Results of the boardroom bunfight

camel · **Posted:** Mon Mar 27, 2006 8:15 am

Jarusa wrote:

Would have liked to at least seen 2 changes.

Hope we don't go down the old path of sticking with people just for the sake of sticking with people.

We need fresh ideas.

I'd have been happy with that too. But, that's not to be, and let's hope the board, with it's new member, can forge ahead with rebuilding the club towards becoming succesful again.

By the sounds of things Lee understands the rank and file want more, here's to him delivering more.

Effes · **Posted:** Mon Mar 27, 2006 8:20 am

Blues New Blood

camel · **Posted:** Mon Mar 27, 2006 8:31 am

Effes wrote:

Blues New Blood

I like the "facts" presented hereâ€¦

Jon Pierik wrote:

There is widespread frustration and, in some cases, hostility between administration, coaching staff and players.

budzy · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 11:17 am **Posts:** 8128

thanks for the scoop kh....a little change is better than no change I suppose

2ndeffort · **Posted:** Mon Mar 27, 2006 11:22 am

Cometh the hour cometh the man??? I voted for Lee, hope he does a good job. Loved to read his comments in the paper. You always hear coaches saying that they needs players in the 2's pushing the main guys to keep them on their toes. Why should the board be any different. I reckon we, the members have sent a message to the board with this vote.

Gee 7 votes short for Clarke, I reckon I'd be trying to do a George Dubbya and force a recount, then a recount and then another recount until the 7 became 7 for instead of against!!!

steve · **Posted:** Mon Mar 27, 2006 11:30 am

In politics, it's usually harder to effect change than not to. That's why I'd like to see all financial members being eligible to vote without registering, because I think that disaffected members are more likely to take an interest than satisfied members.

If you counted the members that were refused voting because they hadn't registered by the cutoff, i reckon you'd get a net 7 votes for Clarke...

woof · **Joined:** Thu Mar 02, 2006 9:51 am **Posts:** 4919

steve wrote:

In politics, it's usually harder to effect change than not to. That's why I'd like to see all financial members being eligible to vote without registering, because I think that disaffected members are more likely to take an interest than satisfied members.

If you counted the members that were refused voting because they hadn't registered by the cutoff, i reckon you'd get a net 7 votes for Clarke...

I think Clarke has only himself to blame. Lee got on the front foot early and ran a very professional campaign well in advance of the election. I knew all about Lee when I got my ballot papers and voted. I knew next to nothing of Clarke. If he had got his agenda out into the market place a bit earlier that would have made a difference.
Probably says something about the person that his agenda was so late in getting to the members.

steve · **Posted:** Mon Mar 27, 2006 12:15 pm

Woof, wasn't trying to imply that Clarke deserved to be there, just that the process should be simplified to make change a little easier in the future using Clarke as an example...

woof · **Joined:** Thu Mar 02, 2006 9:51 am **Posts:** 4919

steve wrote:

Woof, wasn't trying to imply that Clarke deserved to be there, just that the process should be simplified to make change a little easier in the future using Clarke as an example...

Fair enough.
I think he would be kicking himself that he did not get his agenda out earlier.

AGRO · **Posted:** Mon Mar 27, 2006 12:32 pm

2ndeffort wrote:

Gee 7 votes short for Clarke, I reckon I'd be trying to do a George Dubbya and force a recount, then a recount and then another recount until the 7 became 7 for instead of against!!!

Maybe they could get CHAD Liddell to do the recount. :wink:

my two cents · **Joined:** Wed Mar 09, 2005 12:28 pm **Posts:** 572

I missed the deadline so count that 1 vote lost. Also why the fC* is Kernahan on the board? Great captain but what value does he add? His football management nous is average given that he was a key decision maker in outcomes that plague us today, is supposedly soft on senior players, donâ€™t think he is a great marketer either. I agree with Synbad when he says that we need overhaul not just cosmetic surgery.

AGRO · **Posted:** Mon Mar 27, 2006 1:41 pm

AGRO wrote:

2ndeffort wrote:

Gee 7 votes short for Clarke, I reckon I'd be trying to do a George Dubbya and force a recount, then a recount and then another recount until the 7 became 7 for instead of against!!!

Maybe they could get CHAD Liddell to do the recount. :wink:

Ahem, I said CHAD Liddell. :lol:

jimmae · **Posted:** Mon Mar 27, 2006 1:43 pm

my two cents wrote:

I missed the deadline so count that 1 vote lost. Also why the fC* is Kernahan on the board? Great captain but what value does he add? His football management nous is average given that he was a key decision maker in outcomes that plague us today, is supposedly soft on senior players, donâ€™t think he is a great marketer either. I agree with Synbad when he says that we need overhaul not just cosmetic surgery.

Profile. Sticks can sell the Club like few can. Bleeds navy blue and it would come across when he is speaking to someone I'm sure.

JackWorrall · **Posted:** Mon Mar 27, 2006 1:48 pm

AGRO wrote:

2ndeffort wrote:

Gee 7 votes short for Clarke, I reckon I'd be trying to do a George Dubbya and force a recount, then a recount and then another recount until the 7 became 7 for instead of against!!!

Maybe they could get CHAD Liddell to do the recount. :wink:

Ahem, I said CHAD Liddell. :lol:

You might need to punch that line a little harder to get a response.

AGRO · **Posted:** Mon Mar 27, 2006 1:50 pm

JackWorrall wrote:

AGRO wrote:

2ndeffort wrote:

Gee 7 votes short for Clarke, I reckon I'd be trying to do a George Dubbya and force a recount, then a recount and then another recount until the 7 became 7 for instead of against!!!

Maybe they could get CHAD Liddell to do the recount. :wink:

Ahem, I said CHAD Liddell. :lol:

You might need to punch that line a little harder to get a response.

Gee, this is a tough room. :wink:

jimmae · **Posted:** Mon Mar 27, 2006 2:06 pm

Chad Liddell the Sandy footballer? I think most people have no idea what you're talking about. I know I don't.

Wild Blue Yonder · **Posted:** Mon Mar 27, 2006 2:20 pm

Chad?

I thought that was a county in Florida?

mjonc · **Posted:** Mon Mar 27, 2006 2:23 pm

So is it 5.30 or 7 tonight for the AGM? I don't finish work till 6.30 so i'm hoping it's 7pm.

AGRO · **Posted:** Mon Mar 27, 2006 2:33 pm

Jack Worrall - is on the right track and Wild Blue Yonder is in the right state. :wink:

bluegirldanielle · **Posted:** Mon Mar 27, 2006 2:34 pm

steve wrote:

In politics, it's usually harder to effect change than not to. That's why I'd like to see all financial members being eligible to vote without registering, because I think that disaffected members are more likely to take an interest than satisfied members.

If you counted the members that were refused voting because they hadn't registered by the cutoff, i reckon you'd get a net 7 votes for Clarke...

Totally agree steve. I voted but I don't think my vote counted as I wasn't sure if I was registered. After reading something on TC after the cut off date I'm pretty sure I wasn't registered. Therefore, my vote for Clarke didn't count. That is quite significant if he only lost by 7 votes.

Although having been a member of the club for around 10 years I should have known they wouldn't make it easy to vote. They've never made easy in the past.

Results of the boardroom bunfight

Who is online