If Nathan Buckley departs then Eddie McGuire must follow him out the door, writes Mark Robinson

AS the big question swirls around Nathan Buckley, MARK ROBINSON ponders whether Eddie McGuire should seriously consider following Buckley out the door if the coach departs.

Eddie McGuire is in his 19th year at Collingwood president. Picture: George Salpigtidis

AS the big question swirls around Nathan Buckley at Collingwood, perhaps there’s a bigger question to ask.

Should Eddie McGuire follow Buckley out the door if Buckley departs?

The answer is yes.

The club is stale and needs a complete overhaul.

RUN HOME: YOUR TEAM’S FINALS CHANCES

MICK MALTHOUSE: I FEEL FOR BUCKS’ FAMILY

AFL SCANDAL: COULD BUCKLEY RESTORE INTEGRITY?

If Buckley is to be held accountable for on-field performance, and loses his job, then McGuire has to be held accountable for making it happen.

While it was a decision of the board to replace Mick Malthouse with Buckley, it was always McGuire’s baby.

‘‘We believe we have a coach who is coaching at the peak of his powers at the moment in Michael Malthouse and we’ve got what we believe to be the next best candidate of the potential coaches coming through,’’ McGuire said in July 2009.

It hasn’t worked and McGuire, for the first time in nearly two decades, has to ask himself if he should remain president.

Mick Malthouse, Eddie McGuire and Nathan Buckley at the 2009 announcement of the Collingwood coaching transition. Picture: Craig Borrow

If not him, then the Collingwood board must ask McGuire.

There presents another problem.

He’s an autocrat, McGuire. And being the autocrat, he gets all the accolades.

The move from Victoria Park to Olympic Boulevard was a winner, galvanising a stagnant fan base, the recruitment of Malthouse as coach and, of course, the 2010 premiership is his legacy.

But being “the man” means he has to own the mistakes.

He has one flag in 19 years as president and in the past six seasons the club has been seduced and then swallowed by a grand dream which has failed to materialise.

The transition from Malthouse to Buckley came at the end of the 2011 when Malthouse’s team won 22 matches and lost three matches — all to Geelong, including the Grand Final.

Since then it’s been tumbleweeds and with six matches to be played in a season six years later, McGuire is yet to commit to Buckley for a seventh season.

He said this week the decision would be made at the end of the season.

Again, this will be a board decision but nothing happens at Collingwood unless McGuire approves it.

Does Collingwood need a board anyway?

McGuire orchestrated the Malthouse-Buckley agreement about the time other clubs, notably North Melbourne, wanted Buckley as senior coach.

His obsession to keep Buckley led to the Magpies’ Kirribilli agreement — the deal of the century it was called at the time — but that officially broke down when Malthouse quit his role as director of football before it even began.

McGuire with Nathan Buckley at Collingwood training this week. Picture: Getty Images

It’s now 2017 and the original agreement has produced largely nothing.

If football was simply a business then McGuire would face expulsion from the shareholders.

But it’s not that simple. McGuire was elected last year unopposed for another three years.

He would win an election tomorrow if it was held, but that’s not the point.

This is not a hatchet job on Eddie, this is a question about governance and responsibility.

The Buckley years and the 2016 appointment by McGuire of Graeme Allan as head of football have backfired. Stunningly so.

How the Allan business took shape has left a stench within the club and pushed head of football Neil Balme out the door.

Staff were told Allan would be in charge of the women’s arm, but soon enough was named as head of football.

And soon enough was suspended by the AFL for 12 months over the Lachie Whitfield ASADA affair.

Eddie McGuire’s love of Collingwood is indisputable. Picture: Colleen Petch

Allan was the fourth of five heads of football — Geoff Walsh was No.1 and No.5 — in the Buckley years.

Stable management is good management, and surely this merry-go-round hasn’t helped the coach.

The ongoing review into all club operations will produce change.

Chief executive Gary Pert looms as a casualty, Buckley probably will be a casualty. And recruiter Derek Hine might also be vulnerable.

No one seems to be mentioning McGuire.

The president has returned from holidays and wasted little time in accusing the media of hysterical coverage on Buckley, which is quintessential McGuire.

Attack. Attack. Attack.

The Buckley decision clearly is weighing heavily on him, but a decision about his own Magpies mortality is equally as important.

He’s a massive figure in Collingwood’s history, McGuire, but to go forward, does Collingwood really need him to continue as president?

He remains popular and no one can doubt where Collingwood sits in his heart, but after 19 years, stronger leadership would be to hand over his baby.