Lee Hagipantelis

The corporate structure is all wrong.

I don’t believe it is wise to have the chairman and the major sponsor as one entity. I think it is a conflict of interest as the club cannot remove the chairman without foregoing corporate sponsorship.

Hagipantelis has no accountability due to his leverage on the club and that should never be the case.
 
No members vote means we have what we have , I would expect if you could vote both Lee and Justin may well see the front door close behind them and I think there would have been a different coach in control , again only if you could become a member and vote , the shot board would also be long gone
 
Roar_Power said:
Lee brings a huge ego which I think clouds his judgment way too often.
Click to expand...
Most successful people have an ego, so that’s not new.
Possibly clouds his judgment, like hiring Fulton without talking to Sheens or any of the coaching team. Like getting rid of McDonnell when it was part of the original Sheens deal that he came back. Like clinging on to Pascoe purely for financial results.
We’re a footy club and they thrive on winning don’t they ?
If I didn’t know a lot about the Tigers I’d say Lee was making Sheens position untenable, and will only end up one way. Maybe that’s the idea, maybe not.
But if it is, why, ??
 
Halbrowne61 said:
Most successful people have an ego, so that’s not new.
Possibly clouds his judgment, like hiring Fulton without talking to Sheens or any of the coaching team. Like getting rid of McDonnell when it was part of the original Sheens deal that he came back. Like clinging on to Pascoe purely for financial results.
We’re a footy club and they thrive on winning don’t they ?
If I didn’t know a lot about the Tigers I’d say Lee was making Sheens position untenable, and will only end up one way. Maybe that’s the idea, maybe not.
But if it is, why, ??
Click to expand...
I think you've hit the nail on the head. It's hard to see it as anything other than an effort to squeeze Sheens out.

For a number of years, the chair(s) and CEO of the club have worked overtime to spin good PR in the media. Stories about how we're making a profit, memberships are through the roof, even a documentary.

Of course PR is part of running a modern day club but one can't help but think they've also been guilty of putting up a smokescreen to hide chronic under performance where it matters.

However, this is where (for me at least) it gets interesting.

Tim Sheens is extremely well connected in the media and the sport and isn't the kind of guy to toe the line. If (hypothetically) Sheens thought the CEO and chair were clueless clowns, he wouldn't be holding back in private conversations with trusted journos.

So, I see this as a power play at the top of the club between the chair/CEO and whatever the Tim Sheens factions are on the board. It's hard to see how both parties will be at the club in the long term.
 
Yep definite power play . They want to push sheens out as they rather the club be a basket case then lose their power . They are just like politicians they care for power not the office they serve

Have a look at the bottom 3 teams they all share common trait . Power hungry front office .
Dragons same dinosaurs in charge
Bulldogs past 7 years or so instability in board with factions
Tigers enough said
 
Luke Brooks #1043 Fan said:
View attachment 5773

The man lost me after this incident. Think that day was the worst day in the history of our club.
Click to expand...
The Tommy day saga was bad. I just want to understand what gets you here?

Is it the "new" jersey to remember Tommy? Should Lee have held a magpie jersey. Totally agreed. Infact someone else should have held those jerseys of Magpie Lore*.
Yes he is a lawyer but he is at least wearing our club colours.

I mean my biggest problem was not that we were flogged, we were. Nor that we gave up, we did. My biggest problem was not a single player got sent off. We should have been shouting "Cattledog" from the stands.

*wonder what Jason Taylor is doing. **ok that's bad even for my standards**
 
Last edited:
People GIVE UP.

Does anyone still remember the Wests vs Balmain Saga?
The NRL did not have to try and split up the WestsTigers. You had the Balmain and the Magpies members actively trying to do it from within. Nothing else mattered but which animal, Magpie or Tiger came in front.

Then one month they were reminded to renew the coaches contract? *oops forgot about that*.
Then they kinda realised that Sheens probably had his day and fired him a year later.
 
Halbrowne61 said:
Most successful people have an ego, so that’s not new.
Possibly clouds his judgment, like hiring Fulton without talking to Sheens or any of the coaching team. Like getting rid of McDonnell when it was part of the original Sheens deal that he came back. Like clinging on to Pascoe purely for financial results.
We’re a footy club and they thrive on winning don’t they ?
If I didn’t know a lot about the Tigers I’d say Lee was making Sheens position untenable, and will only end up one way. Maybe that’s the idea, maybe not.
But if it is, why, ??
Click to expand...
McDonnel promised Moses if he handled it himself and what he did was play the agents game to get Parra to up their offer .Would you keep him?
 
Bigtom said:
McDonnel promised Moses if he handled it himself and what he did was play the agents game to get Parra to up their offer .Would you keep him?
Click to expand...
That's exactly what I would hope our recruiting head will do.
We can't get Moses, ok pump his tyres and make him ask for a Motza from Parra. Then go hunting for the player Parra can't keep.

Tough world, but that's how it is.
 
crazycat said:
That's exactly what I would hope our recruiting head will do.
We can't get Moses, ok pump his tyres and make him ask for a Motza from Parra. Then go hunting for the player Parra can't keep.

Tough world, but that's how it is.
Click to expand...
Fair point but the only winner from all that was Moses we ‘re still without a halfback
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 1,012 (members: 20, guests: 992)
Back
Top