Di Girolamo puts job on the line to boost Tigers

wtfl1981

New member
NICK DI GIROLAMO'S first act as Wests Tigers chairman could well do him out of the job.

![](http://images.smh.com.au/2013/02/23/4056610/art-Girolamo-300x0.jpg)

The Australian Water Holdings chairman described the position as a privilege and has only been in the role since mid-December after replacing David Trodden as the Balmain-appointed representative. However, one of his top priorities is to instigate constitutional reform to a joint venture which has been, at times, an uneasy marriage between Balmain and Western Suburbs.

''We need to behave in unison to get the best possible outcome for Wests Tigers,'' Di Girolamo said. ''From a corporate perspective, the JV was executed in 1999\. As night follows day, any agreement which has been around for more than a decade needs review.

''If you look at the annual rotation of the chairman, I don't think any leading corporate organisation would require the person at the helm of the organisation to rotate. I understand from a historical point of view why that might have been necessary in 1999, but it doesn't really make for good corporate governance. What you should be looking at is a three- to four-year tenure as a starting point.

''I am happy if it does me out of a job, as long as it means the right structure. If I'm the deputy chairman for three years and someone from the Wests group is the first chairman for the next three to four years, I'm happy because it's in the best interests of the Wests Tigers. That is of paramount importance.''

In his first interview since stepping into the chair, Di Girolamo revealed his blueprint for the Tigers. One of his long-term objectives is to set up centres of excellence at the club's spiritual homes. ''I'd like to see two academies,'' he said. ''If you look at Leichhardt Oval, you've got a great oval. It needs some maintenance, absolutely. But you could put an academy there, you've got the aquatic centre next door, you've got great grounds all around it. You could capture all of that inner west talent in that academy. And you could replicate it at Campbelltown. By having two centres of excellence, you are really looking after the youth. All under the banner of Wests Tigers.''

Of more immediate concern is re-signing captain Robbie Farah, who is off contract at the end of the season and several clubs, including Parramatta, are circling. It's understood the Tigers have tabled a lucrative deal for him to stay until the end of 2017\. ''Nothing would give me greater satisfaction at this early stage of my tenure than to ensure our captain, Robbie Farah, will be our captain for life,'' he said. ''I want to make sure that our two leaders, Robbie Farah and Benji Marshall, are happy. From a cultural perspective, they are interwoven in the fabric of the club. Unfortunately in this day and age not everyone can be a one-club man. But those two deserve the opportunity to be Tigers for life.''

Di Girolamo has plenty of experience in the corporate scene. He was one of the youngest lawyers to become a partner in a leading Sydney law firm, Colin Biggers & Paisley. For six years he chaired the Italian Chamber of Commerce and Industry in Sydney, has overseen the delivery of $700 million in Sydney's northwest in his roles with Australian Water Holdings and is well connected politically. But the 42-year-old's biggest challenge could be to properly unite the Balmain and Wests factions under the Tigers banner. Despite protests from the Magpies, the Tigers will field just one NSW Cup side this year. ''Whilst I understand the importance of identity, having two State Cup teams has the potential to create a wedge at Wests Tigers level,'' he said. ''Having one brand is the most important thing for me. You don't want to see one of your shareholders getting flogged. We need to be in unison.''

He also weighed into the debate about Leichhardt Oval amid fears the boutique ground can't continue to host NRL games following the release of the state government's stadiums strategy. ''I think there will always be a place for suburban grounds but, having said that, the counter argument is centralisation with the costs involved,'' he said. ''I just don't think we're there yet. At the moment there's a need for suburban grounds like Leichhardt Oval and Campbelltown, where there is a great growth area.''

Australian Water Holdings' links to the Obeid family have been highlighted during the ICAC inquiry but Di Girolamo said he had always acted ethically in all of his business dealings. ''My reputation in the corporate world would speak for itself,'' he said.
\
\
http://m.smh.com.au/rugby-league/league-news/di-girolamo-puts-job-on-the-line-to-boost-tigers-20130223-2ey6t.html
 
The longer term rotating chairman proposal is a reasonable idea, however this quote is oxymoron:

**_"to properly unite the Balmain and Wests factions under the Tigers banner"_**

Should read **Wests Tigers** Banner. Balmain do not need uniting under the Tigers Banner as they have been Tigers since Day one… No wonder the Wests side of the fence gets fed up with the lack of proper brand and club recognition in the JV with public references like this.

**_"the Tigers will field just one NSW Cup side this year"_**

Pretty sure there was only one Tigers team in NSW cup in 2012 and many years before that - **Balmain Ryde-Eastwood Tigers.**

If the founding club identities at non NRL level are to be abolished, at least have the respect to honour both partners of the JV equally rather than have it portrayed publically as an extension of Balmain Tigers.
 
@LaT said:
Because god forbid anyone ever shortens the name to just "Tigers"…...

Whats the point of the JV if the club is just called the Tigers? Balmain Tigers might as well stayed in NRL on their own.

The Joint Venture is suppose to preserve the legacy of BOTH clubs, if its not done right or fairly then there will be sides, factions and disjointed fans. If balance wasnt a 'problem' then there would be a WT football club in existance (not a JV) and no Wests Group and Balmain split ownership or single feeder side issues.

Tigers is the mascot of WT, but if the club is only referred to as Tigers (publically by senior people in the club and via the media) then the legacy of Wests dissapears/becomes less relevant while the legacy of Balmain (spiritual home,colours,mascot etc) lives on forever.

Its not about dominance of one identity over the others its about Equality in the JV and how that is portrayed internally and perceived externally.
 
@wtfl1981 said:
@LaT said:
Because god forbid anyone ever shortens the name to just "Tigers"…...

Whats the point of the JV if the club is just called the Tigers? Balmain Tigers might as well stayed in NRL on their own.

The Joint Venture is suppose to preserve the legacy of BOTH clubs, if its not done right or fairly then there will be sides, factions and disjointed fans. If balance wasnt a 'problem' then there would be a WT football club in existance (not a JV) and no Wests Group and Balmain split ownership or single feeder side issues.

Tigers is the mascot of WT, but if the club is only referred to as Tigers (publically by senior people in the club and via the media) then the legacy of Wests dissapears/becomes less relevant while the legacy of Balmain (spiritual home,colours,mascot etc) lives on forever.

Its not about dominance of one identity over the others its about Equality in the JV and how that is portrayed internally and perceived externally.

Not this fickle argument again….
 
Just continue to push that wheelbarrow of division. Because thats the way forward isn't it….
 
It may be fickle to you but what is important to me and many other WT fans is the basic principal of the message above and to ensure that WT is a **fair and balanced JV** - Not a takeover like St.George-Illawarra. Fans cant often control it but the powers to be can do little things to keep original Wests fan happy.

These 'issues' will always be around as long as WT is around and until all Balmain and Magpie men die off.

If it wasnt for the men in power portraying/operating the JV in such a 'Black & Gold' focussed way then there would not be any 'division'. I am highlighting an issue of poorly chosen words by the WT chairman which itself equates to an indirect form of division which contradicts his objective of wanting to be unified.

Its a bit like… "lets rename the United Kingdom to England because we have "moved on" from being known as Scotland and Wales and everyone just calls the UK 'England' anyway"....
 
Ever hear of the phrase mountain out of molehill?

He called us "Tigers"….where does he get off?
 
@LaT said:
Ever hear of the phrase mountain out of molehill?

He called us "Tigers"….where does he get off?

He used the words Balmain & Wests under the Tigers banner… A more appropiate choice would be Wests Tigers banner which means unified. Balmain have always been Tigers. It would be the same bad choice if he just said unified under the 'Wests' Banner. They may just seem like innocent words but they have weight to them when it comes to WT. like matt russell calling the game on fox last night, he uttered the words Wests Tigers about two times the whole game.. He even said 'when the tigers became unified in 2000 and became a JV' they were Tigers that became Tigers apparently...

_Posted using RoarFEED 2013_
 
We are the tigers, we are also wests, we are also the wests tigers. All three names get used and pettyness from fans that we should always be referred to as the wests tigers is ridiculous. I cant wait till all the old people are gone and we can get on with being one club. Go tigers…..sorry i cant say that i might offend someone, go wests tigers! I thought this article showed we might be heading in the right direction and uniting as ONE club.
 
Hmm I think this has been taken out of proportion because he has said under 'Tigers'.
He didn't say Balmain Tigers did he? So I don't understand the issue here. How many marketers/advertising/company supporters refer to the club as Tigers? I see it in the paper all the time, on tipping sights etc. it's not trying to minimise the impact of the Wests in the JV. It's simply because we are the Tigers. Just like Manly are the Sea Eagles and Canterbury are the Bulldogs.

_Posted using RoarFEED 2013_
 
Wtfl - I think you have misunderstood a fair bit of the article - RE: fielding one NSW cup team.

The reason they mentioned that is because the Magpies have tried to field their own team so that the Wests Tigers would have two NSW cup teams and the author simply stated that the Wests Tigers would only field one team this year.

_Posted using RoarFEED 2013_
 
I know the whole situation with the NSW cup arrangement

My point is that nobody makes a distinguishment between the tigers brands and they are often seen as one in the same.

The Wests brand is once again shoved to the side for the sake of a unified identity that is mostly referred to as 'the tigers'

Last week Roosters official website had newtown playing Balmain Tigers as the nsw cup curtain raiser to the nrl game.

He also goes on about 'one brand' when the WT nsw cup team is sponsored by Ryde Eastwood and other NRL clubs do not care about one brand when it comes to their nsw cup feeder team.

There may be 'good intensions' in the words but there is still a lot of hypocrisy and imbalance in the WT family.

_Posted using RoarFEED 2013_
 
@wtfl1981 said:
I know the whole situation with the NSW cup arrangement

My point is that nobody makes a distinguishment between the tigers brands and they are often seen as one in the same.

The Wests brand is once again shoved to the side for the sake of a unified identity that is mostly referred to as 'the tigers'

Last week Roosters official website had newtown playing Balmain Tigers as the nsw cup curtain raiser to the nrl game.

He also goes on about 'one brand' when the WT nsw cup team is sponsored by Ryde Eastwood and other NRL clubs do not care about one brand when it comes to their nsw cup feeder team.

There may be 'good intensions' in the words but there is still a lot of hypocrisy and imbalance in the WT family.

_Posted using RoarFEED 2013_

im sure your hearts in the right place but its rubbish like this that is causing the division..

like it or not, people call us the tigers. everytime we discuss something, we should not have to say 'wests tigers'. some ppl my choose to say wests, others tigers. its a personal preference.

the tigers are our mascot, the animal that represents our team. if you get your nickers in knot about this…. well theres no hope for u... move to the side and let our JV move forward...

i like the 'balmain' title, but idont call us balmain anymore... doesnt mean i get upset everytime someone refers to us as 'wests'.
 
I really have no desire to get involved in this merry-go-round again but surely you are not complaining that Ryde Eastwood is sponsoring the team?
 
@smeghead said:
I really have no desire to get involved in this merry-go-round again but surely you are not complaining that Ryde Eastwood is sponsoring the team?

What do they (another football club) have to do with WT?

_Posted using RoarFEED 2013_
 
@wtfl1981 said:
The longer term rotating chairman proposal is a reasonable idea, however this quote is oxymoron:

**_"to properly unite the Balmain and Wests factions under the Tigers banner"_**

Should read **Wests Tigers** Banner. Balmain do not need uniting under the Tigers Banner as they have been Tigers since Day one… No wonder the Wests side of the fence gets fed up with the lack of proper brand and club recognition in the JV with public references like this.

**_"the Tigers will field just one NSW Cup side this year"_**

Pretty sure there was only one Tigers team in NSW cup in 2012 and many years before that - **Balmain Ryde-Eastwood Tigers.**

If the founding club identities at non NRL level are to be abolished, at least have the respect to honour both partners of the JV equally rather than have it portrayed publically as an extension of Balmain Tigers.

First of all, both of those quotes are from the copy of the writer, not direct quotes from our chariman. Carefully read every one of this quotes and he specifically says **Wests Tigers** apart from when he refers to Benji and Robbie being 'Tigers for life'. (Hardly a crime).

I agree with LaT -

@LaT said:
Just continue to push that wheelbarrow of division. Because thats the way forward isn't it….

Picking things like this out creates further divide rather than pushing forward. I read this article this morning and felt extremely proud that a senior Wests Tigers official is looking for a way to move the organisation forward beyond a joint venture and is talking about these issues rather than the size of the magpie on the shoulder. This is progress finally, and I hope it isn't stalled by the eventual change of chairman this season. Its refreshing to see we were able to find another quality board member after Trodden's resignation, and not someone who has looked to tear the joint apart like we've had previously.
 
@wtfl1981 said:
@smeghead said:
I really have no desire to get involved in this merry-go-round again but surely you are not complaining that Ryde Eastwood is sponsoring the team?

What do they (another football club) have to do with WT?

_Posted using RoarFEED 2013_

They are a sponsor, a sponsorship which reduces financial burden on the Ashfield backing of the side as well. It is a win/win.

If Parramatta Leagues Club wanted to sponsor our State Cup side I would have zero issue as long as their cheques clear
 

Latest posts

Back
Top