Taking a wrecking ball to the club! (Recent Media Reports)

[Magpie_Magic]

The only reason there is any talk at all about an external bid ( true or not) is the current board’s ineptitude and division.
It invites others to try to divide the merger even more.

But the WT board isn’t divided.

It implicates Balmain as did Leo's previous scuttlebutt with the review . Why should there be a link?

It is Balmain who must shut this latest NZ bid down.

 

[Kaito]

There has not been one thing to prove anyone from the Balmain side has instigated this or even shown interest in it.
It’s rubbish.
The sooner this board is cleaned out the sooner it all goes away.

%100 if anything it's the Wests members (on both
sides of the board) angling in 2 make a play for the
licence in 2030 and eventually do away with Balmain.

Doesn't matter whether true or not, — that scenario
makes way more sense than Balmain doing it TBF.
and it's absurd to even think they would 2 start with.

The whole thing is really an issue 4 a couple people...

 

[balmain boy]

You're either Burgess or more likely Cavanagh. Being a former head of the Magpies gets you no brownies on here mate.

 

[TigerJunior4]

Well can you explain Julie Romero’s opposition to the review and can you explain or justify her email directions to the board?

Again

But the WT board isn’t divided.

It implicates Balmain as did Leo's previous scuttlebutt with the review . Why should there be a link?

Itt is Balmain who must shut this latest NZ bid down.

How can you possibly say the board isn’t divided when you’ve got Dennis Burgess actively calling for a return to Wests Magpies and Julie Romero effectively instructing the board not to operate?

Julie’s email was nothing short of disgusting and was an attempt to cease the Wests Tigers board from operating and performing its role.

There’s not even a full board in place because HBG headed by Julie and Mop head Burgess keep delaying recruitment attemtps.

Like everyone points except you and your mate BZN, it’s about good governance and leadership structures at the Wests Tigers. We absolutely would not be in this mess if Julie and Dennis actually made an effort to implement the review recommendations. Instead they keep delaying and creating barriers.

It’s nothing short of vomit inducing. Like I said before do us all a favour and go start a bushrangers forum. Spare us your divisive sentiments and trolling behaviour.

 

[balmain boy]

But not since this has blown up, as far as I'm aware. I have to say HBG's media management is terrible.

That's what you get from unqualified people. They couldn't even spell the name of the club correctly in a press release...

 

[Magpie_Magic]

Well can you explain Julie Romero’s opposition to the review and can you explain or justify her email directions to the board?

Again

How can you possibly say the board isn’t divided when you’ve got Dennis Burgess actively calling for a return to Wests Magpies

Evidence?

and Julie Romero effectively instructing the board not to operate?

It is HBG prerogative.

Julie’s email was nothing short of disgusting and was an attempt to cease the Wests Tigers board from operating and performing its role.

Owners prerogative

There’s not even a full board in place because HBG headed by Julie and Mop head Burgess keep delaying recruitment attemtps.

Owners prerogative

Like everyone points except you and your mate BZN,

Don't know BZN,but I'm sure many share my viewpoint but are discouraged from posting here

it’s about good governance and leadership structures at the Wests Tigers. We absolutely would not be in this mess if Julie and Dennis actually made an effort to implement the review recommendations. Instead they keep delaying and creating barriers.

Why should non binding review recommendations have anything to do with people outside the ownership?

It’s nothing short of vomit inducing. Like I said before do us all a favour and go start a bushrangers forum

Who?

. Spare us your divisive sentiments and trolling behaviour.

What rubbish.

Sorry I don't subscribe to your narrative.

 

[balmain boy]

But the WT board isn’t divided.

It implicates Balmain as did Leo's previous scuttlebutt with the review . Why should there be a link?

Itt is Balmain who must shut this latest NZ bid down.

There is no bid. Christchurch emailed about 20-30 clubs asking if they'd be theoretically interested in any sort of partnership. There's no suggestion Balmain ever considered anything. It's all a massive beat up from someone with an agenda...

 

[TigerJunior4]

Evidence?

It is HBG prerogative.

Owners prerogative

Owners prerogative

Don't know BZN,but I'm sure many share my viewpoint but are discouraged from posting here

Why should non binding review recommendations have anything to do with people outside the ownership?

Who?

What rubbish.

Sorry I don't subscribe to your narrative.

Who? You know the team you dreamt up and advocated for replacing the Tigers but go ahead, play dumb and keep lying g through your teeth.

If you want to brown nose HBG go right ahead, but don’t think they can do whatever they want to the club and run it into the ground due to ‘owner’s prerogative,’ as you put it.

You call it non-binding but all board members voted for it unanimously. Why vote for it only to walk back on it a few short months later. Shows a lack of conviction and integrity but what would you know about that? It’s clear you’re just here to create division and keep this bs Wests vs Balmain narrative.

There’s also plenty of evidence to support what I’m saying including leaked email from Julie herself. Unfortunately all you peddle is bs, lies, and deception.

 

[batboy]

For over the decade, HBG have hidden behind independent chairpersons, a compromised puppet CEO, several high-profile and sacked management staff and coaches, numerous sacked football staff, etc, taking the fall for sustained poor performance. Not once have HBG been held accountable in name for the rot at WT.

Now, finally, these cronies are the ones under the blow torch. It’s about time. None of the current HBG board members can be on the WT board. They are all tarnished in one way or another. Burgess, Romero, Montgomery and Tropiano in particular have to somehow be cut adrift and have absolutely nothing to do with football.

Do you all now see how the WT board and club has been a circus for the past decade, when the majority on the WT board are on this machiavellian HBG board. Rarely do you hear of a board descending to this sort of state, and the only reason it does is because of self-interest, empire-building, and ego. And the ones who are instigating this are accountable to no one but their own.

Got a mate who's a Parra loyalist, Has been through the same thing with self serving Boards etc.
Reckons we're about 18 months from where they got to before change was enforced.

 

[cochise]

There really is no self awareness with you is there?

 

[cochise]

You are already trying to haunt me as a clowns.

 

[hammertime]

Evidence?

It is HBG prerogative.

Owners prerogative

Here's the thing magpie. Julie and Dennis are not owners. They have a fudiciary duty to act in the interests of members and the community. It's written in legislation.

They do not get to exercise their own personal prerogative.

 

[twentyforty]

Embarrassment to who? The average league fan wouldn’t have a clue what goes on in our boardroom.

That’s right, they probably cover up 90% of their blunders. 😂

 

[Magpie_Magic]

Here's the thing magpie. Julie and Dennis are not owners. They have a judiciary duty to act in the interests of members and the community. It's written in legislation.

Subjective

They do not get to exercise their own personal prerogative.

They can exercise that prerogative as representatives of the ownership.

Not to say they should, however.

But we can't link other issues.

 

[Big Red]

Are you calling me a suck BZN? Apparently that’s a sackable offence around here 😂. I’m not here to protect anyone, a show of solidarity maybe but ultimately I don’t believe your story and I’m not convinced you do either.

 

[hammertime]

Subjective

They can exercise that prerogative as representatives of the ownership.

Not to say they should, however.

But we can't link other isissues.

You hit a key word. Representatives. They need to have a lens of the members (owners) first and foremost with every decision.