Kennett Taking Over

[Grendel]

You may not look at what he did whilst a politician but most people will, including myself.

I'm fine with people looking at what he did while he was a politcian.


I'm not fine with this turning into a political debate on a football forum.

That's the final word on it.

 

[Fabulous]

Grendle, Football and Politics go hand in hand. Trust me on this one as someone who has worked and been involved in the AFL & AFL clubs for 25 years. I assume you are referring to politics of a different persuasion than football. Now what would be your response if someone brought religion into it? Isn't football a religion to some? Would suggest better criteria to look at would simply be repetitive/overuse on the same thread or anything that is litigious. Personally I see nothing on this thread that deserves censorship. Others on similiar sites have used their personal views to moderate. This is your call and conscience at the end of the day. After all you have the power.

Good Luck

 

[Grendel]

The last post on page three of this thread was all about politics, nothing about football.

The man was a politician. Fine, acknowledge it and move on as he's now a candidate (and likely to be) President of the HFC in the near future.

Address that and don't bring up past political decisions made that did or did not affect the HFC at/during his time as a politician. It's has no relevance to the now as he is now going to be head of a membership of 30,000 rather than leader of a population of 3 plus million Victorians.

If you want to talk politics fine, there's a board on BF for it (the S&C board). This board is for football discussion, be it on or off field. Political/board room discussion of a football nature (Ian D and Scott for example) no problems.

But the post from MF at the bottom of the third page has nothing to do with football and everything to do with a political viewpoint that this forum is not designed or intended for.

 

[MightyFighting]

The last post on page three of this thread was all about politics, nothing about football.
...
But the post from MF at the bottom of the third page has nothing to do with football and everything to do with a political viewpoint that this forum is not designed or intended for.

On the contrary, I would have thought evaluating the personality of a Hawthorn presidential aspirant via his past actions had everything to do with football.

 

[Grendel]

This isn't about Liberal and Labor, but I'll bite this time:

And that's the last bite. Next post is off to S&C.

 

[MightyFighting]

And that's the last bite. Next post is off to S&C.

Fair enough, but I can still call Kennett arrogant, and question his appropriateness to be president of Hawthorn.

 

[Grendel]

Never said you couldn't. I still think he's got the approval of the bloke (and I'm presuming this, you haven't actually said) that he's (seemingly, it's still hasn't happened yet) going to replace in Ian D.

For mine, that's a pretty good endorsement.

Fwiw, McMahon was/is about the most arrogant man I've ever come across in my life, he was a damn effective President of the EFC as well. I think in any position like that a certain degree of arrogance/belief in your ability to do the job is required.

Carey and Dermott had arrogance, would they have been the footballers they were without it?

Speculation and guess work (and a little bit of ego ) on our part involved in making that judgement.. or at least from my pov it is anyway.

 

[MightyFighting]

Fwiw, McMahon was/is about the most arrogant man I've ever come across in my life, he was a damn effective President of the EFC as well. I think in any position like that a certain degree of arrogance/belief in your ability to do the job is required.

Was he as obnoxious as Jeff?

 

[Grendel]

Worse.. he was an Essendon supporter.

 

[Flightleader]

I fear that just like John Elliot, he'll try to turn the club into his own personal shrine. (He is after all, above all else, an egotist.)

A few of his statements in the Age today could imply that he plans changes for change's sake.

I suspect that the club is in a much worse financial position than it lets on, and can't afford to lose its "family club" image because of Jeff's planned gimmicks.

This is a serious threat to the clubs future.

Lets just hope that with what Dicker has done with allowing such supporter involvement that this won't happen. Also a footy club is a different beast to politics in state government. Jeff will have a slightly different view to things than he would have in running the state. Or at least will have learnt something about the publics view in all this.

I'm willing to give him a go if he gets in.

 

[Robber Baron]

Kennett will be different to Dicker and has much experience in leadership. I'm glad he is going to lead Hawthorn and even more happy that he wants premierships as soon as possible.

Dicker was a good president and his time was up, perhaps he was stale or just getting too old to go on. Jeff is younger and has lots of energy and has already told Eddie to stop pushing Hawthorn around.

I hope Jeff keeps Dunstall and Dermie on the board because they are legends.

Good luck to Ian Dicker on his retirement.

 

[Hawkk]

Kennett will be different to Dicker and has much experience in leadership. I'm glad he is going to lead Hawthorn and even more happy that he wants premierships as soon as possible.

Dicker was a good president and his time was up, perhaps he was stale or just getting too old to go on. Jeff is younger and has lots of energy and has already told Eddie to stop pushing Hawthorn around.

I hope Jeff keeps Dunstall and Dermie on the board because they are legends.

Good luck to Ian Dicker on his retirement.

Couldnt agree more

 

[Hawk Dork]

Hawthorn became a great club when it stopped dividing it self between Catholics and Protestants

A divisive president is the last thing we need.

All this talk of him being
Media savvy..............................jeff.com ??????????????


Great president who will lift membership as president of SMSC did nothing



I want JEFF FOR PRESIDENT OF ESSENDON

 

[Gary Shadforth]

Kennett will be different to Dicker and has much experience in leadership. I'm glad he is going to lead Hawthorn and even more happy that he wants premierships as soon as possible.

Dicker was a good president and his time was up, perhaps he was stale or just getting too old to go on. Jeff is younger and has lots of energy and has already told Eddie to stop pushing Hawthorn around.

I hope Jeff keeps Dunstall and Dermie on the board because they are legends.

Good luck to Ian Dicker on his retirement.

Good post, RB. With regard to your comments on Jeff keeping Jason and Dermie on the board we should keep in mind that it is the members in general meeting, including the right of those on the board, who nominate and elect the board.

 

[Fabulous]

Good post, RB. With regard to your comments on Jeff keeping Jason and Dermie on the board we should keep in mind that it is the members in general meeting, including the right of those on the board, who nominate and elect the board.

Also take into account directors can decide not to stand again or stand down if they are the wrong fit. e.g. As Scott did, as Dicker agreed to do, as Jolly did, as could be the case of 3-4 of the remaining current directors, Hogg, Carnie, Brereton, Dunstall, and possibly Growcott.

Jeff will wan't to bring in fresh thinkers. He can do this by keeping the same board size and replace existing directors, increase to get his choices in, or possibly reduce the size. Suggest he only wants 8. 4 off 2 on.

The fixing up of the board, and the direction it takes with the administration, is the real challenge of the club over the next 18 months.

If we get it wrong this time .....

 

[Gary Shadforth]

Hmmnnn, Fabulous. Not quite sure what you are getting at in most of the points you have made. There is such a matter as the club's constitution wherein the president's powers are codified.

I agree with what you are saying about the challenge the club has over the next 18 months.

 

[Hawkk]

Jeff wont divide the majority of members and supporters, remember we do not represent the majority of supporters, heck I dont even live in Melbourne!!!

I think Jeff will be a good president because he knows when to make the hard descisions, I knows when it is time to make friends and when it is not. Not to mention he will give the club's move to Waverely more high profile then it otherwise wouldnt have recieved. I also think a bonus could be that he could better convert supporters into members.

With his leadership-a win at all costs, he could help us to once again be a power of the competition. Dont be told otherwise, a winning culture stems from the board down, it can be seen within all aspects of the club. From the captain to the boot studder, from the coach to the trainer, from the president to the groundsmen.

We are the only club in the Eastern suburbs of Melbourne, we have a catchment of 1/2 of Melbourne's population!

I think we our list, our president and our training facilities we are entering an exciting time in the clubs history, now only for Fevola....

On Jeff, he is very professional, we need abit more professionalism at the club.

 

[Fabulous]

Hmmnnn, Fabulous. Not quite sure what you are getting at in most of the points you have made. There is such a matter as the club's constitution wherein the president's powers are codified.

I agree with what you are saying about the challenge the club has over the next 18 months.

The essence is - A president requires a unified board and the president sets the guidelines and direction under which the board/directors are to go. If he wants a particular make-up of board members then he usually gets it.

This is a written (codified) responsibilty combined with an unwritten reality of board power/protocol.

 

[Gary Shadforth]

Excellent post, Hawkk.

 

[Gary Shadforth]

The essence is - A president requires a unified board and the president sets the guidelines and direction under which the board/directors are to go. If he wants a particular make-up of board members then he usually gets it.

This is a written (codified) responsibilty combined with an unwritten reality of board power/protocol.

That's clear. Thanks, Fabulous.

 

[Hawk Dork]

Going to ask once and once only. No more about politics please.

The thing only becomes a slanging fest and this is meant to be about footy and only footy.

Next post/s will just be edited out or maybe shunted across to the S&C board that mention what the Libs did or didn't do that was right or wrong.

Stick to footy please.

How very Kennettesque of you Gren
He branded everyone who disagreed with him as anti-victorian
You brand them as anti- football
All discussions involving Kennett naturally should be able to reference his past his past was political.
Can we talk about his army days and how his papers where branded;
Never to Lead Men.

We cant talk of his economic record

Or do we talk about the day that he light fingered a near full packet of cigarettes that an ex hawthorn player left on a table in the super box.He came back from the toilet to find Felicity had them in her purse ,a gift from Jeff.
Reported in The Spy Lawrence Money and told to me personally by the ex Hawk.
Or do we have to agree with you in every way and tow your political line.
There are 52 newspapers in Iraq all express the same line is that what you want?????????????

 

[Hawkk]

Fabulous in theory you are correct, but since when has any president or chairman in any field had a united board.

It'sa very unrealistic aim.

Everyone has differing opinions, its human nature

 

[Fabulous]

Fabulous in theory you are correct, but since when has any president or chairman in any field had a united board.

It'sa very unrealistic aim.

Everyone has differing opinions, its human nature

"United" in the sense the direction the President is going the majority of directors are behind them. If the board has directors who are there knowing the president does not want them there, it creates division and conflict. So, I would suggest every President tries to maintain control by ensuring they have maximum support/supporters. Dicker did this with his appointments and either demoted or ostracised others from his core group. As has been the case at Richmond, Essendon, StKilda, Melbourne, Carlton, Collingwood, Western Bulldogs, AFL commission etc in recent times.

 

[Hawkk]

"United" in the sense the direction the President is going the majority of directors are behind them. If the board has directors who are there knowing the president does not want them there, it creates division and conflict. So, I would suggest every President tries to maintain control by ensuring they have maximum support/supporters. Dicker did this with his appointments and either demoted or ostracised others from his core group. As has been the case at Richmond, Essendon, StKilda, Melbourne, Carlton, Collingwood, Western Bulldogs, AFL commission etc in recent times.

Good point, but the board went for him, so he has the majority of the support there.

Through the media I have noticed also he has the support of the supporters.

It looks like it is all go ahead for Jeff

 

[Fabulous]

Good point, but the board went for him, so he has the majority of the support there.

Through the media I have noticed also he has the support of the supporters.

It looks like it is all go ahead for Jeff

I agree totally. But the issue I am raising is: Does Jeff have support for each member of the current board? Time will tell but it is clear at the moment that Dermie at least is in the firing line.