Search results

Yea i remember that story - it was in that fantasy book.

and didn't go to any of the meetings - they didn't because it was in the paper.

And HBG graciously allowed Balmain to remain as part of the JV - see i can do that too.

Yep i agree - have to laugh when people on here keep throwing out that its not a Balmain vs Wests thing then put up pics like this and say they want the blue wiggle to buy it after he said he would rebrand it as Balmain. And one poster saying he would leave if there was no Balmain still in WT...

Oh well it had to be true then.

So he doesn't need to talk to HBG to hear their side of the story - you think he will just go on what liar Ofarrell and Richo tell him. No doubt he would also take in to account Hagipantellis story of a Wests Magpies coup taking place. Give me a break.

I asked BAGN05 who reported it - he has been having a go about everyone just throwing stuff out there so i wanted him to tell me who actually reported that they weren't attending meetings - no doubt he can't tell me because he was just doing what he accused others of doing.

B Barry wouldn't lie - oh wait.

reported by who?

But now everyone seems to be quoting Hagipantellis as gospel.

I don't know how old you are but your life must be pretty boring when you sit around all day and half the night on a football forum whingeing that things aren't done the way you want them done.

Did you actually read what he said - He is suggesting that its possible O'Farrel is making decisions without consulting board members. I'm not suggesting thats true but it definitely is possible that he is overstepping his powers.

The NRL didn't step in over the eels - Liquor and Gaming removed the board and put an administrator in charge - the only involvement the NRL had was dishing out penalties for salary cap cheating.

Its very relevant with some of the rubbish you're hurling about.

No - even clubs rorting the salary cap and having points ripped out and massive fines have not have their licences revoked. Canterburys infamous trip to Coffs Harbour that brought the game in to disrepute got a slap on the wrists. They did takeover Newcastles licence after Nathan Tinkler handed...

Yea there is - the original one was Sack the Harvey Barnes Group - lot of planning went in to that one.

I saw a report on the news today how Gen Z can't hack the stresses of work and life in general and how mental health issues are soaring in workplaces among this age group. Judging by some of the comments and OTT hand wringing on here i would say the report was pretty close to the mark.

Thats not true - Newcastle were owned by Nathan Tinkler - when he went broke he relinquished the licence and the NRL managed it until a buyer could be found. The NRL didn't just move in and take back the licence. Parramattas board was sacked for inappropriate payments to players by the Liquor...

I didn't say the business was being mismanaged - like everyone else on here i was finally happy that WT had become independent of HBG. i was only pointing out that an owner can legally dismiss a board for any number of reasons.

I don't give a damn about your point. I was laughing at some idiot who puts up a petition without even getting the names right of the entities he is petitioning to remove. But to answer your question - what would they sue them over - having the temerity to enact their right as an owner to sack...