This is always the point that doesn't sit right with me: a football guy on the board. You've got a CEO, which reports to the board, a Football Department head, who reports to the CEO, so why does the board need a further liaison? Anybody of quality who has experience within football operations is somebody you'd want to employ full time at the club if you can.

Being on the CFC board is volunteer work, and pays exactly that. The operational issues at a football club that differ from another business can be explained inside 30 minutes to anybody with significant business experience and/or expertise, which is exactly who should be sitting on the board in the first place. It just feels like having someone with 'football knowledge' creates a worthless board seat.

If they're a worthy board member, and they bring football knowledge, then that's a bonus, but pick people who can improve the club from a non-football perspective and set up the apparatus for getting the best football people employed there.

_________________
29 different attributes,
And only 7 that you like;
20 ways to see the world,
Or 20 ways to start a fight.

Suburban Finacial Planner.

Suburban Veterinarian.

_________________
"Hence you will not say that Greeks fight like heroes but that heroes fight like Greeks"?

Winston Churchill

It's a bit rough expecting them to pad out the CV while they're still in the industry. McKay managed to complete his degree while playing; how many footballers actually follow through with that these days?

I'm not going to sit here and say he's necessarily the right man for the job on-going, but if you want a guy with industry experience who isn't under 60, chances are he's going to have come into this line of work fairly fresh out of his footy career. McKay worked the ladder at the AFL and was very much in touch with the administration caper when he stepped into the role with us, as well as clearly possessing a sharp mind.

Let's not drag his name through the mud after some superficial assessment, let's ask some real questions that might get real answers in an AGM-type environment.

_________________
29 different attributes,
And only 7 that you like;
20 ways to see the world,
Or 20 ways to start a fight.

governance and judging performance of the club, in my experience is best performed by people who understand something about the subject matter.
chris bond
barry mitchell
some more names.
how can they recognise performance if they dont understand what good looks like?
at least admit you dont know and get an independent assessment. there is no evidence of that either.

_________________
'‘He had an enormous capacity to pump himself up and get the best out of himself when it mattered. He had a fire in his belly – a passion for the contest like few other players’' -- D Parkin in reference to the dominator

I agree with you 100% on independent assessment; I think that eliminates any issues regarding a 'boy's club' culture that might cover for mistakes. They'd want to sit down as a group and identify who to bring in though, so everyone's on the same page.

_________________
29 different attributes,
And only 7 that you like;
20 ways to see the world,
Or 20 ways to start a fight.

How old are you Jim and how many boards have you sat on?

I would have thought that being in the "football industry" it might be apt to actually have someone on the board who has a current understanding of the way a football department works considering it's the be all and end all of the entire raisin d'être of the club. I mean I understand we need a certain number of Pratts and a certain number of Mathiesons and that that's a given but I would also have thought having an individual (just one of course) who has at least a @#$%&! clue as to what goes on at the coal face might be just a little useful.

I don't come from a footy background (unless you count captaining my under 14s team) but in my world (retail) I've watched with some delight as the most overhyped whale in my field (Myer) has rolled out stores, ignored online, decided online/omnichannel was the future, rolled backed stores (some only six years old) and generally been Carlton like in everything they've done for the last 15 years. How many people on the Myer board worked their way up from the coal face?

Why is Myer so shit? Bernie Brookes and his cronies basically set up the company to fail in order to cash in on a public offering. Carlton is not dissimilar except our mob are so dumb they're basing their payoff on raised social standing which is so laughable it actually is laughable. At least Bernie and his buddies walked away with eight figure sums. [REDACTED] the company but took the personal payoff.

I can't believe how many idiot articles I've read from young journos in the thrall of department store spin who talk up the crap that comes out of the mouths of the Brookes types. It's emperor's new clothes stuff x 1000.

Our club is no different.

Your post reads like the ramblings of a 23yo intern in The Age business section wanting a wet session with Bernie.

Give me a @#$%&! board with a @#$%&! clue about what it @#$%&! means to be a @#$%&! football club!

_________________
“When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn't become a king. The palace turns into a circus.”
Turkish Proverb

_________________
*(grow - fun - gah)

Yeah but whatabout your whataboutism.

If they have a current understanding GWS, that means they are employed in the football industry, and thus are not a good candidate to be on the board because they have a clear conflict of interest. The CEO and COO/FDM should be bringing the bulk of the current football expertise.

We shouldn't have a guy like Bear Gleeson on the board just because he has 'footy experience'. Given such widespread cultural problems in the AFL right now, it might even be worth leveraging people with experience in other team sports who are at a point in their careers where they bring clear acumen and have the time and earnings in the bank for non-paying positions.

I know how this seems counter-intuitive to running a business effectively, but I'm merely speaking about this in terms of the advisory capacity of the board. It's a fairly unique business structure.

_________________
29 different attributes,
And only 7 that you like;
20 ways to see the world,
Or 20 ways to start a fight.

How is it a "conflict of interest" to be on the board of a football club and to have a current understanding of football?

Do you ever actually think before you post?

I'm not suggesting Gleeson is the answer. Gleeson is another suburban leech on the arse of the Carlton Football Club.

But to suggest we shouldn't have anyone who has a @#$%&! clue about football is insane.

Re-read your own posts.

They're rubbish.

Oh...and say hello to Bernie for me...!

_________________
“When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn't become a king. The palace turns into a circus.”
Turkish Proverb

It's a very straight forward point GWS: they can't come into the position with current football experience while maintaining a board position at a football club.

The criteria for your best case scenario reads like this:

- Recently departed from the AFL industry (player/coach/admin/whatever)
- Applicable business skills/acumen to compliment the board
- Income to support self despite non-paying position
- Capacity to communicate football ideas and concepts to the business heads on the board

That becomes a very short list, very quickly, and many of them simply wouldn't have time. How do you fill that gap adequately? I understand the ideal scenario, but I'm struggling to see how it's consistently achievable without employing a 'yes' person who'd quickly get underlined as a board puppet. I'd rather do away with the requirement and ensure the board invest time in understanding what they're actually running, while bringing in modern ideas from outside of football.

The AFL is in no way a trendsetter in sport, business or communtiy, so I'm not sure why you're so keen on adding AFL experience as a key criteria.

_________________
29 different attributes,
And only 7 that you like;
20 ways to see the world,
Or 20 ways to start a fight.

But Jeannie and Raffy have heaps of qualifications?

It doesn't have to be that current.

Just give me a board with some members who understand retail...sorry football!

_________________
“When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn't become a king. The palace turns into a circus.”
Turkish Proverb

Hawthorn had Dunstall as a 'Football Director'

He basically appointed Clarkson and they have a board position dedicated to a football person working closely with the Football Manager. Their current Football Director is Andy Gowers, he used to play for them and coached in the VAFA.

I hear his son will be a future AA

_________________
Koperek.

What's a criteria? Is it like a neuro-scientist?

_________________
Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience!!!

After Monday and Tuesday, even the calendar says W T F .........
Visit http://fromthemoshpit.com/

This is probably considered the gold standard for this model but let's look at what Gowers does outside board work:

http://timeadvice.com.au/team-andygowers.php

Here's the blurb from Hawthorn's website, which doesn't even bother to mention his business by name (something they do for every other board member):

The Board


Finally, here's an article on him stepping into the role, which goes on to congratulate Dunstall in his position:

Andrew Gowers replaces Jason Dunstall as Hawthorn football director

_________________
29 different attributes,
And only 7 that you like;
20 ways to see the world,
Or 20 ways to start a fight.

A place where you go to cry after carlton games?

_________________
That’s not a political statement — it’s a harsh reality, and we must act,” she said. “He is a clear and present danger to the things that keep us strong and free. I support impeachment.”

Not sure about Gleeson and has been part of the problem so should go
In MY VIEW it is not necessarily the football people on the board that is the problem it is the other people on the board that think they know football but also think the club is their own plaything and have no idea really about corporate governance and acting in the best interests of the company - they have no idea of the importance of stakeholder engagement - they have no strategic vision and seem to in certain circumstances micro- manage the management of the club because most of them in the outside world are owner/directors of their respective businesses ie Pratts Mathieson et al

Give me a board that understands being on a board is all about Governance and not profile and ego.

I'm not fussed what their qualifications are, provided they understand what their function is.

They are supposed to oversee the club and direct it now and into the future. It means not being involved in day to day stuff. It's about holding people appointed to account.

_________________
Everything before the word "but" is horseshit - J Snow

I prefer the vomitorium...

_________________
“When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn't become a king. The palace turns into a circus.”
Turkish Proverb

If Billy Gowers plays 100 games for us can we recruit Andy Gowers to run our club under the son-father rule?

_________________
I hope Essendon* folds.