I've long witnessed professional sports franchises (mostly in North America) engage particularly well with their supporter base. They understand what 'fan engagement' means - and it's not just posting something on facebook and counting how many 'Likes' it receives then giving yourself a pat on the back. No - it's way more than that. But there's an organisation out there that does things a little differently.

They're the Seattle Sounders Football Club - they play in North America's Major League Soccer competition and they have what's called an 'Alliance Council'. In essence, this is a legitimate avenue for fans to have a more pronounced voice. It was set up to serve as a liaison between the Alliance and ownership. A simialr 'Alliance' is in place at Barcelona FC. Now - we don't have 'ownership' per se in the AFL - but it's fair to say that Carlton is the closest thing to it and the board represents the ownership.

In Seattle, the Alliance's goals are to provide its members with a voice in the overall direction of the organization, including but not limited to the following:

• A vote on retention or lack of confidence in the Club’s General Manager every four years

• The right to decide on two of the Club’s charitable partners

• The right to advise on matters regarding game-day experience

• The right to decide matters that primarily affect fan experience

To implement this at Carlton - it would be an Alliance-Lite. I can see where the Alliance Council members could serve as a liaison to the Board but I think Greg Swann or Andy McKay would be pretty nervous if members of the Council Alliance voted on the "retention or lack of confidence" in their positions!

The Sounders Alliance has 40 members. In addition to the 40 - you'd have a couple of staff and perhaps a couple of board members. Now - before anyone bangs on about a 'little Seattle Soccer club' and comparing that to Carlton - the Sounders play at CenturyLink Field which is also the home of the Seattle Seahawks (NFL). That stadium holds 67,000. The Sounders average 44,038 to their home games. Carlton's average home game attendance in 2013 was 44,179. They have a cap on membership (32,000) who hold an 18-match season ticket membership. Given what time of year they play - they're also competing against the Seattle Mariners (MLB) for bums on seats - so they're going more than ok.

Now here's why it's would work at Carlton. I've already seen two petitions to make the '26-'97 jumper the one the club wears all the time. There's probably a third somewhere out there, perhaps a fourth on places I don't look at such as BigFooty or facebook, but the point being is that if we had a Carlton Supporter Alliance - everyone would know where to go to raise the issue and get it properly presented to the Board. Take it to a member vote if need be. The Alliance meets every two months - it goes on the agenda, it gets work-shopped, it becomes a proposal. What happens now is very little. The first time the board is likely to hear this as a whole will be at the AGM when someone asks the question of Greg Swann at the AGM and he gives a convoluted reason as to why it can't happen.

The same goes for the Blue Print issue. I get along along really well with Jay Allen - I think he's an outstanding Communications Manager - but I don't agree with some facets of the 'Blue Print' - the stale presentation, set, discussion points and host. It has massive potential and it's a long way from living up to that potential. I met with Jay last August and raised these concerns (among others) but I'm just one supporter with one opinion. What if it were the Supporter Alliance presenting these concerns with realistic suggestions - I have absolutely no doubt that change would occur.

We've been a reactive football club for far too long. The board and staff are there to do a job and for the most part they do it well - but they are caretakers of the club for the supporter. The supporters own the club. We mightn't get a say in who holds the keys to our club - but we sure as hell should get a say in how it's run and what it looks like.

It won't be legitimate in many people's eyes. That's understandable. Like in these forums - we're not going to agree on everything. But it does represent a legitimate voice for the supporter. A proper avenue for discussion with the board. A direction for ideas to be developed. You can have a Grandmother on there, you can have a 14 year old kid on there, you can have advertising guru on there, you can have the facebook neanderthal on there, you can have an ex-player on there, you can have an ex-pat schoolteacher in China using HD video conferencing on there, you can have a photographer from Sydney on there....put simply you want the club represented by the fans on there.


http://www.soundersfc.com/alliance/council/about.aspx

Brilliant.

Magnificent, even.

All for it.

Nice one, Doc.

_________________
And so while others miserably pledge themselves to the pursuit of ambition and brief power, I will be stretched out in the shade, singing.

Like it Doc. Question is whether the Board would be open to the idea.

Leeds United has the Leeds United Supporters Trust. I don't know a lot about it, other than it is taken seriously by the Club. For instance, in recent takeover shenanigans (and there have been lots unfortunately), the Chairman was briefed on proceedings, kept in the loop etc.

http://lufctrust.squarespace.com

I've long thought that the voice of the passionate supporter in the outer is missing from all clubs, and also the AFL. I would like to see such a person on the Board at the Club, and even on the AFL Commission.

_________________
Mens sana in corpore sano.

Bring back the laurel wreath logo!!!

Doc,

I prefer informal, grass roots groups that are not politically or financially aligned to the management of the club.

The closest the blues have had to this sort of thing is the Carlton Unofficial Selection Committee.

A group without formal power structures and rulers (they have leaders and elders only) but well connected to the power structures of the club.

Purely interested in the health of the club and the performance of the players and the team. A major voice at AGMs which are otherwise very boring and monotonous evenings.

The only group that quickly organized itself to call for an extraordinary AGM in 2002 that resulted in the Elliot board being removed (except for diesel and sticks who were recruited for Collos number 1 ticket). In fact they were the pressure group behind the scenes that pushed for collo to run as president and group together a few people on the new board.

Once you couple a supporters group to the clubs power structure you inherently compromise what that group can do in times of crisis.

I would support it if it were completely independent from any aspects of the clubs operation. No financial assistance either.

_________________
Vice President, International Extreme Sarcasm Society (IESS)

There's the theory............Let's talk the practice.

What do you see Doc?

I would suggest that if Ryan Trainor or Mark LoGiudice become President - this is happening. But as you know - things change.



Seeing as you'd have one or more board and staff sitting in on meetings - you'd never have it 100% independent, there are some things that just wouldn't get up. But there are plenty of ideas, that would have fallen by the wayside in the past, that could be implemented.

That's you're only response? A gif? Nothing else to add? I don't expect everyone to say it's a good concept - but if you think it's a terrible concept, at least state why!

Have you seen his other posts?
He's more predictable than me.
Must be an alter.

_________________
dane's trolling again

No. I don't really pay much attention to the poster unless their avatar is a clown.

I think its an excellent idea Doc.
100% for it.
How do we get it done?

Like a lot of things - wait for Sticks to leave. If you haven't already noticed - the club is very regimented in sticking to a schedule of releasing information on certain things. If it happens in 2015, something might come out post Grand Final, but the club will control that side of things.

I'll be in Seattle sometime in July or August, so I plan on doing a little reconnaissance mission and finding out more about it and how they make it work. I'll be happy to provide a bit of a SWOT analysis to a couple of board members if they're interested. It's not like the board don't know about this. If it can be framed to work at Carlton then I believe it'll have support. It has the tick of approval from a few board members who understand fan engagement.

What's the chance the AFL will block a move to get something like this to happen, and be viable and worthwhile?

_________________
And so while others miserably pledge themselves to the pursuit of ambition and brief power, I will be stretched out in the shade, singing.

The AFL wouldn't be concerned with something like this.

Interesting Doc. How is it decided who the members of the Alliance are?

_________________
It's never as good as it looks and it's never as bad as it seems.

I like the sound of it.

Good to know. Wasn't sure if it would be seen by AFL House as a threat to the hold they have over the clubs, or dilution of their power.

_________________
And so while others miserably pledge themselves to the pursuit of ambition and brief power, I will be stretched out in the shade, singing.

That's something that would need to be figured out. I'd expect in Year One a few people would be sounded out and others would send in an expression of interest. Two year terms sound reasonable and then it's turned over via a vote.

Sounds like something for your recon trip, Doc. I'm not sure how the process could be fairly handled outside of a vote, but you can see how a great idea could turn sour with fan blocs running conflicting agendas and grinding it all to a halt.