To All EFC Members wanting to challenge the board to have Sheed's reinstated.....

[grindog]

There is an assumption being made that those who are *for* Sheeds are getting sentimental...perhaps there's something in that, but I have to question 'change for change's sake' which is something the board seem to be doing...

My biggest issue with the non renewal of Sheed's contract is who *will* ultimately replace him...I would have wanted to secure someone who fans may at least perceive to be able to deliver something out of the ordinary (Thompson anyone?), as I'm sure Sheedy would have over the next few years.

Sheed's record stands for itself, a premiership every 6.8 years is something other clubs only dream of...

So to give those fans some credit...,perhaps the challenge wouldn't be felt necessary if there was a belief that the board actually did know what the heck they were doing...

FWIW I will support the Bombers no matter what, but geez I really hope they have already got someone special...

Pretty much agree spot on.
My issue is not the sacking of Sheeds. It is how the board themselves have handled themselves.

 

[Pevers-Legend]

questions to ask - Flag every 6.8 years or 1 in 14 years, 2 in 22 years. Not so flash when you lookat it that way. Stats are meaningless - now is what is important.

Sheedy has been assessed on list development. You have to say - if that was a key criteria - it was right that he got the flick.

We have not threatened seriously for the flag in 6 years - we are a run of the mill side that relies far too heavily on its best players. We have very little teamwork - we always seem to work harder for our goals.

Question: How have the young players developed since our last flag? Who are genuine 200 gamers, who are in the dunno basket?

How many of Monfries, Dyson, Bradley, Lee, Nash, Lonergan, Slattery, Ryder, Stanton, Winderlich, Dempsey, Laycock are you sure will be top notch players, or will deinfitely make it.

A change is needed as there is plenty of talent in that list, but aside from 2 or 3, not many you would class as deinfite top line players (and you need 2-3top line players + 6 solid 100 games players coming through every 3-4 or so years to be at the top).

Perfect example of why Sheedy has to go - Where did he play Bradley on the weekend?

 

[~RFM~]

Question: How have the young players developed since our last flag? Who are genuine 200 gamers, who are in the dunno basket?

How many of Monfries, Dyson, Bradley, Lee, Nash, Lonergan, Slattery, Ryder, Stanton, Winderlich, Dempsey, Laycock are you sure will be top notch players, or will deinfitely make it.

A change is needed as there is plenty of talent in that list, but aside from 2 or 3, not many you would class as deinfite top line players (and you need 2-3top line players + 6 solid 100 games players coming through every 3-4 or so years to be at the top).

Perfect example of why Sheedy has to go - Where did he play Bradley on the weekend?

You make a fair point...and reasons why I'm not quite as disgruntled as I could be .

AS far as where he should have played Bradley I would have said Bendigo .

I *do* see a lot of talent in that list and I would take out 2 or 3, and consider the rest of them all have a chance of 'making' it, especially Dyson, Slattery, Winderlich, Stanton, and Laycock (if he ever grows into that body of his!) I actually have a lot of faith in Sheeds that he knew where he was going with the list but that is not my main beef.

I think I was annoyed that the board appeared to essentially panic when three coaches in a row were dropped...I reckon it would have been classier to hold the cards a little closer and line someone up on the side. Then again, I'm grateful for the opp to fairwell Sheeds, so I'm not sure how it could have gone differently without his full co-operation.

Give the long tenure, fantasy land would have been for Sheeds to mentor someone for the coaching spot during 2008. But that is *my* fantasy, obviously not Sheedys!!

 

[Pevers-Legend]

I think I was annoyed that the board appeared to essentially panic when three coaches in a row were dropped...I reckon it would have been classier to hold the cards a little closer and line someone up on the side. Then again, I'm grateful for the opp to fairwell Sheeds, so I'm not sure how it could have gone differently without his full co-operation.

that is something I am happy about - we needed to act, we did. It also has the up-side that we can say goodbye to two tremendous servants fo the Essendon footy club the right way, not the wrong way like when someone was turfed a few years back by the coach............GO'D

 

[MOJOE]

I'm looking forward to seeing if Graham McMahon is involved with the challenging supporters, along with the one EFC board member who sided with Sheedy. That will spice things up a bit.

 

[Minglis]

Pi$$ Off.

Our board was elected by members to make such decisions, not you. If you don't like what they have done, then don't vote for them at election time.

We are not Carlton or Richmond and if you want to unstabilise the club, go and barrack for one of those teams, you're likely to find more people there who agree with your course of action.

Not everyone will agree with the board's decision, but like the players, try and embrace it. Your actions will only cause factions which will destory years of off field stability built at this great club.

For the sake of this club's long term future, leave things alone.

What a load of crap.

The constitution allows a petition of members to demand an EGM then raise a vote of no confidence in the board's leadership. The board was elected to make decisions - this is true - and the members have the right - the right! - to challange said decisions.

If the Essendon board has done the right thing by the club, it has nothing to fear from an EGM and vote of no confidence. It will be voted back in and a mandate established to backup the concept that not renewing KS was the right move.

If they have done the wrong thing by the club? Thats what the mechanism is there for - to allow the membership to throw them out, between AGMs if neccessary.

AFTER that vote is done, and if the chips fall the way you obviously feel they should, then you can tell dissenters to p!ss off.

FYI, I would sign the petition and vote no confidence. I support Essendon, not a fat cake eater who - in my opinion - is part of the problem, not the solution.

Every game Essendon wins from now on is, ironically, another stack of votes against the current board. If Hird comes back and inspires the Bombers to 6th place (or higher, if we could rabbit-out-of-the-hat at subi in 22).... well may we say, god save the coach. Because nothing will save this board.

 

[stander]

FYI, I would sign the petition and vote no confidence.

I'm sure the board felt some vindication for their decison when they found out Sheedy and O'Donnell had no idea which ruckman was supposed to be on the ground in the last quarter. Very poor internal controls.

 

[TheMagicRat]

You make a fair point...and reasons why I'm not quite as disgruntled as I could be .

AS far as where he should have played Bradley I would have said Bendigo .

I *do* see a lot of talent in that list and I would take out 2 or 3, and consider the rest of them all have a chance of 'making' it, especially Dyson, Slattery, Winderlich, Stanton, and Laycock (if he ever grows into that body of his!) I actually have a lot of faith in Sheeds that he knew where he was going with the list but that is not my main beef.

I think I was annoyed that the board appeared to essentially panic when three coaches in a row were dropped...I reckon it would have been classier to hold the cards a little closer and line someone up on the side. Then again, I'm grateful for the opp to fairwell Sheeds, so I'm not sure how it could have gone differently without his full co-operation.

Give the long tenure, fantasy land would have been for Sheeds to mentor someone for the coaching spot during 2008. But that is *my* fantasy, obviously not Sheedys!!

Well said, i also agree that Bradley shouldn’t have been in the side, to be honest he is another Hennerman, and should not be on the list (he is an oxygen thief), I think the keeping of these 2 players (hennerman & bradley are 2 reasons we needed a change).

I am also like you in that i am more frustrated by our boards perceived following of everything Carlton is doing. The sheedy decision looks like a knee jerk reaction to Pagan's sacking, now I hear we have also interviewed Voss for the job, again it appears we are just following Carlton's lead. This is my biggest problem with our board. As we stand now I will not support a spill, however if Michael Voss is appointed coach I will absolutely support the immediate sacking of the board & Peter Jackson.

Sorry to get off topic a smidge but i have to vent this while I’m going.

Michael Voss would be the absolute worst candidate for the coaching job @ Essendon, he has sever image problems (re pub brawl), he is from Brisbane (enough said), he is inexperienced (well lest be honest he has none). If we can get Mark Thompson off Geelong it would be the ideal situation, followed by Harvey, Eyres & Bluey McKenna.

 

[essendon]

Its amazing that its the lets do it for Sheeds mentalilty for each game now, I mean we were first doing it for Hirdy and we lost the last 3 prior to Adelaide sitting outside the 8 now we win, and we should rub it in the noses of the board because they had made a business decision for the FUTURE of the club, seriously, what it has done is put the whole club on notice and players are playing for their careers now, the favourites wont be getting a game next year any more b/c there will be a different coach, the list will change and so will the the football dept too eventually, i reckon its fantastic what is going on and fancy Sheeds singing the song with the guys at the end of the match, I mean thats great but why on this weekend? why not in the past? the players themselves were surprised, and that RAMA dragged him in, its all about the club and not the individual, see ya Sheeds thanks for the memories its time to move on to a new era !!!!!

Well done board to have the guts to make a big decision.

 

[nicho_magic]

i agree that this is not what we need, but at the same time i feel sheeds could have been given the arse a few weeks to early. sheedy is a proven coach, the coach we will get isn't necessarily going to be a proven coach... time will tell. we had to part ways at some stage, was this year the right time?

 

[Don Envy]

What a load of crap.

The constitution allows a petition of members to demand an EGM then raise a vote of no confidence in the board's leadership. The board was elected to make decisions - this is true - and the members have the right - the right! - to challange said decisions.

If the Essendon board has done the right thing by the club, it has nothing to fear from an EGM and vote of no confidence. It will be voted back in and a mandate established to backup the concept that not renewing KS was the right move.

If they have done the wrong thing by the club? Thats what the mechanism is there for - to allow the membership to throw them out, between AGMs if neccessary.

AFTER that vote is done, and if the chips fall the way you obviously feel they should, then you can tell dissenters to p!ss off.

FYI, I would sign the petition and vote no confidence. I support Essendon, not a fat cake eater who - in my opinion - is part of the problem, not the solution.

Every game Essendon wins from now on is, ironically, another stack of votes against the current board. If Hird comes back and inspires the Bombers to 6th place (or higher, if we could rabbit-out-of-the-hat at subi in 22).... well may we say, god save the coach. Because nothing will save this board.

I'm not doubting what the constitution does or doesn't allow. I'm sure Carlton and Richmond also allow EGM's to be called under their respective constitutions as well.

My point is more about the infighting and factions such actions can cause, as witnessed first hand by what has happened at Richmond and Carlton in recent years.

I think most would concur that a strong and united club off the field is essential to on field success. We are as stong as any atm, I don't want the personal agenda's of a minority of disgruntled supporters undoing so much hard work that has gone into making us a strong club. Like I said, if enough people don't agree with what the current board have done, then vote them out at the next election.

 

[Bomber32]

To all those members who are stirring up this trouble, please move on. We still have a chance of making the finals and this is a distraction our players and coaches do not need.

I have been one of Kevin Sheedy's biggest supporters, but the decision has been made and we should all learn to live with it.

 

[Minglis]

I dont think even an EGM and board spill (and subsequent renewing of Sheedy) would create factions, nor would the attempt and failure of such an action.

Bomber fans might turn on the odd player (/wave Henneman) but ive never - ever - met any Essendon supporter who comes close to your average eat-our-own Tiger fan.

 

[Aussie Assault]

I won't be voting to sack the entire board. It will put the club back a long way and will divide our club.

Get some new blood in the coaching department, hopefully young, and play some exciting footy with the kids we have. They are not the greatest young blokes in the league but with experience a bunch of them will turn into decent players.

Support the decision whether you like it or not for the good of the club, Sheedy was never going to be there forever..

 

[Longy413]

I'm sure the board felt some vindication for their decison when they found out Sheedy and O'Donnell had no idea which ruckman was supposed to be on the ground in the last quarter. Very poor internal controls.

You really are incapable of doing anything other than taking pot shots aren't you?

 

[David_Hilley#19]

I don't agree with what is being done but, we are not going find someone better than sheedy at the moment so we shouldn't of not renewed his contract but what is done is done and we must move forward.

 

[Don Envy]

I dont think even an EGM and board spill (and subsequent renewing of Sheedy) would create factions, nor would the attempt and failure of such an action.

Bomber fans might turn on the odd player (/wave Henneman) but ive never - ever - met any Essendon supporter who comes close to your average eat-our-own Tiger fan.

If you don't think any negative action related to the biggest club decision by any club in probably 50 years will be picked up and blown completely out of proportion by the media, then you're living on another planet. You only have to look at the back page of todays HUN to see that it's starting already.

You are correct about us not eating our own, ala Richmond fans, and I'd like to keep it that way, so let's embrace the boards decision, right or wrong and get behind the club. Trust me, now is when they're gonna need the support of us members because this is the going to be the biggest change to hit the club in decades. We need to be united on this as our support will go a long way to ensuring the changes will be a success.

 

[twinkle toes]

The board needed to act and they did, 27 years service is fantastic and will never be beaten by anyone else. Why cant we let go of kevin? Yes he has done a great job, but the list we have needs major rebuilding, we are not going to challenge for a flag whilst we have one of the slowest midfields getting around, also we will not have dustin fletcher, james hird, lucas and matty lloyd or mal micheal, there is your spine there gone within the next 1,2,3 or 4 years, if you are real bombers supporters you will back teh board as they have had the balls to make the decision, and i am pretty sure kevin himself would not want to be reinstated under these circumstances, think of teh big picture the future of teh club and the next premiership cup which is 4-5 years away..... by the way i do barrack for essendon but my club says geelong as i dish out a bit on my local thread where i play and i dont want the boys to be on to me....

 

[Minglis]

The difference between "get behind the club" and "get behind the board" is the focal point of my argument.

You can be behind the club and still want to sack the board. The board and the club are not one and the same.

I think 40 years from now history will record this sacking ("non-renewal") on the same page it mentions Norm Smith being dumped by Melbourne. The bombers are still every chance to host a home final this season - its my opinion the Hawks are vastly overrated - and the club has some great young talent developing. The board's reasoning of "needing a 3-5 year plan" has one gaping hole in it - we are already at yr3 in that 5 year plan.

This list has the potential (should Gumby develop like Franklin, Monfries / Dyson come on, Ryder develop like he has been) to challange - and challange hard - for a flag in 09, and send Dustin out to pasture in grand style.

 

[Don Envy]

The difference between "get behind the club" and "get behind the board" is the focal point of my argument.

You can be behind the club and still want to sack the board. The board and the club are not one and the same.

I think 40 years from now history will record this sacking ("non-renewal") on the same page it mentions Norm Smith being dumped by Melbourne. The bombers are still every chance to host a home final this season - its my opinion the Hawks are vastly overrated - and the club has some great young talent developing. The board's reasoning of "needing a 3-5 year plan" has one gaping hole in it - we are already at yr3 in that 5 year plan.

This list has the potential (should Gumby develop like Franklin, Monfries / Dyson come on, Ryder develop like he has been) to challange - and challange hard - for a flag in 09, and send Dustin out to pasture in grand style.

I agree that we are perhaps in a position to do something in 2 years time, IF things fall into place for us. But any success we may have in 2 years will only be temporary as the likes of Lloyd, Lucas and Fletch will retire after this. The 3-5 year plan is to replace these guys and build for sustained success and it will require quite a bit of list rebuilding between now and then to get us there.

 

[Minglis]

I agree that we are perhaps in a position to do something in 2 years time, IF things fall into place for us. But any success we may have in 2 years will only be temporary as the likes of Lloyd, Lucas and Fletch will retire after this. The 3-5 year plan is to replace these guys and build for sustained success and it will require quite a bit of list rebuilding between now and then to get us there.

Gumby, Ryder are 2 parts of that plan. The missing link is the next Lloyd, IMO. Johns hasnt come on like he was hyped, but to be fair, to have even "made it" after having his hip joint pretty much destroyed is a great job by itself.

I think Sheedy was banking on a son-of to fill that role now... you never know, maybe Jay Neagle has it in him yet

 

[stander]

You really are incapable of doing anything other than taking pot shots aren't you?

I guess thats my oblique way of supporting the boards decision, and an incident I felt worthy of raising. You've got all the accolades covered, so we're just balancing the ledger.

And don't get personal, turbo.

 

[Longy413]

I guess thats my oblique way of supporting the boards decision, and an incident I felt worthy of raising. You've got all the accolades covered, so we're just balancing the ledger.

Where were the accolades in this thread?

You had a perfect opportunity to provide your reasoning behind supporting the boards decision.

Yet you took a pot shot at Gary O'Donnell who failed to perform a task that was delegated to him. One that in the end worked in our favour.

You're not balancing the ledger at all, you're being subjective. I understand not everyone likes Kevin Sheedy, I understand people are happy he isn't coaching next season, I too support the boards decision.

But your being critical for the sake of being critical. There is a big difference in providing balanced reasoning and taking random pot shots. What you said has no place in this thread and by no means justifies the boards decision.

And don't get personal, turbo.

Cute.

And I didn't.

 

[eb075]

I don't want the personal agenda's of a minority of disgruntled supporters undoing so much hard work that has gone into making us a strong club..

Surely if an EGM is called and the board is outed then it was not a "minority" of disgruntled supporters rather a "majority". Reading thru' all of this, it's pretty easy to see who agrees with the decision and who doesn't.

Sacking Sheedy is not just another coach sacking, it's a pretty significant event in the club's history and I think if some members feel strongly enough to want to challenge it before it's too late, then they have that right. If the "majority" disagree, then that'll come out at the meeting.

There are lots of reasons being thrown around here such as repsect the board, unity, great club etc., etc. but most of them all boil down to whether you agree with the decision or not. I am an unabashd Sheedy fan and find it interesting that we could have had this exact same discussion back at the end of 1997 when blood was being called for - and would have possibly missed 2000! I don't believe in change for the sake of change. Is there anyone out there better at this stage? If so, then why are other clubs reportedly talking to Sheeds for their club? I'm happy to let it play out for the moment and listen to any arguments and then decide if an EGM is called.

 

[DannyJames13]

Surely if an EGM is called and the board is outed then it was not a "minority" of disgruntled supporters rather a "majority". Reading thru' all of this, it's pretty easy to see who agrees with the decision and who doesn't.

Sacking Sheedy is not just another coach sacking, it's a pretty significant event in the club's history and I think if some members feel strongly enough to want to challenge it before it's too late, then they have that right. If the "majority" disagree, then that'll come out at the meeting.

There are lots of reasons being thrown around here such as repsect the board, unity, great club etc., etc. but most of them all boil down to whether you agree with the decision or not. I am an unabashd Sheedy fan and find it interesting that we could have had this exact same discussion back at the end of 1997 when blood was being called for - and would have possibly missed 2000! I don't believe in change for the sake of change. Is there anyone out there better at this stage? If so, then why are other clubs reportedly talking to Sheeds for their club? I'm happy to let it play out for the moment and listen to any arguments and then decide if an EGM is called.

I've brushed over this thread a little but read a fair bit and this seems to be the most common sense view so far. Ant had a few good things to say as well.

It never ceases to amaze me at the courage people display on these forums when they are on the other side of a computer screen that can't act in retaliation.

I have only read the herald sun article, however as far as I can see this group have sought out the thoughts of essendon fans to help them make the decision whether to act or not.

Another point I would like people to comment on is this:

* most people, it seems, agree the recruiting over recent years has been sub par. so if Sheeds gets the team to a prelim has he not done a brilliant job given the talent? and if yes are you not excited about what he could acheive given this years crop of recruits?