HBG, Independent Directors Sacked
- Thread starter BlackWhiteGold
- Start date
The Chad
Well-known member
You named 3 "Magpies aligned" posters.
This one-upmanship & attempts to belittle others is not unique to that side of the argument.
In fact, I think the numbers weigh heavier the other side.
Urgh , your lack of ability to look in the mirror right now…. Seriously . There’s only 1 side . Wests tigers. .
The fact you can’t see there’s a difference between outrage at the position the club is in ( the joke of the league) , and others openly mocking and doing a jig saying things like “we own 90% we can do what we want” , or every issue that comes up “why don’t you march to Ashfield “ , as if they’re the same thing is an indictment on yourself .
There’s no power struggle going on . There’s fans sick of supporting the joke of the league , and others clinging to some inept corporate body who have gone from failure to failure , because they represent the idea of a club that hasn’t really existed in 26 years . I mean the name of HBG FFS implies unity , something they simply aren’t really advocating for .
I honestly don’t get it . Man U can’t stand Radcliffe . Tottenham just got rid of Levy , and want there ownership group to sell for pretty much the same issues as the tigers - the club is run to sustain itself not to make a push and win trophies . Why are people defending a group of people who simply can’t run the club . I would honestly say the same thing about Balmain if they were in charge . Old men with no idea , neeed to move out of the way , and let some new voices in the room .
The way the narrative gets spun is deliberate because if the spotlight is firmly positioned on the real issues - 26 years of failure and no end in sight , then there’s no real thing to debate .
But that’s not what you will reply with . It will be some garbage about the magpies and HBG , a the conversation will shift again . So irritating
Last edited:
Bus 2 Terrigal Lagoon
Active member
...or... genius move to lock down the next great coach in the NRL.
In the wake of last December’s fun n games, this forum was awash with alarmist nonsense about our season having been hijacked and the players will be irreparably affected by the drama. How we were going to hell in a hand basket 🥴
Yet here we are - a couple of months on .... I have not seen a more upbeat playing group than the current team who are all 100% behind the coach. Two good wins in the trials and it’s onwards & upwards 👍
Benji is a humble man so his comments that he didn’t deserve the extension show the class of the guy,
Time will tell, but I reckon HBG’s decision to lock down the coach long term will prove to be a master stroke.
cochise
Well-known member
A coach that has no desire to coach elsewhere and was widely regarded as a poor coach. There was no reason to extend Benji at that time. I am a huge Benji fan and believe he will be a great coach.
The extension was to calm player unrest over the board room dramas. Same reason the clauses are still in Luai's contract despite being heavily rumoured before the drama.
Bus 2 Terrigal Lagoon
Active member
The club wasn’t blown up.
In fact I can’t recall a more positive vibe heading into a new season.
Go back and listen to your chat with Mielekamp.
The place is humming !!!
Bus 2 Terrigal Lagoon
Active member
So it was a good decision
cochise
Well-known member
No, because the decision did not need to be made now.
Bus 2 Terrigal Lagoon
Active member
You seem to be confusing - having an alternate view to yours, with “sowing division”.
I guess you’d prefer the forum to be an echo chamber.
As someone who doesn’t agree with those who wanted to storm Wests Ashfield and overthrow the club’s hierarchy - to now be accused of sowing division - Mildly amusing 🤣
426Tlgerland
Well-known member
Our current CEO is on trial , HBG run the joint so he will spin what ever he is instructed other wise he could be shown the door , extending Benji was a reaction due to the way December’s blow up panned out , media talk of players looking to leave if the coach go moved on , Luai speaking direct to the board that’s why they did it , yes 2 good results in the trials , playing group behind the coach100% , but having PVL having to get involved showed how much the league was fed up with the way HBG operated , once PVL got involved sacked board members and chair all offered jobs back , remember they didn’t walk they were sacked by HBG , the people backing HBG all the time need to look at facts and take of your rose glasses , PVL got involved and now nothing from HBG at all , why you may ask , well I say PVL warned them that if it kept up it would get messy and those debenture holders would be in a spot of bother , just my opinion ,
Jolls
Well-known member
The problem I see in this thread is that we (the royal we) are all symptoms of the major issue the club has. Now it is not as simple as making one change and fixing the joint - the issue is complex with a number of factors at play: self interest; defence of, and links to the foundation clubs; ownership issues; and one upmanship (which is endemic). None of those are the real issue at the club though, and despite HBG's poor performance as the owners, they are also only part of the problem.
Most of the "symptoms" we see are protectionist measures: Balmain vs Wests vs Wests Tigers vs HBG. The cause is that we (Wests Tigers) have never progressing our mindset and structue from a joint venture to a unified entity. That small change in attitude and outlook is the key to success.
Until that shift happens there will be no change - animosity will continue to exist and petty arguments over the number of magpies on the jumper and the colour of the home strip will forever dominate common sense.
The problem isn’t Balmain; it isn’t Wests; it isn't the 90% ownership model. We have fared significantly better than the Northern Eagles and in my view (due to the debenture system) we are probably a little behind St George Illawarra (although I understand that significant infighting still exists) as an NRL JV.
I personally don't think the "division will naturally die out is valid". It may be the case - but can we really afford another 25 years of Wests v Balmain v WestsTigers V HBG?
We don't need to change the ownership structure or get bought out bring about success - in fact I think it would be counter productive as "Wests Ashfield" would circle the wagons in defence of "their" property.
There really isn't that much required, in my view, to turn it around. There is no use trying to address the rusted ons from any of the self interested groups - what is required is the the grown ups to sit in a room and realise that the issue at the heart of the matter is that 25 years on we are still trying to operate as a joint venture instead of a single entity - Wests Tigers.
The action required from HBG is symbolic in the first instance - it simply neeeds to anounce the death of the joint venture and that we are now one unified club. Legally that is not quite true as shareholder representation at HBG is required - but at WT level we should be focussed only on delivering Wests Tigers results.
This would finally address the matter. HBG ownership does not need to change and junior competitions remain the same. HBG does need to internally address the incongruency between the community clubs focus and Wests Tigers but that is work for down the track. The mindset change is all that is initially required as the consitution already caters for the "at odds" issue of Community Clubs and Rugby League.
This is how elite clubs run.
There would be a need, in due course, to align the boards and review to constitution to ensure that the foundation club's heritages and junior systems are protected. This could easily be wrapped up in a HBG led governance review.
The key though, is that the Wests Tigers board is empowered to make the decisions that best support Wests Tigers under a clear set of financial and decsion making delegations. At the administrative (board level), where we are talkng strategy and $, there is no need for Balmain or Wests representation. This should be retained at the ownership (HBG) level with constitutional protection/by laws to prevent interference with the WT board.
I envisage a board made up of suitably qualified personnel with a liaison representative from HBG. There should be no factional ties at this level in the organisation. Wests MAgpies and Balmain Junior representation should be part of the football department.
Richo was heading in this direction, but clearly his bulldozing style scared the horses. Was it self interest? Maybe. Was it Richo talking out of school and making deals behind the boards back? Maybe. But we will never know so what is the point of arguing about it.
The right thing for us to be doing is getting on board the united club train and convincing our peers, our mates and the membership of HBG that we are better off all rowing in the same direction.
My gut feel is that HBG felt change was forced on them last time - "we" need to have them come to the realisation that unity is necessary and for them to make the change of their own volition.
Of course HBG will have an opinion too - we need to get a foot in the door and start the discussion.
Most of the "symptoms" we see are protectionist measures: Balmain vs Wests vs Wests Tigers vs HBG. The cause is that we (Wests Tigers) have never progressing our mindset and structue from a joint venture to a unified entity. That small change in attitude and outlook is the key to success.
Until that shift happens there will be no change - animosity will continue to exist and petty arguments over the number of magpies on the jumper and the colour of the home strip will forever dominate common sense.
The problem isn’t Balmain; it isn’t Wests; it isn't the 90% ownership model. We have fared significantly better than the Northern Eagles and in my view (due to the debenture system) we are probably a little behind St George Illawarra (although I understand that significant infighting still exists) as an NRL JV.
I personally don't think the "division will naturally die out is valid". It may be the case - but can we really afford another 25 years of Wests v Balmain v WestsTigers V HBG?
We don't need to change the ownership structure or get bought out bring about success - in fact I think it would be counter productive as "Wests Ashfield" would circle the wagons in defence of "their" property.
There really isn't that much required, in my view, to turn it around. There is no use trying to address the rusted ons from any of the self interested groups - what is required is the the grown ups to sit in a room and realise that the issue at the heart of the matter is that 25 years on we are still trying to operate as a joint venture instead of a single entity - Wests Tigers.
The action required from HBG is symbolic in the first instance - it simply neeeds to anounce the death of the joint venture and that we are now one unified club. Legally that is not quite true as shareholder representation at HBG is required - but at WT level we should be focussed only on delivering Wests Tigers results.
This would finally address the matter. HBG ownership does not need to change and junior competitions remain the same. HBG does need to internally address the incongruency between the community clubs focus and Wests Tigers but that is work for down the track. The mindset change is all that is initially required as the consitution already caters for the "at odds" issue of Community Clubs and Rugby League.
This is how elite clubs run.
There would be a need, in due course, to align the boards and review to constitution to ensure that the foundation club's heritages and junior systems are protected. This could easily be wrapped up in a HBG led governance review.
The key though, is that the Wests Tigers board is empowered to make the decisions that best support Wests Tigers under a clear set of financial and decsion making delegations. At the administrative (board level), where we are talkng strategy and $, there is no need for Balmain or Wests representation. This should be retained at the ownership (HBG) level with constitutional protection/by laws to prevent interference with the WT board.
I envisage a board made up of suitably qualified personnel with a liaison representative from HBG. There should be no factional ties at this level in the organisation. Wests MAgpies and Balmain Junior representation should be part of the football department.
Richo was heading in this direction, but clearly his bulldozing style scared the horses. Was it self interest? Maybe. Was it Richo talking out of school and making deals behind the boards back? Maybe. But we will never know so what is the point of arguing about it.
The right thing for us to be doing is getting on board the united club train and convincing our peers, our mates and the membership of HBG that we are better off all rowing in the same direction.
My gut feel is that HBG felt change was forced on them last time - "we" need to have them come to the realisation that unity is necessary and for them to make the change of their own volition.
Of course HBG will have an opinion too - we need to get a foot in the door and start the discussion.
tigertragic
Well-known member
All that was needed was for the independent Wests Tigers board to be allowed to continue to act in the best interests of Wests Tigers.
That was blown up
Jolls
Well-known member
That is 100% true - but painting HBG as the enemy isn't going to solve the situation, it will have them defending their position. We need the HBG directors (debenture holders) to respond to reputational and commercial pressure - this can be pushed externally but really needs to come from within the organisation.
As a newly minted WA/HBG member I intend to lobby internally for unity of purpose - I tust that there are other WA/HBG that will start pushing the barrow as well.
Nobody was doing that ! Thats absolute hyperbole if I’ve ever seen it . They used their only avenue for protest to emphasise a point .
There’s zero constitutional way for people to affect change in the club. There’s no way for opposing ticket to run . That ticket could have the smartest brains in the world with a bunch of money and contacts , and there’s no way for that to happen . Zero !
Like I said … constant spin and shifting the narrative . The point of my previous post was about people universally wanting a successful football club ; and you shift it to be about the individuals.
Like i said .. because they represent what you and yours are , or you associate yourself with that .
It’s the same thought ideology of why wives stay with convicted murderers , heinous people etc.
they be a clown , but they’re my clown . I just don’t get it …. And I never will .
And the way you’re saying “storming the castle” as if the fanbase is fickle and not absolutely patient is annoying .
For the first time since I can remember people are actually pointing the spotlight on the real issues . The wrong people making the wrong decisions.
And the fact your see it as some slight on yourself … just proves how screwed your ideology is .. For the billionth time . If the club had found success and sustained it both off the field and on the field, I’d be pro HBG with you . Eg. We were like the broncos who had 2 lean years and the whole place was gonna get burnt to the ground , fans were gonna abandon the team etc. it was pathetic .
But That’s not the wests tigers fanbase. We have been the opposite , quick to defend and close shop around anyone critical of the club , and its ownership . Until now . And it’s not knee jerk and it’s not mob mentality . It’s 26 years of failure with a few years in the middle of infield success in spite of the failure .
Our owners of our club . Both wests and Balmain have failed us . They’ve failed you . They’ve failed me . They’ve failed our kids . The fact this doesn’t upset you…. Well I dunno. It upsets me . Because I genuinely love the wests tigers . Both sides of it .
tigertragic
Well-known member
After 10-15 years of HBG debenture closed shop incompetence I wish you well.
Jolls
Well-known member
It has to start somewhere and it sin't going to happen overnight. I know Shaun is pusing for board alignment at his level so if the message is coming form several directions it could get up.
426Tlgerland
Well-known member
Do you think the debenture holders will ever give up on that position and change it , take away that power they have , I say o chance , until that is gone and certain people loose protection nothing will change , we need to be able to vote as members just like normal clubs , these folks on the current board can still run for spots but they know they most likely won’t be selected as there would be loads of new members joining just like Jolls has just done , also on voting a club could have 10 thousand members and on the vote night only 1500 have voted , most patrons don’t vote , they just see their mates , eat , drink , play pokies , I was a director for years at a club and when elections were on we would put on a free feed , basic stuff , and hope our members rocked up but most times it was a small amount , and voting numbers were always low compared to the actual amount of members , all clubs know this , so if we could vote I would think an increase in members would happen and voting numbers would go up .in the case of Wests Ashfield and Wests Tigers boards
Last edited:
426Tlgerland
Well-known member
Could be a good thing mate but beware , if people on boards don’t like what your doing ,a club ban could be on the cards 😂
weststigers
Well-known member
Where HBG were the majority on the WT board in the past...
Could someone list their past achievements? Just to be fair and objective to HBG leadership and stewardship.
We seem to be focusing on one decision they made which has yet to play out in its entirety. Even Don Bradman got the occasional duck, so let's look at the whole picture.
Happy to hear from @Bus 2 Terrigal Lagoon @The Chad and any other supporters and defenders of this most recent change.
Could someone list their past achievements? Just to be fair and objective to HBG leadership and stewardship.
We seem to be focusing on one decision they made which has yet to play out in its entirety. Even Don Bradman got the occasional duck, so let's look at the whole picture.
Happy to hear from @Bus 2 Terrigal Lagoon @The Chad and any other supporters and defenders of this most recent change.
Jolls
Well-known member
Wouldn't have an effect on me I'm 281 km away so not likely to be dropping in for a cold ale on the way hime form work!👍👍👍
