HBG, Independent Directors Sacked

[Telltails]

Agreed. Unfortunately they're the owners so deserve majority on the board. I doubt it will work any other way.

Mate it doesn't matter who has the majority if the people you are working with are not pulling in the same direction - hence the review. They had a majority then and three directors got dumped and banned on the back of it.
No way Richardson would have signed on without an independent board for that reason.
They have a history of infighting detrimental to "WTs" reaching it's potential.

 

[gallagher]

Mate it doesn't matter who has the majority if the people you are working with are not pulling in the same direction - hence the review. They had a majority then and three directors got dumped and banned on the back of it.
No way Richardson would have signed on without an independent board for that reason.
They have a history of infighting detrimental to "WTs" reaching it's potential.

No argument from me, especially your last sentence.
But unfortunately they are the owners and they seem want a majority on the board. Vlandys can't pull a license because of that, he probably agrees with it.
I'm optimistic that things can still work out seeing as the chairman and some board members returned. They must have some optimism about the joint.

 

[mtd#2]

Again though- is that situation possible?

Its also possible that I win powerball this Thursday, but that doesn't mean I should stop working does it?

The majority of us are making decisions based on what we see at face value and the pretty solid rumour of who was about to be appointed (based on text messages witnessed by certain people on this forum who put their name to it).

This back and forth with endless "this could of happened" is a waste of everyone's time. Its pretty clear what happened. Its pretty clear the intentions. Sure, there are things we dont know, but as mentioned above, if they want to clear the air then no one is stopping them.

 

[mtd#2]

A well functioning organisation doesn't dismiss 8 board members in 18 months.

Not necessarily true.. if they are cleaning the decks to run a more professional organisation, then this could be a good strategic move - however I don't think it applies to hbg

 

[mtd#2]

No, I'm happy for them not to be the owners. And I'm filthy that Richardson is gone.
I'm just looking for reasonable discussion and must people in this thread are either far left or far right. Chad can see both sides IMO.
I don't know if the board deserved to be dumped or not. I'm not gonna assume that they did or didn't.
I know they signed off on a 3 ground stadium contract in the one city so straight away I'm not impressed with them.

What have the board done this year that has you feeling we're on the right path?

So which stadiums would you have not signed on with? Leichardt? Campbelltown? Commbank?

 

[mtd#2]

Agreed. Unfortunately they're the owners so deserve majority on the board. I doubt it will work any other way.

Do they deserve it? The NRL owns the wests tigers brand and thats where the money is.. so maybe there should be NRL directors on the board instead?

 

[weststigers]

One thing is clear.

The findings of the review, which:
- recommended an independent board
- was implemented and agreed to by HBG,

has now been changed to majority HBG board. Fact.

Regardless of the detail and who was right or wrong in this instance:
- HBG have not maintained their commitment to an independent board.

I would understand if they replaced independent with independent, but they have taken control by sacking the independent board members - O'Farrell has agreed to come back. The others not so keen understandably.

That is fact. There is nothing Chad or anyone else can say that refutes that. If HBG install a new set of independent board members with a majority, I will take it back and cheer.

This is the part that seems to be ignored in favour of discussing the politics of it all.

 

[KevB]

Mate it doesn't matter who has the majority if the people you are working with are not pulling in the same direction - hence the review. They had a majority then and three directors got dumped and banned on the back of it.
No way Richardson would have signed on without an independent board for that reason.
They have a history of infighting detrimental to "WTs" reaching it's potential.

Could the NRL integrity investigation into Richardson played a part in his resignation?

Has this issue been resolved?

 

[cochise]

Not necessarily true.. if they are cleaning the decks to run a more professional organisation, then this could be a good strategic move - however I don't think it applies to hbg

Doesn't that mean they weren't well functioning to begin with?

 

[cochise]

One thing is clear.

The findings of the review, which:
- recommended an independent board
- was implemented and agreed to by HBG,

has now been changed to majority HBG board. Fact.

Regardless of the detail and who was right or wrong in this instance:
- HBG have not maintained their commitment to an independent board.

I would understand if they replaced independent with independent, but they have taken control by sacking the independent board members - O'Farrell has agreed to come back. The others not so keen understandably.

That is fact. There is nothing Chad or anyone else can say that refutes that. If HBG install a new set of independent board members with a majority, I will take it back and cheer.

This is the part that seems to be ignored in favour of discussing the politics of it all.

There are other of the independents returning.

 

[mtd#2]

Doesn't that mean they weren't well functioning to begin with?

Organisations that vere offcourse can get back on track with the right leadership, which might include the culling of the old guard. It would be unfair to assume that businesses cannot be turned around because they have been dysfunctional in the past.

I dont think this is the case with HBG though, their decisions make no sense.

Hammertime hit the nail on the head - Richo was likely too fast paced and wasnt about sitting around waiting for stuff to happen. He is the sort of guy we needed to get the club back on course. I think Shaun seems like a good guy, but he's no richo.

 

[cochise]

Organisations that vere offcourse can get back on track with the right leadership, which might include the culling of the old guard. It would be unfair to assume that businesses cannot be turned around because they have been dysfunctional in the past.

I dont think this is the case with HBG though, their decisions make no sense.

Hammertime hit the nail on the head - Richo was likely too fast paced and wasnt about sitting around waiting for stuff to happen. He is the sort of guy we needed to get the club back on course. I think Shaun seems like a good guy, but he's no richo.

So they do that because they weren't functioning in the first place.

 

[weststigers]

There are other of the independents returning.

Are we sure about that? I know they were invited back, but there is one that refuses...I thought the others were "considering".

 

[cochise]

Are we sure about that? I know they were invited back, but there is one that refuses...I thought the others were "considering".

Yes, there is at least one other returning.

 

[area52]

There are other of the independents returning.

Is Charlie Viola returning ?

 

[mtd#2]

So they do that because they weren't functioning in the first place.

I am not sure what point you are trying to make. Do you not think that organisations can improve their functionality by making the right changes?

 

[cochise]

I am not sure what point you are trying to make. Do you not think that organisations can improve their functionality by making the right changes?

My point is, only poorly performing organisations have that level of turnover at the governance level.

 

[mtd#2]

My point is, only poorly performing organisations have that level of turnover at the governance level.

Sure. But with the right changes, some organisations can turn things around.

 

[tigertragic]

I am not sure what point you are trying to make. Do you not think that organisations can improve their functionality by making the right changes?

I’m sure organisations can bring in better quality members, however, HBG is limited to having a majority board of debenture holders, who have become debentures holders thru a closed shop selection process. Therefore I think you will find any new debenture holders will have an existing ‘alignment’ with HBG.

Thus limiting any possible improvement or direction moving forward.

 

[Jolls]

I’m sure organisations can bring in better quality members, however, HBG is limited to having a majority board of debenture holders, who have become debentures holders thru a closed shop selection process. Therefore I think you will find any new debenture holders will have an existing ‘alignment’ with HBG.

Thus limiting any possible improvement or direction moving forward.

While I think that is correct at HBG level I don't think is has to be at WT level. They could choose to appoint a number of board members that are selected from within the HBG membership based on the skills that they hold. Of course they can do the exact opposite as well so only time will tell.

The end result is that we need a board that has the interests of Wests Tigers at its core. I personally don't care if they are HBG or independent - as long as they have the skills required and are looking after the best interests of WT as opposed to other factions.

We, the unwashed, don't know what we don't know. However, based on the statement by BOF we can assume that HBG have been given some clear direction from the NRL regarding actions they could take if HBG continues its malevonent behaviour.

I trust that this is enough for HBG to step back a little and focus on what's best for Wests Tigers as opposed to the wants of a few debenture holders.