Hawthorn's presidential succession plan should go ahead, despite Geoff Lord's interference.

Current president Jeff Kennett had a smooth transition prepared for the end of his term. Andrew Newbold would be groomed in the months preceding the changeover, ready to swiftly take over the role when his time came.

As with any method of selecting a president, there are pros and cons. The pros are that is quick, cheap, and doesn't result in fellow board members bickering with one another.

The big con, though, is the lack of transparency involved. Newbold may be a perfect candidate, but the Hawthorn members wouldn't know. Some, perhaps most, may trust Kennett to select their next president without consulting them, but undoubtedly many would prefer a democratic vote.

This is where Geoff Lord comes in.

Lord, a prominent businessman who served as Hawthorn president in the mid-1990s, took issue with the silent turnover, and announced that he would challenge Newbold for the position. Don Scott was a supporter of the challenge, slamming the "boys' club" that is the Hawthorn board.

The merits of this challenge and which candidate has the more powerful backing have been debated hotly, but there is one critical element to the issue that appears to constantly be overlooked. That is that Newbold is the best candidate for the job.

He has been a board member since 2003, spending recent years as Kennett's vice-president. In that time, he has no doubt been learning from one of Hawthorn's most successful presidents, and preparing himself for the task when Kennett's term ends in December.

His business record is impressive, and he was one of the driving forces behind Hawthorn's move back to Waverley Park.

The situation is comparable to Nathan Buckley's transition into the position of Collingwood's head coach. He has used his time under Mick Malthouse to learn his craft first-hand from one of the best in the business.

Lord, in contrast to Newbold, has not been a board member for years, and when his presidential term ended, Liam Shiels was four. Footy has changed so much in that time. If he thinks that running a club today is the same as it was back them, he's kidding himself.

Not that his term was particularly successful, either. When Lord left the club, it was in such a dire financial position that within a year, Hawthorn was on the verge of merging.

Of course, opening the communication lines and paving the way for transparency in the presidential race are good things. But an election for an election's sake is not.

What was supposed to be a smooth transition will now take much longer, cost much more, and result in mud-slinging matches between parties who should be supporting each other. And all for what will probably be the same result.

If Scott wants an election, he will get one. But he would be hard pressed to find a better candidate than Newbold to make one worthwhile.