Wanderers Members Committee News

[ManfredSchaefer]

Thought it worthwhile to put up some info here that was discussed in tonight's members committee meeting with some of the suits as it may help give forumites a handle on where the club (thinks) it's heading, where it's been, and what they are saying to us or asking for.

Before I continue, a few points...first off I have no minutes or other official documents, and others who were at the meeting may interpret what I saw and put down here differently. I will try not to speak for others, but if my observations are worth correction from other forumites who were there please go for it.

Now there was an agenda for those present (about 20 members) and the following points were covered:

• South West Sydney

A certain balding club chairman fired up over this and how the FFA handled the expansion, not just with respect to SWS but also the Western Melbourne Generics. The phrase 'dutch auction' may have been used regarding the decision to expand via these franchises, and said chairman may have said that the Wanderers will continue to do what it can in servicing as much of the new mob's catchment. The club was certainly opposed to the SWS bid, especially after the two previous groups combined into one), but the opposition was left behind closed doors so as to avoid the bad look given to the sport & HAL via the smurfs stoushing with Southern expansion.

• Corporate facilities & western stand

Bottom line the almost complete lock out of the western stand at Bankwest from members was driven by the design of the new stadium as laid out by Infrastructure NSW & the govt. Whilst the club might be able to position more members over that side further down the road, it would appear that for now politics and economics associated with the new stadium have driven the agenda.

• Police

As had been spoken of at last year's members' forum at Marconi, the Homebush LAC have been pricks and the suits have struggled to get any lee way from them. The discussions with the North West LAC commander for the return to Parra are apparently more positive, due in some part to the chief rozzer being sokkah compliant. However said balding man with a Greek surname did reiterate that the club is very much at the mercy of the venue providers & NSW Police Farce when it comes to how games are policed. In my opinion not enough focus was placed on how dodgy seccos can be/have been, and it would appear that just like the police situation the venue management will be the one deciding how the goon squads operate.

• Active support & the decline in crowd attendance

Plenty of chat here about how the club was supportive of the RBB but also how logistically problematic it was dealing with them at times. That same bloke with the lack of hair put as much of a positive spin on the relationship between the suits and all actives as he could...I'll leave it up to those actually engaged in those discussions to present a complementary or contradictory standpoint.

The decline in crowd numbers was certainly linked to the shite venues we've endured, and also to the misfirings and bad luck seen this season on the pitch. Snakes got a few mentions for his brain explosions, whereas on the other hand the introduction of rising young talent through the academy & youff was lauded. One very telling comment was made about last season's coach...Gonebau apparently never spent any time with any of the NYL group etc after one first introductory match. 

• Wanderland 2.0, seat allocations and 2019/20 memberships

There's going to be a flood of info coming out from tomorrow onwards. Bottom line seat allocations will be coordinated initially via group leaders and by category (Red, then Black, etc etc). Membership prices are going up, but based on a desultory review of my own situation it's possibly around a hike for an individual of $30 for 2019/20. The message was the pricing modelling was extremely hard to develop and the overall aim was to keep membership prices at the lower end of the range contrasted with other clubs.

• General stuff

1. Nothing was discussed re the W-League team...hope to address that later
2. Marquee for 2019/20...see today's World Game report...it's the same we heard tonight
3. Mudgee...the chief suit was livid that the FFA scheduled the Matildas in competition with our community round...reportedly not telling anyone until after the Mudgee announcement and then it was by email
4. Safe standing...after a bit of argy-bargy the new safe standing fixtures will be a drop in model so as to not disrupt the poor ickle NRL twats
5. Unless there are 60,000 people hanging to go to a derby we will never be going back to ANZ for such a game
6. Leeds fans have at least one bay sorted in the new stadium & may be allocated more seating around the venue.

Hope this gives some idea what went down. I can't speak for the others, but I'd be okay if anyone wants to DM me on something that they want the club to hear about. I might not be able to help, but perhaps I can at least suggest who and how to approach.

Edited February 26, 2019 by ManfredSchaefer

[Paul01]

6 minutes ago, ManfredSchaefer said:

Thought it worthwhile to put up some info here that was discussed in tonight's members committee meeting with some of the suits as it may help give forumites a handle on where the club (thinks) it's heading, where it's been, and what they are saying to us or asking for.

Before I continue, a few points...first off I have no minutes or other official documents, and others who were at the meeting may interpret what I saw and put down here differently. I will try not to speak for others, but if my observations are worth correction from other forumites who were there please go for it.

Now there was an agenda for those present (about 20 members) and the following points were covered:

• South West Sydney

A certain balding club chairman fired up over this and how the FFA handled the expansion, not just with respect to SWS but also the Western Melbourne Generics. The phrase 'dutch auction' may have been used regarding the decision to expand via these franchises, and said chairman may have said that the Wanderers will continue to do what it can in servicing as much of the new mob's catchment. The club was certainly opposed to the SWS bid, especially after the two previous groups combined into one), but the opposition was left behind closed doors so as to avoid the bad look given to the sport & HAL via the smurfs stoushing with Southern expansion.

• Corporate facilities & western stand

Bottom line the almost complete lock out of the western stand at Bankwest from members was driven by the design of the new stadium as laid out by Infrastructure NSW & the govt. Whilst the club might be able to position more members over that side further down the road, it would appear that for now politics and economics associated with the new stadium have driven the agenda.

• Police

As had been spoken of at last year's members' forum at Marconi, the Homebush LAC have been pricks and the suits have struggled to get any lee way from them. The discussions with the North West LAC commander for the return to Parra are apparently more positive, due in some part to the chief rozzer being sokkah compliant. However said balding man with a Greek surname did reiterate that the club is very much at the mercy of the venue providers & NSW Police Farce when it comes to how games are policed. In my opinion not enough focus was placed on how dodgy seccos can be/have been, and it would appear that just like the police situation the venue management will be the one deciding how the goon squads operate.

• Active support & the decline in crowd attendance

Plenty of chat here about how the club was supportive of the RBB but also how logistically problematic it was dealing with them at times. That same bloke with the lack of hair put as much of a positive spin on the relationship between the suits and all actives as he could...I'll leave it up to those actually engaged in those discussions to present a complementary or contradictory standpoint.

The decline in crowd numbers was certainly linked to the shite venues we've endured, and also to the misfirings and bad luck seen this season on the pitch. Snakes got a few mentions for his brain explosions, whereas on the other hand the introduction of rising young talent through the academy & youff was lauded. One very telling comment was made about last season's coach...Gonebau apparently never spent any time with any of the NYL group etc after one first introductory match. 

• Wanderland 2.0, seat allocations and 2019/20 memberships

There's going to be a flood of info coming out from tomorrow onwards. Bottom line seat allocations will be coordinated initially via group leaders and by category (Red, then Black, etc etc). Membership prices are going up, but based on a desultory review of my own situation it's possibly around a hike for an individual of $30 for 2019/20. The message was the pricing modelling was extremely hard to develop and the overall aim was to keep membership prices at the lower end of the range contrasted with other clubs.

• General stuff

1. Nothing was discussed re the W-League team...hope to address that later
2. Marquee for 2019/20...see today's World Game report...it's the same we heard tonight
3. Mudgee...the chief suit was livid that the FFA scheduled the Matildas in competition with our community round...reportedly not telling anyone until after the Mudgee announcement and then it was by email
4. Safe standing...after a bit of argy-bargy the new safe standing fixtures will be a drop in model so as to not disrupt the poor ickle NRL twats
5. Unless there are 60,000 people hanging to go to a derby we will never be going back to ANZ for such a game
6. Leeds fans have at least one bay sorted in the new stadium & may be allocated more seating around the venue.

Hope this gives some idea what went down. I can't speak for the others, but I'd be okay if anyone wants to DM me on something that they want the club to hear about. I might not be able to help, but perhaps I can at least suggest who and how to approach.

Thanks. Let's see the club's spin on the meeting 

[ManfredSchaefer]

Oh...thought I'd just add a generic observation that both old & new FFA have not won many brownie points from the club's management, and the Foxtel overlords are seen as (for now) just that.

[ManfredSchaefer]

2 minutes ago, Paul01 said:

Thanks. Let's see the club's spin on the meeting 

Might be said what we heard tonight was the club's spin...

[bombagol]

Thanks Manfred for the summary.

But what is this "Members Committee"?  When did I miss this being established?

[ManfredSchaefer]

2 minutes ago, bombagol said:

Thanks Manfred for the summary.

But what is this "Members Committee"?  When did I miss this being established?

The Members Committee is a group of Members who meet with the suits to discuss with them what is going on with the club. It was first suggested during the members forum at Marconi back in 2017 (I think). There has been a committee in place beforehand, however it may have had only limited meetings in previous incarnations. There was an email circulated a few weeks back asking for nominees for the 2019 edition...

Have to say that the actual 'mission' of the committee is very hazy. I don't believe the club sees it as an advocacy group for members, helping the suits develop policies and protocols. Also I don't believe many of us (if any) want to be that. Perhaps its more akin to a focus group for marketing purposes.

That's my take anyways.

[GunnerWanderer]

thanks for that Manfred.

I'm sure JT would love your colourful description of him 

[ManfredSchaefer]

2 minutes ago, GunnerWanderer said:

thanks for that Manfred.

I'm sure JT would love your colourful description of him 

After I asked him about Mudgee he said "You can't ask any more questions coz you get me cranky" 

[HillsPanther]

Are the suits acknowledging the action (or inaction) that the rbb is taking and their reasons for taking it? Or are the suits taking the "head in the sand" strategy?

[ManfredSchaefer]

5 minutes ago, HillsPanther said:

Are the suits acknowledging the action (or inaction) that the rbb is taking and their reasons for taking it? Or are the suits taking the "head in the sand" strategy?

They did make reference to the actions of the RBB and whilst not talking specifics they said that they are talking to them and will continue to do so.

To be frank what the club and the RBB talk about should be spoken of by them. Whilst there are some active support members on the committee, I don't believe any of them have any insight into what has transpired/is transpiring in that particular area.

[Paul01]

56 minutes ago, ManfredSchaefer said:

A certain balding club chairman fired up over this and how the FFA handled the expansion, not just with respect to SWS but also the Western Melbourne Generics. The phrase 'dutch auction' may have been used regarding the decision to expand via these franchises, and said chairman may have said that the Wanderers will continue to do what it can in servicing as much of the new mob's catchment. The club was certainly opposed to the SWS bid, especially after the two previous groups combined into one), but the opposition was left behind closed doors so as to avoid the bad look given to the sport & HAL via the smurfs stoushing with Southern expansion.

Based on this the Smurfs favouritism held sway at FFA HQ at Oxford St.

the best case for expansion was for Southern Expansion without Wollongong 

no more favours for those lowlifes in the East. 

[ManfredSchaefer]

Just now, Paul01 said:

Based on this the Smurfs favouritism held sway at FFA HQ at Oxford St.

the best case for expansion was for Southern Expansion without Wollongong 

no more favours for those lowlifes in the East. 

I'm not 100% sure that is the reading I'd take from what I heard (and perhaps I misunderstood or misrepresented what was said & meant). The way I suspect the decision to go with the two new franchises is seen by our suits was they used big dollars waved at the FFA at the last minute to outbid their rivals. Throw in the influence of Foxtel & the 'must go to Sydney/Melbourne' agenda and I believe that WSW management consider both new ventures dodgy cash grabs with $$$ offers being thrown at the FFA.

[Paul01]

6 minutes ago, ManfredSchaefer said:

I'm not 100% sure that is the reading I'd take from what I heard (and perhaps I misunderstood or misrepresented what was said & meant). The way I suspect the decision to go with the two new franchises is seen by our suits was they used big dollars waved at the FFA at the last minute to outbid their rivals. Throw in the influence of Foxtel & the 'must go to Sydney/Melbourne' agenda and I believe that WSW management consider both new ventures dodgy cash grabs with $$$ offers being thrown at the FFA.

The Western Melbourne bid is dodgy money. 

The Macarthur-SWS bid is a marriage of convenience that could end in tears with the billionaire land developer Laing Walker tied up with the ex-chairman of Sydney United. 

[Burztur]

Quality post is quality

The point with Police and Seccos seems to be danced around by the club. I think it’s better if they clearly set out what the role of each of the groups is.

[Keithie]

Thanks Manfred, good update.

[ManfredSchaefer]

1 hour ago, Burztur said:

Quality post is quality

The point with Police and Seccos seems to be danced around by the club. I think it’s better if they clearly set out what the role of each of the groups is.

Here's how the game day set up was explained to us:

The NSW Police Farce (I assume more specifically the relevant LAC) and the venue managers negotiate on how many cops are present at a game. The police put in their estimate & then (possibly) the venue guys go for a lower level, then it's 'let's make a deal'. However at the end of the day the cops will have final say on policing numbers/presence.

Then the police put out the offer within their staffing system to get the required number of PC Plods on the job. Whilst some of them may be repeat attendees the rule of thumb appears to be anyone can get a shift. Of course from the clubs' point of view as well as ours if we keep getting the same PCs who know who we are and what goes on then there should be less potential for friction. On the other hand, if the rozzers are a bunch of sokkah hating fascist pricks with no desire whatsoever to use common sense and relate to the community, and are there for the extra overtime, well why should they give a shite about what goes down. Throw in the attitude of the LAC commander & well...you can work it out for yourself.

As for seccos, well they are venue management responsibility. Considering most members of the security industry were behind a closed door when God was handing out brains, charm and humour, well again you can imagine (or already know) what can go down on game day.

The club's only real pro-active capabilities when it comes to secco issues are the club marshals that we have seen at work since one of our derbies in Season One. The chain of action as described last night goes along the line of marshals taking the first action if there are any issues, followed by seccos, and then if (supposedly) serious enough only then do the cops get involved.

Of course we all know that the reality is marshals can themselves be pinged by the seccos and/or coppers, and the marshal numbers are very small and usually limited to a presence near actives or on marches (remember those lol). Also, and this is my interpretation of what was presented to us, the club is effectively powerless in taking any stance on how security and policing is enforced. If the LAC wants to show off to his or her political masters that he's tough on sokkah hools, then nothing the club can say will change that and how it impacts on the fans. Also, seccos have been reported for breaches of appropriate behaviour (e.g. male security searching female fans and touching a breast, scanning kids) however again the club appears to have no ability to actually punish said secco, or ask for that person to never work at the ground again.

Now I may be a bit off beam with how I've summarised and interpreted what was said last night, however Burztur I think what you say is right in that the club needs to come out with a clearer statement of the roles and responsibilities of each group. Perhaps something like a FAQ or charter for security needs to be put in place so we all have a clearer understanding of the what the club and the fans can and can't influence re security. I don't want to excuse the suits for individual situations where a fan or members feels aggrieved at security heavy-handedness, however as it would appear in a general context, they are just as powerless as we are when it comes to how authority is structured and implemented at games.

Re cost of the security...I believe that eventually through venue management all costs are passed to the club and its members. I'm not 100% sure how that is then recouped, however I assume it would be both built into our annual membership fees as well as ticket prices at the venues.

[SBW]

Theres a lot to take in but I'll start with the SWS bid.

So @ManfredSchaefer, have you ever heard of the David Gallop Metrics? You know, Sydney centric, fish where the fish are, its all about numbers and meeting the corporate kPis? In David Gallop's definition, doesn't matter how bad the crowds are in the A-League, Gallop will consider this season a success and he will bring up his metrics to prove that.

Also, while I'm here, has anyone asked the club about club's recruitment and retention policy? How do we go about recruiting players and so forth? Because last few seasons, it just seems we are signing NPL2 quality players on the cheap and the results on the field are showing how poor of a team we have been over the last couple of seasons.

[Edinburgh]

31 minutes ago, ManfredSchaefer said:

Here's how the game day set up was explained to us:

The NSW Police Farce (I assume more specifically the relevant LAC) and the venue managers negotiate on how many cops are present at a game. The police put in their estimate & then (possibly) the venue guys go for a lower level, then it's 'let's make a deal'. However at the end of the day the cops will have final say on policing numbers/presence.

Then the police put out the offer within their staffing system to get the required number of PC Plods on the job. Whilst some of them may be repeat attendees the rule of thumb appears to be anyone can get a shift. Of course from the clubs' point of view as well as ours if we keep getting the same PCs who know who we are and what goes on then there should be less potential for friction. On the other hand, if the rozzers are a bunch of sokkah hating fascist pricks with no desire whatsoever to use common sense and relate to the community, and are there for the extra overtime, well why should they give a shite about what goes down. Throw in the attitude of the LAC commander & well...you can work it out for yourself.

As for seccos, well they are venue management responsibility. Considering most members of the security industry were behind a closed door when God was handing out brains, charm and humour, well again you can imagine (or already know) what can go down on game day.

The club's only real pro-active capabilities when it comes to secco issues are the club marshals that we have seen at work since one of our derbies in Season One. The chain of action as described last night goes along the line of marshals taking the first action if there are any issues, followed by seccos, and then if (supposedly) serious enough only then do the cops get involved.

Of course we all know that the reality is marshals can themselves be pinged by the seccos and/or coppers, and the marshal numbers are very small and usually limited to a presence near actives or on marches (remember those lol). Also, and this is my interpretation of what was presented to us, the club is effectively powerless in taking any stance on how security and policing is enforced. If the LAC wants to show off to his or her political masters that he's tough on sokkah hools, then nothing the club can say will change that and how it impacts on the fans. Also, seccos have been reported for breaches of appropriate behaviour (e.g. male security searching female fans and touching a breast, scanning kids) however again the club appears to have no ability to actually punish said secco, or ask for that person to never work at the ground again.

Now I may be a bit off beam with how I've summarised and interpreted what was said last night, however Burztur I think what you say is right in that the club needs to come out with a clearer statement of the roles and responsibilities of each group. Perhaps something like a FAQ or charter for security needs to be put in place so we all have a clearer understanding of the what the club and the fans can and can't influence re security. I don't want to excuse the suits for individual situations where a fan or members feels aggrieved at security heavy-handedness, however as it would appear in a general context, they are just as powerless as we are when it comes to how authority is structured and implemented at games.

Re cost of the security...I believe that eventually through venue management all costs are passed to the club and its members. I'm not 100% sure how that is then recouped, however I assume it would be both built into our annual membership fees as well as ticket prices at the venues.

I would add re police presence (as with Manny, my expanded interpretation):

- the police assess the need and mix of secy and police

- the venue can try to negotiate the mix

- the police charge for their decision level

- and? The allocation, location of those resources is included in the plan/decision

- then, on top of that, with no additional charge, (and no notification?) the police can allocate riot squads etc to attend with their usual threatening approach and potentially locate themselves where they will cause the most angst

So, even if a reduced presence is agreed, the actual presence can be very different.

[ManfredSchaefer]

4 minutes ago, Edinburgh said:

I would add re police presence (as with Manny, my expanded interpretation):

- the police assess the need and mix of secy and police

- the venue can try to negotiate the mix

- the police charge for their decision level

- and? The allocation, location of those resources is included in the plan/decision

- then, on top of that, with no additional charge, (and no notification?) the police can allocate riot squads etc to attend with their usual threatening approach and potentially locate themselves where they will cause the most angst

So, even if a reduced presence is agreed, the actual presence can be very different.

Thanks for that Ed...and whilst it may not fit the narrative of some, when it all boils down to it what ever the cops & their masters want, the cops and their masters get.

[Erebus]

I think WSW fans need to start to understand and accept that the club will NEVER get into a war of worlds through the media. They have never done so, and will never intend to in the future.

Re: Gumby - we've mentioned this a bunch of times on ATB that he came in with this promise of youth due to his experience with teh Olyroos but he didn't attend any sessions and couldn't name any of the NYL players.

[Zelinsky]

7 minutes ago, Erebus said:

I think WSW fans need to start to understand and accept that the club will NEVER get into a war of worlds through the media. They have never done so, and will never intend to in the future.

Re: Gumby - we've mentioned this a bunch of times on ATB that he came in with this promise of youth due to his experience with teh Olyroos but he didn't attend any sessions and couldn't name any of the NYL players.

About going public: there is no point in doing so, especially if the governing body is fundamentally anti football. When WSW and VIC ended up in a public finger pointing exercise after the 2013 Dec 28th pub ambush in Melbourne, FFA whipped both of them into shape and submission very quickly.

Gombau did not understand that the club owners consider youth development the club's crown jewel. By ignoring the kids he signed his death sentence. His only chance to maybe hold on to his job was a semi final appearance, but after blowing up the locker room, that did not happen. All of this was explained by JT in the member's meeting at Marconi in June last year.

[Zelinsky]

12 hours ago, ManfredSchaefer said:

They did make reference to the actions of the RBB and whilst not talking specifics they said that they are talking to them and will continue to do so.

To be frank what the club and the RBB talk about should be spoken of by them. Whilst there are some active support members on the committee, I don't believe any of them have any insight into what has transpired/is transpiring in that particular area.

Running WSW is an ongoing balancing act. I think it was in the member's forum after S3 when JT stressed that the WSW are operating in a hostile environment. Police, security, stadium operators, FFA, other clubs, media, rival codes - they are happy to have a go when given half a chance.

It is a myth that the club is opposed to the RBB. What the pyro enthusiasts don't quite appreciate is just how much pain and trouble they caused with the Melbourne pyro party in S4, and Arnie gate in S5. That's what the club is sick and tired of, the time and effort it takes to mop up this ****. That was the backdrop to JTs combative email to all members back in 2017.

 

[hawks2767]

Arniegate was just an overzealous backlash from pissing squealing smurfs, waaaah the RBB is bad please ban them daddy FFA (whilst ripping chairs up at ANZ after Santalab trashed their perfect season and going unpunished). The FFA should have dismissed their hysterical crying for all that it was.

At least the 15 odd bans expire in time for the new stadium.

Happy that the club is on the right page in regards to SWS too, they're a fraud - only existing because of another ESFC whinefest.

 

[Zelinsky]

19 minutes ago, hawks2767 said:

Arniegate was just an overzealous backlash from pissing squealing smurfs, waaaah the RBB is bad please ban them daddy FFA (whilst ripping chairs up at ANZ after Santalab trashed their perfect season and going unpunished). The FFA should have dismissed their hysterical crying for all that it was.

No, it wasn't just that. It turned into an Earth quake that shook the WSW community at large, and certainly rocked the club. By smuggling the banner into the ground, the RBB lost the trust of club officials. That you don't seem to appreciate just how much trouble the banner caused behind the scenes is part of the problem.

[Edinburgh]

1 hour ago, FCB said:

About going public: there is no point in doing so, especially if the governing body is fundamentally anti football. When WSW and VIC ended up in a public finger pointing exercise after the 2013 Dec 28th pub ambush in Melbourne, FFA whipped both of them into shape and submission very quickly.

Gombau did not understand that the club owners consider youth development the club's crown jewel. By ignoring the kids he signed his death sentence. His only chance to maybe hold on to his job was a semi final appearance, but after blowing up the locker room, that did not happen. All of this was explained by JT in the member's meeting at Marconi in June last year.

Re Gombau,  pretty much restated last night.

[Taurus]

Hey @Manfred

Please follow up the whereabouts of the emails that were meant to be sent to each existing member, that had been included in a group seating arrangement for season 19/20.

I know I've been included in a group seating arrangement with 10 or so others for next season, by simply quoting my m'ship number to our group leader, but I had to ring club's m'ship dept to confirm same.

If emails aren't being sent to members, which appears to be the case with my groupies, we should be able to check our status via the membership portal

 

[Edinburgh]

13 minutes ago, Taurus said:

Hey @Manfred

Please follow up the whereabouts of the emails that were meant to be sent to each existing member, that had been included in a group seating arrangement for season 19/20.

I know I've been included in a group seating arrangement with 10 or so others for next season, by simply quoting my m'ship number to our group leader, but I had to ring club's m'ship dept to confirm same.

If emails aren't being sent to members, which appears to be the case with my groupies, we should be able to check our status via the membership portal

 

Have you received an email today with info about the seat offer process etc?

[Taurus]

Not as of 5 mins ago.

I'm talking about the group seating process, which IIRC, which was to close mid December.

[hawks2767]

35 minutes ago, FCB said:

No, it wasn't just that. It turned into an Earth quake that shook the WSW community at large, and certainly rocked the club. By smuggling the banner into the ground, the RBB lost the trust of club officials. That you don't seem to appreciate just how much trouble the banner caused behind the scenes is part of the problem.

Should they have done it ?

Absolutely not.

Were people banned because of crocodile tears.

I'm staying with yes.

[Zelinsky]

9 minutes ago, hawks2767 said:

Should they have done it ?

Absolutely not.

Were people banned because of crocodile tears.

I'm staying with yes.

They thought they were just playing with matches, but they set the whole barn on fire. The fall out was dramatic. In the end 15 guys or so getting an 18 month ban was just a side note, in the bigger scheme of things.