Opinion Effectiveness of the Board and Executive Leadership

[Kram]

Yeah just merge this into the "Vent here" thread.

 

[dockshark]

Because regular posters here like to think of BF as a place for more rational discussion. There is a venting thread already for venting. This type of visceral emotional reaction is what you'd expect to read in the comments of a Facebook media post.

Especially the fact that you're returning and replying to every comment and trying to keep the outrage machine going. A lot of people don't have time for that here, it's quite irritating.

Even in this above post, emotional hyperbole over real facts. "30 years of underperformance", this is not a fact, it's an emotive statement designed to get a reaction. Is "performance" strictly measured by premierships won? I don't think so. We've at times had the best team in the league, it's just never fallen into place at the right time of a specific year. So your statement is factually false.

Thankfully, most people can see that in the AFL it doesn't take much to get beaten and overreacting to an unexpected loss is mostly a waste of time after the initial shock has dissipated. Yet here you are, still banging on about it telling us to make a stand three days later.

This thread should honestly just be deleted.

It's you that's being emotive, and you've made your point very clear that you disagree with my position which is your perogative.

Now you are having a crack at me for repsonding to discussion on a discussion forum?

I don't agree that it should be deleted, but given it is upsetting you this much I think perhaps you should move on and stop reading it.

 

[poshman]

I really don't see why you see it as necessary to describe my contribution as nonsense, but if that makes you feel better then good for you.

It is reactive, to 30 years of underperformance and a desire to see our club develop the type of high performance culture that successful clubs seem to be able to foster.

The problem is that you are assigning historical challenges (we sucked) with culture now. Do you really think we have the same culture now we did under Drum?

It is that lack of clarity that makes this nonsensical. Geelong is considered to have a great culture. Yet before 07 how long was it between premierships? Using your vague definitions they had a poor culture for decades and the 07 team only had a good culture when the won the premiership. Did that mean if they lost the GF they had a bad culture? Do you see how that definition of culture isn't useful or accurate?

We haven't had 30 years of underperformance unless you view the premiership as the only measure of successful performance. Is that what you are saying? We have underperformed for many if not most of our 30 years. We have over performed in some years and been exceptional in others. When you make sweeping generalisations it is either not serious, which I believe you are, or it is emotional nonsense.

 

[mattis117]

It's you that's being emotive, and you've made your point very clear that you disagree with my position which is your perogative.

Now you are having a crack at me for repsonding to discussion on a discussion forum?

I don't agree that it should be deleted, but given it is upsetting you this much I think perhaps you should move on and stop reading it.

I'm having a go at you for trying to start a movement. It's pathetic. You've been told so by multiple posters, probably best to just give it up already.

You remind me of the Woodside protesters that naively believed that everyone agrees with them, only to find out that very few people actually agreed with them, they've just been stuck in their own little echo chamber. You've come here and made this post expecting everyone to get behind you and demand action be taken! only to find yourself being ridiculed.

As if the club isn't already doing everything it possibly can to win games of AFL. Moronic members who can't handle their emotions and make pathetic threats to the club does not magically improve performance. In fact, all you're asking to do is distract them from their jobs, inevitably making performance worse.

This narcissism ain't helping anyone.

 

[dockshark]

I'm having a go at you for trying to start a movement. It's pathetic. You've been told so by multiple posters, probably best to just give it up already.

You remind me of the Woodside protesters that naively believed that everyone agrees with them, only to find out that very few people actually agreed with them, they've just been stuck in their own little echo chamber. You've come here and made this post expecting everyone to get behind you and demand action be taken! only to find yourself being ridiculed.

As if the club isn't already doing everything it possibly can to win games of AFL. Moronic members who can't handle their emotions and make pathetic threats to the club does not magically improve performance. In fact, all you're asking to do is distract them from their jobs, inevitably making performance worse.

This narcissism ain't helping anyone.

Ok. I'm not going to keep responding to your rude posts. If you want to keep throwing out insults and playing the man then that's your perogative.

I hope your day gets better.

 

[dockshark]

The problem is that you are assigning historical challenges (we sucked) with culture now. Do you really think we have the same culture now we did under Drum?

It is that lack of clarity that makes this nonsensical. Geelong is considered to have a great culture. Yet before 07 how long was it between premierships? Using your vague definitions they had a poor culture for decades and the 07 team only had a good culture when the won the premiership. Did that mean if they lost the GF they had a bad culture? Do you see how that definition of culture isn't useful or accurate?

We haven't had 30 years of underperformance unless you view the premiership as the only measure of successful performance. Is that what you are saying? We have underperformed for many if not most of our 30 years. We have over performed in some years and been exceptional in others. When you make sweeping generalisations it is either not serious, which I believe you are, or it is emotional nonsense.

I'm simply arguing that on balance over our 30 year history we have not been able to develop the type of culture that generates sustained results. Yes we've had periods of good onfield performance but we've not been able to sustain them and we appear to be slower than many clubs at turning perfomance around. I would like to ask some questions of the board around why this is the case and what they are doing to rectifiy it.

I'm just about to head out but I'll respect your post with a more detailed response including some points of comparison for you using data (given you've asked for clarity) when I get home later.

 

[mayne iac]

Ok. I'm not going to keep responding to your rude posts. If you want to keep throwing out insults and playing the man then that's your perogative.

I hope your day gets better.

You are in the minority mate, give it up.

 

[Raz]

As some have said . The eagles have been down , been rated as one of the worst teams in past few years . Were being considered for priority draft

And yet they crunched us . What does that say about our club culture

While fans blame umpiring and fixtures for our losses there is no pressure put on the club to change our mediocre culture to be we just win . Do whatever it takes to improve , the club needs to stop accepting this mediocre results for past 30 yrs . No more .

 

[Belnakor]

As some have said . The eagles have been down , been rated as one of the worst teams in past few years . Were being considered for priority draft

And yet they crunched us . What does that say about our club culture

While fans blame umpiring and fixtures for our losses there is no pressure put on the club to change our mediocre culture to be we just win . Do whatever it takes to improve , the club needs to stop accepting this mediocre results for past 30 yrs . No more .

The eagles fielded a more experienced and older team than us on the weekend. The furphy they were a bunch of rookies is completely wrong.

They have a good core that they basically doubled down on after 2018.. and then most of them became permenantly injured. Now guys like Yeo are back and suddenly they’re looking a lot better.

It’s not magic. They have a much shorter injury list and their best players are all fit and available. Unlike us.

 

[StingBitten]

I didn’t know you had this level of post in you. I apologise for the Tom Browne comment, your welcome here anymore Mr Duffield

Mr Duffield walks among us?

 

[Madas]

You are in the minority mate, give it up.

Nothing wrong with the minority and how in fact are you measuring that ?
By the couple of posters who’ve come on here all vocal and frankly a bit rude to someone who is just hurting and trying to make change ?

Therein lies the difference
The grumpy ones are just the “ there is nothing you can do about it types , suck it up “

Then there are those who try and make change .
It’s a form of protest and we can all see that in all facets of life a strong voice of protest can have results.

I totally get why DockShark is wigging out .
The Derby was just a can of petrol thrown onto smouldering embers .

WE HAVE NO ******* FORWARD LINE FOR *S SAKE !

This is a massive concern and if anyone doesn’t think so then I’m not sure what planet they are from

So what the f is the harm in writing to the club to say get your bloody recruiting team to pull their digits out and FIX this or tell them to Piss off

In all likelihood we will just get a letter of platitude back saying we’ve listened to your concerns and it’s been raised with the relevant people ( ie : chucked in the bin )

But at least I can say I’ve tried to make change and not just be another useless prick having a go at someone who is

Definitely a rant and worthy of the vent thread

 

[dockshark]

I definitely think your point is valid (we can disagree on the timing, but that's largely irrelevant at his point).

My question is what would you like to see done or done differently? I've given some thought to this and without the use of useless motherhood statements or emotional, Monday expert declarations, I've struggled to come up with anything I'd consider would have actually moved the dial.

I'm interested in your thoughts.

Good question.

A close friend of mine was part of the challenge on the board at Richmond in 2016. Essentially the way this worked in that circumstance was that a few well informed members studied the constitution and established there was a requirement to gain a minimum number of signatures and secure a minimum number of attendess to trigger an EGM. What was interesting about this particular situation was that whilst it was reported as a serious move on the board, if you talk to people involved their main objective was to make a clear statement that they weren't happy with the strategic leadership and direction set by the board. Ultimately Peggy O'Neal was able to resolve the situation 'peacefully' but what followed was a number of structural changes (including within the footy dept) and the Tigers went on to win premierships in 2017, 2018, and 2020. The level of influence of the challenge on the board has been hotly debated, but there is no doubt it directly contributed to some of the actions taken inbetween 2016 and 2017.

Now to be clear (and to try to circumvent some emotional reactions ) I'm not suggesting that a move on the board is needed here. But a contextually appropriate model could be an open letter to the board, signed by a sufficient number of members to give it credibility seeking clarity on a range of issues. For example:

• Explain the current strategic targets given that Simon Garlick's previous target set in 2021 of 2 premierships and 80000 members in 4 years now looks totally implausible
• Explain the rationale of the 1 year extension offered to JL, what triggered it and what alternatives were considered
• Outline what steps the club is taking to arrest players leaving giving some of the high quality players that have sought trades in the last 2 years
• Outline what oversight the board currently provides over the footy operations dept, what KPIs they have applied and how they assess it's effectiveness as a dept.
• When was the last time an independent review of the boards operations was conducted and what is the intended timing of the next independent review (don't assume that this will be in the public domain)

This type of approach would be a constructive model for members engaging with the board and may have the net effect of iniating more rigour in self evaluation, consideration of the make-up of the board, and consideration of the current boards competence.

 

[Madas]

Good question.

A close friend of mine was part of the challenge on the board at Richmond in 2016. Essentially the way this worked in that circumstance was that a few well informed members studied the constitution and established there was a requirement to gain a minimum number of signatures and secure a minimum number of attendess to trigger an EGM. What was interesting about this particular situation was that whilst it was reported as a serious move on the board, if you talk to people involved their main objective was to make a clear statement that they weren't happy with the strategic leadership and direction set by the board. Ultimately Peggy O'Neal was able to resolve the situation 'peacefully' but what followed was a number of structural changes (including within the footy dept) and the Tigers went on to win premierships in 2017, 2018, and 2020. The level of influence of the challenge on the board has been hotly debated, but there is no doubt it directly contributed to some of the actions taken inbetween 2016 and 2017.

Now to be clear (and to try to circumvent some emotional reactions ) I'm not suggesting that a move on the board is needed here. But a contextually appropriate model could be an open letter to the board, signed by a sufficient number of members to give it credibility seeking clarity on a range of issues. For example:

• Explain the current strategic targets given that Simon Garlick's previous target set in 2021 of 2 premierships and 80000 members in 4 years now looks totally implausible
• Explain the rationale of the 1 year extension offered to JL, what triggered it and what alternatives were considered
• Outline what steps the club is taking to arrest players leaving giving some of the high quality players that have sought trades in the last 2 years
• Outline what oversight the board currently provides over the footy operations dept, what KPIs they have applied and how they assess it's effectiveness as a dept.
• When was the last time an independent review of the boards operations was conducted and what is the intended timing of the next independent review (don't assume that this will be in the public domain)

This type of approach would be a constructive model for members engaging with the board and may have the net effect of iniating more rigour in self evaluation, consideration of the make-up of the board, and consideration of the current boards competence.

Much more articulate and considered approach than mine but let’s tackle it from multiple fronts

 

[FD2646]

Good question.

A close friend of mine was part of the challenge on the board at Richmond in 2016. Essentially the way this worked in that circumstance was that a few well informed members studied the constitution and established there was a requirement to gain a minimum number of signatures and secure a minimum number of attendess to trigger an EGM. What was interesting about this particular situation was that whilst it was reported as a serious move on the board, if you talk to people involved their main objective was to make a clear statement that they weren't happy with the strategic leadership and direction set by the board. Ultimately Peggy O'Neal was able to resolve the situation 'peacefully' but what followed was a number of structural changes (including within the footy dept) and the Tigers went on to win premierships in 2017, 2018, and 2020. The level of influence of the challenge on the board has been hotly debated, but there is no doubt it directly contributed to some of the actions taken inbetween 2016 and 2017.

Now to be clear (and to try to circumvent some emotional reactions ) I'm not suggesting that a move on the board is needed here. But a contextually appropriate model could be an open letter to the board, signed by a sufficient number of members to give it credibility seeking clarity on a range of issues. For example:

• Explain the current strategic targets given that Simon Garlick's previous target set in 2021 of 2 premierships and 80000 members in 4 years now looks totally implausible
• Explain the rationale of the 1 year extension offered to JL, what triggered it and what alternatives were considered
• Outline what steps the club is taking to arrest players leaving giving some of the high quality players that have sought trades in the last 2 years
• Outline what oversight the board currently provides over the footy operations dept, what KPIs they have applied and how they assess it's effectiveness as a dept.
• When was the last time an independent review of the boards operations was conducted and what is the intended timing of the next independent review (don't assume that this will be in the public domain)

This type of approach would be a constructive model for members engaging with the board and may have the net effect of iniating more rigour in self evaluation, consideration of the make-up of the board, and consideration of the current boards competence.

I'd be happy to sign - 20 yr member and sick of the BS. It is absolutely the time to hold those in positions of authority more accountable, especially if we don't make finals (again). Unfortunately I don't believe we will make finals and should this be the case, it should trigger some changes on multiple fronts (eg coaching and board).

 

[poshman]

For discussion about club leadership.

As mentioned I am very happy with the board announcements last week. I think they are a big win!

I also thought Bell had far too much power under Alcock and that seems to have been dealt with. He is now a non visible part of the club.

 

[poshman]

To be honest, I'm ambivalent toward Bell but, Acres only really looks like a total howler in hindsite. Its not like we delisted him, just offered a contract reflective of his output over the last contract, although to be fair he probably tried to be a bit clever about it and I think everyone is happy to say it was a mistake but that happens sometimes.

Logue was being squeezed into the team in a position that was completely wrong for him and realistically it would have been irresponsible to match the roos offer, even if we did have the money to do it.

Neale was already out the door - sure the signature wasn't literally on the paperwork but he would have already committed verbally. (Also, when there was talk of Neale potentially returning to Freo prior to the birth of his first child, many posters on this site flipped out - so sure of themselves he wouldn't even make the 22 haha.) Further, I'm happy to put up my hand and say at the time, I was prepared to release Neale to get the pick for Hogan - clearly I was wrong though!

There were some of us who were saying the loss of so much experience would hurt the next season. Acres was low balled and then went to the market. It is a risk people take in footy clubs and business. Wce are going through the same with Yeo at the moment. And to be fair to wce, they had more reason to low ball him given age and injury history.

We had acres locked down on one wing, he was easily B22. There was no reason to play cute with him.

Logue is another who was low balled and then went to the market. And while he wasn't B22 he would be and have been great positional cover in the team. He was not as important as Acres structurally.

I didn't mention Neale, although the Hogan trade turned into a disaster.

Bell has been moved on. Which would indicate that the club also had concerns about his performance.

 

[errant bounce]

The club has been set on a corporate tone since 2010 and aesthetic downgrades like the jumper are one thing, but the desire to appeal to sponsors is the real killer. sponsors didn't like the down and out, little cousin vibe of the Dockers and corporate dickheads didn't want to associate their brand with an 'inferior product.' it was all about the Steves upping metrics and targets and having something to chuck on a resume. if you've seen wanky corporate resumes, all they do is revolve around dot points, brand names, and numbers. it's all they were doing with the club.

I think people like Bell are genuinely good people with their hearts in the right place. I think he's a decent fella. I understand lots of supporters don't share the same sentiment. and I can understand if that causes issues and, considering the clubs middling performances with him involved, sees Bell gone.

But Fremantle is just going through corporate a-hole after corporate a-hole and most of them are coming from a hardcore, western suburbs or Victorian business background. I'm a Labor person but I can respect the effect Kennett had on Hawthorn: he had passion, desire, the right kind of ego, and some life experience. Eddie McGuire's the same. you'd kill for people with that sort of dogged passion for the club and, as I said, maybe different background. it's mental but even Rick Hart was alright for the club.

Fremantle's issues probably began with its inception back in 1994 though, a victim of the 90s NBA wannabe franchise model, West Coast's insane success, and the AFL having nowhere near the money it does now – champion players like Brent Harvey

Brent Harvey

Age

45

Ht

167cm

Wt

75kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

21.3

5star

K

13.2

5star

HB

8.2

5star

M

3.9

4star

T

2.1

4star

G

1.2

4star

No current season stats available

D

6.0

2star

K

3.0

1star

HB

3.0

3star

M

1.2

2star

T

0.6

3star

G

0.6

3star

were still working in sports shops when we entered the competition.

The move from Freo Oval has been a killer as well. Fremantle Council are idiots but the Steves took every slight 'advantage' they could to justify a move to Cockburn. we did what St Kilda did but 15 years later and like their return to some soul at Moorabbin, we'll end up clamouring back for a return to the Parry by South Terrace. it was definitely a high ticket discussion point around Covid with some senior figures.

 

[poshman]

The club has been set on a corporate tone since 2010 and aesthetic downgrades like the jumper are one thing, but the desire to appeal to sponsors is the real killer. sponsors didn't like the down and out, little cousin vibe of the Dockers and corporate dickheads didn't want to associate their brand with an 'inferior product.' it was all about the Steves upping metrics and targets and having something to chuck on a resume. if you've seen wanky corporate resumes, all they do is revolve around dot points, brand names, and numbers. it's all they were doing with the club.

I think people like Bell are genuinely good people with their hearts in the right place. I think he's a decent fella. I understand lots of supporters don't share the same sentiment. and I can understand if that causes issues and, considering the clubs middling performances with him involved, sees Bell gone.

But Fremantle is just going through corporate a-hole after corporate a-hole and most of them are coming from a hardcore, western suburbs or Victorian business background. I'm a Labor person but I can respect the effect Kennett had on Hawthorn: he had passion, desire, the right kind of ego, and some life experience. Eddie McGuire's the same. you'd kill for people with that sort of dogged passion for the club and, as I said, maybe different background. it's mental but even Rick Hart was alright for the club.

Fremantle's issues probably began with its inception back in 1994 though, a victim of the 90s NBA wannabe franchise model, West Coast's insane success, and the AFL having nowhere near the money it does now – champion players like Brent Harvey were still working in sports shops when we entered the competition.

The move from Freo Oval has been a killer as well. Fremantle Council are idiots but the Steves took every slight 'advantage' they could to justify a move to Cockburn. we did what St Kilda did but 15 years later and like their return to some soul at Moorabbin, we'll end up clamouring back for a return to the Parry by South Terrace. it was definitely a high ticket discussion point around Covid with some senior figures.

Who were those senior figures? I know some of the senior figures and one mid level management person at the club and all he talks about is how much they love the facilities and the flexibility it gives them. So much so they are expanding and looking at a plan to further expand when the current expansion is under way.

So it is nothing like St Kilda who went a long way away compared to Freo who went into a suburb within its historical district. If you grew up south of Cockburn in Spearwood you played footy at south Fremantle for example. My understanding is that the Saints didn't invest heavily in expansion either.

Some of the people I know who work at wce say they miss some things about Subi but absolutely love the new HQ.

Do you know these corporate a-holes? Or is that just your opinion of them?

I wouldn't mind a high profile president who went for bat for us like Eddie. I also don't mind a quieter but equally determined approach.

I don't think Bell was or is a bad person. I don't know him personally so I wouldn't make that judgement. I do think he was not experienced enough for the role. His experience was captain of the club and a radio gig. I said it didn't make sense at the time and it still does't.

Interesting discussion on the colours. I wish we had kept the full green and red training jumpers from the early 2000's in our away and clash rotations. let's be the club with a range of strips.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Who were those senior figures? I know some of the senior figures and one mid level management person at the club and all he talks about is how much they love the facilities and the flexibility it gives them. So much so they are expanding and looking at a plan to further expand when the current expansion is under way.

So it is nothing like St Kilda who went a long way away compared to Freo who went into a suburb within its historical district. If you grew up south of Cockburn in Spearwood you played footy at south Fremantle for example. My understanding is that the Saints didn't invest heavily in expansion either.

Some of the people I know who work at wce say they miss some things about Subi but absolutely love the new HQ.

Do you know these corporate a-holes? Or is that just your opinion of them?

I wouldn't mind a high profile president who went for bat for us like Eddie. I also don't mind a quieter but equally determined approach.

I don't think Bell was or is a bad person. I don't know him personally so I wouldn't make that judgement. I do think he was not experienced enough for the role. His experience was captain of the club and a radio gig. I said it didn't make sense at the time and it still does't.

Interesting discussion on the colours. I wish we had kept the full green and red training jumpers from the early 2000's in our away and clash rotations. let's be the club with a range of strips.

Ironically give the discussion on the JL thread, I'd argue Bell would have been far more suited to a board role as a passionate ex player with decent extra curricular experience

 

[Purple Jesus]

The club has been set on a corporate tone since 2010 and aesthetic downgrades like the jumper are one thing, but the desire to appeal to sponsors is the real killer. sponsors didn't like the down and out, little cousin vibe of the Dockers and corporate dickheads didn't want to associate their brand with an 'inferior product.' it was all about the Steves upping metrics and targets and having something to chuck on a resume. if you've seen wanky corporate resumes, all they do is revolve around dot points, brand names, and numbers. it's all they were doing with the club.

I think people like Bell are genuinely good people with their hearts in the right place. I think he's a decent fella. I understand lots of supporters don't share the same sentiment. and I can understand if that causes issues and, considering the clubs middling performances with him involved, sees Bell gone.

But Fremantle is just going through corporate a-hole after corporate a-hole and most of them are coming from a hardcore, western suburbs or Victorian business background. I'm a Labor person but I can respect the effect Kennett had on Hawthorn: he had passion, desire, the right kind of ego, and some life experience. Eddie McGuire's the same. you'd kill for people with that sort of dogged passion for the club and, as I said, maybe different background. it's mental but even Rick Hart was alright for the club.

Fremantle's issues probably began with its inception back in 1994 though, a victim of the 90s NBA wannabe franchise model, West Coast's insane success, and the AFL having nowhere near the money it does now – champion players like Brent Harvey were still working in sports shops when we entered the competition.

The move from Freo Oval has been a killer as well. Fremantle Council are idiots but the Steves took every slight 'advantage' they could to justify a move to Cockburn. we did what St Kilda did but 15 years later and like their return to some soul at Moorabbin, we'll end up clamouring back for a return to the Parry by South Terrace. it was definitely a high ticket discussion point around Covid with some senior figures.

Knowing both the Steves personally, you couldn't be more wrong. Harris in particular bleeds purple.

 

[poshman]

Ironically give the discussion on the JL thread, I'd argue Bell would have been far more suited to a board role as a passionate ex player with decent extra curricular experience

Yes I could have got behind a board position for Bell. He could have stayed in the media and helped be an advocate for us as well.

 

[poshman]

Knowing both the Steves personally, you couldn't be more wrong. Harris in particular bleeds purple.

I met him twice. Prior and post his time at Freo. And he was crazy about the team both times. Loves Freo. And not an A hole at all.

 

[errant bounce]

Knowing both the Steves personally, you couldn't be more wrong. Harris in particular bleeds purple.

Yeah I reckon you roll in those circles.

If you 'bled purple' you wouldn't open consultation on changing the teams name – not the naff 'Dockers' moniker, the real one.

That happened.

They wanted to appeal to sponsors and wanted to make the club as generic as possible to do that.

Interesting though because the club was under heavy pressure to drop Woodside but didn't because no other offers were worth half as much; they took Bankwest back after their dalliance with West Coast for about a third of the money Bankwest gave the Eagles.

The club was so desperate for money they took on some shonky 'we'll give you the money later' from that questionable money lender (yuck) company that was targeting old people and promptly went bankrupt.

Freo was trotting along okay with Allphones, Spa Showcase, and treated those companies with contempt expecting mega companies to come on board.

They never did.

 

[greatgatsby]

Yeah I reckon you roll in those circles.

If you 'bled purple' you wouldn't open consultation on changing the teams name – not the naff 'Dockers' moniker, the real one.

That happened.

They wanted to appeal to sponsors and wanted to make the club as generic as possible to do that.

Interesting though because the club was under heavy pressure to drop Woodside but didn't because no other offers were worth half as much; they took Bankwest back after their dalliance with West Coast for about a third of the money Bankwest gave the Eagles.

The club was so desperate for money they took on some shonky 'we'll give you the money later' from that questionable money lender (yuck) company that was targeting old people and promptly went bankrupt.

Freo was trotting along okay with Allphones, Spa Showcase, and treated those companies with contempt expecting mega companies to come on board.

They never did.

Are you a relative (or a rehash) of Silent Alarm?

 

[errant bounce]

I met him twice. Prior and post his time at Freo. And he was crazy about the team both times. Loves Freo. And not an A hole at all.

Who rocks up a corporate function, and let's be honest most people who have 'met' someone in football did so at the Doig or a signing session or at the Feddy, and doesn't represent their interests with the utmost? people on 75k go to out of hours events and still the flag.

It'd be more insightful if you knew them growing up, knew them before the money truly rolled in, or knew them in business.

I've met barflys with lots of bad words about both the Steves and plenty of ill to speak. those people also cared for the club.

Lots of people who suck up to these sorts have spent no time in Freo and don't know much about football. lots of people on this forum became members after attending a game in their mid-30s.