VAFA General Discussion 2022-2023-2024

[Chief]

Hi all.

Aucklander and I have had a couple of runs through recent posts in this thread and removed a few unsavoury comments.

The usual griping and gossip is par for the course, but some posts go overboard.

Site rules are here:

Terms and rules

You must agree to these terms and rules before using the site.

www.bigfooty.com

People who do not abide by them will have accounts blocked from threads, boards, or banned entirely.

If you see such posts, please report them so they can be attended to. We don't and can't read every post, and mods may be absent for periods around this time of year when people are busy or on holiday.

You can always contact admin here if anything is urgent:

Contact us

www.bigfooty.com

 

[bedford]

By virtue of having one of the biggest junior clubs in the state and a good retention rate of juniors into seniors Beaumaris are a good chance to play Premier. They were one of 4 stand out B grade clubs this season and who knows, had the season run its course they may have got promoted this year. They have had a few tastes in recent years but never threatened and have only lasted a year, maybe two each time. The others you mentioned? In the current environment they have zero chance. Willy might be a smokey. Strong U19s who play in Premier division and plenty of juniors coming through but depth was poor from what I saw this season.

What you posted JJ was spot on , we aspire to get to B and bounce between there and C . It's nearly impossible to get to the top , looking forward to some battles down the track.

 

[HedgeFund]

By virtue of having one of the biggest junior clubs in the state and a good retention rate of juniors into seniors Beaumaris are a good chance to play Premier. They were one of 4 stand out B grade clubs this season and who knows, had the season run its course they may have got promoted this year. They have had a few tastes in recent years but never threatened and have only lasted a year, maybe two each time. The others you mentioned? In the current environment they have zero chance. Willy might be a smokey. Strong U19s who play in Premier division and plenty of juniors coming through but depth was poor from what I saw this season.

If:

1. nearby local $uburban clubs can’t offer decent ca$h and/or standard, and

2. not many of the juniors attended private schools;

then the district club stands a fighting chance of luring/retaining sufficient talent to make Premier.

That suggests Willy, AJAX and Fitzroy are the most likely in the current environment.

 

[AM]

If:

1. nearby local $uburban clubs can’t offer decent ca$h and/or standard, and

2. not many of the juniors attended private schools;

then the district club stands a fighting chance of luring/retaining sufficient talent to make Premier.

That suggests Willy, AJAX and Fitzroy are the most likely in the current environment.

Fitzroy? Think you're allowing previous associations to cloud your judgement there HF.

You have to look no further than the make-up of the VAFA board to see the private school influence. One member has a genuine district football club background.

The VAFA is principally a wealthy private school comp at the top level. Tightening what is permitted recruitment-wise and limiting the number of junior teams are a couple of measures that might go a way to evening the field thereby restoring the comp to being a glorious one.

 

[Keano15]

So what are the odds of district clubs like Hampton Rovers, Ormond and Beaumaris ever getting into Premier/A Section in the future?

I think this is possible but:
1. VAFA need to lower points for A & B Grade (to limit the influence of the foreign legion approach)
2. Some limiting of the number of teams (U/19's and Thirds) is required
3. SFL need to continue to be inept

 

[Over The Post]

OK, what's going on with the board? Rumours of ructions at HQ. Pigeons coming home to roost, and all that.

Do we have any spies? Any confidential sources? Any unnamed officials speaking on condition of anonymity?

 

[Keano15]

OK, what's going on with the board? Rumours of ructions at HQ. Pigeons coming home to roost, and all that.

Do we have any spies? Any confidential sources? Any unnamed officials speaking on condition of anonymity?

Hostile board takeover lead by some clubs and life members.

 

[AM]

I think this is possible but:
1. VAFA need to lower points for A & B Grade (to limit the influence of the foreign legion approach)
2. Some limiting of the number of teams (U/19's and Thirds) is required
3. SFL need to continue to be inept

 

[Over The Post]

You're up late.

 

[AM]

You're up late.

Been 'Zooming', "Spiritual Advisor"

 

[Not Jonathan Brown]

Hostile board takeover lead by some clubs and life members.

All seems a bit strange - hearing they cancelled the AGM in December because a member who was nominating for a director position passed away, but still held a board meeting where they pointed fingers and decided to toss the President. Sounds as if there was an AGM the overthrow wouldn't have occurred, so something fishy seems to have happened.

Also heard a handful of members have called for an EGM on Monday 14 Feb to move a motion to remove the new President due to the process of appointing them not done correctly. Only issue is at the EGM the Chair of the meeting can veto anyone talking and the Chair is the new President.

Interesting times ahead

 

[louisej]

FWIW becoming closer and closer to a 5 division league by the day.....

am both amused and bemused by the 17 January response of Mick Overman, the President pro-tempore of the VAFA.

Mick correctly advised of the VAFA’s obligations to hold another general meeting under the Corporations Act 2001. That is about where the facts end and the nonsense begins.

Overman’s assertion that Tim Habel and Alistair Ewart, who were among the signatories to the letter requesting the meeting, are not members of the VAFA is entirely wrong. Both ran unsuccessfully for the Board in 2020. Would the Board or the CEO of the VAFA have accepted their nominations had they not been members? As members of member clubs, they are entitled to run and have been for a decade or more. Under the old definition, (VAFA member = VAFA club delegate) which Overman chooses to cite, he himself would have been ineligible to join the Board.

More embarrassing for Mr Overman is his response to the grievances aired in the letter from the 14 signatories.

“Whilst we dispute the validity of a number of the grievances, we point out that they occurred under the leadership of the previous President,” he wrote.

I would ask Mr Overman which he disputes and which he doesn’t, and how often did he stand up to voice his disapproval of actions that led to grievances he supports. The role of Pontius Pilate is not a good fit for our Mick.

Given his actions in December, he is more suited to the part of Brutus, playing alongside his fellow plotter Dean Matthews as Cassius.

To quote Shakespeare:
Cassius: The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, But in ourselves

Mr Overman’s take on a conflict in the statements of life member Phil Stevens’ is flat out laughable.

I am sure the former CEO can speak for himself, but his call for board accountability was simply a pillar of his candidacy. Somehow Mr Overman seems to insinuate that it was the trigger for the leadership coup in December, and that his call now for the dumping of Overman and Matthews is a threat to accountability.

Stevens is not the only Life Member in Mr Overman’s sights.
“A concern is that a number of Life Members may not be ‘up to speed’ with the complexities of running the largest senior football competition in the country and are not fully informed of the current situation,” Overman wrote.

The concern for me, and I’m sure for others, is that Mr Overman could so easily dismiss the concerns of those who have given decades of service and built this Association to the level it was. Of course, had the appalling constitution been passed by the members last year, Mr Overman and his buddies on the board could now sack Mr Stevens and the other Life Members in the same fashion that they knifed the former President George Voyage.

Mr Overman continues: “We are also aware of some misinformation being circulated by unauthorised persons”. Sorry about that, Mr President, but it seems that a great many people who care about the VAFA missed your memo telling us all who is authorised.

In closing, the treacherous Overman tries to sell the “look away, nothing to see here” line. Let’s get on with the season, he says, as if nothing has happened.

And then, to close, he invites people to contact the CEO regarding the issues he has raised in his letter. In doing so, he has shamefully involved the Association’s staff in his politicking. This is a gross over-reach. Mr Connell would do well to observe neutrality in these matters and to tell the temporary president that he must remain impartial in these matters.

 

[louisej]

Hostile board takeover lead by some clubs and life members.

am both amused and bemused by the 17 January response of Mick Overman, the President pro-tempore of the VAFA.

Mick correctly advised of the VAFA’s obligations to hold another general meeting under the Corporations Act 2001. That is about where the facts end and the nonsense begins.

Overman’s assertion that Tim Habel and Alistair Ewart, who were among the signatories to the letter requesting the meeting, are not members of the VAFA is entirely wrong. Both ran unsuccessfully for the Board in 2020. Would the Board or the CEO of the VAFA have accepted their nominations had they not been members? As members of member clubs, they are entitled to run and have been for a decade or more. Under the old definition, (VAFA member = VAFA club delegate) which Overman chooses to cite, he himself would have been ineligible to join the Board.

More embarrassing for Mr Overman is his response to the grievances aired in the letter from the 14 signatories.

“Whilst we dispute the validity of a number of the grievances, we point out that they occurred under the leadership of the previous President,” he wrote.

I would ask Mr Overman which he disputes and which he doesn’t, and how often did he stand up to voice his disapproval of actions that led to grievances he supports. The role of Pontius Pilate is not a good fit for our Mick.

Given his actions in December, he is more suited to the part of Brutus, playing alongside his fellow plotter Dean Matthews as Cassius.

To quote Shakespeare:
Cassius: The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, But in ourselves

Mr Overman’s take on a conflict in the statements of life member Phil Stevens’ is flat out laughable.

I am sure the former CEO can speak for himself, but his call for board accountability was simply a pillar of his candidacy. Somehow Mr Overman seems to insinuate that it was the trigger for the leadership coup in December, and that his call now for the dumping of Overman and Matthews is a threat to accountability.

Stevens is not the only Life Member in Mr Overman’s sights.
“A concern is that a number of Life Members may not be ‘up to speed’ with the complexities of running the largest senior football competition in the country and are not fully informed of the current situation,” Overman wrote.

The concern for me, and I’m sure for others, is that Mr Overman could so easily dismiss the concerns of those who have given decades of service and built this Association to the level it was. Of course, had the appalling constitution been passed by the members last year, Mr Overman and his buddies on the board could now sack Mr Stevens and the other Life Members in the same fashion that they knifed the former President George Voyage.

Mr Overman continues: “We are also aware of some misinformation being circulated by unauthorised persons”. Sorry about that, Mr President, but it seems that a great many people who care about the VAFA missed your memo telling us all who is authorised.

In closing, the treacherous Overman tries to sell the “look away, nothing to see here” line. Let’s get on with the season, he says, as if nothing has happened.

And then, to close, he invites people to contact the CEO regarding the issues he has raised in his letter. In doing so, he has shamefully involved the Association’s staff in his politicking. This is a gross over-reach. Mr Connell would do well to observe neutrality in these matters and to tell the temporary president that he must remain impartial in these matters.

 

[MelbaHigh]

written and authorized by Phil Steven & Tim Habel. Lord help us

This discussion group has done nothing but smash the previous board for the last 3 years. The old President (who in particular has been hammered on this tread) is rightfully moved on by the majority of the board and a small few want to hand the keys back to the old guard. Are people insane?? Credit to Overman for taking a stand - my criticism is why did it take so long?

 

[Not Jonathan Brown]

written and authorized by Phil Steven & Tim Habel. Lord help us

This discussion group has done nothing but smash the previous board for the last 3 years. The old President (who in particular has been hammered on this tread) is rightfully moved on by the majority of the board and a small few want to hand the keys back to the old guard. Are people insane?? Credit to Overman for taking a stand - my criticism is why did it take so long?

I think the issue isn't that it happened its how it's happened. It seemed as if there was a push from clubs for change leading into the AGM with numerous director nominations, the change happened but it was done under the noses of the clubs through a separate board meeting.

 

[zeroseven]

The special general meeting is to be chaired by The Right Honorable M Overman according to the official club notice received. The business of the meeting is by resolution to remove RHMO. The Board has agreed that Mighty Mick RHMO can chair this meeting where he is subject to getting the gong. Chairperson has right to decide who speaks. It would not surprise to see only relatives of RHMO being able to speak!

Can anyone outside the VAFA Board and our behind the scenes puppet master BC see just a tiny, tiny, tiny CONFICT OF INTEREST?

With a Board like this, directed by the puppet master it is no wonder the Lifers and clubs are demanding change. Bring it on. Cunning, sly move to make it a Mazda Zoom Zoom meeting to keep the clubs apart. No one will notice this hahahahahah.

 

[XXXXAFL]

I think this is possible but:
1. VAFA need to lower points for A & B Grade (to limit the influence of the foreign legion approach)
2. Some limiting of the number of teams (U/19's and Thirds) is required
3. SFL need to continue to be inept

Lowering points will only hamper Uni Blues. Brighton, Caulfield, SKOBAFL and Xavs can put teams with 22 points on the field no one else can compete with. They already topped Premier ladder last year.

 

[bedford]

Some new blood on here lol

 

[Max Leader]

Lowering points will only hamper Uni Blues. Brighton, Caulfield, SKOBAFL and Xavs can put teams with 22 points on the field no one else can compete with. They already topped Premier ladder last year.

Need to reduce points of top 4 teams only

 

[Keano15]

The special general meeting is to be chaired by The Right Honorable M Overman according to the official club notice received. The business of the meeting is by resolution to remove RHMO. The Board has agreed that Mighty Mick RHMO can chair this meeting where he is subject to getting the gong. Chairperson has right to decide who speaks. It would not surprise to see only relatives of RHMO being able to speak!

Can anyone outside the VAFA Board and our behind the scenes puppet master BC see just a tiny, tiny, tiny CONFICT OF INTEREST?

With a Board like this, directed by the puppet master it is no wonder the Lifers and clubs are demanding change. Bring it on. Cunning, sly move to make it a Mazda Zoom Zoom meeting to keep the clubs apart. No one will notice this hahahahahah.

Not sure cramming clubs into a room is really the best move right now. Pretty sure there is still a Pandemic on. Suppose the pandemic is the board’s fault too.

 

[Jimmyjack]

Need to reduce points of top 4 teams only

Points are not the answer, in the VAFA or elsewhere. SKOB played in 3 GF’s in a row with plenty of room left in the points cap. Perennial powers in other comps like Deer Park and Vermont kept winning flags years after the points introduced. Dingley in the SFL is another. Points made no difference. Uni Blues got away with one due to some poor administration/interpretation by the VAFA but that has since been tightened up. We can accept things they way we are and be happy to just find our own level. But if we want equalisation then points make very little difference and more radical measures are required.

 

[Keano15]

Lowering points will only hamper Uni Blues. Brighton, Caulfield, SKOBAFL and Xavs can put teams with 22 points on the field no one else can compete with. They already topped Premier ladder last year.

I think you’ll find Xavs, Collegians and Blues would find lowering points challenging. SKOBS not as much. Brighton & Caulfield are predominately all from their schools.

 

[pazza]

written and authorized by Phil Steven & Tim Habel. Lord help us

This discussion group has done nothing but smash the previous board for the last 3 years. The old President (who in particular has been hammered on this tread) is rightfully moved on by the majority of the board and a small few want to hand the keys back to the old guard. Are people insane?? Credit to Overman for taking a stand - my criticism is why did it take so long?

People are attacking Stevens and Habel?

 

[Hippster]

I think you’ll find Xavs, Collegians and Blues would find lowering points challenging. SKOBS not as much. Brighton & Caulfield are predominately all from their schools.

Not sure about Wesley and Uni…but Claret & Stout would find lowering points a breeze. The footy factory could play a 22 point team most weeks if needed.

 

[Max Leader]

Not sure about Wesley and Uni…but Claret & Stout would find lowering points a breeze. The footy factory could play a 22 point team most weeks if needed.

They probably could but it would change the players they chased. Hopefully leaving them for other teams.

 

[Mike Olotripo]

Collegians should not have a problem with the lowering of points