Lee & JP finally lose the confidence of the Board??

Todd Packer said:
The coach thinks it's disruptive.
The player managers think it's disruptive.
The player manager that's reported to be refusing to deal with the club because of what's going on thinks it's disruptive.
The fact is that we will be running around with a team in 2024 that is less than it could be because of what you have instigated.
The thing I know is that you'll tell yourself it would've happened anyway.
Click to expand...
Good God, do you actually ever read what you type before hitting post? This is, by far, one is the dumbest things ever written on this forum, by anyone. Ever.

Is it a bit disruptive? Sure, change always is, especially for those who lose their jobs. But this is all extremely necessary change. The board must go. The chairman must step down. The CEO must be replaced.

There is no doubt here. History and performance is there for all to see. The incompetence of every single member of the board is undeniable. They don't know what they're doing, and that's not a surprise given they've all achieved very little in business in the big scheme of things. They are all small businesspeople. They have no merit to be on the board of a large company, no relevant skills or experience making decisions for an organisation our size. The club fails every year because these are the people coming up with the blueprints for the club's future. They make the decisions. They leak info to the press.

The changes going on are also happening whilst almost the entire club is on holidays. It will have very little impact on Benji, and no impact on agents etc. Anything which suggests it is is a smokescreen from someone worried for their own job.

Everyone in the media, the players, pundits have been saying for a long time that the problems at the club start at the top. It's been that way for a long time and I have little doubt this feedback is apparent from the review. Change is absolutely necessary if we ever want the club to change.

Anyone opposed to changes at the board and CEO level rejects someone that wants the club to fail.
 
Last edited:
Needaname said:
Yep. That’s the bit I can’t get. You’re either in or you’re out. You can’t be both or say your one thing and do the other.
Click to expand...
He may not be part of the team deciding who we should and shouldn't target but he definitely is part of the negotiations the club has with incoming players. We know this for a fact, there are numerous photos of him in meetings with players and agents. He even drove to meet Latrell when we were pursuing him.

What part he plays now with Fulton and Benji running the football department remains to be seen.
 
So do these changes to the Board potentially involve changes to its membership, structure and the devolution of authority eg all recruitment to the GM of Football? I am asking because changes have been mentioned any number of times on this thread but with little detail.
 
pawsandclaws1 said:
So do these changes to the Board potentially involve changes to its membership, structure and the devolution of authority eg all recruitment to the GM of Football? I am asking because changes have been mentioned any number of times on this thread but with little detail.
Click to expand...
I would suggest that only the board can ok these changes. The same board that are potentially the ones found to be incompetent from this review. I very much doubt that they will get a negative response as they have employed this bloke and I dare say sit in the same box on game day with him drinking piss. Can you imagine doing a review on your boss (or someone that has hired you) and telling him/ her they are shit. Its laughable.
 
tigertuff said:
I would suggest that only the board can ok these changes. The same board that are potentially the ones found to be incompetent from this review. I very much doubt that they will get a negative response as they have employed this bloke and I dare say sit in the same box on game day with him drinking piss. Can you imagine doing a review on your boss (or someone that has hired you) and telling him/ her they are shit. Its laughable.
Click to expand...
It's pretty clear to anyone who's walked the earth for a while what's gone on here.
A board member or maybe a couple of board members who have a grudge against certain people (You've seen the main suspect named in the media last week) have latched on to the bogus petition like manna from heaven.
It was a gift from god dropped in their laps and they've strung along podcasters, media types and supporters with actual good intentions.
The results were in before the race started. In racing parlance it's a "boatie".
 
tigertuff said:
I would suggest that only the board can ok these changes. The same board that are potentially the ones found to be incompetent from this review. I very much doubt that they will get a negative response as they have employed this bloke and I dare say sit in the same box on game day with him drinking piss. Can you imagine doing a review on your boss (or someone that has hired you) and telling him/ her they are shit. Its laughable.
Click to expand...
Do you think Barnier is getting paid to do the review?
I thought he was doing it FOC.
 
twentyforty said:
Do you think Barnier is getting paid to do the review?
I thought he was doing it FOC.
Click to expand...
I doesn't matter if he is paid or not. I feel there is a conflict of interest there. Not doubting his skills and ability to do the job just that he more than likely spends time with and has some sort of relationship with the same people he is auditing. It just doesn't look right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 472 (members: 2, guests: 470)
Back
Top