It's a question we've all been asking for these last years. Why are we so slow to change anything that's not working? Why are we so conservative? Why don't we act like other clubs at sacking coaches, boards, CEOs etc?
Now firstly, this isn't a defence of the status quo, I've made it clear I think we need to evolve culturally and the structures set up for conservatism need to be forcibly changed (including more football experience and more encouragement for calculated risk taking).
But context is important, and I want to take everyone back to when this current structure was announced and remind us all of the reasons that we are where we are. Here was part of the announcement that outlined why we needed to change:
In the 7 years between 2009-2016 these arrangements led to constant board and management turnover especially in the football Club including: -
· Five different CEOs
· Five different Head Coaches
· 25 different Board Directors
The constant change resulted in the on field and off field performance of the Football Club shifting to the bottom 25% of NRL Clubs on most metrics. This framework was also one of the reasons why multiple Directors between 2009 and 2016 (including the previous two Chair and Deputy Chair) were subject to investigations by ILGA and found to be not fit and proper people to be leading registered Clubs.
So whilst the mood is grim right now and there's a growing thirst for change (which is absolutely needed) - we have to remember why we are where we are and not forget the past.
We needed these reforms. They have served their purpose.
And now it's time for us to evolve again...not back into chaos, but into a more nimble organisation geared towards sporting excellence.
As we head towards change I thought it was good to remind everyone of how important the past was, to make sure we never repeat it.
Replies
Well put Cappy, you are providing a wake up call, that doesn't mean you have to shoot everyone one on the premises.
It will be interesting to see if the responses you receive have any originality in them or we get the standard "sack everyone".
In the end Poppa I think even the "sack everyone" crowd would have to agree that, even though the last season and a half has been disappointing it's nothing compared to those dismal years.
I still remember those years, whenever you told anyone you were an Eels supporter they wouldn't laugh at you, they would feel pity. It was the worst.
Stability at Board level is a good thing but that doesn't have to translate to an unwillingness to implement change in the organisation where needed. If the Board have rejected a Bennett approach to coach Parra in 2025 - and I stress if - that's not stability that's lunacy.
Yes Michael you have taken it to the level, where people can understand and put into perspective the levels of change that are now overdue to be applied. Natural evolution of any business process.
If the board made that decision and the discussion took place that resulted in us rejecting Bennet's offer, then further explanation is required. My further understanding that it was an expression of interest rather than an offer and the subsequent handling of it, is subjective but for myself disappointing.
That is of course taken from a position of no understanding on my part.
Well said, Michael. I agree. And great blog, Captain.
Stabilty and rigidity eventually becomes a weakness, where you can snap into pieces, if you don't adapt to changing circumstances, grow and evolve.
As a club, we're now at those crossroads in the not too distant future over the next few years.
As a historical footnote, I would just add a few things.
One, initially, we had no choice in the reforms, as you implied Cap.
It wasn't due to great planning or a choice by our own club.
The NSW Government, Clubs NSW and the NSW Independent Liquor and Gaming Authority (ILGA) stepped in after finding us not fit (Registered Clubs Act) after we got caught for our dodgy practices in the 2016 cap scandal. Then, ILGA replaced the entire sacked Eels' board with Max Donnelly as a temporary administrator.
So, we could call it karma or consequences for all our post-Fitzy messy, in-house factional wars and being dumb, basically.
I still remember Sharp's words saying he wanted to return the Eels to their rightful glory years and winning ways: "doing whatever it takes."
That's a cautionary tale about dumb, fast success that often comes with consequences.
The road to hell is paved on good intentions.
You have to be smarter than the Storm's operators if you want to be "creative" outside the cap (e.g. Roosters, Souths, Dogs, Cowboys, Broncos, Storm are more careful nowadays).
Additionally, in his clean up, Max Donnelly also wanted to avoid our messy dysfunctional, factional wars and protect the club from "privatisation" noting he believed that someone had that in the mind (mmm, wonder who) and the Eels could have been vulnerable to that.
So, for all those hoping for some powerful big-hitting businessmen with passion, pull and clout like some other clubs, it may never happen in our lifetime.
Consequences and karma.
We are changing in small steps called Kaizen in Japanese. We have now pretty much fixed our Junior development with Kellyville and our own acadamy. We are doing work on recruitment and retention which still needs addressing. (Lomax but we are still need one more). We have a coach with a contract that expires in 2025 which probably will not be renewed unless a GF is won. He may need to move on this year if it is shown he has lost the confidence of the players but I would prefer to see solid improvement before year end. As this article says mass changes lead to all sorts of issues that we do not want.
Recruitment has been our biggest issue and I think we have been burnt by going over the cap and may have over reacted.
Stability in the board is paramount but you need the right board members in place.
If the board is past its use by date, stability needs to be an afterthought.
This is a great post and I agree wholeheartedly.
When emotions run high on this site there are many calls to tear down the entire place and start from scratch. We don't want to do that ever again. As you've written, that's how we used to operate and it is always a complete disaster.
What we need to do now is evolve. Tweak the Football club Board to ensure that the appropriate skillsets are present especially NRL level experience and professional sport experience.
Tweak the Leagues Club constitution so that members have better oversight of the Football Club Board. Currently Football Club Directors are basically untouchable. The club doesn't even publish who they are. Again I'm not advocating for mass changes or a return to the bad old days of elections, just a tweak so that if Directors fail to perform or act in the club's best interests there are mechanisms in place so they are answerable to members.
I don't know anyone on the current Football Club Board. Maybe they are working through all the issues we're concerned about. Maybe they're meeting with Bennett and we don't know because our Board does not leak (unlike Souths which leaks like a sieve). Maybe they know they need better NRL expertise on the Board but there is simply no ex-player who fits the bill. I understand these things can't be communicated to members. However better comms from the Football Club Directors would allay some fears here because right now, all we see are former bankers and private equity types doing nothing and hoping things will get better. Little wonder we're all anxious.
Tweaking the club structure to allow more transparency to members as to the operation of the football club is an absolute must Mutts, I totally agree.
The operations, selection, KPIs etc of the football club remain a complete mystery. And whilst I understand the initial changes were intentionally made obscure to remove some of the influence of member blocks and to protect members from accidentally screwing up the reforms, at some stage the ivory tower had to be removed and trust restored back in the members.
That time is now.
These recent 2 appointments to the football board are a perfect example of how not to do it - zero transparency, just basically telling members once it's happened. Merit selection shouldn't mean no transparency.
We don't need everything to change at once, but the suggestions you've made above would be a great start to give us incremental improvements.
IMO, it's highly unlikely we will have major changes to the PNRL Footy board's "stable" status quo MO for some time. No matter how hard we wish for it or bang our heads on it.
We'll get "tweaking" and their handful of turnovers every year or so (via some committee of unknown faces) which they'll inform of us.
We'll be lucky to get away from the PNRL footy board's "cat and mouse" game of "hide and seek" that has been played since the reforms.
Does anyone here even know who all the current directors of the PRNL are? Saratinos (CEO), McElduff, John Forrest, Sue Coleman (who has been on the PNRL board, flip-flopping between PLC and PNRL). Who else is on the protected species list?
The last PNRL annual report that I found (they used to be easy to find) was back in 2017. If anyone can find them, please share them. They'll have the names of who's on the board and details of the operations.
Back then on the PNRL board, during the reform period we had eight directors: Max Donnelly, Anthony Shiner, Col Robertshaw, Jim Sarantinos*, Michael McRitchies's, Sean McElduff*, Steven Sherman, Victoria Leaver. Other than Sarantinos and McElduff who knows who's left from them?
It's kind of ironic that the back page (p.72) of the Club's latest 2023 Annual Report notes five principles our club stands for - service, passion, openness, respect, teamwork. And in it, we get 3 pages (4%) of any information about the footy club. A one-page "Dear Members" letter from Sarantinos where we know what to expect. And nother two pages from MON, one of which is on the Women's game and a paragraph on pathways.
If the board had an ounce of passion and an average footy IQ they'd look at the cold, hard stats and say, "Houston we have a serious, serious problem" with our power and yardage game that as fallen of a cliff:
If they came to that "Holy Sheet" conclusion we all have. And then, "Sheet, we have to do something footy related" there is a way they could eat their cake and keep their glorious status quo.
Just get a new GM of Footy and a new head coach. Get the most competent and best footy brains they can.
The very best. Bennett is the obvious head coach answer (with not a lot after that). McDermott (he could work), Holbrook (not sure he'd help much), Ryles (high risk, likely to fail), Macnamara (not sure) etc.
The GM question is a tricky one. A Ponisini-like figure would be ideal. But, he's GM at Storm and he and his family are heavily invested in Melbourne. A hard basket. Forget Matt Cameron. He's CEO of the Panthers Footy. Coming back here as GM is a demotion and backward step. Parr is another one. He's also the Footy GM of Knights. It's unrealistic to dream about Smith or Bernie. They're good eggs, but practically retired.
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next