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

[The Fresh Oil]

So if the review concludes that the board are crap what happens. Sorry for asking another unanswerable question.

I think you’re looking at it wrong. Imo.

If the review finds glaring issues in the board structures or performance, it gives them (the board) a chance to address these issues. Doesn’t necessarily mean everyone is fired or major changes.

You have to cut through the BS a lot of the anti-review nut jobs post on here. They are against any change purely for non-wt reasons.

 

[innsaneink]

'More than likely' 🤣

Keep making shit up

 

[innsaneink]

It does

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.

It does matter it shows how void of the facts of the matter you are on this

 

[tigertuff]

I think you’re looking at it wrong. Imo.

If the review finds glaring issues in the board structures or performance, it gives them (the board) a chance to address these issues. Doesn’t necessarily mean everyone is fired or major changes.

You have to cut through the BS a lot of the anti-review nut jobs post on here. They are against any change purely for non-wt reasons.

I am all for a review and more importantly, change at the Tigers. The only question I ask is that if there are issues with the board structure or members of that board, they are the only ones that can initiate the changes. It might mean they are sacking or removing themselves from their positions. I can't really see that happening. Hope I am wrong though.

 

[tigertuff]

It does
It does matter it shows how void of the facts of the matter you are on this

I don't claim to know the facts mate. I'm just a dumb supporter waving his flag hoping for the best outcome for our club. I just find the process a bit on the nose and can't really trust the process. Hope I am wrong.

 

[Magpie_Magic]

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 get little in business in their lives. 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.

This isn't true.

J Dorahy, Lee and Rick Wayde have all managed big businesses and sporting organisations.

How many clubs have entie boards made up of CEOs and board members of large companies. Not many

Penrith is chaired by Greg Alexander for eg.

Evif the whole board was replaced where would we find suitable candidates who would want what is largely an hounary position.

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.

However any negotiations that have begun are now affected by the media involvement in this.

Everyone in the media, the players, pundits have been saying for a bday 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.

Changes at Chair and board level have already been occurring and will continue to occur.

 

[pawsandclaws1]

I don't claim to know the facts mate. I'm just a dumb supporter waving his flag hoping for the best outcome for our club. I just find the process a bit on the nose and can't really trust the process. Hope I am wrong.

As we know, conflicts of interest can be real, apparent or perceived. What you stated earlier is perfectly reasonable and like you I am a supporter of a review.

 

[Magpie_Magic]

As we know, conflicts of interest can be real, apparent or perceived. What you stated earlier is perfectly reasonable and like you I am a supporter of a review.

The review isn't the problem.

It's the process of arriving at one. Dirty laundry must be kept in house.

The petitions organisers should, with their contacts at the club went straight to the club to suggest a review. More than likely they would have received an affirmative response. They could then have even threatened a petition asking for one if turned away.

We can't have a club qualifying to fan based groups in this way. This sets a precedent that if things are no good petitions can be organised and the club can be controlled to a degree from the outside.

If the media and others are in the shadows this is a very negative development for our club.

 

[pawsandclaws1]

The review isn't the problem.

It's the process of arriving at one. Dirty laundry must be kept in house.

The petitions organisers should, with their contacts at the club went straight to the club to suggest a review. More than likely they would have received an affirmative response. They could then have even threatened a petition asking for one.

If the media and others are in the shadows this is a very negative development for our club.

Yes, the highlighted text hits hard. We don't need this in the media.

 

[tony soprano]

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".

Thinking it's to get a "big fish" like John Coates in control there.

 

[balmain boy]

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".

Tony has to go too. All of them except Dorahy have to go. If they don't voluntarily we have to harass the crap out of them until it's impossible for them to ignore us.

And this was the problem with the petition, it simply asked for a review. When what's required is obvious, the petition needed to demand that the board stood down. They are the centre of everything that's awful about this club. The toxic naivety and complacency and complete lack of strategic thinking. That's what sets us apart as the worst club in the NRL.

Why wasn't the review undertaken by someone independent of the club? How many of them are likely to fall on their swords? The negligence is extraordinary. If the board reported to anyone they would have been fired. That's why the current structure is untenable.

There is no accountability at the club, and it shows in everything we do. It must start, and at the top.

 

[balmain boy]

The review isn't the problem.

It's the process of arriving at one. Dirty laundry must be kept in house.

The petitions organisers should, with their contacts at the club went straight to the club to suggest a review. More than likely they would have received an affirmative response. They could then have even threatened a petition asking for one if turned away.

We can't have a club qualifying to fan based groups in this way. This sets a precedent that if things are good petitions can be organised and the club can be controlled to a degree from the outside.

If the media and others are in the shadows this is a very negative development for our club.

What rubbish.

The only way to make change at the board level is through a very vocal, public campaign. With pressure hounding them constantly, ridiculing them. Embarrassing them.

 

[Magpie_Magic]

Sadly, it seems cochise and Joel Helmes have been on this forum and possibly had a chance to look at my post #694. where I put a question to them regarding media and outside involvement.

Perhaps they have not had time to formulate a response. Perhaps they have chosen not to reply.....fair enough.

Any actions they may have taken with or without media involvement or outside contacts are within their rights. Never met the guys but I'm sure they are genuine and have the clubs best interests at heart. Trouble is more powerful actors can now gain leverage.

But if there is media or other contacts it paints the process in a different light with sad consequences for our club.

 

[balmain boy]

This isn't true.

J Dorahy, Lee and Rick Wayde have all managed big businesses and sporting organisations.

How many clubs have entie boards made up of CEOs and board members of large companies. Not many

Penrith is chaired by Greg Alexander for eg.

Evif the whole board was replaced where would we find suitable candidates who would want what is largely an hounary position.

However any negotiations that have begun are now affected by the media involvement in this.

Changes at Chair and board level have already been occurring and will continue to occur.

Lee does head up a large organisation, yes. Albeit he does not have the personality required to be a leader. How the board failed to see this i don't know. I'm not saying the whole board needs to be made up of CEOs, but people who have held positions of power with skills and experience making decisions for large organisations. People who have a demonstrated ability to plan strategically, implement the plan and achieved sustained success as a result. Those are the people we need on the board.
There would be hundreds of people out there with these skills who would volunteer for the board, if such a position was ever advertised like a job. Heck Anthony Field would be a much better Director than the muppets we've currently got. He turned a small rock band into one of the best known children's entertainment groups of all time, globally. How does that compare to being a painter? A real estate agent? A former rock musician..?

 

[Magpie_Magic]

Lee does head up a large organisation, yes. Albeit he does not have the personality required to be a leader. How the board failed to see this i don't know. I'm not saying the whole board needs to be made up of CEOs, but people who have held positions of power with skills and experience making decisions for large organisations. People who have a demonstrated ability to plan strategically, implement the plan and achieved sustained success as a result. Those are the people we need on the board.
There would be hundreds of people out there with these skills who would volunteer for the board, if such a position was ever advertised like a job. Heck Anthony Field would be a better Director than the muppets we've currently got. A painter? A real estate agent? A former rock musician..?

It's a subjective.

But most RL boards are staffed by largely insignificant people.

Suitable candidates with sporting experience and possible WT interest would be rather thin on the ground.

 

[Needaname]

Far out man, can we petition a review of the contributors of the forum, I seriously questioning their qualifications to be able to post anything of value into these discussions.

 

[balmain boy]

It's a subjective.

But most RL boards are staffed by largely insignificant people.

Suitable candidates with sporting experience and possible WT interest would be rather thin on the ground.

It's about the skills that they possess that they can bring to the WT. They don't have to be famous, though having 1-2 well known members add credibility. People who have achieved sustained success and have a connection to the community, a passion for footy is preferable but not mandatory for all board members, though some on the board should definitely have footy knowledge.

 

[The Fresh Oil]

I am all for a review and more importantly, change at the Tigers. The only question I ask is that if there are issues with the board structure or members of that board, they are the only ones that can initiate the changes. It might mean they are sacking or removing themselves from their positions. I can't really see that happening. Hope I am wrong though.

My opinion again ( no insight at all) it would be really hard to hide from or not address in some way, even at board level once the results are public. The board may be untouchable within the HBG but the NRL ( I assume) would also like to see the results. The license the NRL grants must come with some caveats.

 

[The Fresh Oil]

Sadly, it seems cochise and Joel Helmes have been on this forum and possibly had a chance to look at my post #694. where I put a question to them regarding media and outside involvement.

Perhaps they have not had time to formulate a response. Perhaps they have chosen not to reply.....fair enough.

Any actions they may have taken with or without media involvement or outside contacts are within their rights. Never met the guys but I'm sure they are genuine and have the clubs best interests at heart. Trouble is more powerful actors can now gain leverage.

But if there is media or other contacts it paints the process in a different light with sad consequences for our club.

Mate, sorry to break it to you but you come across as a tin foil hat wearing nut bag. I’m guessing the guys read your question, if they even bothered finish reading it probably dismissed it straight away. Much the same way you quickly walk past and not make eye contact with the crackhead at the train station yelling about 5g in the vaccine.

You’re this websites crackhead. I engage with you cause I find it funny.

 

[colinbh]

Far out man, can we petition a review of the contributors of the forum, I seriously questioning their qualifications to be able to post anything of value into these discussions.

Me too.