- Joined
- Aug 9, 2006
- Posts
- 2,696
- Likes
- 3,092
- Location
- Level 2 Bar, Coventry End
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
- Other Teams
- Packers, Detroit Tigers
Thread starter
#1
As a die-hard Saints’ fan, I have been dismayed by the latest events at our club. There has been a lot of talk on this forum and elsewhere, and I thought it was time that someone took a look at the Footy First manifesto and reviewed it.
The manifesto is so shallow, if it was water it would not form a puddle. It is 12 pages long and does not outline a single thing that they would do if they were in charge (spending more money on “footy” is not a plan). The manifesto includes a sticker, a double-paged poster of a Saints emblem (which, incidentally, looks to me like trade mark infringement) and a lovely colour cardboard greeting card with the faces of the Footy First team on it.
Below I have pulled out their main points and made my comments:
“During Mr Butterss’ time on the Board, the club has had four Senior Coaches, four chief executive officers and four chief financial officers”
There have been three coaches during Butterss’ time as president, including our second-longest serving coach ever. Presumably the current coach will be around for a few years yet.
Agreed that the CEO/CFO position seems like a revolving door. There have been rumblings about Archie Fraser. If Footy First is elected, will they make it five CEOs in eight years? How is that adding to stability?
“Footy First members and its footy sub-committee will not meet with Mr Butterss or his group to be sold on some kind of compromise deal”
This is the most ludicrous thing they say. If they are really interested in the best interests of the football club, why wouldn’t they meet with Butterss? What’s to lose? If you don’t like what he has to say, you say thanks and go your separate ways. Are you so weak that you think he will hoodwink you into making a deal against your will? Are you so arrogant that you think Rod Butterss has absolutely nothing useful to say?
“One choice is the same footy sub-committee of Messrs Butterss, Casey and Kellett you have had for six seasons.”
Whoa. I thought it was terrible having new people in roles. When you were talking about CEOs and CFOs, continuity was a marvellous thing. Now it’s horrible. And you want to replace them with the following people:
“In fact in 2006 we dropped to last on the list of AFL Club’s revenue. Even after AFL special subsidies are taken out, our revenue still puts us in the bottom four clubs.”
First, to include AFL handouts is ridiculous. So we have stronger revenue than three other Melbourne clubs. Second, we lost significant money by pulling out of the Tasmania deal (for two reasons - 1, we lost money from the Tasmanian Govt, 2, we lost 3000 Tassie members), but everyone accepts that this was a great outcome for us. It showed that we are maturing as a club. Melbourne, Bulldogs, Kangas and Hawthorn all sold games interstate this year to boost their coffers. Geelong plays home games in Melbourne for the same reason.
“And you, the Member, received the lowest monetary level of benefits of any club member in the league”.
Like I give a toss.
“Footy First would have spent less on debt reduction and far more on the football department”
Great. Can’t wait to go back into debt. You beauty. And what if you put us two million dollars in debt in pursuit of a premiership that we fail to win and then a few years later we find ourselves at the foot of the ladder with falling membership, falling sponsorship and a massive debt? Butterss has retired debt and is now increasing footy department spending for the third year in a row. We don't need your crazy "plans".
“Thanks for your eight years on the board. But you have had your time…You, Glenn Casey, Mark Kellett and Ray King have had between six and eight years on the Board.”
So, length of service is a bad thing? How long have you been on the Gregory’s Transport board? Presumably since it was formed in 1983. Is there a ceiling on how long other members serve on the Gregory’s board? Of course there isn’t, because we all accept that experience is a great thing. Most of us would agree that renewal is a good thing, but the way to do that is to gradually introduce new people who can learn from the experienced people. Tipping out a combined 30-odd years of experience on the St Kilda Board in one go just because they’ve “had their time” is nothing short of mornonic.
“Do not insist on a messy contest”
I would swear that the Footy First team have been all over the airwaves telling us that the St Kilda members must decide, even though it will cost us 100k and 2 months of bloody infighting.
“Nathan and I promise you this. We will make it a powerhouse in the AFL and put footy first.”
It would not be hard to make St Kilda a stronger club. The current administration and the one before that (Plympton) have put together more than a decade of decisions that have turned this club from basket case into a respected member of the league. They have built the base upon which Westaway and his cohorts know they can perform. I wonder if Footy First would be coming forward if St Kilda really was the basket case they are pretending it is. Westaway has supposedly been a Saints fan all his life but he was apparently not willing to put up his hand for a board position before now.
“We will reinvest in growth assets, and most importantly, put more money back into the football department”
What areas of football department spending are you going to increase? And by how much? You cannot seriously send me a 12 page manifesto where the main point is “increase football department spending” and not answer these questions. How stupid do you think I am, that I’ll just turn over the club to you when the sum total of your plans is “spend more money on stuff”.
“Why did they not fix the injury problem four, five or six years ago?”
From memory we didn’t have an injury problem four, five or six years ago. We had almost a full list to choose from through 2004. It was 2005 that the problem first bit hard, and at the end of that year the Saints appointed Craig Starcevich, who was credited with performing miracles in injury management up at Brisbane. Half way through this season Butterss appointed a three-man team of renowned AIS sports scientists to look in to the problem. What more do you want them to do? Do you think appointing the sports scientists was a good idea? Would you keep them on? Would you appoint more? Would you personally take a masseuse course and warm up the Clarke brothers’ legs yourself? What? Just tell me one thing you’d do. Anything.
“Premierships are hard to win. We all know that, but we believe that supporters know that a golden opportunity has been lost in the last four seasons, given the talent we had. Footy First will turn this around!!!”
Beware boards promising premierships.
An article on page 1 of the Sunday Age chronicled our love of the Messiah. Westaway is not the first messiah to come our way. He’s not even the first transport magnate. That honour goes to Lindsay Fox, who came in with a five year plan to win a premiership and left us with four consecutive wooden spoons. Fox occasionally tries to meddle in the Saints, but mostly he just attends Carlton games.
There is no doubt that a lot of people have problems with Butterss. Footy First represent that anger, but they represent nothing else. They present absolutely no solutions. They basically point out some problems, promise to earn more money, spend more money and win a premiership and give us absolutely no clue as to how they will do it. They treat us like fools and ask us for a blank cheque.
Saints fans, whatever you think of Butterss, you simply must demand more than that. We must stand up against this sort of egotisical messiah crap. As the old saying goes, and as we know only too well, if you don’t stand for something, you’ll fall for anything.
The manifesto is so shallow, if it was water it would not form a puddle. It is 12 pages long and does not outline a single thing that they would do if they were in charge (spending more money on “footy” is not a plan). The manifesto includes a sticker, a double-paged poster of a Saints emblem (which, incidentally, looks to me like trade mark infringement) and a lovely colour cardboard greeting card with the faces of the Footy First team on it.
Below I have pulled out their main points and made my comments:
“During Mr Butterss’ time on the Board, the club has had four Senior Coaches, four chief executive officers and four chief financial officers”
There have been three coaches during Butterss’ time as president, including our second-longest serving coach ever. Presumably the current coach will be around for a few years yet.
Agreed that the CEO/CFO position seems like a revolving door. There have been rumblings about Archie Fraser. If Footy First is elected, will they make it five CEOs in eight years? How is that adding to stability?
“Footy First members and its footy sub-committee will not meet with Mr Butterss or his group to be sold on some kind of compromise deal”
This is the most ludicrous thing they say. If they are really interested in the best interests of the football club, why wouldn’t they meet with Butterss? What’s to lose? If you don’t like what he has to say, you say thanks and go your separate ways. Are you so weak that you think he will hoodwink you into making a deal against your will? Are you so arrogant that you think Rod Butterss has absolutely nothing useful to say?
“One choice is the same footy sub-committee of Messrs Butterss, Casey and Kellett you have had for six seasons.”
Whoa. I thought it was terrible having new people in roles. When you were talking about CEOs and CFOs, continuity was a marvellous thing. Now it’s horrible. And you want to replace them with the following people:
- Nathan Burke: 1 year’s experience working in a football department.
- Andrew Thompson: 0 year’s experience working in a football department.
- Mordy Bromberg QC: 0 year’s experience working in a football department.
- Michael Klim: 0 year’s experience working in a football department.
“In fact in 2006 we dropped to last on the list of AFL Club’s revenue. Even after AFL special subsidies are taken out, our revenue still puts us in the bottom four clubs.”
First, to include AFL handouts is ridiculous. So we have stronger revenue than three other Melbourne clubs. Second, we lost significant money by pulling out of the Tasmania deal (for two reasons - 1, we lost money from the Tasmanian Govt, 2, we lost 3000 Tassie members), but everyone accepts that this was a great outcome for us. It showed that we are maturing as a club. Melbourne, Bulldogs, Kangas and Hawthorn all sold games interstate this year to boost their coffers. Geelong plays home games in Melbourne for the same reason.
“And you, the Member, received the lowest monetary level of benefits of any club member in the league”.
Like I give a toss.
“Footy First would have spent less on debt reduction and far more on the football department”
Great. Can’t wait to go back into debt. You beauty. And what if you put us two million dollars in debt in pursuit of a premiership that we fail to win and then a few years later we find ourselves at the foot of the ladder with falling membership, falling sponsorship and a massive debt? Butterss has retired debt and is now increasing footy department spending for the third year in a row. We don't need your crazy "plans".
“Thanks for your eight years on the board. But you have had your time…You, Glenn Casey, Mark Kellett and Ray King have had between six and eight years on the Board.”
So, length of service is a bad thing? How long have you been on the Gregory’s Transport board? Presumably since it was formed in 1983. Is there a ceiling on how long other members serve on the Gregory’s board? Of course there isn’t, because we all accept that experience is a great thing. Most of us would agree that renewal is a good thing, but the way to do that is to gradually introduce new people who can learn from the experienced people. Tipping out a combined 30-odd years of experience on the St Kilda Board in one go just because they’ve “had their time” is nothing short of mornonic.
“Do not insist on a messy contest”
I would swear that the Footy First team have been all over the airwaves telling us that the St Kilda members must decide, even though it will cost us 100k and 2 months of bloody infighting.
“Nathan and I promise you this. We will make it a powerhouse in the AFL and put footy first.”
It would not be hard to make St Kilda a stronger club. The current administration and the one before that (Plympton) have put together more than a decade of decisions that have turned this club from basket case into a respected member of the league. They have built the base upon which Westaway and his cohorts know they can perform. I wonder if Footy First would be coming forward if St Kilda really was the basket case they are pretending it is. Westaway has supposedly been a Saints fan all his life but he was apparently not willing to put up his hand for a board position before now.
“We will reinvest in growth assets, and most importantly, put more money back into the football department”
What areas of football department spending are you going to increase? And by how much? You cannot seriously send me a 12 page manifesto where the main point is “increase football department spending” and not answer these questions. How stupid do you think I am, that I’ll just turn over the club to you when the sum total of your plans is “spend more money on stuff”.
“Why did they not fix the injury problem four, five or six years ago?”
From memory we didn’t have an injury problem four, five or six years ago. We had almost a full list to choose from through 2004. It was 2005 that the problem first bit hard, and at the end of that year the Saints appointed Craig Starcevich, who was credited with performing miracles in injury management up at Brisbane. Half way through this season Butterss appointed a three-man team of renowned AIS sports scientists to look in to the problem. What more do you want them to do? Do you think appointing the sports scientists was a good idea? Would you keep them on? Would you appoint more? Would you personally take a masseuse course and warm up the Clarke brothers’ legs yourself? What? Just tell me one thing you’d do. Anything.
“Premierships are hard to win. We all know that, but we believe that supporters know that a golden opportunity has been lost in the last four seasons, given the talent we had. Footy First will turn this around!!!”
Beware boards promising premierships.
An article on page 1 of the Sunday Age chronicled our love of the Messiah. Westaway is not the first messiah to come our way. He’s not even the first transport magnate. That honour goes to Lindsay Fox, who came in with a five year plan to win a premiership and left us with four consecutive wooden spoons. Fox occasionally tries to meddle in the Saints, but mostly he just attends Carlton games.
There is no doubt that a lot of people have problems with Butterss. Footy First represent that anger, but they represent nothing else. They present absolutely no solutions. They basically point out some problems, promise to earn more money, spend more money and win a premiership and give us absolutely no clue as to how they will do it. They treat us like fools and ask us for a blank cheque.
Saints fans, whatever you think of Butterss, you simply must demand more than that. We must stand up against this sort of egotisical messiah crap. As the old saying goes, and as we know only too well, if you don’t stand for something, you’ll fall for anything.

