Infighting has Wests on the brink

AmericanHistoryX

Well-known member
The Wests Tigers on Tuesday night descended into a state of civil war with the Balmain side of the joint venture accusing the Magpies of "betrayal of trust and an indication of disrespect".

Balmain chairman Leslie Glen issued a blistering response to revelations in Fairfax Media that powerful stakeholder Wests Ashfield wants control of the Wests Tigers board in exchange for saving the club from insolvency.

As reported, the joint venture requires an urgent cash injection of $1 million to save it from financial collapse – a fact the NRL mysteriously wanted to ignore.

Balmain directors met on Tuesday night to discuss how to respond to Wests' proposal, under which the Magpies would gain an additional director on the board and the chairmanship for three years. But the appearance of the story in Fairfax Media – as well as comments from Wests chairman Mike Bailey – has outraged Balmain, and the joint venture's future is shrouded in uncertainty.

"Wests made an offer to Balmain Tigers recently, as outlined in the Herald article, which was confidential and which was to be considered by the Balmain Tigers board this evening [Tuesday]," Glen said. "The leaking of that offer and the comments by Mike Bailey is seen by me, at least, as a betrayal of trust and an indication of disrespect from our partners at Wests Ashfield.

"Balmain Tigers has a history of loyalty and honour in its dealings with all those with whom it has ties. We supported the formation of the ARL Commission and respect its authority and its charter to develop rugby league and foster the links between sport and the community. We recognise that corporate governance is a fact of life in our present-day economy."

While Wests wants control of the Tigers, Balmain wants to see more independent directors installed – something outlined in a report commissioned by the NRL earlier this year. It is understood the ARL Commission would only consider handing over additional funding to save the Tigers if they agreed to change their structure to a more independent model to stop the incessant infighting.

"We are pleased to co-operate with [NRL chief executive] Dave Smith, who has provided financial assistance to the NRL clubs that have made the game so popular," Glen said. "We need further financial support in order to continue this work now, it is true, but we believe we must strive to become independent as quickly as possible in order to become resilient and worthy of our heritage. Staying moribund, as Wests appear to desire, is not part of our ambition. Independent members of our Wests Tigers board who can offer us innovation and ideas are welcomed, not shunned. Balmain doesn't want to keep the same old people to continue warming seats on the Wests Tigers' Board (including myself). The Balmain Tigers' board welcomes change which will lead to a stronger Wests Tigers in the future."

Smith refused to elaborate on whether the NRL would financially assist the Tigers.

"I've met with the Wests Tigers board . . . but I am not going to go into the details of those discussions," he said. "We are working with all our clubs to make sure they are meeting those aims and that there is a five-year planning horizon. The financial accountability that is being built across the game will play an important role in that going forward."

The Wests Tigers board is due to meet on Thursday week, when the coaching structure for next season will be determined.
\
\
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/league-news/claws-are-out-infighting-has-joint-venture-on-the-brink-20130820-2s9bf.html#ixzz2cY9A6sq1
 
Bigger rabble then Parra.

Congratulations to all the truly worthless [This word has been automatically removed]wits involved
 
While Wests wants control of the Tigers, Balmain wants to see more independent directors installed – something outlined in a report commissioned by the NRL earlier this year. It is understood the ARL Commission would only consider handing over additional funding to save the Tigers if they agreed to change their structure to a more independent model to stop the incessant infighting.

Seems pretty obvious that an independent board is essential. If this is accurate, Wests need to do what's best for the club, not for them.
 
mor·i·bund
/ˈmôrəˌbənd/
Adjective
>
(of a person) At the point of death.
(of a thing) In terminal decline; lacking vitality or vigor.

I needed to look it up….probably save a few others from having to :wink:
 
As an original Western Suburbs Magpies supporter the current infighting is disappointing.

If Wests are putting in the majority of the funding ATM I can understand why they want more control of the board. If it was Balmain who were putting up most of the funding then I would expect Balmain to have more control of the board….it just seems logical.

In saying all of that though both clubs came together to create ONE CLUB under the NRL banner so common sense needs to prevail. There really is no more Balmain Tigers or Wests Magpies.....we all support one team "WESTS TIGERS".

I do believe we need more independant directors to stop this rubbish continually raising its head.....otherwise we will both go the way of a NEWTOWN or NORTH SYDNEY.

We are either UNITED or we fall.
 
@smeghead said:
Bigger rabble then Parra.

Congratulations to all the truly worthless [This word has been automatically removed]wits involved

Couldn't agree more

_Posted using RoarFEED 2013_
 
@Tigerdave said:
While Wests wants control of the Tigers, Balmain wants to see more independent directors installed – something outlined in a report commissioned by the NRL earlier this year. It is understood the ARL Commission would only consider handing over additional funding to save the Tigers if they agreed to change their structure to a more independent model to stop the incessant infighting.

Seems pretty obvious that an independent board is essential. If this is accurate, Wests need to do what's best for the club, not for them.

Do you think Wests wanting control, leadership, making firm decisions not wishy washy 50/50 decisions is them wanting whats best for them, or Wests Tigers?

I see their point of view….it CAN be whats best for WTs.

Do Balmain now only want the NRL in because they DONT want Wests to have control?
How long can that be sustained?
 
@innsaneink said:
@Tigerdave said:
While Wests wants control of the Tigers, Balmain wants to see more independent directors installed – something outlined in a report commissioned by the NRL earlier this year. It is understood the ARL Commission would only consider handing over additional funding to save the Tigers if they agreed to change their structure to a more independent model to stop the incessant infighting.

Seems pretty obvious that an independent board is essential. If this is accurate, Wests need to do what's best for the club, not for them.

Do you think Wests wanting control, leadership, making firm decisions not wishy washy 50/50 decisions is them wanting whats best for them, or Wests Tigers?

I see their point of view….it CAN be whats best for WTs.

Do Balmain now only want the NRL in because they DONT want Wests to have control?
How long can that be sustained?

It *could* be what's best, but I would expect an independent board would be better. We need to move forward and I think an independent board is the way to go.

It's certainly possible that Balmain are just doing this so Wests won't have control, but regardless of their motives I think the only way to finally rid ourselves of in-fighting is an independent board.
 
@innsaneink said:
Do you think Wests wanting control, leadership, making firm decisions not wishy washy 50/50 decisions is them wanting whats best for them, or Wests Tigers?

I see their point of view….it CAN be whats best for WTs.

Do Balmain now only want the NRL in because they DONT want Wests to have control?
How long can that be sustained?

Exactly. Wests Ashfield has been in business for close to 60 years, they must have been doing something right to last that long. Their capital is tied to the success of Wests Tigers…....why would they not want the best for Wests Tigers?

I don't understand the drive for "independent" directors. The club could always get external consultants to provide independent views of the direction of the business. Further, if the NRL wants to push this type of structure, then **ALL** NRL clubs should have independent directors.
 
Have the entre board step down next Thursday. Have the NRL appoint a new independent board, with a chosen representative from Balmain and Wests with no previous experience as a board member with Balmain, Wests or WT. Enough for the foundation clubs to get their views across but decisions to be made by independent people on what's best for the club.

7 man board, 5 independent, 1 Balmain, 1 Wests.

NRL can stump the cash to keep us going in the short term.

It makes too much sense not to happen. Neither Balmain or Wests should have control of the board anymore so make the decision and stand down after the coaching review is complete.
 
I think we need a few independant members of the board to truly be a efficient board.

I think the current board members are a pathetic joke for the reasons I spelt out in the thread yesterday and more.

Wests Ashfield should have a greater say if they contribute the bulk of capital investment but every current board member should be sacked and stamped never again for their history of disgraceful infighting and self serving toadyism
 
I donot see a problem with having some balamin or wests representatives on the board but agree we also need a mix of some independants…..ie

3 independant
2 Balmain
2 Wests.
 
50/50 pretty much for fourteen years given us division and two steps forward, three steps back mentality

60/40 or whatever = decisions, not divisions (quote black n white) - decisions, no fighting - like it or lump it

wether thats with independants included I dont mind…as lone as we move forawrd
 
Money talks so Wests should have the greater day at board level… As long ad their charter is Wests Tigers I'm ok with that... And I'm originally from the balmain side

_Posted using RoarFEED 2013_
 
Though I sometimes wonder about independant directors.

Would they be nothing more than an NRL appointed public servant….happy to merely keep the peace, without any real ambition or desire....keep the club afloat mid table.

Without a vested interest or heartfelt desire...how can you really put everything into a role which would be something youve been told to do
 
@innsaneink said:
Without a vested interest or heartfelt desire…how can you really put everything into a role which would be something youve been told to do

Further, why would stakeholder with a vested interest hand over decision making power to an "independent" party not appointed by themselves?

If there are issues with the business strategy, then external advice and expertise is required, not independent board members.
 
That is a concern but not as concerning as our current situation where the directors merely jostle for what's best for two non existent teams.

I would hope and believe there are people willing to come in to the job at the NRL's behest whose sole desire is the growth of the game and therefor success of the club
 
@Gary Bakerloo said:
@innsaneink said:
Without a vested interest or heartfelt desire…how can you really put everything into a role which would be something youve been told to do

Further, why would stakeholder with a vested interest hand over decision making power to an "independent" party not appointed by themselves?

If there are issues with the business strategy, then external advice and expertise is required, not independent board members.

Because they are a minor contributor in comparison?
 

Latest posts

Staff online

Back
Top