wild dog wrote:Personally as a paid up member and financial contributor, I don't want Kris and the board to spend too much time worrying about the message this appointment process sends to CDFC supporters. We currently have an SANFL administration where the message is effectively that the SANFL league is no longer their main priority. The SANFL exists to support what the AFL wants. If you want to attack a message that affects SANFL supporters, attack that.
We are talking about a club ran on a shoestring who do not have teams of PR executives; from my personal observations we struggle to afford a proper marketing team (come back Kym Jarman please.) There is no network of chums from Saint Knobs or Princes Polishers et al who can knock out a spin team after hours in the Adelaide Club. For the 2000 CDFC members or so, probably a couple of hundred visit the club each week. They can just knock on Kris Grants office door and have a discussion. For me without any knowledge of the process and as an outside spectator, the process was carried out with little fuss and remarkable speed. As to whether Paul was the main contender, so what. They carried out due diligence, held appropriate interviews and made a decision. It happens in the public service every week and in the private sector main contenders are targeted. To think that a public statement would read that they sacked Andrews because a better guy was available on our door step, which could then possibly invoke a clause where Andrews could demand compensation, is naïve to the extreme.
At some point the club must have told Andrews the 'real' reason whether that was in person/via phone/via email so if a public statement is telling the truth then the club should have nothing to worry about in the case of compensation unless Andrews has a genuine case for it, which he would have regardless of what the statement said. I also believe come the AGM the club should be open about the financial position the sacking has put the club in, I hope as others have mentioned that we are actually better of financially for this. Especially given they were begging for money to survive only 12 months ago.
The club are yet to even say that he was sacked due to 'on-field results'
You are grossly exaggerating the time it takes to keep members informed.....I run a facility with over 2000 members and over 100,000 visits a year let I can let them know any message I need to within the time it takes to type the message plus about 2 minutes to send it through our bulk e-blast/message service which the clubs obviously has. The statement Granty released should not have taken any more than 5 minutes in total. If the members aren't worth spending 5 minutes on to keep up to date then they don't need to look to far as to why people are dropping away.
As Booney mentioned.....don't piss in peoples pockets and tell them its raining...….oh and then reach into the piss and pull out some money for them.