Opinion Football club AGM and elections

[Phalangist]

That's what they said about trump

So true

 

[Bad Billy]

don't Understand where the “board has done nothing” sentiment is coming from ?
In two years we’ve;
Gone from 3m over the cap to under.
Replaced the entire football department.
Replaced full kit of sponsors (despite previous sponsors deliberately trying to destabilize, because of their relationship with previous admins)
Won the Canterbury cup and the interstate championship.
Blooded a number of juniors (some of whom look like being the goods).

Success can be measured in a number of ways.

 

[Spoonman84]

don't Understand where the “board has done nothing” sentiment is coming from ?
In two years we’ve;
Gone from 3m over the cap to under.
Replaced the entire football department.
Replaced full kit of sponsors (despite previous sponsors deliberately trying to destabilize, because of their relationship with previous admins)
Won the Canterbury cup and the interstate championship.
Blooded a number of juniors (some of whom look like being the goods).

Success can be measured in a number of ways.

They have also made extensive improvements to the junior league in the Canterbury Bankstown district and the Bulldog junior teams.
Plus the partnerships with group areas in northern NSW.

 

[Shire Dog]

The indecision comes in not firing Pay earlier when they were on the verge of doing so. They've gotten cold feet because of two close wins. Which shouldn't change anything. If they thought Pay wasn't the right coach two weeks ago, then he still isn't the right coach.

I'm pretty sure players and coaches can be recruited and persuaded to sign by clubs. Obviously our club isn't convincing potential recruits enough in negotiations. Maybe they're not offering enough money, selling the vision of the club or can come up with the necessary TPA's? The lack of clarity on a coach, lack of talent at the club and lack of other signings would be key factors. As would an unattractive style of play where we have the worst attack, worst defense and are coming 15th.

Who knows what will happen in regards to the board members financial situation? Either way it's concerning because they may have to step down which could lead to massive changes and may delay the rebuilding process even further as new people put their stamp on the club.

I don’t have any knowledge when it comes to the workings of a football club and the board in general
How does a board members personal financial situation effect them from
standing in February
Also how many people will put there hand up to contest

 

[Spoonman84]

I don’t have any knowledge when it comes to the workings of a football club and the board in general
How does a board members personal financial situation effect them from
standing in February
Also how many people will put there hand up to contest

If a board member has been involved in a company that has declared insolvency or bankruptcy they may not be eligible to stand on a board.
I have no idea about all the in's and out's of it but it could be a problem for one member of the board.
Everyone standing for election has to nominate by November 30 I think that's just off the top of my head so I could be wrong.

 

[B-Train]

I don’t have any knowledge when it comes to the workings of a football club and the board in general
How does a board members personal financial situation effect them from
standing in February
Also how many people will put there hand up to contest

What Spoonman said. I wasn't aware that this was a requirement until recently either.

 

[Shire Dog]

If a board member has been involved in a company that has declared insolvency or bankruptcy they may not be eligible to stand on a board.
I have no idea about all the in's and out's of it but it could be a problem for one member of the board.
Everyone standing for election has to nominate by November 30 I think that's just off the top of my head so I could be wrong.

All good thanks for that information
So it looks like that person does not have business integrity which then reflects on their character
Our club won’t be associating with them,is this correct
What is a general number on the ballot,example 10 people

 

[Spoonman84]

All good thanks for that information
So it looks like that person does not have business integrity which then reflects on their character
Our club won’t be associating with them,is this correct
What is a general number on the ballot,example 10 people

ASIC and Clubs NSW have a code of conduct for board members and declaring insolvency or bankruptcy can breach that. As I said I’m not up to speed on all the fine details of it so we will have to wait for more information to come out.

Personally though if someone runs their personal business into the ground then it does raise questions if they are the right type of person to be on our board.

There is no set number on how many people can nominate but it’s generally around 10-15 candidates.

 

[Shire Dog]

ASIC and Clubs NSW have a code of conduct for board members and declaring insolvency or bankruptcy can breach that. As I said I’m not up to speed on all the fine details of it so we will have to wait for more information to come out.

There is no set number on how many people can nominate but it’s generally around 10-15 candidates.

That all makes sense and is fair enough
I have to find out if I’m eligible to vote in February for the first time,
Either way it’s probably a good time to gather some information regarding the board in general
Might even run for election,better fix up my finances lol

 

[Spoonman84]

That all makes sense and is fair enough
I have to find out if I’m eligible to vote in February for the first time,
Either way it’s probably a good time to gather some information regarding the board in general
Might even run for election,better fix up my finances lol

When did you join the football club? If it’s three years since you joined up in Feb next year you’ll be able to vote.
Well if you haven’t run a company in to the ground in the last year you have more going for you then some board members haha.

 

[Alan79]

I'm not ecstatic about the ladder position. But the on field results weren't unexpected to me. I had hoped that the reserve grade players who got chances would give it their all and demand permanent spots in the side as well as pay rises as the cap allowed. But I also knew realistically that an inexperienced roster can compound early errors in any game and we've really seen it a lot this year.

Extending the contract of Pay is a decision I still think was made too soon. But if the board isn't looking at his replacement I'll be surprised. The previous administration team should not have broken the salary cap with panicked buys to appease fans nor hired a rookie coach to appease the Bulldogs DNA dribble that fans were also saying.

I see a few positives from this board though. Our moderately recent success (late 70's through to 2004) was based on great juniors and astute recruitment. The new board have done some ground work towards ensuring we can move towards building the bulk of our roster from players we develop which will help us with the salary cap eventually. They've also snapped up DWZ quietly when other suitors were chasing him. And I think Sue, Napa, Meaney, Cogger and CHN were pretty good signings given our admin team made them long after the bulk of talent was already locked up elsewhere and there wasn't a huge amount of money to bring players over.

So people who are judging the board on this season's results are being a bit harsh. Our team and coach were both very highly touted under the old board. But they built a substantial list of issues for their successors to fix. The junior ranks had reputedly become caustic, our senior ranks had plenty of highly paid players that needed cleaning up and our junior base wasn't in a position to fill the gaps left by outgoing talent. But the board made some tough decisions to fast track changes. Allowing the Morris twins to leave while offloading Woods and not offering Eastwood a new deal gave us the chance to chase quality in DWZ. It's fair enough to want a winning team every year. But year one of the rebuild was always going to rely on substandard depth players and rookies growing a new leg to attain a good ladder position. Pay had a tough task that some experienced coaches weren't willing to risk their reputations on if rumours are correct. I personally don't think he's the one to take us forward and didn't applaud the old boards choice to sign him. But will support him till an adequate replacement comes in. I'm hopeful that the board has made all the required moves to set our future success in motion. The biggest concern is that they renewed Pays contract early. But like every signing we needed to make it was a gamble. Maybe they hoped he'd be more focused if he had more job security. This whole year had an element of gambling on unproven people. It's how we move forward over the next few years that counts. Not stage one of climbing out of a septic tank.

 

[TwinTurbo]

didn't applaud the old boards choice to sign him.

I believed at the time and still do that he was the best of the candidates that applied and didn't walk away when they saw the depth and length of the Cap problem.

Go Dogs

 

[DinkumDog]

I'm not ecstatic about the ladder position. But the on field results weren't unexpected to me. I had hoped that the reserve grade players who got chances would give it their all and demand permanent spots in the side as well as pay rises as the cap allowed. But I also knew realistically that an inexperienced roster can compound early errors in any game and we've really seen it a lot this year.

Extending the contract of Pay is a decision I still think was made too soon. But if the board isn't looking at his replacement I'll be surprised. The previous administration team should not have broken the salary cap with panicked buys to appease fans nor hired a rookie coach to appease the Bulldogs DNA dribble that fans were also saying.

I see a few positives from this board though. Our moderately recent success (late 70's through to 2004) was based on great juniors and astute recruitment. The new board have done some ground work towards ensuring we can move towards building the bulk of our roster from players we develop which will help us with the salary cap eventually. They've also snapped up DWZ quietly when other suitors were chasing him. And I think Sue, Napa, Meaney, Cogger and CHN were pretty good signings given our admin team made them long after the bulk of talent was already locked up elsewhere and there wasn't a huge amount of money to bring players over.

So people who are judging the board on this season's results are being a bit harsh. Our team and coach were both very highly touted under the old board. But they built a substantial list of issues for their successors to fix. The junior ranks had reputedly become caustic, our senior ranks had plenty of highly paid players that needed cleaning up and our junior base wasn't in a position to fill the gaps left by outgoing talent. But the board made some tough decisions to fast track changes. Allowing the Morris twins to leave while offloading Woods and not offering Eastwood a new deal gave us the chance to chase quality in DWZ. It's fair enough to want a winning team every year. But year one of the rebuild was always going to rely on substandard depth players and rookies growing a new leg to attain a good ladder position. Pay had a tough task that some experienced coaches weren't willing to risk their reputations on if rumours are correct. I personally don't think he's the one to take us forward and didn't applaud the old boards choice to sign him. But will support him till an adequate replacement comes in. I'm hopeful that the board has made all the required moves to set our future success in motion. The biggest concern is that they renewed Pays contract early. But like every signing we needed to make it was a gamble. Maybe they hoped he'd be more focused if he had more job security. This whole year had an element of gambling on unproven people. It's how we move forward over the next few years that counts. Not stage one of climbing out of a septic tank.

Astute observations and well articulated @Alan79, if only we saw these sort of posts more often on TK.

I’d add that the then new board (elected Feb 2018) who barely had their feet under the desk told us at the Member Forum in May 2018 (I was in the room) that the truth was it would be a painful ride until at least 2020 and more likely it would be 2021 before we could genuinely be contenders again. I don’t believe they’ve ever deviated from that message.

I believe this board deserve another term in Feb 2020. If by season 2021 we have not assembled a quality squad that are not playing finals football again and respected by our opposition as we once were as well as having solved other challenges such as longer term coach, sponsors and junior development - I’ll be all for a change of board in Feb 2022.

Until then, I show my age by channelling the words of Axl Rose: ‘All we need is just a little patience’.

 

[Shire Dog]

When did you join the football club? If it’s three years since you joined up in Feb next year you’ll be able to vote.
Well if you haven’t run a company in to the ground in the last year you have more going for you then some board members haha.

I’ll check my emails at work this afternoon to see the exact dates of my membership
Have a feeling might be short by a several months
Definitely haven’t run any company into the ground,I’ve been working at the same place for over 30 years
Anyway happy to just support this great club and watch the team play
I expect honesty from our hierarchy and progression in the right direction

 

[Mr Invisible]

ASIC and Clubs NSW have a code of conduct for board members and declaring insolvency or bankruptcy can breach that. As I said I’m not up to speed on all the fine details of it so we will have to wait for more information to come out.

Personally though if someone runs their personal business into the ground then it does raise questions if they are the right type of person to be on our board.

There is no set number on how many people can nominate but it’s generally around 10-15 candidates.

"Fit and proper person" I think is the wording they like to use.

Also worth noting that George Peponis is the new chairman of Clubs NSW. He was on the board for them already, and I believe has left his post at NSW RL board to take up the position.

I dare say he'd have his ear to the ground over this situation unfolding and be watching it closely.

That's how he know about the appointment of the 2 neutral directors (Iemma and Kannan) (and put them in place) at the Leagues Club. He knew that Clubs NSW were making that a requirement for board transparencies.

 

[Spoonman84]

"Fit and proper person" I think is the wording they like to use.

Also worth noting that George Peponis is the new chairman of Clubs NSW. He was on the board for them already, and I believe has left his post at NSW RL board to take up the position.

I dare say he'd have his ear to the ground over this situation unfolding and be watching it closely.

That's how he know about the appointment of the 2 neutral directors (Iemma and Kannan) (and put them in place) at the Leagues Club. He knew that Clubs NSW were making that a requirement for board transparencies.

Peponis is a club legend but he also has his agenda. Appointing Iemma and Kannan when he did was nothing more then a last ditch attempt to maintain control of the Leagues Club board.

 

[Teddybear]

Peponis is a club legend but he also has his agenda. Appointing Iemma and Kannan when he did was nothing more then a last ditch attempt to maintain control of the Leagues Club board.

Now we all know why

 

[Spoonman84]

Now we all know why

To be fair though the Football Club books are in good order so maybe Opes is only allowed access to the petty cash tin!

 

[Mr Invisible]

To be fair though the Football Club books are in good order so maybe Opes is only allowed access to the petty cash tin!

I don't know why, but the following situation just came into my head.
*Opes out shopping with the Football Club Chair George*
Opes: Can I have an ice cream?
George: Only if you brought your pocket money with you!
Opes: Thanks George, I promise I'll do all my chores this week.

Peponis is a club legend but he also has his agenda. Appointing Iemma and Kannan when he did was nothing more then a last ditch attempt to maintain control of the Leagues Club board.

I think it was a bit of both. He knew additional governance was coming in and introduced it in advance. I don't think they've brought it in as a requirement just yet, but can't be far off.