AFL appoints US company to find footy’s next boss

[Harry]

It would be great to find that interview, I've searched and searched but to no avail.

Keep searching. The truth is out there.

 

[tigersnake]

So what is it Richmond have done to provoke this sentiment and incur the wrath of the AFL? I just can't see where it comes from.

Interesting question TBR, the $64K question. A few theories, and that is all they are:

We have been league leaders in inclusiveness, we've dragged the AFL along at times, they don't like being outshone.

Lack of Richmond people in senior AFL executive or board positions. Tribal allegiances run deep. eg. When presented with 2 similar but competing choices, eg Tiges v Geelong for an AFLW licence, which one do you reckon gets up?

We don't buy-in the the AFL boys club *smile*, we paddle our own canoe.

Our rapid rise, on the field and off, makes us tricky to politically control. (To me this was symbolised by the fixed grimaces on the faces of GM and SH after the 2020 GF., that is not evidence, but I like it)

Our rapid rise upset the applecart in the eyes of the AFL, their preferred option, GWS and GC winning flags in sexy new markets.

 

[Ian4]

Ok let’s run through your suppositions.
1. Brendan Gale inherited the Wantirna club and because he chose not to exit to your acceptable timeframe, it’s a “stain” on his reputation? Do you honestly believe it’s his decision alone and that he would not have the support for this decision from the entire board. Including Peggy?
Then you go and compare our financial performance against other clubs that, until recently, had massive investments in pokies and derived the majority of their revenues through them? I call it prudent financial management although socially unattractive. When the time is right, they’ll exit. Without a stain on them.
The people with better financial acumen than you would also understand the dire financial position we were in as recently as 2013 when we had raging debts, a very disproportionately small, high net worth supporter base compared to other big clubs, only a few loyal sponsors and a medium membership base that still expected results and wouldn’t accept mediocrity ( like bottoming out )
2. Our membership operations are poor? This is simply an outrageous sensationalist claim. Over $100k members for multiple years and clearly number one in recruiting new members. Gale introduced industry leading innovations like hiring a demographer to map out our potential demographic support base and set about marketing directly to them.
The only problem is that success sometimes breeds complacency and many members haven’t renewed their memberships because they feel they’ve been neglected by an “arrogant “ club or that their needs haven’t been sufficiently met. Those people should travel overseas to appreciate how successful clubs grow and how difficult it become to purchase tickets once you become “very” successful.
3. Our sponsorship arrangements are underwhelming? Think you’ll find we’re in the top 3-4 clubs for sponsorship revenue. Enough said.
4. You’re blaming Gale for the AFL’s decision to deny us an early AFLW license? That is an unimaginable stretch. Peggy and a couple of board members actually formed a subcommittee to formulate their strategy and presented it directly to the AFL.
5. Governance disquiet? What does that even mean? Have you been following Cornes or Mark Robinson?
Gale came to the club as CEO when we were a basket case. He put together a plan and judged by any metrics, has been wildly successful.
Suggest you’re taking the pI$$

OK, here is the reply I promised.

1. Pokies. I don’t find pokies offensive, but perhaps that’s because I am not a gambling addict. I have been to Central Coast Stadium in Gosford and Campbelltown Stadium in SW Sydney. Do you know what they have next door? Massive social clubs where fans congregate pre and post-game to have a feed and a drink. I have been carrying on for years and years that Richmond should be doing this at PRO. It would be a massive money spinner for the club.

2. Membership operations are very poor. Ever since we started winning premiership and jumped to 100,000, we have been treated like a number. The customer service (which was never really that great to begin with) is exceptionally poor IMO. To me this highlights the lack of importance the club places on its supporters.

Premiership circle members being made to book their own seats is a pretty good example of what members didn’t want, but the club did it anyway. Same goes for seating at the annual home game at Marvel.

One thing I’d like to hear from the club is what proposals they put forward every year regarding fixture requests? Why isn’t this made public? For example, I would like to know if the club actually asked for Thursday night home games?

3. I don’t know where we stand when it comes in sponsorship dollars. But what I do know is that NIB are dogs and I will never buy any club merchandise that bears their sponsorship logo.

4. Yes, I do partially blame the club on not getting an inaugural AFLW licence. I will forever remain dirty at the AFL and RFC that we did receive the opportunity to win the inaugural premiership. I’m not saying the club is entirely to blame (of course the AFL is), but we are allowed to question and demand answers as to why we didn’t get the licence. I think the club owes it to us supporters to provide an explanation.

5. Governance is the biggest issue at the club. I’m not talking about the footy department or making the club profitable. We have done great in that regard. I am talking about the club being held accountable by the members.

This is basically impossible now due to the changes Benny and Peggy have made to the club constitution. They have made it impossible to hold an EGM. The nomination committee makes it impossible for rank and file members to get onto the board. Board members are not voted in democratically anymore. Applicants get vetted by the nomination committee. Elections are now rare, but when we have one, the ones endorsed by the nominations committee are then endorsed by the board, which means others have no chance of getting in. And then we have Peggy who decided to limit the president’s term to 6 years, but only after she received a third term and stays for 9 years.

In conclusion, do you see the trend of my post? The club needs to factor in the supporters in every decision they make, including the PRO redevelopment, the board, memberships, fixture, etc. Without the supporters, there is no club. The incumbents have lost sight of this IMO.

 

[DavidSSS]

As usual I find your logic flawed and odd. At the broad level, you can pluck out a single example and question it, thats fair enough, but when those single examples mount up and become a trend, thats when it gets compelling. And that is where we are at with the AFL. A clear trend. But you always focus on any given example and question it. Fair enough, but that is not how political analysis works. Its all about the trend.

Second, I find it surprising that you've used that evidence of the discussion of the AFLW bid rejection to strengthen your argument, it actually strengthens mine. Peggy O'Neal is an extremely effective corporate high flyer out in the real world, beyond the AFL (boys club) bubble. If Peggy says she can't understand why the bid was rejected, that's good enough for me.

Often to me BR, you don't seem to understand how politics works. I apologise if thats condescending, but that is the impression I get. The dodgey way the AFL operates, in many ways, isn't unusual. Dirty politics, petty jealousies, favouritism, nepotism, lack of accoutability, all of these things happen in large and small organisations everywhere. I would have thought most people who have worked in a few different jobs, experienced a bit of life, would be aware of that. To me the likelihood is higher in an organisation like the AFL, big money, competitive alpha male environment, no clear and robust accountability mechanism.

Yep, and now the explanation for the failure of the AFLW bid has changed from not a good bid, to didn't lobby hard enough.

DS

 

[jb03]

It would be great to find that interview, I've searched and searched but to no avail.

You have to go to the dark web

 

[Harry]

You have to go to the dark web

I'm pretty sure you'll find it on Infowars.com

 

[The Big Richo]

Yep, and now the explanation for the failure of the AFLW bid has changed from not a good bid, to didn't lobby hard enough.

Brendan Gale said they didn't lobby hard enough, not me. And I didn't say it wasn't a good bid, I didn't say it was nay sort of bid because I don't know. All I said was it failed and I'm happy to take that on face value as an issue of merit rather than AFL bias because Peggy told me she did a good job and should have been picked.

 

[Willo]

Sorry I didn't realise you were in the Board room when they made decisions on Board changes, and likewise I take it you were also in the presentation Richmond gave the AFL on AFLW....

Would you believe I was there.
I told the afl to gagf. I told Gill he needed to trim his bouffant and play fair and told sHocking he was a complete cheating fookwit and to *smile* off back to Geelong.

Maybe I should have waited until we completed the presentation.

 

[The Big Richo]

Would you believe I was there.
I told the afl to gagf. I told Gill he needed to trim his bouffant and play fair and told sHocking he was a complete cheating fookwit and to *smile* off back to Geelong.

Maybe I should have waited until we completed the presentation.

See, this is my point. There is always a simple, rationale explanation that doesn't involve the AFL cheating us.

 

[TT33]

Brendan Gale said they didn't lobby hard enough, not me. And I didn't say it wasn't a good bid, I didn't say it was nay sort of bid because I don't know. All I said was it failed and I'm happy to take that on face value as an issue of merit rather than AFL bias because Peggy told me she did a good job and should have been picked.

Brendon Gale was being very nice to the AFL, if you read between the lines, what he was really saying was " we didn't kiss the AFLs ass enough "

 

[artball]

put your money on Frydenburgh ....

 

[bob]

It is the way you frame your posts. You aren't simply questioning as you claim here.

Perfectly said Ian.

 

[bob]

People need to get over this idea that questioning or criticising Richmond people is out of bounds. Just like anyone they have strengths and weaknesses and it is ok to discuss them.

The Big Richo: People need to get over this idea that questioning or criticising Richmond people is out of bounds. Just like anyone they have strengths and weaknesses and it is ok to discuss them.


Another rubbish statement - we constantly query, question and criticise the club on this site.
I've mentioned ad nauseum the lack of commercial ability of Brendon and the Club in comparison to other Clubs.

Its the way you phrased everything else in your 'look at me, I'm the smartest bloke in the room' post. You do it all the time.

 

[bob]

Interesting question TBR, the $64K question. A few theories, and that is all they are:

We have been league leaders in inclusiveness, we've dragged the AFL along at times, they don't like being outshone.

Lack of Richmond people in senior AFL executive or board positions. Tribal allegiances run deep. eg. When presented with 2 similar but competing choices, eg Tiges v Geelong for an AFLW licence, which one do you reckon gets up?

We don't buy-in the the AFL boys club *smile*, we paddle our own canoe.

Our rapid rise, on the field and off, makes us tricky to politically control. (To me this was symbolised by the fixed grimaces on the faces of GM and SH after the 2020 GF., that is not evidence, but I like it)

Our rapid rise upset the applecart in the eyes of the AFL, their preferred option, GWS and GC winning flags in sexy new markets.

Another insightful post IMO

 

[Baloo]

If anyone needs more evidence of the AFL working against Richmond, just look at the Sport Precinct Proposal. Everything in that area gets enhanced, added too, cleaned up, even the Pies training facilities. What stood out like a sore thumb is that there wasn't even a mention of PRO. This proposal was the work of Eddie & Gil.

It was so bad, even Jabba the Hutch said that it really wasn't fair of the AFL to exclude Richmond in the proposal.

BTW, nice of the 2 Melbourne players brawling in a public restaurant and trashing the place get a deservedly bigger AFL sanction that Shai Bolton did for just being aggressive and wanting to fight while sticking up for his mates. Oh, hang on.

 

[tigerman]

There are some significant people of note who think that Benny would a good choice as the AFL's next CEO, they must think that he's doing a good job at Richmond.

"In response to a survey sent to the bosses of all 18 clubs, Richmond chief executive Brendon Gale emerged as a popular choice as the next AFL supremo, and a quarter of the 16 bosses who responded said they would support a Tasmanian team if an existing club relocated."

By Jake Niall, Michael Gleeson and Peter Ryan​

June 18, 2022 — 5.00am