Carlton Supporters Club

It's not about the media, it is absolutely about the Board. Look around and tell me which of the other 17 clubs behave this way. Which of the other 17 clubs have a track record as bad as ours ? Which of the other 17 clubs treat their senior coach like this ?

It's a disgrace, and it has nothing to do with the media.

Just about every club through the decades has had periods as bad, or even worse, than ours. Unfortunately, ours is now and ours is the most recent to fail to adapt/made populist changes driven by fear and ineptitude.

This whole review, which I suspected and said as much previously, could very well expose crevices in our Board and the backlack might just see the demise of many on our Board. Good. Sayers has a helluva job on his hands presently.

I'm still not sure why you think Sayers is separate to the rest of the Board ? He is IMO part of the problem. The only way he isn't part of the problem is if he is some kind of lone voice in the wilderness, the only sensible one there who is constantly outvoted and outmuscled by his more incompetent brethren. Which I somehow doubt.

I only hold out hope due to his reputation and how he has instituted a more structured process. We'll know very soon, I suspect, if he is the man for the job. He, at least, deserves a go. If what he institutes shortly is a ballsup, then there will no doubt be a spill at the EGM. But for now, patience is the key.

All of that is fair enough, but you are ignoring a few things that are getting on peoples nerves.

1. This board started a review mid-season which no doubt had an effect on the way the football department ran.
2. This board sacked Barker 2 days after the review was announced (clearly not finished yet) because he said he was not going to be around next year.
3. This board sacked Bolton and appointed Teague.
4. This board sacked Malthouse and appointed Bolton.
5. This board sacked Ratten and appointed Malthouse.

Not entirely correct.

Only Jeanne Pratt was on the board when Ratten was sacked and Malthouse appointed.  Sayers and Mathieson were appointed after those deeds were done and attended their first board meeting in October 2012.  All current board members, with the exception of Chris Townshend, were there when Bolton was sacked.  Townshend took his place on the board shortly before Teague was appointed.

It's probably drawing a long bow to say that the board sacked Barker; that was Liddle's work.

My email to our membership dept

Good afternoon.

Having received the following advice from Luke Sayers:

"The Club will take the necessary time required to absorb this review and any outcomes or decisions will be made on the timeframe that is in the best interest of the Club"

I wish to advise that CFC memberships held by our family members are to be considered in the following manner.

Members X, X, & X will take the time necessary to consider the outcomes and decisions made by The Club before renewing our respective memberships.

This means permission to "rollover membership" is to be placed on hold.

Our assessment of the eptitude of the decision making, resultant implementation, and communication of the review, will determine whether or not our long term membership status will continue.

This is in response to what appears to be chronic ineptitude in The Club's decision making. This has resulted in humiliation and embarrassment to be a member of what was once a great sporting club.

If anyone is interested enough to seek opinion from members, I'd welcome the opportunity to discuss further.

Yours faithfully
X

The board appoints and holds the reigns on Liddle so the line of responsibility for his decisions is 100% attributable to the board especially for hiring/firing key personnel.

Not entirely correct.

Only Jeanne Pratt was on the board when Ratten was sacked and Malthouse appointed.  Sayers and Mathieson were appointed after those deeds were done and attended their first board meeting in October 2012.  All current board members, with the exception of Chris Townshend, were there when Bolton was sacked.  Townshend took his place on the board shortly before Teague was appointed.

It's probably drawing a long bow to say that the board sacked Barker; that was Liddle's work.

The board announced the review. Barker was sacked because of the announcement of the review. He wouldn't have said to Liddle/Board they need to find a replacement for him if it wasn't made clear that a review was undertaken.

But the board did hire Liddle so they have blood on their hands one way or another.