Observations on internal issues?

[The Nostradamus]

Have said it many times, Joyce is a big reason why we are in this mess. Quicker that muppet is out the better. Good to hear Kingy bring him up.

100%

Cam Joyce and brad Scott both need to be sacked

Get some fresh eyes in the joint at the top

 

[wandering123]

Why on earth is vitriol being directed at someone who has nothing to do with on field performance?

Because she is a woman. It's as simple as that.

 

[wandering123]

It's only in its infancy, but another group is mobilising as we speak. This includes a few former players if they agree to jump on board.

This is the kind of thing that got us into this mess in the first place - expecting former players and other influential supporters to save us from a bad administration.

We, as the members of NMFC, have a lot more power than we think. We, as a collective, can call a meeting, we can put forward resolutions and we can dump directors regardless of what's in the constitution. We should think about these things.

 

[Only Forwards]

We, as the members of NMFC, have a lot more power than we think. We, as a collective, can call a meeting, we can put forward resolutions and we can dump directors regardless of what's in the constitution. We should think about these things.

How?

 

[wandering123]

How?

I haven't read the constitution or looked at this particularly deeply (and have assumed NMFC is an ordinary public company). This is the corporate law generally:

1. Section 249F allows members with at least 5% of the votes that may be cast at a general meeting may call a general meeting.

2. Section 249N allows members with at least 5% of votes to give notice to the company of a resolution they propose to move at a general meeting.

3. Section 203D allows the members of a public company to remove a director from office in a general meeting (despite any agreements or anything in the constitution). Two months of notice of intention must be given (see section 249N).

A resolution requires only 50% of votes cast (doesn't require 50% of members, only 50% of those present and voting).

So theoretically, if we could mobilise 5% of voting members, we could begin threatening the directors (i.e. if they don't do something about the perception of toxic behaviour, we will move a motion removing you from directorship).

 

[shimaburnsgrieg]

I haven't read the constitution or looked at this particularly deeply (and have assumed NMFC is an ordinary public company). This is the corporate law generally:

1. Section 249F allows members with at least 5% of the votes that may be cast at a general meeting may call a general meeting.

2. Section 249N allows members with at least 5% of votes to give notice to the company of a resolution they propose to move at a general meeting.

3. Section 203D allows the members of a public company to remove a director from office in a general meeting (despite any agreements or anything in the constitution). Two months of notice of intention must be given (see section 249N).

A resolution requires only 50% of votes cast (doesn't require 50% of members, only 50% of those present and voting).

So theoretically, if we could mobilise 5% of voting members, we could begin threatening the directors (i.e. if they don't do something about the perception of toxic behaviour, we will move a motion removing you from directorship).

The constitution is on the club (NMFC) website under 'Club' - I can't get a link to work for you but its easy to find.

Section 10.1 deals with the removal and appointment of Directors.

It would be good to get your views on whether our rules are consistent with corporate law and the path forward for us rank and file members to seek change here.

 

[big_e]

This is the kind of thing that got us into this mess in the first place - expecting former players and other influential supporters to save us from a bad administration.

We, as the members of NMFC, have a lot more power than we think. We, as a collective, can call a meeting, we can put forward resolutions and we can dump directors regardless of what's in the constitution. We should think about these things.

Half-arsed measures will make them dig in.

Best way is to keep public pressure up, and to make media figures turn on him. Get them to put some arbitrary line in the sand - x wins by the bye, or something like that. And then if we don't achieve it, his position is untenable.

 

[bengrina]

A few questions. Firstly what happened to that ‘war chest’ we had for thr likes of degoey, Martin ect? Secondly what are the chances of josh kelly coming to a club with such instability in terms of ladder position and who will be coaching us moving forward?

 

[wandering123]

The constitution is on the club (NMFC) website under 'Club' - I can't get a link to work for you but its easy to find.

Section 10.1 deals with the removal and appointment of Directors.

It would be good to get your views on whether our rules are consistent with corporate law and the path forward for us rand and file members to seek change here.

Found it.

I'm not an admitted lawyer so I can't provide an overall indication of whether the rules are consistent. I do note the following (only my view):
- clause 3.2(a) of the constitution provides that it's interpretation is subject to the Act (being the corps act 2001)
- nothing in the constitution can override the provisions I've previously listed, and it doesn't appear that any attempt to do so has been made in the constitution.

I would think the path forward would be firstly demand some answers from the directors and club in a public sphere. Give them an opportunity to address our concerns first (which is consistent with our members' contract to not bring the club into disrepute - see clause 7.2) - although I note they haven't exactly been on the front foot so far.

If we don't get sufficient explanation or traction in an informal capacity, the next step is to gather fairly significant member support and then make a formal approach to the directors asking for explanations in our capacity as voting members. If necessary, we could also remind them of our rights as members to remove them from office.

If both of those options fail, then as a collective we could consider engaging a lawyer to confirm our rights as members (I.e. to call or request a meeting and put forward a resolution to remove relevant directors), and go from there. It is a very extreme and wouldn't at all be recommended unless and until other means were exhausted.

 

[The Warlord]

So I had the idea that we could set up a GoFundMe to collect for Brad's payout - someone mentioned something similar earlier.

Pitched as: "We're the members and supporters and we donate money to the club all the time for stuff we know will make us stronger. Same with this."

Obviously we're not going to collect enough to fund Brad's payout - if we meet the target (I'm thinking $50k is a nice round figure) we'd donate it to the Royal Children's Hospital Appeal. Unless of course the club do ditch him and want it!

But it would be a good media hook beyond "aggrieved fans want Scott gone", it taps into pre-existing conceptions about North but turns them around, it shares well on social.

But when I went to set it up I could only nominate the kids hospital appeal direct, or put myself, I'm a bit wary of asking people to send money to a random GoFundMe (would I hand over cash like that?).

Thoughts?

 

[SpiderBurton22]

So I had the idea that we could set up a GoFundMe to collect for Brad's payout - someone mentioned something similar earlier.

Pitched as: "We're the members and supporters and we donate money to the club all the time for stuff we know will make us stronger. Same with this."

Obviously we're not going to collect enough to fund Brad's payout - if we meet the target (I'm thinking $50k is a nice round figure) we'd donate it to the Royal Children's Hospital Appeal. Unless of course the club do ditch him and want it!

But it would be a good media hook beyond "aggrieved fans want Scott gone", it taps into pre-existing conceptions about North but turns them around, it shares well on social.

But when I went to set it up I could only nominate the kids hospital appeal direct, or put myself, I'm a bit wary of asking people to send money to a random GoFundMe (would I hand over cash like that?).

Thoughts?

One step above a petition.

 

[The Warlord]

One step above a petition.

More likely to get media and this will be an air war first and foremost.

 

[Only Forwards]

So I had the idea that we could set up a GoFundMe to collect for Brad's payout - someone mentioned something similar earlier.

Pitched as: "We're the members and supporters and we donate money to the club all the time for stuff we know will make us stronger. Same with this."

Obviously we're not going to collect enough to fund Brad's payout - if we meet the target (I'm thinking $50k is a nice round figure) we'd donate it to the Royal Children's Hospital Appeal. Unless of course the club do ditch him and want it!

But it would be a good media hook beyond "aggrieved fans want Scott gone", it taps into pre-existing conceptions about North but turns them around, it shares well on social.

But when I went to set it up I could only nominate the kids hospital appeal direct, or put myself, I'm a bit wary of asking people to send money to a random GoFundMe (would I hand over cash like that?).

Thoughts?

You would need to have a ground force at games talking to members to explain the position and hand out literature detailing the position of the gofund me and the cause.

I don't know how much funds we'd raise.

I do however think if the members want a board representative, that person needs to be out getting proxies before the end of this season with a similar ground force.

 

[The Warlord]

You would need to have a ground force at games talking to members to explain the position and hand out literature detailing the position of the gofund me and the cause.

I don't know how much funds we'd raise.

I do however think if the members want a board representative, that person needs to be out getting proxies before the end of this season with a similar ground force.

It is a stunt - it gives a media hook to a more organised thing if/when there is one, but first and foremost gets the idea that there's action beyond just talking.

If I were to start it, should the formal destination be the RCH?

 

[Only Forwards]

RCH makes sense.

You could always donate it to the huddle.....

 

[The Warlord]

RCH makes sense.

You could always donate it to the huddle.....

Red rag to a bull lol.

 

[gomfs]

Not sure that's entirely correct.
There is some serious money in the coterie groups, particularly the Match Committee members.

If there's one thing the NMFC needs to do, it's look after its strong financial members, hence influence if they are disgruntled.

Having been associated for a number of years I can assure you there is no influence. Match committee members have left because of this

 

[Devington]

Having been associated for a number of years I can assure you there is no influence. Match committee members have left because of this

I'm curious. Many many non-coterie members have mentioned how over the years they have been made to feel less and less valued, that the quality of social club functions, victory room events etc etc have declined dramatically.

Do you know if it's a similar thing for the coteries? It would be one thing for *influence* to disappear (and in certain situations that could be a good thing), but another entirely if these high dollar contributors were finding their ties with, access to, and respect from the club had declined.

 

[longlivenmfc]

Having been associated for a number of years I can assure you there is no influence. Match committee members have left because of this

Is there no one in the match committee members who’s got the balls and connections to make a play? I thought that group was meant to be our heavy hitters?

 

[Snake_Baker]

This is the kind of thing that got us into this mess in the first place - expecting former players and other influential supporters to save us from a bad administration.

The campaigners there right now aren't collecting gold medals either.

 

[fnqroo4life]

I've read every post and I am only marginally more aware of the trouble we are in behind the scenes. I am a member and a passionate supporter but not 'in the know' as some clearly are. It leaves me a little frustrated trying to read between the lines of some of the posts. Why continue with the cloak and dagger stuff when it seems to be that very reason the club is in its current position? Some truths from those in the know would surely rally support from all, supporters and past and present members alike. It feels like this is a critical point in our clubs existence and the time is now to lay all the cards on the table or we will fade into the history books like Fitzroy.


On SM-G960F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Lemma]

Because people on here like to appear like they know a secret...it's schoolyard stuff really

 

[Snake_Baker]

Because people on here like to appear like they know a secret...it's schoolyard stuff really

This "schoolyard stuff" just tipped off a crisis meeting.

 

[Lemma]

Yeh mate, it was all you haha

 

[Snake_Baker]

Yeh mate, it was all you haha

You sound cut. Are you Brads missus?