Im not defending HGB more focusing on a man's character
HBG, Independent Directors Sacked
- Thread starter BlackWhiteGold
- Start date
He publically backed the board and Julie Romero when they took forever to appoint independent directors and people were questioning their commitment to an independent board.
Made it very clear he wouldn't have accepted the position to if an independent board was not in place.
He is definitely a man of his word because when they blew it up he acted exactly how they expected him to.
Jolls
Well-known member
After a bit of digging while I won't have voting rights for three years I can submit questions to the board and as Wests Tigers Members we can also make submissions to and ask wquestions of the WestsTigers Board.
HBG rules:
HBG rules:
- Financial Questions Procedure: Members are requested to advise the General Manager in writing at least fourteen (14) days prior to the date of the AGM regarding any query about financial statements or accounts.
- General Communication: While the Board manages the Club and holds confidential investigations (such as those regarding director conduct), they also provide information to members via direct correspondence, such as CEO updates or statements regarding governance.
- Member Rights: The Constitution and By-Laws outline the specific rights and procedures for members, including how to interact with the board. For non-financial questions, it is standard practice to contact the Club's management or submit written correspondence for the attention of the Board.
That interpretation certainly fits your bias but could be interpreted as sticking in there when times get tough.
"We're in a crocodile roll for our life and we want people here that want to be part of that crocodile roll and we'll make sure every person here is part of that crocodile roll.
"every person at this club has got to be in for the crocodile roll.
"Anyone here has got to want to be in the crocodile roll. We want people to fight to the fricken death. He's got to make calls with what he wants to do with his future. He's certainly got a future if he wants to get in the crocodile roll.
"We don’t want any player who doesn’t want to be at the club for the crocodile roll that lies ahead and that applies to every player including John Bateman. If he’s not comfortable with the club and the direction Benji is taking us, that is a decision for him.
To use a richardson line " at the end of the day" he bailed the crocodile roll and is banking the clubs money.
Can we agree he held the players at a higher standard than himself?
This wasn't about times getting tough - it was considered a season when steps forward were made.
He was employed with conditions and a commitment from the board to appoint an independent board they chose to renege on that which left two alternatives walk away and stick to his word, and or work under conditions he said he would not adhere to.
It's got nothing to do with any bias from me - it happened.
I disagree.
The rug was pulled from under him.
It'd be like quoting his wedding vows, then his wife cheats on him, so he leaves, then making out hes the bad guy for not honouring the vows.
Calling him a fat ceo that quit at the first opportunity tells us all we need to know what you're focusing on.
Tbh i thought he may have stuck around just to stick it up HB...but that wouldve been to the detriment of WTs ...he could see his position was untenable due to their actions
Id imagine he foresaw more of the same December shenanigans if he stuck around
Last edited:
Jolls
Well-known member
No, if players contractual conditions are not met they can walk, he had contractual conditions that weren't met so he is operating to the same standard.
So what did you expect him to do; stay?
If it he did and was part of the "crocodile roll" someone besides you would be on here crowing about how morally corrupt he was for not standing his ground on the independent board.
None of us unwashed know what the intent of HBG was at the time - but the reality of it is that they made it untenable for Richo to stay - perhaps that was the simple motive - perhaps not.
If you wan't to chalk it up as a win for your argument no problems. Pretty hollow victory though.
How much progress and respect did we lose as a club as a result of it? How many potential fans walked away? How many potential members did not sign? How many members did not renew?
Richo didn't meet your standards - I'm sorry that you feel that way but that is your choice. The much bigger problem is how far the events set the club back.
wstigers11
Well-known member
It’s a waste of time
They care more about their HBG overlords than a successful Wests Tigers
They care more about their HBG overlords than a successful Wests Tigers
This thread would slowly die if they stopped trying to defend the indefensible...
One of the first things he did in an interview when he turned up was call them
'The Blazer Brigade'
He didn't quit, He just got sick of the idiots - December was just the icing on the cake.
Easy to forget he stipulated he wouldn't work for them unless there was independant Directors,
It then took them 12 months to rubber stamp those Directors and less than that to then dismiss them.
They'd like to run the show, but aren't capable.
They employed a bloke that was, But he didn't want to answer to them.
I don't imagine the likes of Gus answer to Board Members too much either...
Moreso, Tell them how it's going to be and discuss it from there.
Rock Hopper Steve
Well-known member
Until smarter people are chosen on the W.A. board things will never change and like a lot on here just won't admit that's not going to happen until the debenture system is removed.
What board would think to send Wests Tigers ex-players under a giant magpie would be a good idea, what was going through their minds I wonder, it's just embarrassing.
Last edited:
The players aren't some walking contractual documents yeah, they're the ones putting their body on the line. Its a very tough sport players risk permanent injury
Its not some internet victory for me i just think your being manipulative
You love richardson but you don't know the bloke or the club.
What is known tho is he threw dirt on players about something and did the exact same thing but he is gone now.
There were numerous examples of him talking out of school. Like others have mentioned here i tend to agree his doesnt walk on water like others think of him
I don't see any evidence the club has gone backwards since he has departed.
Must be difficult swinging that pen.
You're acting like richardson is a saint in all this
"it was considered a season when steps forward were made."
What does that even mean its just your opinion
Jolls
Well-known member
Mate, I know nothing of Richo apart from what he has stated. As for the club I have been a member long enough to know it well and have taken the time to read the constitution and by laws so that I understand how the joint operates.
Richo clearly stated that he would only take the job on if he had an independent board. You are 100% correct that he also stated that if you weren't in for the crocodile roll you weren't wanted.
But he didn't do exactly the same thing as Galvin or TDS, who were contracted to the club. He allowed them to walk because they weren't invested in the future. In his case HBG broke their contract with him.
What I stated to you earlier was: If he stays he is morally corrupt for not standing by his commitment to the independent board; if he goes he wasn't in it for the crocodile roll. This is a lose lose situation.
Richo didn't break the contract conditions HBG did.
So nothing went backwards?
- Members not renewing reduced club revenue.
- Potential members walking away due to the turmoil.
- Another restart of the plan under different leadership.
- A realignment of the staff and player values by the interimm CEO
I don't think he walked on water at all and I questioned some of his decisions. But he had a proven track record of turning clubs around and our leadership forced his hand to make a decision - compromise his morals or walk.
If you bothered to read anything I have written the issue with the Club wasn't Richo - it also isn't necessarily HBG as such (even though they have been at the centre of most of the issues). The issue we have is the mis alignment of the two boards and our failure to move from joint venture thinking to being a single entity.
It is fine if your opinion is that Richo lacks conviction - but the alternate argument is equally as valid and plenty, including myself, value moral courage above proving a point.
Last edited:
What did he do wrong? Hbg sacked the directors , not richo.
