The Board Convo

[bulldogtragic]

Reading that Susan Alberti had to step away from the board after reaching her maximum 4 terms, does anyone know the by-laws about whether Peter Gordon can serve only four in total (his last stint, and current stint) or whether he can serve four in a row during this stint?

[Twodogs]

Maybe the president is ex-gratia to the board. I think that's the term, it means that the chairman isn't subject to the sa,e rules that govern the rest of the board.

[bulldogtragic]

Maybe the president is ex-gratia to the board. I think that's the term, it means that the chairman isn't subject to the sa,e rules that govern the rest of the board.

The Vladimir Putin rule.

[bornadog]

The actual number is 3 stints, but an amendment was made for Sue to extend. She mentioned she could have stayed more with another amendment.

[KT31]

Reading that Susan Alberti had to step away from the board after reaching her maximum 4 terms, does anyone know the by-laws about whether Peter Gordon can serve only four in total (his last stint, and current stint) or whether he can serve four in a row during this stint?

It was mentioned there was scope to amend the constitution so Susan could stay on for another term, this may apply to the Presidency also.

[bulldogtragic]

The actual number is 3 stints, but an amendment was made for Sue to extend. She mentioned she could have stayed more with another amendment.


It was mentioned there was scope to amend the constitution so Susan could stay on for another term, this may apply to the Presidency also.

Personalities, success, donations and individuals aside... What point is the constitution if you can change it whenever you want on a rotating basis? Why not remove term limits all together and then it's no longer an issue for Peter or anyone else deemed worthy of a longer stint on the board.

[KT31]

Personalities, success, donations and individuals aside... What point is the constitution if you can change it whenever you want on a rotating basis? Why not remove term limits all together and then it's no longer an issue for Peter or anyone else deemed worthy of a longer stint on the board.

Its a fair point and something I was wondering earlier BT.

[bulldogtragic]

On the flip side to Susan leaving the board (Grant & Kent too this year), is there an obvious replacement?

Paul Dimmattina has long said he wanted on. Luke Darcy might throw his hat in. Are there high profile business folks sniffing for a spot. Perhaps a WOOF member? :D

[bornadog]

On the flip side to Susan leaving the board (Grant & Kent too this year), is there an obvious replacement?

Paul Dimmattina has long said he wanted on. Luke Darcy might throw his hat in. Are there high profile business folks sniffing for a spot. Perhaps a WOOF member? :D

Happy to put my hand up :D

[Greystache]

On the flip side to Susan leaving the board (Grant & Kent too this year), is there an obvious replacement?

Paul Dimmattina has long said he wanted on. Luke Darcy might throw his hat in. Are there high profile business folks sniffing for a spot. Perhaps a WOOF member? :D

Please BT. The nicest way I could put it is the Dimmatina's are full of shit.

Neither Paul or his Dad do anything that isn't exclusively for their own benefit. For all their talk they've given nothing back to either Richmond or the Bulldogs and have sucked out massive amounts of free advertising for their business interests in the process, often at the expense of bad publicity for the club itself.

[bulldogtragic]

Please BT. The nicest way I could put it is the Dimmatina's are full of shit.

Neither Paul or his Dad do anything that isn't exclusively for their own benefit. For all their talk they've given nothing back to either Richmond or the Bulldogs and have sucked out massive amounts of free advertising for their business interests in the process, often at the expense of bad publicity for the club itself.

I didn't say I wanted him on the board in a million years. But only that every time there's a vacancy he says he wants on. Unless his son Kai comes on in his junior footy career, I'm happy to leave him in the past as just a former player.

[Greystache]

I didn't say I wanted him on the board in a million years. But only that every time there's a vacancy he says he wants on. Unless his son Kai comes on in his junior footy career, I'm happy to leave him in the past as just a former player.

I'd personally just prefer we gave him the Stephen Dank treatment and treat his bullshit as nothing more than attention seeking.

[bulldogtragic]

I'd personally just prefer we gave him the Stephen Dank treatment and treat his bullshit as nothing more than attention seeking.

Isn't that what the club does? From memory his last attempt fizzled even quicker than the last Richmond challenge.

[Greystache]

Isn't that what the club does? From memory his last attempt fizzled even quicker than the last Richmond challenge.

The club yes, but fans and the media take him seriously and the momentum behind it builds until it reaches the put up or shut up point and he slinks away again.

I remember when his old man was agitating all over the media that Richmond needed to sack Terry Wallace and that he'd personally pay out the contract for the good of the club if it meant getting rid of him. The Richmond board publicly said that the financial cost of the payout was a factor but if Dimatina would cover it then it was something they'd look at. He immediately went into hiding.

[Topdog]

Personalities, success, donations and individuals aside... What point is the constitution if you can change it whenever you want on a rotating basis? Why not remove term limits all together and then it's no longer an issue for Peter or anyone else deemed worthy of a longer stint on the board.

Yes fully agreed. Rules are rules for a reason

[bornadog]

Yes fully agreed. Rules are rules for a reason

Rules are meant to be broken :D

[LostDoggy]

Personalities, success, donations and individuals aside... What point is the constitution if you can change it whenever you want on a rotating basis? Why not remove term limits all together and then it's no longer an issue for Peter or anyone else deemed worthy of a longer stint on the board.

I think it's best looked upon as a convention rather than a hard and fast rule.

The convention is that a board member serves for 3 terms maximum, however the convention may be upturned if the candidate has displayed outstanding credentials and abilities (such as Susan unquestionably did).

However the convention can only be upturned through a formal amendment that needs to be voted on.

I'd say that's fair enough.

[Twodogs]

Is the two term presidential rule in the States a hard and fast constitutional rule/amendment or just a convention that they obey because Washington only served two terms?

[bulldogtragic]

I think it's best looked upon as a convention rather than a hard and fast rule.

The convention is that a board member serves for 3 terms maximum, however the convention may be upturned if the candidate has displayed outstanding credentials and abilities (such as Susan unquestionably did).

However the convention can only be upturned through a formal amendment that needs to be voted on.

I'd say that's fair enough.

I don't want to argue, but leaving aside the marvellous individual, a club constitution is not a convention. It's the governing instrument. If we want to allow great people to have more than a specified amount of terms then simply remove the term limit. The point of a term limit is to ensure turnover, have fresh ideas/thinking come in and not allow people to hold power for so long that the club suffers, see Jack Elliot & Edward McGuire. I think a term limit is a great rule within the club constitution coincidentally and that sometimes good people can't continue in the same role. But there's no point having such a rule and then changing it when you want to suit. Putin has done the same thing in Russia about term laws coincidentally. So it makes no sense. Either the constitutional rule is a good one and we stick with it, or we delete it all together. I don't see it as a convention and its a half measure concept in that we would believe in this concept because of the good of the club, but can wilfully ignore it through changing the constitution, despite believing in the rule. It also sets a bad & dangerous precedent if other long term board members want an extension beyond the limit, but shouldn't really be. This could hurt or damage the club. As I say individuals aside, either we stick with term limits or abolish them. I don't mean to argue.

[1eyedog]

Is the two term presidential rule in the States a hard and fast constitutional rule/amendment or just a convention that they obey because Washington only served two terms?

Convention. Roosevelt served 3 terms and was voted in for a fourth but died. He was a steady hand during WWII which was a key reason for his ongoing success.

[Twodogs]

Convention. Roosevelt served 3 terms and was voted in for a fourth but died. He was a steady hand during WWII which was a key reason for his ongoing success.


I thought it was just a convention, cheers BT.

It's funny, the yanks are so obsessed with the health of the POTUS that they won't vote for somebody if they have the sniffles but the only Pres to get past them for 3 terms was confined to a wheelchair.

[westdog54]

I thought it was just a convention, cheers BT.

It's funny, the yanks are so obsessed with the health of the POTUS that they won't vote for somebody if they have the sniffles but the only Pres to get past them for 3 terms was confined to a wheelchair.

Woodrow Wilson spent the entirety of the last year of his presidency in a Wheelchair. Somehow managed to negotiate the formation of the League of Nations in amongst that, as well as court and marry his second wife after his first wife passed away.

[Twodogs]

Woodrow Wilson spent the entirety of the last year of his presidency in a Wheelchair. Somehow managed to negotiate the formation of the League of Nations in amongst that, as well as court and marry his second wife after his first wife passed away.


Didn't know that. Back before the dawn of the mass media I guess you could keep things concealed a lot more simply. Was it Harrison the one whose wife didn't tell anyone he'd died and gave running the country herself a go instead? "Well he reckons we should..." "No he doesn't want to see anyone" and "he's ready to see you. Oh bugger he's fallen asleep, again yeah! It is a bit smelly" and all that..

[bulldogtragic]

Woodrow Wilson spent the entirety of the last year of his presidency in a Wheelchair. Somehow managed to negotiate the formation of the League of Nations in amongst that, as well as court and marry his second wife after his first wife passed away.

That's because he wasn't a then Footscray member and have access to a thought sharing forum or exchange. If he'd been such a member and had that forum im sure he wouldn't have done 90% of that. We'd been in five grand finals in a row before his death (1924), winning three and losing two, two VFA premierships in 3 years, going for back to back premierships in the comp the year he died, pushing to get into the VFL against those cheating Essendon pricks and recruited some huge fella on a rediculous/monster 6 year, 9 thrupence a year deal. No way he could do any day job well under such circumstances.

How times have changed.

[Twodogs]

He bought 4 houses with that first nine thrupence. And a model T Ford.