - way to diminish Silk’s credentials and his CV in one sentence there, Jeff. Someone’s clearly not enjoying having everything not go his way these past few weeks.

Agree with that. A classic backhanded and ungracious statement from a festering president who’s unhappy about being forced into a “retirement agreement”.

It’s fair to say that Shearer was part of the bargain that has brought about Kennett’s departure. My information is that Shearer has been no great shakes as a board member. I’ll be voting for the other candidate first, because she’s a non-Kennett candidate and secondly, because with Silk, they will freshen up a board that need new blood after the Kennett regime.

And next year, looking forward to Andy Gowers joining them.

 

[Hawkk]

David Parkin and Peter Hudson have both thrown their weight behind Shearer

Redirect Notice

 

[KermitJagger]

Yikes. Has anyone asked Shearer if he's willing to do that, because if our fundraising stalls for Dingley.....then what?

Exactly, and if anything he's done an admirable job where he's at. He's managed to secure a huge amount of funding while being anchored down by a massive funding deterrent in Kennett. Jeff is no friend to any of the AFL, State Labor or Federal LNP and we've secured funding from all three.

 

[Mercy Seat]

Yikes. Has anyone asked Shearer if he's willing to do that, because if our fundraising stalls for Dingley.....then what?

He’s up for re-election so he / they would most certainly have an idea of what he’s going to be doing if he is not reappointed.

As in the business world, boards and roles are shuffled all the time and it’s not uncommon for people to hold onto roles in committees outside of a board role.

 

[Flukey!]

Both camps have preferred candidates:

The club have argued very strongly for Shearer. In the latest email from Jeff, he has a snippet dedicated to Jennifer Holdstock, nothing more. Clearly the focus is on retaining Shearer.

HFC quite clearly want Ian Silk with no preferred 2nd candidate.

If we collectively vote Shearer and Silk, it is a win/win and gives us the best chance of success and the change we want.

Dont jeopardise the outcome by voting for Holdstock.
She may be an amazing person and candidate, just not now.

 

[Mercy Seat]

50 prominent Hawks back Silk in club’s board battle

Hawthorn board candidate Ian Silk’s supporters include 11 premiership players, and the wife of a legendary club figure, as he seeks election.

www.theage.com.au

 

[TylerDurden]

 

[Ned Ryerson]

50 prominent Hawks back Silk in club’s board battle

Hawthorn board candidate Ian Silk’s supporters include 11 premiership players, and the wife of a legendary club figure, as he seeks election.

www.theage.com.au

The Crimmins family is a fairly big endorsement.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

Full credit to Tim, but why did he prompt Kane on that? Doesn't show a great deal of touch with the external perceptions of our club.

 

[Jaeger]

Dafuq

 

[Ned Ryerson]

Is Shearer trying to let Holdstock pull a Bradbury? I haven't listened to the interview (but will once it's uploaded) but those excerpts sound a tad car crash-like. I mean, yeah the list needs work but for a director to publicly agree with Cornes saying it is one of the worst in the league isn't exactly a vote of confidence in the players.

 

[flinchfree]

Is Shearer trying to let Holdstock pull a Bradbury? I haven't listened to the interview (but will once it's uploaded) but those excerpts sound a tad car crash-like. I mean, yeah the list needs work but for a director to publicly agree with Cornes saying it is one of the worst in the league isn't exactly a vote of confidence in the players.

Or his own work as well as the board/President/talent scouts/development coaches in putting together the HFC list and developing them for supposed future success.
In fact, it's the comment of a man who is at complete odds with the current direction and work of the Club and seeking to have them removed for an alternate narrative.
Absolutely mind boggling thing to say after being given the slip stream to re-election by the current President.
No way I'm voting for him. He's too stupid to know where his bread is buttered and would be a dangerous loose cannon in any future Hawthorn organization if he were to front the media again.

Complete. Dipstick.

 

[Brant]

Dafuq

How do you trust a project like Dingley to a guy that openly admits he 100% agrees with Kane Cornes - especially when it comes to our list (which is actually bloody good if fit)??? What a di**head.

Someone is about to finish 3rd in voting for a Board seat...

 

[flinchfree]

How do you trust a project like Dingley to a guy that openly admits he 100% agrees with Kane Cornes - especially when it comes to our list (which is actually bloody good if fit)??? What a di**head.

Someone is about to finish 3rd in voting for a Board seat...

Yup.
Hawks for change group needs to put out an email immediately calling out this imbecile and politely recommending Jennifer Holdstock as running mate with Silk.

 

[Flukey!]

How do you trust a project like Dingley to a guy that openly admits he 100% agrees with Kane Cornes - especially when it comes to our list (which is actually bloody good if fit)??? What a di**head.

Someone is about to finish 3rd in voting for a Board seat...

My question would be why would a guy whose skills are fundraising and the like be commenting on the list.

 

[Off The Couch]

I’m asking why ask the question in the first place.

Every man and his dog knows Kane’s thought on our list.

i just don’t understand the context here
Where was he going with this question

 

[flinchfree]

I’m asking why ask the question in the first place.

Every man and his dog knows Kane’s thought on our list.

i just don’t understand the context here
Where was he going with this question

Stupid people do stupid things and win stupid prizes.

 

[hawk65]

Dafuq

Haha when I saw that tweet I thought it was Tim Watson replying not Tim Shearer. I know where my 2nd vote is going now.

 

[Yardie]

I’m asking why ask the question in the first place.

Every man and his dog knows Kane’s thought on our list.

i just don’t understand the context here
Where was he going with this question

I'm a tad confused as well. It seems he was trying to deflect by assuming he could outmaneuvre Cornes cause he is smarter.

Remember kids, don't argue with an idiot cause they will bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.

 

[flinchfree]

I'm a tad confused as well. It seems he was trying to deflect by assuming he could outmaneuvre Cornes cause he is smarter.

Remember kids, don't argue with an idiot cause they will bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.

I'm going with regular joe in the presence of athlete, asking a question he didn't know the likely response to, and then being too star struck to do anything but agree/aquiesce because he felt lacking in his own convictions on the subject of sporting performance and key indicators of success.
May also be an unguarded reveal of his inner perception that the shemozzle of the last couple years of on field performance and difficulty in getting a mature hand over of coaching responsibility has him believing that the Club is in some disarray.

Absolutely awful optics.