Correct me if I'm wrong, but the top 4 voted were endorsed by the Football Club, so should not have had ANY votes for them (as their position at the club is assumed).The final results
View attachment 5355
What so you support Peponis being run out of the club do you?As Graham said. Our leagues club was number 1 now we are number 4 under this club legend. Power plays for self benefit.
You explain the appointment of James "Gabby" Marroun then?a politician and a banker are the ones who can be trusted to safeguard the club
he was appointed by the football clubYou explain the appointment of James "Gabby" Marroun then?
I must admit that confounded me when I voted. There was no mention of preference voting so effectively voting for those who are already appointed is just wasting a vote. I think that had there been only 3 votes allowed instead of 7 and the 4 Footy Club appointees not appear on the ticket there would have been a different result.Correct me if I'm wrong, but the top 4 voted were endorsed by the Football Club, so should not have had ANY votes for them (as their position at the club is assumed).
Yet despite that many How To Vote cards had them as recommend in voteable positions (which assuming it's formal) would have just wasted preferences. I bet the informal vote topped all of them.
Yeah but why???he was appointed by the football club
I think its a legal thing where even though they are appointed they still need to be voted onto the board if that makes sense.Correct me if I'm wrong, but the top 4 voted were endorsed by the Football Club, so should not have had ANY votes for them (as their position at the club is assumed).
Yet despite that many How To Vote cards had them as recommend in voteable positions (which assuming it's formal) would have just wasted preferences. I bet the informal vote topped all of them.
Yep. I am happy to see him go. Sick of power plays and own hidden agendasWhat so you support Peponis being run out of the club do you?
I hope you're correct in your assumptions. Everyone just wants all parties to work for the Dogs, not themselves.There was nothing subversive about the appointments.Forget about anything else if Iemma and Kanaan were available for appointment to the Board the club would be crazy not to invite them on. One is a political powerbroker, the other the CEO of a huge finance organisation - happy days. That they may have more of an alliance with the existing chairman than potentially with others is an issue, but not a major one. Neither of these blokes are going to damage their reputation by making decisions that will bring either the leagues or footy club down - not for a few grand a year. And just for the record my golf club has had to go through exactly the same thing - reducing its board from 12 to 7 to comply with the legislation and we have the capacity to appoint 2 expert practitioners to those 7 to improve governance and decision-making. I just wish we had blokes of these two's calibre volunteering to do it.
One final thought. Everyone seems pretty sure that Peponis won't be re-elected chair because Coorey is aligned to Anderson. When I was there voting last week the two Coorey brothers and Peponis were having coffee together in the coffee shop. No matter who the chair is, the good news is that the club will continue to develop and the footy club will still be secure. Unlike Dragons, Tigers and Manly to name a few.
It's probably something along the lines that all directors sitting on the board that wish to stand can be voted for (endorsed or otherwise).I think its a legal thing where even though they are appointed they still need to be voted onto the board if that makes sense.
The financial reports show nothing out of the ordinary (agendas).Yep. I am happy to see him go. Sick of power plays and own hidden agendas
See there it is.Yep. I am happy to see him go. Sick of power plays and own hidden agendas
I get the need for change of the Footy Club and I am happy that we have it but the Leagues club is a different beast and needs to be run by people with a different skill set. I agree Peponis should have stayed out of it. It wasn't his role to comment and should have been censured for it but I would hate to see the club go backwards because favours have been repaid and old alliances reactivated. One sure way the footy club can get its grant cut is if the leagues club doesn't make a profit, which it has done for many years now.I hope you're correct in your assumptions. Everyone just wants all parties to work for the Dogs, not themselves.
I, and many others, feel it was the wrong thing to do and underhanded and 2 new unelected directors would not be sitting on our Board now if Dib had been unopposed and won. That is subversive and a last minute stunt that members had little time to digest IMO.
The vast majority of the members and fans wanted change. The new board got an unpreceded landslide endorsement. Only our greatest player in Turvey was returned.
Chairman Peponis was wrong to be so biased and denigrate the character of the Reform Ticket and then try and rig the will of the members who want change.
I am just trying to represent the feelings of the majority of Dogs fans who think this has all been so unnecessary and should not have happened.
We all hope the club can get over it and move on.
Mr I we wouldnt be hearing about our FC or LC if the FC had of been run successfully by Dib's Board and therefore voted out and we also could have just got on with voting for the LC committee if Dr G had of accepted the will of the members.It's probably something along the lines that all directors sitting on the board that wish to stand can be voted for (endorsed or otherwise).
Which brings with it another question: Why wouldn't the FC wait until the election to endorse directors, and can those endorsements change at any time (or does it rely on the director standing down). Why not wait to see who gets voted on and go from there.
It'd be nice if the constitutions for both boards were clearly accessible on both websites.
The financial reports show nothing out of the ordinary (agendas).
At the end of the day, a board should be seen but not heard.
How many other FC and LC boards do you heard about? I mean in fairness ours had to get involved towards the end there, but most just go about things and are rarely heard of.
The previous LC members have worked with many other FC board members in the past without problems.Mr I we wouldnt be hearing about our FC or LC if the FC had of been run successfully by Dib's Board and therefore voted out and we also could have just got on with voting for the LC committee if Dr G had of accepted the will of the members.
All the drama and publicity has been generated because of Peponis firstly going public bagging Anderson etc and then sneakily placing in two new directors to try and keep his Chairmanship. George has had control of the whole sorry public mess. Its about time they all got on with what the members voted for...whether it was right or wrong it is what it is and the losers should just accept it.
Yes but you can hardly blame the reform ticket for being very very wary with Peponis now and not wanting to lose control and therefore have their agenda stuffed around. He has gone all tired and emotional and brought discredit to our democratic elections. This is unchartered territory George has got our FC into now and he has been totally ruthless in his tactics...just as he was in wresting control of the NSWRL I might add.The previous LC members have worked with many other FC board members in the past without problems.
None of them have ever jumped up and down nor expressed concern over the desperate requirement to have control of the LC.
The LC always set aside a grant in their financial report, and that is locked in regardless for that financial year as a commitment.
All the while Iemma and Kanaan remain on the board, things will remain "okay" because there is accountability in place. If they are outed somehow, I think there will be attempts to force other directors to resign until the entire makeup is what some desire.
He’s probably building the Anderson palace with the clubs moneyYou explain the appointment of James "Gabby" Marroun then?