HBG, Independent Directors Sacked

[rihannafan1]

“Agenda” in this context, meaning any poster with an alternate opinion.

Darcy told big fat porkies and yet across the forum, it’s hardly caused a ripple of discussion.

What we’re you saying about sycophants and doing no wrong ?

You are the one defining an agenda as anyone with an alternate opinion. I am not. Tucker has plenty of opinions different to other posters but they are fluid, depending on the discussion. He doesn't have an agenda. He isn't highlighting every mistake certain people make and isn't trying to muckrake.

Darcy hasn't disadvantaged the club over and over. He has been able to choose a direction and stick with it. I reckon very, very few on here care what he says or does, frankly, except for those he has spoken out about, who, unsurprisingly, seem to have tried make an issue out of it.

 

[rihannafan1]

What??? - the quote was from O'Farrell.

What???

 

[Merlot]

You are the one defining an agenda as anyone with an alternate opinion. I am not. Tucker has plenty of opinions different to other posters but they are fluid, depending on the discussion. He doesn't have an agenda. He isn't highlighting every mistake certain people make and isn't trying to muckrake.

Darcy hasn't disadvantaged the club over and over. He has been able to choose a direction and stick with it. I reckon very, very few on here care what he says or does, frankly, except for those he has spoken out about, who, unsurprisingly, seem to have tried make an issue out of it.

your kissing the wrong backside there

 

[area52]

Sorry mate- didn't realise you knew what was discussed between PVL & the Tigers.

Probably proposed chammas as CEO

 

[weststigers]

I wasn't clear in my post, apologies.

I meant to point out that no one from HBG has made a statement (except for rants on facebook) since the reinstatement of the independent director's.

They were super keen to keep the fans updated after the sackings, yet remain completely silent after the reinstatements.

If they really cared about the fans, as insinuated in the original video, then we would have heard from them by now.

In my opinion, the lack of communication speaks volumes as to their original motives and where they landed post meeting with PVL.

@Vicious has made the point that HBG don't have to update fans. He is right, they don't.... the same way players don't have to sign autographs for fans... but they do it anyway.. because its the right thing to do...

At the end of the day it ALL comes back to intent, and their intent was going to set the footy club back 5-10 years. I've seen people post on this forum that they saw first hand saw text messages where BE was told he had the GM role.. that SP was being lined up as CEO... after our best year on and off the field in so long!!

We aren't living in the 90s where organisations could pull the wool over people's eyes.. We have a pretty good idea what they had planned.

The only thing that matters is their ownership. That's what they keep saying. 20 guys...who don't even own it...making the decisions for thousands of stakeholders.

But stuff the poor mugs that pay $27 for their kids to attend a trial as sone complain about. They don't "own" it so they don't matter. But keep paying...and respect the ownership...oh and respect the 60 year old and over Magpies supporters who never got over the merger.

The disdain for fans is astounding, but 200 or so old fellas will be happy.

 

[weststigers]

Sorry mate- didn't realise you knew what was discussed between PVL & the Tigers.

Chad, you keep refuting everything on the basis that people weren’t actually there to jnow what happened, yet you completely ignore Barry O’Farrell’s own statements that WT directors were in the room when decisions were being made. Btw...HBG never refuted that.

By your logic, no conclusion could ever be drawn about anything unless every person personally witnessed every conversation.

That standard isn’t reasonable, and it certainly isn’t applied consistently here.
This constant retreat into “context” and “you weren’t there” every time the things become uncomfortable is getting old. And frankly, for a man of your age, you should know better by now.

 

[mtd#2]

Exactly. Not for sale.

Wests Ashfield was built in 1955 to support the Western Suburbs Magpies. They continue to do that via all the clubs contemporary incarnations.

Maybe Laundy could buy the Balmain RLFC - given he was a supporter and I imagine it would go for loose change 👀

The ticket to the dance is the NRL licence... HBG dont own that.. their power is perceived, as seen by "their decision" to reinstate the independent directors.

 

[The Chad]

Chad, you keep refuting everything on the basis that people weren’t actually there to jnow what happened, yet you completely ignore Barry O’Farrell’s own statements that WT directors were in the room when decisions were being made. Btw...HBG never refuted that.

By your logic, no conclusion could ever be drawn about anything unless every person personally witnessed every conversation.

That standard isn’t reasonable, and it certainly isn’t applied consistently here.
This constant retreat into “context” and “you weren’t there” every time the things become uncomfortable is getting old. And frankly, for a man of your age, you should know better by now.

You're right. Barry O'Farrell did say HBG were in the room. And HBG hasn't refuted that.

And Barry agreed to come back.

And some people are riding HBG into the ground because they don't understand WHY this happened.

All I'm doing is saying that maybe there is more to this than meets the eye. Instead of saying HBG is absolutely the 'monster'- maybe...just maybe... PVL & O'Farrell & Meiklecamp etc have heard the HBG reasoning & been ok with it?

HBG do not need to tell us, the fans, everything.

I don't like being told to believe a narrative is right simply because some people believe it is so. Half the narrative supports the group think. A large part of the story doesn't explain why PVL, O'Farrell etc are still happy to work with HBG.

Particularly given how O'Farrell & Richardson were buddy-buddy & O'Farrell comes back but Richo leaves. Doesn't THAT feel odd at all?

 

[king_sirro]

Chad, you keep refuting everything on the basis that people weren’t actually there to jnow what happened, yet you completely ignore Barry O’Farrell’s own statements that WT directors were in the room when decisions were being made. Btw...HBG never refuted that.

By your logic, no conclusion could ever be drawn about anything unless every person personally witnessed every conversation.

That standard isn’t reasonable, and it certainly isn’t applied consistently here.
This constant retreat into “context” and “you weren’t there” every time the things become uncomfortable is getting old. And frankly, for a man of your age, you should know better by now.

Bang on.

Also, the fact HBG released a long winded video statement when they blew the joint up but have gone silent once they were made to backflip highlights the obvious. If anything Chad says is remotely correct, than HBG would have released another statement. Instead they are hiding in silence and embarrassment

 

[hammertime]

I think it's a part of it for some people though. I mean HBGout is about getting rid of wests magpies.
And have a look at people wanting Laundy to buy the club. Would they be as keen if he was magpies fan rather than a balmain fan?
There's dinosaurs from both the original clubs here.

Its not really though mate. HBG fund both balmain and wests these days. HBGOut is really about incompetent management. The fans would love them if they had kept the independant board and helped fund the club... but they just had to go and do something idiotic and self interested.

I am someone who doesnt want private ownership, especially if aligned to one of the historical clubs. Private ownership opens up other issues. I can't speak for others, but the laundy angle is the wrong option. I think people just see that as better than HBG, which is probably fair..

The leagues club model is right. We just need to get HBG back at arms length OR have a governance model inside HBG that opens accountability for idiotic decisions (i.e. remove debenture holders). We can't continue with this crazy structure.

 

[The Chad]

Bang on.

Also, the fact HBG released a long winded video statement when they blew the joint up but have gone silent once they were made to backflip highlights the obvious. If anything Chad says is remotely correct, than HBG would have released another statement. Instead they are hiding in silence and embarrassment

"than HBG would have released another statement."

Why? To what purpose? To appease questioning fans?

They (HBG) made a statement after taking the actions they took- giving a reason (believable or not) for the purpose. They gave a timeline for a new board to be implemented.

People (fans) are demanding more information. That they haven't appeased the fans doesn't mean that their reasoning has been shown to be incorrect or that they are 'hiding in embarrassment'.

If HBG have done a heinous thing- why did O'Farrell come back? His running mate Richo left the club, unable to work with HBG, but O'Farrell, the guy punted, comes back willingly. This doesn't feel odd at all? Like maybe there is more to it than the fan theories?

 

[The Chad]

Chad, you keep refuting everything on the basis that people weren’t actually there to jnow what happened, yet you completely ignore Barry O’Farrell’s own statements that WT directors were in the room when decisions were being made. Btw...HBG never refuted that.

By your logic, no conclusion could ever be drawn about anything unless every person personally witnessed every conversation.

That standard isn’t reasonable, and it certainly isn’t applied consistently here.
This constant retreat into “context” and “you weren’t there” every time the things become uncomfortable is getting old. And frankly, for a man of your age, you should know better by now.

Age should have taught you that any narrative by the media should be questioned, particularly if it doesn't always make perfect sense.

 

[Jedi_Tiger]

The ticket to the dance is the NRL licence... HBG dont own that.. their power is perceived, as seen by "their decision" to reinstate the independent directors.

thankfully nrl owns wests tigers licence in nrl, hbg cant do much about that.
As long as PVL sticks.ti his guns of only wests tigers in nrl then all good

 

[king_sirro]

"than HBG would have released another statement."

Why? To what purpose? To appease questioning fans?

They (HBG) made a statement after taking the actions they took- giving a reason (believable or not) for the purpose. They gave a timeline for a new board to be implemented.

People (fans) are demanding more information. That they haven't appeased the fans doesn't mean that their reasoning has been shown to be incorrect or that they are 'hiding in embarrassment'.

If HBG have done a heinous thing- why did O'Farrell come back? His running mate Richo left the club, unable to work with HBG, but O'Farrell, the guy punted, comes back willingly. This doesn't feel odd at all? Like maybe there is more to it than the fan theories?

Um yes to appease disgruntled fans, um yes to man up rather than hide.

If you cant see its odd to make a big song and dance statement at first, then when it all backfilled to go silent than I cant really help you.

 

[Merlot]

Will we see Vicious back after the chad has done his 3 days of tripe
Vicious said he wouldn't comment on such matters until there was something news worthy ,fingers crossed

 

[The Chad]

Um yes to appease disgruntled fans, um yes to man up rather than hide.

If you cant see its odd to make a big song and dance statement at first, then when it all backfilled to go silent than I cant really help you.

I've never said it's not odd. The whole thing is odd.

They released a statement. Until that statement is proven untrue, or when there is further developments (the new board is set)- I don't see why another statement needs to be released.

It's not their job to appease your curiosity any more than mine.

If anything- people should question O'Farrell on his stance about coming back. Was there a statement about that from the director of the Wests Tigers board?

 

[weststigers]

Age should have taught you that any narrative by the media should be questioned, particularly if it doesn't always make perfect sense.

I just quote the people involved. Including the CEO directly from his video. And the chairman who was in the room at every board meeting. Marina Go has a few things to say as well. You see the quotes and continuously say we have no information to fill the gaps.

Are all these people saying the same thing lying? What crusade are you on exactly?

 

[weststigers]

You're right. Barry O'Farrell did say HBG were in the room. And HBG hasn't refuted that.

And Barry agreed to come back.

And some people are riding HBG into the ground because they don't understand WHY this happened.

All I'm doing is saying that maybe there is more to this than meets the eye. Instead of saying HBG is absolutely the 'monster'- maybe...just maybe... PVL & O'Farrell & Meiklecamp etc have heard the HBG reasoning & been ok with it?

HBG do not need to tell us, the fans, everything.

I don't like being told to believe a narrative is right simply because some people believe it is so. Half the narrative supports the group think. A large part of the story doesn't explain why PVL, O'Farrell etc are still happy to work with HBG.

Particularly given how O'Farrell & Richardson were buddy-buddy & O'Farrell comes back but Richo leaves. Doesn't THAT feel odd at all?

So Barry came back....after PVL got involved. Don't YOU think that's strange?

The only thing we don't know is what threat PVL made, but whatever it was, it made HBG backflip.

The other board members refuse to return. Doesn't that feel odd?

But my question to you is. You think it's odd...so what is your summation? You've asked a lot of questions...thrown out plenty of doubts, but no opinion. Speak up.

 

[gallagher]

Its not really though mate. HBG fund both balmain and wests these days. HBGOut is really about incompetent management. The fans would love them if they had kept the independant board and helped fund the club... but they just had to go and do something idiotic and self interested.

I am someone who doesnt want private ownership, especially if aligned to one of the historical clubs. Private ownership opens up other issues. I can't speak for others, but the laundy angle is the wrong option. I think people just see that as better than HBG, which is probably fair..

The leagues club model is right. We just need to get HBG back at arms length OR have a governance model inside HBG that opens accountability for idiotic decisions (i.e. remove debenture holders). We can't continue with this crazy structure.

Good post mate, totally agree.
But some do want wests to sell and for the magpies to disappear at state cup.
It's not as simple a saying that this has nothing to do with the magpies, it does for some.

 

[gallagher]

It would appear the majority who want HBG to act for the benefit of Wests Tigers are Wests Tigers fans. They don’t want Balmain Tigers back, they don’t want Wests Magpies back.
HBG doesn’t seem to align with this thinking.

Wouldn't it be great to have some ex wests tigers players on the board. Thankfully Denis is gone, Stapleton next for me. Been there way too long