Imagine the Eels get off to a flyer. Riding high on the table and their stocks soaring again, as their young guns take the competition by the storm. What's the worst thing you could do at that point? How about running a Parramatta Leagues Club election, thrusting the club onto the front and back pages for all the wrong reasons again, and letting the political and factional warring again dominate the attention of the club.
One of the key tenants of the Parramatta Leagues constitutional reforms being proposed is the abolition of the ugly all-in elections, where every two years the Parramatta Leagues Club board is voted upon. Anyone who has had anything to do with these elections knows they are bitter, divisive and leave a stain of recriminations and spite behind them.
Tonight members will vote on the Tuck Shop proposal, which will accept the proposed constitutional reforms on the basis that all seven members of the initial board will be chosen from a general election. The proposal is the result of various factions within the Leagues Club aligning, in order to have one last general election. Those behind the push have been remarkably frank about the factionalism at play, here. Former board member Paul Garrard admitted at the last AGM that the constitutional reform process had brought the factions together and then told the SMH: “"You are always going to get factions – it doesn’t matter if you have a tuckshop or a club.”
There is enormous self-interest at play. The former board members, politicians and developers backing the Tuck Shop proposal all have put together little friends and family groups, as well as having the support of some popular former players. They no doubt feel that this is their best chance, perhaps their only chance, of ever winning back control of the club.
The last thing our clubs needs, presumably in the middle of a football season is another circus of a general election. One that promises to be bigger, and messier than ever, because for many who stand little chance of being elected on their own individual merits, this would represent the last throw of the dice. For a club that is trying to re-build its foundations, I can think of nothing more damaging.
The argument will be that this is all about getting Max Donnelly out of the club, with claims related to how much his role is costing Of course the same people making those claims have now twice knocked down the constitutional reforms that would otherwise have had ended the club’s administration.
At stake, is whether Parramatta Leagues and its football club continue to be beholden to factional groups, or whether it moves forward, encouraging well-qualified candidates to put their hands up on the basis of their own individual merits. No doubt the factions will turn out in force, and if the rest of the membership exhibits the same kind of apathy that has been displayed at past AGM and constitutional votes, we will be right back where we started and the Eel's season will be threatened before it even begins.
The vote will be held tonight at the Novotel Hotel in Parramatta at 7pm. All Parramatta Leagues Club members with three-year voting rights are encouraged to attend and have their say.
Comments
I don't think they have a chance at getting this passed, at least half the room were showing their annoyance when fitzy and co were speaking at the normal AGM
One concern was i'm not sure some people were aware that these weren't max's reforms so they might vote FOR thinking they were supporting max. The lady next to me thought they were max's reforms until i told her otherwise.
HFK, Fantastic stuff. It's great you can share what is going on at ground zero. You mean some people think that a FOR/YES is a vote for Max? Woooh. That's concerning. How did that miscommunication happen?
On ground zero - how much support do you feel is there for Max and the anti-2-year-factionalist vote, with the voting constituents?
I didn't hang around, had to sit through the normal AGm first and there is a growing ground swell against Fitzy and other former faction members, at least half the crowd were showing annoyence towards Fitzy and co whenthey were speaking at the normal AGM. I have been to the last 3 voting AGM's and there was a noticable swelling of faction opponents.
As soon as voting was declared open after the normal AGM finished a lot of people voted and left including myself, not sure how many people were confused but the lady i spoke to was.
The proposal was not successful. With 100 odd people voting against the proposal, they're needed to be 300 votes for the proposal and I think there was 160 so it was well short in the end. The only thing that can be achieved by blocking the full constitutional reform proposal at this point, is to further entrench the administrator in at the club for another 12 to 18 months and I don't think anyone will have an appetite for that, at this point. From speaking to Max, he's keen to put the reform proposal back on the table as quickly as possible, although he probably has the ammunition now to say there is a stalemate and ask for ILGA to allow him to bypass the voting process.
Hell on Eels, l believe the confusion on the voting slip was created deliberately by the way it was worded, and yes, l reckon some people voted FOR rather than AGAINST believing they were voting for Max. This is how it was worded, and it shows how desperate the factions are becoming by saying "yeah, we're willing to compromise in regards to the constitution, but only if the members get to vote the first board in.
The first part mentioned Max's constitution but then it had added to it INSERT CLAUSE blah blah blah, DELETE CLAUSE 10.7 including parts 1 to 6 (or whatever the number was) meaning DELETE THE CLAUSE WHERE MAX WOULD HAND PICK THE INITIAL BOARD MEMBERS.
So, basically, the factions were saying "okay, you can have the constitution as long as we get the chance to be the first board selected" (by our friends, families, family friends, and whoever else is willing to take sides with the factions who have nothing on their minds but self interests). Obviously so they can cash in on the $800M Hotel development no doubt.
The idiots who voted FOR, don't even realise that what they're voting for won't even get passed through/accepted. They don't realize we're going in circles and achieving nothing but GROUND HOG DAY. These idiots complain about how much salary Max earns, but it's the same idiots who are keeping Max around with their voting decisions.
I guess they are only thinking about the money they'll receive from their property developer uncles/cousins etc for helping them get onto the board.
Let's see how much more desperate they become at the next election and see what other parts of the constitution they're willing to compromise on, and what other parts they want DELETED and/or INSERTED. No doubt they're already working on that right now.
Super Strong, Thanks for your reply and input. I love hearing from supporters on ground zero. Glad the factions were un-successful. Did Phil hypnotise you too?
REPLY TO "HKF" to his question on PAGE #4. Yeah mate, l gathered we had to vote AGAINST, but l just wanted to be 100% certain l wasn't being tricked by the wording of it all so l waited until Phil finally showed up so I could ask him. When he showed up and sat behind us, my missus was talking to him about something else and I never got around to it apart from saying "it's a little confusing". My missus popped my real name up to him and I was like "Oh great, thanks for that, now he knows l was banned from 1EE many years ago under a different user name". But Phil knows I've been a good boy since then :)
When Max announced the adjournment for the counting of the votes, Phil joked "We should be given drinks while we wait" ;)
My missus said you have beautiful eyes Phil. She said she was mesmerized by your eyes. No wonder l could barely get a word in :) l was the guy playing online poker throughout the entire AGM. Phil asked if I was winning and l said yes. Phil's presence didn't just have an effect on my missus either. While he was sitting right behind us, l was winning in the poker tournament, but as soon as he left, l got eliminated :)
At this point yes Fong, if the fools voted his reforms in at the last election Max would be finished at the club now but no, so he is here until the reforms get passed so the ball is in the factions hands as to when Max goes.
Who were you before you got banned?