I've been to Penguin. Good fish and chip shop.

_________________
Click here to follow TalkingCarlton on twitter
TalkingCarlton Posting Rules

thou shall not covert thy neighbour's ass

_________________
NG
S M C , S F L

The fish N chips are better than the town's footy jumper

_________________
I just want my old club back ... (edit) maybe I have!

I don't know anyone on the current board. Ive spoken to a few people over the past couple of years about Carlton in general, and about the board in particular. These are people in the business community who we'd all probably be pleased to have involved in a boardroom or advisory capacity.

And the general feeling is that CFC is a closed shop, with two dominant factions and a bunch of courtesans.

No-one really wants to fight Sticks, not in this town, because that really means you're taking on the Pratts. People who want to make their way in Melbourne's business community don't need to make enemies of the Pratts. And all Kernahan is a suit with a Pratt hand up it's arse.

So the realistic options are:

You get invited onto the board because they think you belong and will toe the line. Which means you're not really going to effect any kind of change.

You don't get invited on because you have a power base and you think the joint needs a shake-up, which means you have to publicly challenge the Pratt Family, and possibly also the Mathesons.

Change needs to come either through the Mathesons taking on the Pratts (and sticks).. Or Sticks coming out and saying: I'm done, I want the whole thing opened up. While sticks has no real expertise, he has power due to the fact that he owns the members hearts, because he's the only premiership captain on the board.

Sadly, I don't think sticks has the nous to extricate himself from this. I think he's being used.

Bottom line, the boardroom is a place that no businessperson wants a piece of, lest it sully xtheir reputation. Because its not a properly functioning board. At least that's the feedback Ive gotten from an admittedly small sample of potentials.

IMO, it would be in our best interests for Matheson to make a strong al-or-nothing play, clean the joint out, get Craig in there, xbring in a wise old head to mentor him (if it's not Bruce himself), and (just my opinion) pull the Pratts into line by creating a club that isn't reliant on their largesse.

But I'm asking someone to start a fight. Why should it come to that?

Hundreds of good people out there... But they don't want to take on the Pratts/Kernahan.

Harold could, but he doesn't need that shit. He should be allowed to enjoy life now, not have to get into brawls.

Bruce could. I hope he does.

Maybe sticks really IS reluctant. Maybe he actually doesn't feel like he can just walk, because he's not really doing this off his own bat. I'd imagine the Pratt family is hard to say no to. Dunno.

I think sticks is a president in name only. Which is a real problem.

I've moved JohnM's post here...on DocSherrin's recommendation, it really does warrant further discussion as it sums up the situation in a little more detail than the usual 'Sticks is hopeless and has to go'.

_________________
"The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent." Qui-Gon Jinn 15-05-2005

"there’s more chance of me becoming the full forward for the [Western Bulldogs] than there is of any change in the Labor Party." Julia Gillard 18-05-2010

Great insight JohnM, thanks

Do you think Sticks understands the dynamic at play?

Is Matheson working to create a more diverse powerbase, with more strong voices other than his family and the Pratts?

Or is he happy with a cozy duopoly?

I can understand the board's mediocrities' / courtesans' motivations, but why would the Pratts / Mathesons be content with the status quo? They don't need to get new connections or business opportunities. They were happy to support the club in the past without the hand on the tiller in the past. Why would they have a problem bringing figures of substance on to assist?

I don't know about the Pratt's motivations. I do know that football club boards can be an intoxicating place to be... A lot more fun than cardboard boxes and recycling plants. So while people put in, they also get a lot out of it too. In many ways, AFL clubs are at the centre of a lot of soft power in this town (and Perth and Adelaide).

So if you're a Pratt, maybe being in the inner circle gives you something you don't have. Just like being a patron of the Arts brings you something as well.

Then you've got the complicating factor of a dying man's wishes... Would Jeannie feel she can walk away without disrespecting her husband's wish? Can Sticks do likewise?

Unfortunately I suspect the power plays at Carlton (always difficult and complex) are far from simple right now.. More like a soap opera than well-functioning governance.

I don't think there's an easy fix short of a Matheison Bomb being launched from the Gold Coast. There's a lot of emotion at play in there, never a good thing IMO.

theres a certain melbourne club, very well run. I know a guy who joined the board, but ultimately he was there for the wrong reasons... It was more about him than the club. He lasted a very short time... The chairman saw right through him and out he went. Strong leadership, a united board, all working together for the betterment of the club, not their own advancement in Melbourne business and social circles. That's what you need, and that's why is club will probably win the flag this year and why we're middle of the table.

It's like our own Game of Thrones. Jeannie is the Imp (the show's words, not mine)

Terrific insight John, but I'm sure you're as aware as I am of how these things can work at times.

For those that can't get in there will always be grumblings of one nature or another. That's been happening since the year dot.
I do though hope you're wrong but do somehow fear that you're not.

I've had advice that Kernahan is on shaky grounded and have voiced that here recently.
We'll just have to see how that now plays out.
I know it's not all about Sticks, but just maybe we can get a move on things with some open exposure to the board and its workings at large. Maybe we can and then again maybe we can't.

You'd like to think though that for these people to get to positions of power, that they would have more knowledge and creative thinking than "Get Mick Malthouse, because he's Mick Malthouse", and have the intelligence and nous to recognise where things can be done better and take strong, professional steps to overcome them. You know, like a business?

Maybe I'm just naive

_________________
WADA medical director Dr Alan Vernec describes Essendon* FC drug case as biggest scandal in team sport the world of sport has seen. #WC2WB

#GUILTY

Thanks again JohnM. Kremlinology is fascinating!

I'm not saying Jeannie has to leave the board to open things up a bit. She can honour Richard's wishes without holding the club to ransom, can't she? Would be disappointed if she is using CFC as her dollhouse.

And the Mathesons? What might a Bruce bomb look like? A rival ticket to remove Pratt and Sticks? Is he interested in bringing quality in and finding a gun president? Is his agenda to create a highly-functioning Hawthorn-like board without him necessarily being the power behind the throne?

You know how it works Don.

It's just like a football forum.
Get enough voice from a vocal few that can muster a good argument and others can be persuaded to follow.
Before you know it you're just a mini-me or an echo, that thinks that they're adding something and being individual when in reality they're just someone else's shadow.
The funny thing though is that sometimes those leading the charge have themselves lost the vision or become party to an alternate agenda.

It's a board of 13 though. With a Chairman who's a chairman in name only. God only knows how decisions are being made. I'm sure there's some good people in there, but if you put a few good people into a dysfunctional environment, you won't get great decision-making.

From the outside, the CFC board seems to function like most poorly-run businesses I've seen up close: haphazard decision making, lack of clarity, lacking in the confidence to set a course and stay it, and no demonstrable strategy for success.

I know I'm not in there, but anyone who's been involved in an organisation bereft of quality leadership can see the signs.

I'll bet no-one can answer what should be a very simple question. That question is: who does the buck stop with at Carlton? Who is the one person who sets the agenda, and makes sure everyone else works to that agenda? (ok that's two questions but they mean the same thing).

If you said Sticks, yes he should be that person. But he isn't. There isn't one. There's a bunch of people with opinions, some with more say than others. Recipe for disastrous dysfunctionality.

Muddled, confused leadership = no hope of catching the likes of Hawthorn, Collingwood and West Coast. the truth is that flags are won from the top-down. They're not won by the coach or a few players, they're won via a whole-club effort.

That's why a club like Melbourne can have all the draft picks in the world but never be any good. And that's why, until our board of directors functions as effectively as Hawthorns and West Coasts, we won't be as good as those clubs.

That's why supporters should care about off-field stuff. Because unless that's humming, no flags for you.

Yep

_________________
WADA medical director Dr Alan Vernec describes Essendon* FC drug case as biggest scandal in team sport the world of sport has seen. #WC2WB

#GUILTY

That's true to a point but just to a point.
I mean West Coast finished last only 2 years ago. How different is their board now to what it was then?
Would we be saying the same thing had have we scored a couple of extra points last year to beat WC at their home in the final?

No doubt we need to address our situation starting right at the top but I just think it's too easy and convenient to point the finger to one area as the source of all the problems.
Maybe we just had too many players injured this year. Just maybe.

This really stood out for me, and I've posted it in this thread because I think it's a Club issue, not coach.

Last year, the Club's goal was to win a final. We did that but on the back of a pretty ordinary second half of the year (4 wins, 7 losses from memory). But the stated goal was to win a final, we achieved that, and Ratten got a new contract.

Even this year, the stated goal was top 4, and to be able to play home finals.

Compare that with Ross Lyon's approach...



http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/d ... 25mes.html

Leadership and culture is amongst other things about setting expectations, demanding the very best, and a little more, always challenging, stretching, squeezing that little bit extra. The difference in the way Lyon leads his players and the way our players have been led couldn't be more stark.

_________________
Mens sana in corpore sano.

Bring back the laurel wreath logo!!!

Lyon would have been a great get for us last year but Freo were more ruthless then our inspid board to make the move

Dont forget this though.



Didn't help St Kilda to play down a win.

I understand Lyon's point, but sometimes you have to enjoy the little wins and milestones along the way.

_________________
"The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent." Qui-Gon Jinn 15-05-2005

"there’s more chance of me becoming the full forward for the [Western Bulldogs] than there is of any change in the Labor Party." Julia Gillard 18-05-2010

You just can't help but laugh looking at that photo...classic. You can always bank on St Kilda (and Richmond) for out-hopelessing us. Long may it continue.

_________________
Mens sana in corpore sano.

Bring back the laurel wreath logo!!!

I'm not convinced that's the case anymore. I've been very impressed with Brendan Gale over the last 18 months. If you go back to summer 2011, the Tigers were bereft of a major sponsor. Luxbet and Dick Smith decided to reduce their $ commitment to the Tigers - but Gale has proven himself to be one of the more astute CEO's. Jeep were signed for 3 years - ME Bank became naming rights holders to the training facility and within 18 months, the Fighting Tiger Fund had cleared ALL of the clubs' $6million debt. They set up specific marketing and branding for the Fighting Tiger Fund and used it on all correspondence during the year.

...In case you skipped over that last bit - Richmond set up a fund, aimed to clear a debt of $6million and accomplished that inside 18 months. True Story.

Over the last 12 months they've also established a 'Board Nominations Committee' - responsible for considering and advising the Board on matters relating to the appointment of directors.

Specifically, the Board Nominations Committee establishes a transparent and formal procedure to identify individuals who are qualified to become Board members. The process ensures that at all times, the Board comprises those most suited to adequately discharge its responsibilities and duties.

The board also took it upon themselves to engage the services of the Hay Group to review the operation of the existing Board as a whole (and its individual members) to ensure that the Board is well placed to achieve its stated objectives in the most effective and efficient manner.

Its four members are Emmett Dunne (Chair), / Assistant Commissioner Victoria Police Ethical Standards Department &
Member of the AFL Tribunal 1993 to present; Ms Henriette Rothschild, (General Manager of Hay Group Pacific. Works with Boards and executive teams in the corporate and NFP sector on organisational change, board effectiveness and executive capability);
Mr Michael Green, (Practised as a solicitor 1970-1995; Played in 1967, 1969, 1973 and 1974 premierships). Maurice O’Shannassy
(Club Vice President)...

I believe Hawthorn also have an advisory group to the Board in place. These clubs have their house in order. So why don't we? It's not difficult. It's just about putting the right processes in place to keep everyone honest to the role they undertook in the first place. It leaves little room for complacency.