News REX CHADWICK STANDS DOWN FROM RICHMOND BOARD

[Ned_Flanders]

Why not stand down before the last election?
Now the board chooses his replacement instead of the members

I already told you. His replacement would face election in 2018, not 2016. The replacement takes over the term of the person they are replacing

Its why dunne faced the punters, because mathies (?) was due for election in 2016

Its why free resigning made no difference, as he was not due for reelextion in 2016

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Personally, i reckon that in these situations the runner/runners-up from the last election should be the ones installed should they accept.

I can see where it would lead to problems but you would hope that most election years would be strong enough that these runner-up candidates we're still of a high enough quality to sit on the board

You may want to look at our past elections

One of the reasons we created the noms committee was we struggled to get quality candidates running.

Even before the astroturfer, the racist, and FoF. Remember in the old days every challenger was a punter with no relevant experience who was gunna be the voice of the common fan.

 

[Komrade_Tiger]

You may want to look at our past elections

One of the reasons we created the noms committee was we struggled to get quality candidates running.

Even before the astroturfer, the racist, and FoF. Remember in the old days every challenger was a punter with no relevant experience who was gunna be the voice of the common fan.

I understand that and that was what i meant by leading to problems. In an ideal world is where my personal feelings i stated above come into it, now the world isnt ideal but at the very least IMO that should be the starting point.

Admittedly, i'm only 21 so do not have much knowledge of this but our past elections for the last 15-20 years at a pure guess would be terrible because of how terrible we were. The more professional (which we now are) we come across as, the easier it should be to get quality candidates to run

 

[Ned_Flanders]

I understand that and that was what i meant by leading to problems. In an ideal world is where my personal feelings i stated above come into it, now the world isnt ideal but at the very least IMO that should be the starting point.

Admittedly, i'm only 21 so do not have much knowledge of this but our past elections for the last 15-20 years at a pure guess would be terrible because of how terrible we were. The more professional (which we now are) we come across as, the easier it should be to get quality candidates to run

If you want to know why candidates who are quality dont run, look at this board

We had posters accuse incumbents of stealimg.money from the club, and of fattening their own wallets at the cost of the club succeeding

We also had one pathetic poster make unsubstantiated claims that posters here were promised financial rewards if they supported bob the builder on thw forums (SunshineTiger Never got his barbie bus )

Also look at the bile said about O'Neal, and the general hate to all lawyers (although oddly Wallace, the lawyer, was okay )

For an unpaid gig, its a lot of s**t to put up with

 

[mopsy]

Two down and at least two more still need go.

What the whole lot need to go.People are being treated like mugs.

 

[mopsy]

So the new guy gets two yrs as an appointed member of the board in other wordss one of the boys , and then in two yrs time they rely on the apathy of most members where the gang member is appointed unopposed.
We all know this is the card being played and if the newbie is challenged the weight of the board is thrown behind him/her where it is most likely they will be elected anyway.
The question really is why would people run for the board but not for the reasons RFCTIGER 74 gives. Why would you bother if your face dont fit.

 

[telsor]

Casual vacancy is filled by the club, and his seat is put up to election when he is due (off mem 2018, but I've forgotten right now)

Filled by the club I agree with, it's just sensible, but all board members appointed by outside elections should be required to stand at the next election.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Filled by the club I agree with, it's just sensible, but all board members appointed by outside elections should be required to stand at the next election.

That's not how most boards work to my understanding. Remember this is a. Orporate law requireemnt, not a democratic institution

 

[telsor]

That's not how most boards work to my understanding. Remember this is a. Orporate law requireemnt, not a democratic institution

I agree it's 'common practice', but no reason the club constitution can't be amended to allow this.

 

[richoatthedisco]

Also look at the bile said about O'Neal, and the general hate to all lawyers (although oddly Wallace, the lawyer, was okay )

For an unpaid gig, its a lot of s**t to put up with

It might be unpaid but there are a lot of benefits. There's no way O'Neal would have been invited to be one of the first two female members of the exclusive Carbine Club (40 members, total) if she weren't RFC president. AFL boards are great business schmoozing opportunities. No one does it for nuthin'.

Peggy cops bile for many reasons. She was the third of two choices for president. She and Gale are seen to be the ones who unnecessarily saddled us with Hardwick for two extra years, but refused to be accountable for it. The obvious and blatant manipulation regarding the timing of the release of election materials deserved more bile than it received. Dunne was parachuted in to shore up her (and others') position.

I have no doubt many supporters are insulted that an American lawyer who didn't know squat about our game for well over half her life can claim to love the club as much or more than they do. I think she said "my club" the way you or I would, but plenty took offence.

That's not how most boards work to my understanding. Remember this is a. Orporate law requireemnt, not a democratic institution

It's Richmond Football Club, not Richmond Football Corporation. We're members, not shareholders. The board tried to limit the ability of members to call an EGM based on the spurious notion that we had to comply with the Corporations Act. We don't. It was a cynical attempt to divest power from the members and is another reason this board is on the nose.

 

[KiwiTiger]

This is exactly what we have all been saying. IT IS DOWNRIGHT CRIMINAL AFTER WHAT HAS JUST GONE ON. But the suckers will swallow it all hook line and sinker.
How many times does this has to happen before people open their eyes.

Rex has been a wonderful servant of the Club, and has stood down due to ill health. I wish he and Denise all the best going forward, and wish Rex the best with his health battle. I've been honoured to get to know them both, and travel away with Rex to our pre-season camp in Arizona in 2011.

I'm struggling to see how all this is criminal.

Haere Ra

 

[Ned_Flanders]

I agree it's 'common practice', but no reason the club constitution can't be amended to allow this.

Sorry, should have made my point more clear - I'm not sure how much (if any) deviation is allowed under corp law.

Also your model has one big problem. Free and Rex's replacements would face election this year, plus three others. Does that mean only one seat is open in 2019, and does that mean our new cycle is 3:5:1?

 

[Ned_Flanders]

It might be unpaid but there are a lot of benefits. There's no way O'Neal would have been invited to be one of the first two female members of the exclusive Carbine Club (40 members, total) if she weren't RFC president. AFL boards are great business schmoozing opportunities. No one does it for nuthin'.

Peggy cops bile for many reasons. She was the third of two choices for president. She and Gale are seen to be the ones who unnecessarily saddled us with Hardwick for two extra years, but refused to be accountable for it. The obvious and blatant manipulation regarding the timing of the release of election materials deserved more bile than it received. Dunne was parachuted in to shore up her (and others') position.

I have no doubt many supporters are insulted that an American lawyer who didn't know squat about our game for well over half her life can claim to love the club as much or more than they do. I think she said "my club" the way you or I would, but plenty took offence.


It's Richmond Football Club, not Richmond Football Corporation. We're members, not shareholders. The board tried to limit the ability of members to call an EGM based on the spurious notion that we had to comply with the Corporations Act. We don't. It was a cynical attempt to divest power from the members and is another reason this board is on the nose.

People calling her a campaigner and a **** wasn't disagreeing with her actions, it was pathetic

Also Richmond football club IS a not for profit company bound by the corporations act. Before you have a cry at least try to get one fact right for once

 

[caroma]

It's Richmond Football Club, not Richmond Football Corporation. We're members, not shareholders. The board tried to limit the ability of members to call an EGM based on the spurious notion that we had to comply with the Corporations Act. We don't. It was a cynical attempt to divest power from the members and is another reason this board is on the nose.

Actually it's 'Richmond Football Club Limited'...

 

[Helen Wheels]

We also had one pathetic poster make unsubstantiated claims that posters here were promised financial rewards if they supported bob the builder on thw forums (SunshineTiger Never got his barbie bus )

When you provide unarguable proof on an internet forum for everything you say, so will I.

 

[turtle27]

So we have a board member who has served the club very well, and still we have pathetic posters, and once again the usual suspects, coming out and accusing the board of being dodgy and being criminals. No wonder this forum is up the s**t.

 

[SunshineBoy]

If you want to know why candidates who are quality dont run, look at this board

We had posters accuse incumbents of stealimg.money from the club, and of fattening their own wallets at the cost of the club succeeding

We also had one pathetic poster make unsubstantiated claims that posters here were promised financial rewards if they supported bob the builder on thw forums (SunshineTiger Never got his barbie bus )

Also look at the bile said about O'Neal, and the general hate to all lawyers (although oddly Wallace, the lawyer, was okay )

For an unpaid gig, its a lot of s**t to put up with

Actually that's not quite true, I've been touring Australia in my Barbie bus,but it wasn't from supporting bob the builder, it was from the focus on footy group, just sayin

 

[Ned_Flanders]

When you provide unarguable proof on an internet forum for everything you say, so will I.

No, you did something noone else on this board has ever done

To try and win an argument you accused those who disagreed with you of fictional criminal misconduct

Noone else has ever stooped so low

 

[Helen Wheels]

No, you did something noone else on this board has ever done

To try and win an argument you accused those who disagreed with you of fictional criminal misconduct

Noone else has ever stooped so low

Never accused anybody of criminal misconduct.

 

[theflea]

Why not stand down before the last election?
Now the board chooses his replacement instead of the members

As has been stated even if this did happen, the last election would not have filled this position. Elections only fill position when the tenure or time frame ( 3 year stint) is up for renewal.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Never accused anybody of criminal misconduct.

You accused posters of posting opinions on here solely for later financial benefit if bob won. That is a crime

 

[Helen Wheels]

You accused posters of posting opinions on here solely for later financial benefit if bob won. That is a crime

No it isn't. Never said it was.

Some posters have accused the Board of what amounts to criminal misconduct. Maybe that's what you meant.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

No it isn't. Never said it was.

Some posters have accused the Board of what amounts to criminal misconduct. Maybe that's what you meant.

Whether you think its a crime or not is irrelevant. Corrupting an agm vote is illegal, and that is what you said posters were doing here

 

[Helen Wheels]

Whether you think its a crime or not is irrelevant. Corrupting an agm vote is illegal, and that is what you said posters were doing here

Political lobbying is not a crime.
These accusations of yours against my posts are way off the mark.

 

[Punt rd end]

It might be unpaid but there are a lot of benefits. There's no way O'Neal would have been invited to be one of the first two female members of the exclusive Carbine Club (40 members, total) if she weren't RFC president. AFL boards are great business schmoozing opportunities. No one does it for nuthin'.

Peggy cops bile for many reasons. She was the third of two choices for president. She and Gale are seen to be the ones who unnecessarily saddled us with Hardwick for two extra years, but refused to be accountable for it. The obvious and blatant manipulation regarding the timing of the release of election materials deserved more bile than it received. Dunne was parachuted in to shore up her (and others') position.

I have no doubt many supporters are insulted that an American lawyer who didn't know squat about our game for well over half her life can claim to love the club as much or more than they do. I think she said "my club" the way you or I would, but plenty took offence.


It's Richmond Football Club, not Richmond Football Corporation. We're members, not shareholders. The board tried to limit the ability of members to call an EGM based on the spurious notion that we had to comply with the Corporations Act. We don't. It was a cynical attempt to divest power from the members and is another reason this board is on the nose.

So where does Nicole Livingston fit into the picture as she was also invited to be a member of the Carbine club