What does St Kilda stand for?

[JeffDunne]

Recently Robert Walls posed this question to a confused Mark Harvey (in regards to Freo).

There was an interesting reaction to the question and an even more interesting reaction from the club post the interview. While not a Robert Walls fan I reckon it’s probably the best question I can remember being asked of a club official in recent times. It hit Harvey and the club squarely between the eyes.

I wished the question had been unsuspectingly unleashed on us.

Unfortunately, like everything in the AFL, for every original thought there’s a hundred imitations. The question has now become so predictable I doubt any club or official will be caught out like Freo again.

Having said that though, I have real doubts anyone from St Kilda could genuinely answer that question beyond giving us some pre prepared spin. That really is a concern and it’s probably why we currently feel so disillusioned with the club.

Do we know what Greg Westaway stands for (in relation to St Kilda)?

What about the board? Nathan Burke & Andrew Thompson?

Archie Fraser?

The coach?

The captain?

Everywhere I look all I see a vacuum in terms of direction and question marks on commitment to the club (whether those perceptions are fair or not). The club has become so insular we hear little and what can be at best described as inconsistent snippets of information. It’s light years from what we’d become accustomed.

The purpose of this thread isn’t to rehash the tired old debates we’ve seen a thousand times. It’s more an attempt to identity why we all feel so disillusioned and why we keep rehashing those tired old debates a thousand times.

Regardless of your thoughts on the individuals in the previous admin, you can’t deny at their best they gave us a very real sense of direction. And no doubt too, their unravelling coincided with when we started losing that direction. Let’s not go there though.

“Move onâ€

[congorozides]

there is only one man.

S Warne for President of ST Kilda FC.

[barks4eva]

Or am I wrong

Most likely!

[JeffDunne]

Or am I wrong

Most likely!

Quality input as usual.

[rodgerfox]

It's a very good question.

My thoughts are though, that when you're winning on-field - the rest is all rosy.

In my view, and it clearly started with the old Board, we forgot that on-field is what footy clubs are all about.

Profits aren't what we barrack (well, most of us). Modern footy depts designed to keep Demetriou happy and in his good books aren't why we buy memberships.

It's winning footy matches.

If you build it, they will come.

'It' is footy matches. 'Building', is winning.


Once we get our shiit together on-field, the rest will follow. It's as simple as that.

The problem is, our club seems to think that because we have a 'modern footy dept' the rest will take care of itself. Some supporters seem to believe this too. They've been sucked in big time.

Footy isn't about tightly run admin offices. It's about 22 guys going out each week bleeding for their jumper and doing exactly what the coach wants them to do. Week in, week out. It's about bleeding for your mates. Genuinely caring about your team winning, and the impact that has on the supporters who've carried the club for 100 years.

This is where it starts.

Our coaching panel, in my view, treat the club as an employer. Whiteboards and witches hats do not inspire men.

What you're talking about JeffDunne needs to come from the coach. It's simple. It needs to be a Saints man. Someone who has bled for the club. Someone who can kick the players in the arse and they'll know it's because of the passion and pride the coach has in the club - not because them losing doesn't look good on his resume.


Nathan Burke and Danny Frawley need to be involved on-field.

We are in serious shiit. Going nowhere fast as a club. The longer people blame our recruiting the longer and further we're going to fall.

Someone who has bled for this club, needs to take over the reigns and get this group on track before it's too late.

Someone with passion, and someone with heart, and someone who understands us.

A messiah, if you will.

[maverick]

Good post.

Some of what you say about leadership and needing someone to bring it together really brings it home for me.

The more times we self implode, the clearer it becomes that we rely on the messiah complex more and more.

Someone on here recently said the STKFC is like a kid needing constant direction and chastising to keep them on the straight and narrow.
I agree.

We are followers, we NEED something or someone to believe in, we are the masters of the hope strategy.

I hate it.

[rodgerfox]

Good post.

Some of what you say about leadership and needing someone to bring it together really brings it home for me.

The more times we self implode, the clearer it becomes that we rely on the messiah complex more and more.

Someone on here recently said the STKFC is like a kid needing constant direction and chastising to keep them on the straight and narrow.
I agree.

We are followers, we NEED something or someone to believe in, we are the masters of the hope strategy.

I hate it.

All clubs need a messiah.

Why are we supposedly dependant on it - yet other clubs aren't?

The biggest argument against the 'rotational captaincy' policy was that we needed one strong leader. "Look at Hird, look at Voss, look at Carey" etc.

Messiahs.

Why did Carlton go for Judd? Why did Collingwood want Malthouse?

Footy clubs and footy culture are all about strong leaders and huge individual performances.

Why does the AFL have a Brownlow Medal? Why do we have a Norm Smith Medal?

Because the game is built on 'messiah's'. It's not just us. It's the culture of AFL footy, and the culture of most sports in the world.


Carlton got Pratt, the Judd. And are now in the 8.

If that isn't a 'messiah' complex then I don't know what it. They sold about 900,000 memberships without playing a game after signing Judd.

[Cairnsman]

You could argue that most area's of the club are in good shape except the playing group.

Can somebody explain to me how we won 8 out the last 11 games last year and can't string two wins together this year.

My firm belief is that the problem at the moment is the players attitude.

What did Ross say after Saturday night: the players are lacking enthusiasm and energy.

WTF!!!!!

[yipper]

Good post.

Some of what you say about leadership and needing someone to bring it together really brings it home for me.

The more times we self implode, the clearer it becomes that we rely on the messiah complex more and more.

Someone on here recently said the STKFC is like a kid needing constant direction and chastising to keep them on the straight and narrow.
I agree.

We are followers, we NEED something or someone to believe in, we are the masters of the hope strategy.

I hate it.

All clubs need a messiah.

Why are we supposedly dependant on it - yet other clubs aren't?

The biggest argument against the 'rotational captaincy' policy was that we needed one strong leader. "Look at Hird, look at Voss, look at Carey" etc.

Messiahs.

Why did Carlton go for Judd? Why did Collingwood want Malthouse?

Footy clubs and footy culture are all about strong leaders and huge individual performances.

Why does the AFL have a Brownlow Medal? Why do we have a Norm Smith Medal?

Because the game is built on 'messiah's'. It's not just us. It's the culture of AFL footy, and the culture of most sports in the world.


Carlton got Pratt, the Judd. And are now in the 8.

If that isn't a 'messiah' complex then I don't know what it. They sold about 900,000 memberships without playing a game after signing Judd.

Agreed. Every club is the same. We all need our messiah - and we especially need one down at Moorabbin again - NOW.

[JeffDunne]

Here's a secret maverick . . . most clubs rely on the messiah complex.

The most successful clubs through history have had a person that the club rallied around.

There's exceptions of course but it's not uncommon to have a Matthews, a Pratt, a McGuire, etc.

We have nobody atm.

[rodgerfox]

You could argue that most area's of the club are in good shape except the playing group.

It's like Greg Chappell playing well, but getting out.

What's more important, playing well? Or making runs?


And if you're not making runs, are you really playing well?


If we're not winning games, why are we thinking that the club is in good shape? Surely the only reason the Board, the footy department or any department at the club only exists so we win footy matches?

[saintspremiers]

there is only one man.

S Warne for President of ST Kilda FC.

What a bloody good, sensible idea that is!

Warney is a passionate Saints fan, with a huge media/public profile, and very smart to boot.

No - forget about his womanising - he's a very astute sportsperson with significant business interests also.

He could be the perfect fit.

[maverick]

Good post.

Some of what you say about leadership and needing someone to bring it together really brings it home for me.

The more times we self implode, the clearer it becomes that we rely on the messiah complex more and more.

Someone on here recently said the STKFC is like a kid needing constant direction and chastising to keep them on the straight and narrow.
I agree.

We are followers, we NEED something or someone to believe in, we are the masters of the hope strategy.

I hate it.

All clubs need a messiah.

Why are we supposedly dependant on it - yet other clubs aren't?

The biggest argument against the 'rotational captaincy' policy was that we needed one strong leader. "Look at Hird, look at Voss, look at Carey" etc.

Messiahs.

Why did Carlton go for Judd? Why did Collingwood want Malthouse?

Footy clubs and footy culture are all about strong leaders and huge individual performances.

Why does the AFL have a Brownlow Medal? Why do we have a Norm Smith Medal?

Because the game is built on 'messiah's'. It's not just us. It's the culture of AFL footy, and the culture of most sports in the world.


Carlton got Pratt, the Judd. And are now in the 8.

If that isn't a 'messiah' complex then I don't know what it. They sold about 900,000 memberships without playing a game after signing Judd.

Don't agree RF.

Carlton are in need now, not every 5 years or so, they have a strong history of stability and success, we rebuild every 5 years or so.

The Pies do not rely on hope or messiahs.
Malthouse runs footy, McGuire runs marketing and to a certain extent finance, they work together complementing strengths.

We sweep a new broom through every 5 years or so on the back of one or two people with the rest of the place hanging on their every word and action. No teamwork no clear responsibilities or direction, just disaster after disaster. What other club would have their president loan the coach a million bucks and serve a writ on him to get it back.

We as members let this happen time after time, simply because we are happy to let individuals use it as their plaything.

I agree we need people that love the place in there at the top, Westaway is one of these, around them should be shrewd business people and strategic thinkers both on and off the footy field to make the St Kilda brand work as it should.

Its ultimately about winning, but its also about making the hard business decisions that mean the people that take over from the current encumbents, are left with more than their predecessors. This is both in and out of the footy department.

Quick fixes are just not going to work.....

[Cairnsman]

You could argue that most area's of the club are in good shape except the playing group.

It's like Greg Chappell playing well, but getting out.

What's more important, playing well? Or making runs?


And if you're not making runs, are you really playing well?


If we're not winning games, why are we thinking that the club is in good shape? Surely the only reason the Board, the footy department or any department at the club only exists so we win footy matches?

Has the board, the footy department or any department had wholesale changes since April-June last year. Has the coaching panel changed our game plan that much since April-June last year.

Here's part of why I reckon the players have got the s***s at the moment and lost their enthusiasm and energy.

Ross said post match recently that he asked everyone in the box, "do we train this" and hence the team performances have worstened since.

And there have been similar public comments made that suggest that there is descent in the camp. Does anybody at all consider that it might just be the players are a little sooki sooki la la at the moment.

[maverick]

Here's a secret maverick . . . most clubs rely on the messiah complex.

The most successful clubs through history have had a person that the club rallied around.

There's exceptions of course but it's not uncommon to have a Matthews, a Pratt, a McGuire, etc.

We have nobody atm.

They are not messiahs, they are leaders (except Pratt IMO)

The difference is proven success in their field.
Matthews is a proven leader of men in footy, McGuire a proven walking PR man..neither steps out of their domain, they are smart enough to leave other parts of the footy department to the experts in there.

A messiah thinks they can control all areas and honestly believes they are the best at it...they have success in one area and think its easy to transalte that across into another...

Effectively out of their depth...this is what we get...flawed leadership...

[Saint Bev]

Well I think Greg Westaway must have some passion for St Kilda to head a take over of the board. I think Burke and Thompson shouldn't even be questioned, its obvious. If you have ever heard Archie Fraser speak, he is extremely passionate. Have heard Anthony Rock speak live and he seemed totally committed. Can't talk about the rest.

However I do think that people who come to the club with different back grounds are committed to the cause, but it does take time for them to become "one of us". You have to give them time. The only persons who I can think off that didn't embrace us was Malcom Blight, he truely didn't give a rats.

[rodgerfox]

Here's a secret maverick . . . most clubs rely on the messiah complex.

The most successful clubs through history have had a person that the club rallied around.

There's exceptions of course but it's not uncommon to have a Matthews, a Pratt, a McGuire, etc.

We have nobody atm.

They are not messiahs, they are leaders (except Pratt IMO)

The difference is proven success in their field.
Matthews is a proven leader of men in footy, McGuire a proven walking PR man..neither steps out of their domain, they are smart enough to leave other parts of the footy department to the experts in there.

A messiah thinks they can control all areas and honestly believes they are the best at it...they have success in one area and think its easy to transalte that across into another...

Effectively out of their depth...this is what we get...flawed leadership...

That's not the definition of a messiah.

A messiah is a strong leader who delivers the goods.


All sports survive on this. Michael Jordan at the Bulls. Guus Hiddink with the Socceroos. Johnny Wilkinson for the Poms.

The list could go on.


Because we select the wrong Messiah, as opposed to Carlton who have a history of selecting (or buying) good messiah's is not really the point.

Both clubs, like most others, need a messiah.

A messiah isn't a self-proclaimed leader, in the footy world. A messiah is a person that others see as a leader to follow to the promised land.


We've simply come up short in our history when looking for these leaders.

[rodgerfox]

If you have ever heard Archie Fraser speak, he is extremely passionate.

Apart from being passionate about pie, what else is he passionate about?

[older saint]

Actions determine what a club stands for , not words, messiahs, names or reputations. Many of thos enames mentioned are promotoed bacause of there actions.

While Shane Warne has a high profile name and $ would a be able to commit the time. They tried Simon O'Donnell many years ago and it was a failure and he had to pull out due to lack of time.

This is a testing time for the board however they appointed the coach - may not have selected him but ratified the decision, and they then must stand by that decision. Remember just over 15 monbths ago Geelong had to make a hard call and they showed the courage to back their original choice and look where that got them . The tough call needs to be made on players .
For the majority of the history of this club the tail has wagged the dog, in recent times that changed until grown men with huge egos decided to use the club as a medium to fight their battles.

When things are bad you need to bunker down, keep united and achieve something before your head comes up. Don't bite into the media inuendo like the rubbish Caro comes ot with and just win some games!

[St DAC]

What a bloody good, sensible idea that is!

Warney is a passionate Saints fan, with a huge media/public profile, and very smart to boot.

No - forget about his womanising - he's a very astute sportsperson with significant business interests also.

He could be the perfect fit.

Are you kidding????


I've no doubt he's a passionate Saints man, and the best bowler I've witnessed in the past 20 years. But with anything other than cricket he is as dumb as a stump. He can barely string two words together.

Not very presidential ...

[JeffDunne]

Well I think Greg Westaway must have some passion for St Kilda to head a take over of the board. I think Burke and Thompson shouldn't even be questioned, its obvious. If you have ever heard Archie Fraser speak, he is extremely passionate. Have heard Anthony Rock speak live and he seemed totally committed. Can't talk about the rest.

I think you need to read my post again.

I'm not talking about anyone lacking passion.

I don't doubt for a second the passion of GW, NB or AT - in fact I admire all three for the passion they have for the club.

[saintm]

there is only one man.

S Warne for President of ST Kilda FC.

Doubt he would have the time even if he had the inclination- his manager said when his return to the Test team was being discussed that he was pretty much booked out until the end of 2009.

Have the Club ever used him in any capacity, though. Have heard him offer in his retirement to mentor the players etc.. Has this offer ever been taken up?

[yearning_for_grant]

What do we stand for?

Why that is easy!

We stand for honesty, integrity, honour, morality, and fairness.

Ours is the culture of the working man! We have toiled hard and fairly for the last 100 years, and we are now beginning to see the fruits of our labour, the rewards of our hard work. 3 finals appearances in the last 4 years, including 2 preliminary finals appearances, is testament to that.

For us it is not about success as it is for other clubs, it is about the way you achieve that success. Our premierships may be thick and thin, but when they come, we know they are deserved! And that is what matters most!

[fonz_#15]

the harsh reality is...we stand for mediocrity.

if we ceased operation right now, for whatever reason, we would be remembered as the football club that didn't know how to win games all that often.

[St.Kenny]

Excellent post JD which actaully gets one to think about why they depart with their hard earned each week and well at the end of the day is it really worth it.
Firstly, I dont have a problem with lower profile presidents. Frankly I'm sick to deatht of the 'loud mouthed' presidents who trumpet all their clubs achievements and perspectives. I would argue Frank Costa (And Port Adelaide pres who ever he is) has beats Eddie Maguire and Pratt hands down in this regard. Putting substance before PR is clearly the way to go if results on the field matter most. If Westaway aspires to be modest in public statements but keen to let onfield results speak for themselves and let the players bath in the glory then i'm all for him. Afterall our previous glamour President enhansed his profile by riding fairly and squarely on the success of the club in the last few years. What great speeches or observations is he famous for?

What do we stand for?
Well this is the sort of question to spark a barage of responses which I have come to realise is not necessarily a good thing. As it displays how divided we actually are as a club. Clearly success means more to some than others. I truly believe the notion of the 'social' club as presented in Russell Holmsleys famous historical account of the ST.KFC is still well and truly alive. Many elements within the club have a problem with success and would rather not deal with it. As long as they can see a few heros or individuals doing well each weekend then they'll come back again. Team success is not essential. The virtues of competitiveness and having a crack are not high on the agenda. History has shown this.

I'm not sure if i've added to the discussion or expanded it. But thats my 2 bob.