HBG, Independent Directors Sacked

Yes they loaned $100 to the HBG, they actually earn interest on this.

HBG has a 7 seat board, those 20 debenture holders get 5 seats on the HBG board. The general membership gets 2.

To make things worse, the last 2 general membership voted directors were sacked by the rest of the board.

This is not how I want my club ran.
You just don't get it you buffoon.

HBG/WESTS/WESTS MAGPIES is NOT YOURS.

Wests being in control of 90% of our club and a bunch of ungrateful rebels only 10% means WESTS ARE THE LANDLORD AND EVERYONE ELSE IS ONLY A TENNANT.
MOST LANDLORDS WON'T TOLERATE TENNANTS THAT CAUSE TROUBLE SO THE TENNANT SOON FINDS THEMSELVES HOMELESS AND LIVING ON CHARITY.
BUT WAIT, THERES MORE, WESTS HAVE ALREADY BEEN CHARITABLE, SO THAT OPTION IS NO LONGER THERE AND THE TENNANT KNOWS THIS.
THE ONLY OPTION AVAILABLE NOW IS TO BECOME SQUATTERS.
BUT, TO BE A SUCCESSFUL SQUATTER WE HAVE TO STORM THE RAMPARTS AND BE PREPARED TO SPILL BLOOD TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE CONTROL, AND THE UNFRIENDLY LANDLORD IS BANNISHED FOREVER.
 
You just don't get it you buffoon.

HBG/WESTS/WESTS MAGPIES is NOT YOURS.

Wests being in control of 90% of our club and a bunch of ungrateful rebels only 10% means WESTS ARE THE LANDLORD AND EVERYONE ELSE IS ONLY A TENNANT.
MOST LANDLORDS WON'T TOLERATE TENNANTS THAT CAUSE TROUBLE SO THE TENNANT SOON FINDS THEMSELVES HOMELESS AND LIVING ON CHARITY.
BUT WAIT, THERES MORE, WESTS HAVE ALREADY BEEN CHARITABLE, SO THAT OPTION IS NO LONGER THERE AND THE TENNANT KNOWS THIS.
THE ONLY OPTION AVAILABLE NOW IS TO BECOME SQUATTERS.
BUT, TO BE A SUCCESSFUL SQUATTER WE HAVE TO STORM THE RAMPARTS AND BE PREPARED TO SPILL BLOOD TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE CONTROL, AND THE UNFRIENDLY LANDLORD IS BANNISHED FOREVER.
But it is mine, they are owned by the members, I am a member.

Are you a member?
 
I'm not sure it needs to be that covert.

HBG's first complaint was (kind of)- they were not being included in business decisions at a board level.

The reaction was to remove the board not aligned with HBG.

PVL interviews those board members.

Richo resigns (with an investigation over his head- still unresolved). More rumour/detail comes out that the business decisions were related to the deals around stadiums going forward- deals that Richo negotiated- not the board.

PVL meets HBG & the independents are offered their roles back.

Richo is not asked to return. Mielekamp replaces him.

Kade7 comes out & suggests Richo isn't as clean as he paints himself- Kade7's rumours are generally pretty solid.

I suggested a few days ago that the board removal could have been HBG reacting on poor information & PVL, after hearing both sides, negotiated the return & that the HBG beef might have been with Richo's dealings instead.

People make mistakes. Moving the board on- could have been a case of a mistake on where the blame lay.

The question that bothers a few people now is- why would O'Farrell etc even agree to come back? If, during the PVL negotiation, HBG realised their error & accepted fault on that- couldn't that take the sting out?

Richo remains sidelined. I think Richo was the cause of the HBG complaint.
Thread 'Tigers eye permanent move back to spiritual homes at Leichhardt, Campbelltown' https://weststigersforum.com/thread...itual-homes-at-leichhardt-campbelltown.33153/

The stadium strategy that was implemented has been spoken about since 2022 when Pascoe was here.

I find it really odd this would be a legitimate reason to blow up the board.

There's a huge weight of evidence against the comment that Paton made about this. He was typically vague about what the precise beef was, but they were certainly aware about the stadium strategy.
 
Last edited:
I used to follow the magpies before Wests Tigers - i only watch them now as a Wests Tigers reserve grade side - i bet half the people wanting them gone don't even watch or associate with reserve grade. i don't get what the gripe to get rid of them is about - changing the name is certainly not going to magically transform them in to a powerhouse of reserve grade.
It’s not going to magically transform them into a successful side but it is embolic of the fact that, as a club, we can’t be get over the past and escape the continual infighting since we became a JV.

We’re the Wests Tigers and our feeder clubs should reflect that.

In my opinion having them play at Lidcombe is more of a concern. I’d be ok if they were called the Magpies and played out of Campbelltown every week. The Lidcombe Oval decision just screams as if some old guys are trying to re-live the 1970s.

Ideally they would be called Wests Tigers and play in SW/Macarthur region for every home game. Makes sense given the clubs strategic plan about building our presence and investing in that area.
 

Latest posts

Staff online

Back
Top