Taking a wrecking ball to the club! (Recent Media Reports)

[TigerJunior4]

Your embarrassing cochises movement with your posts.

It’s you’re btw.

 

[Magpie_Magic]

It's a bit more elevated than that.

You can apply at the front desk, but it has to be approved by the board at a board meeting. They vet you to be a general member....

I don't know that specific criteria, but would assume they look at how many AGMs you've attended, how often you visit the club, have you ever been cited for anything... You know, doing their due diligence.

I suspect if you are turned down, they must notify you why they have turned you down.

I worked at one club where even a normal member was approved by the board at a board meeting (and the board would check their internal records to check if you have ever visited the club before and been asked to leave for example). This is more common than you know. Some RSL clubs even share "blacklists" of names of people...

Not in my instance.

I just applied for an upgrade after 3 years.

Perhaps, if one has been in trouble with the club they may have the upgrade cancelled.

And obviously in situations like is occurring at the moment safeguards are constitutionally put in place.........the law protects entities this way.

But I haven't heard of this.

But this also can apply to social members if they've caused issues.

In the old days one needed a proposer and someone to second your application back in the late 80s.

Standard club practices,

 

[Magpie_Magic]

It’s you’re btw.

Keep going.

People can see your weak arguments.

 

[Magpie_Magic]

There’s no argument.

You said ‘your embarrassing Cochise.’

It’s you’re as in you are.

Your really helpful to his cause.

 

[TigerJunior4]

Your really helpful to his cause.

Did I touch a nerve there?

You seem a little agitated.

 

[Magpie_Magic]

Did I touch a nerve there?

You seem a little agitated.

Not me.

We'll see you at the HBG AGM..

 

[cdinoz007]

So, we should all just sit back and do nothing? Read the room, it’s about the unification of this fan base. It’s about trying to give people a voice.

Instead of criticising, why not give some solutions?

...ok I'll bite here.

How about this. Instead of being antagonistic towards the HBG, perhaps look into setting up a Supporters Trust and offering to work with the football club.

These are very popular in the UK (ManUtd supporters trust has a quarter of a million members!). I am a member of 2x supporters trusts and are in place for many football, rugby and cricket clubs.

It's never been done here before to my knowledge, but this would give you something to look at instead of ranting and petitioning and could be a groundbreaking achievement

Some sporting organisations allow the supporters trust to present to the board, and sit in on some board members. Some sporting organisations invite the trust to appoint a board member.

A Trust would have a paid for subscription, which simply covers costs of running the Trust, nothing else. Perhaps $20 a year for a personal membership, $200 for a corporate membership.

The Trust would need its own constitution, and by laws, and a board to run it.

The suggestion would be the board made up of a selection of members, but perhaps including a board member of legal standing (and not already involved in sponsorship of the club).

If Wests Tigers saw a formalise supporters group, they would take the supporters groups more seriously and perhaps actually listen.

 

[cdinoz007]

Not in my instance.

I just applied for an upgrade after 3 years.

Perhaps, if one has been in trouble with the club they may have the upgrade cancelled.

And obviously in situations like is occurring at the moment safeguards are constitutionally put in place.........the law protects entities this way.

But I haven't heard of this.

But this also can apply to social members if they've caused issues.

In the old days one needed a proposer and someone to second your application back in the late 80s.

Standard club practices,

Duly Noted.

 

[TigerJunior4]

Not me.

We'll see you at the AGM.

Oh and what AGM would that be?

HBG AGM or am I missing something here?

You’re being quite vague and veiled. Maybe try being more upfront, honest and transparent.

 

[tigermate]

Let's be real, most people have no idea who the Debenture holders are.

Why create disunity between the debenture holders? That's only going to cause more strife at Wests Tigers. You should be asking for harmony.

You haven't forced the HBG to commit to anything. They had already ratified the recommendations in Dec 2023.

Seriously, you won't get "30,000 people outside their board meetings". You want your voices heard? Join HBG and attend the AGM

The Govt will not intervene. There is no question that any wrong doing has occurred at the club, no fraud and no breaking of laws. You don't like their structure.... That's not something the govt can change . It's a perfectly legal structure. The only people who can charge the constitution of HBG are it's board and it's members. They have to want to change.

Tou

...ok I'll bite here.

How about this. Instead of being antagonistic towards the HBG, perhaps look into setting up a Supporters Trust and offering to work with the football club.

These are very popular in the UK (ManUtd supporters trust has a quarter of a million members!). I am a member of 2x supporters trusts and are in place for many football, rugby and cricket clubs.

It's never been done here before to my knowledge, but this would give you something to look at instead of ranting and petitioning and could be a groundbreaking achievement

Some sporting organisations allow the supporters trust to present to the board, and sit in on some board members. Some sporting organisations invite the trust to appoint a board member.

A Trust would have a paid for subscription, which simply covers costs of running the Trust, nothing else. Perhaps $20 a year for a personal membership, $200 for a corporate membership.

The Trust would need its own constitution, and by laws, and a board to run it.

The suggestion would be the board made up of a selection of members, but perhaps including a board member of legal standing (and not already involved in sponsorship of the club).

If Wests Tigers saw a formalise supporters group, they would take the supporters groups more seriously and perhaps actually listen.

lol

You do know the last petition brought about a complete restructure of the club ?

People take things seriously when their jobs and livelihoods are at stake - and the only way to do that is to put pressure on so that they are worried it might actually impact them.

 

[Tucker]

Most correct comment on this whole thread.

Around 50 regular posters dominate the forum and believe that this place is a barometer for the general public.

Read any other social media platform and you'll soon realise how miniscule this forum and it's opinions are.
Most people, nearly all casuals are completely switched off and sick of this shit.

I’ve spoken with people who are absolutely sportsmad about this issue and they sincerely had no idea what I was talking about.
People don’t give a shit about the back room manoeuvrings of the country’s worst sporting club.

 

[Telltails]

It's a bit more elevated than that.

You can apply at the front desk, but it has to be approved by the board at a board meeting. They vet you to be a general member....

I don't know that specific criteria, but would assume they look at how many AGMs you've attended, how often you visit the club, have you ever been cited for anything... You know, doing their due diligence.

I suspect if you are turned down, they must notify you why they have turned you down.

I worked at one club where even a normal member was approved by the board at a board meeting (and the board would check their internal records to check if you have ever visited the club before and been asked to leave for example). This is more common than you know. Some RSL clubs even share "blacklists" of names of people...

As if anything is as simple as applying at the front desk.

Tou

lol

You do know the last petition brought about a complete restructure of the club ?

People take things seriously when their jobs and livelihoods are at stake - and the only way to do that is to put pressure on so that they are worried it might actually impact them.

Sounds like a damage control PR exercise

 

[cdinoz007]

100%

It's nothing like North Korea.

In North Korea, you have a gun pointed to your head to vote for the divine leader.

Here,

1. You have a choice to join Holman Barnes Group
2. You have a choice to go to the AGM
3. You have a choice in voting for a board member
4. You have a choice to request to become a general member
5. You have a choice of 20 candidates to vote for as a general member to make 5 board members

Let's stop the emotive outbursts ... You'll gain more support from everywhere when you make salient points and your statements are factually backed and your sources are referencable.

There is a positive way forward here. I don't think your highly emotive approach is the right one. But you can get it right

 

[Joel Helmes]

It's nothing like North Korea.

In North Korea, you have a gun pointed to your head to vote for the divine leader.

Here,

1. You have a choice to join Holman Barnes Group
2. You have a choice to go to the AGM
3. You have a choice in voting for a board member
4. You have a choice to request to become a general member
5. You have a choice of 20 candidates to vote for as a general member to make 5 board members

Let's stop the emotive outbursts ... You'll gain more support from everywhere when you make salient points and your statements are factually backed and your sources are referencable.

There is a positive way forward here. I don't think your highly emotive approach is the right one. But you can get it right

Thanks for the lesson 🙄

 

[Magpie_Magic]

Tou

lol

You do know the last petition brought about a complete restructure of the club ?

People take things seriously when their jobs and livelihoods are at stake - and the only way to do that is to put pressure on so that they are worried it might actually impact them.

Because the club wanted to have the plausible deniablity to make changes.........especially in regards to Lee.

It doesn't mean the club is happy with the process to arrive there.

This is different in that it is attacking the ownership of the club from a small segment of its fanbase, almost as if an ultimatum.

Not the way partners should behave.

 

[BAGNF05]

Reading the room lol.

You talking about WTF . That's not reading the room..........this place dominated by people running multiple accounts doesn’t represent our entire fanbase.

This forum is a bubble.

Show us this group living outside the bubble who are happy with WT performance as an organisation. Hint: There isn’t one.

 

[Magpie_Magic]

Show us this group living outside the bubble who are happy with WT performance as an organisation. Hint: There isn’t one.

So it is a bubble.

 

[Iron Fist]

The dynamic duo richo moved him on not needed

FFS! Lee was a non-executive chairperson, on an 8-person board.

Lee, Myatt (ind) and a joke that Myatt was considered independent
Stapleton (BT)
Burgess, Romero, Wayde, Andreacchio (HBG) Dorahy (WM)

What do you think is the faction that got their way is on this board?

Happy to sack Madge, install Sheens (who had sued the club!), agree to succession, then didn’t consult Sheens (HC and GM Football) & Benji (future HC) to install Fulton. What a farkin circus!

They want you to believe that Lee and Pascoe made all the decisions, which they succeeded and still do it appears. Control of the board was firmly with HBG and has been since 2016. Pascoe was out of his depth but it was what they wanted as they had him on a string. In Lee, they had a clown to be their face and voice for their ineptitude. It was perfect for them.

The supporter base has wised up now and want insurance middle managers, musicians, car salesmen, real estate agents, and John laws wannabes off the board of a professional sports organisation.

 

[Joel Helmes]

FFS! Lee was a non-executive chairperson, on an 8-person board.

Lee, Myatt (ind) and a joke that Myatt was considered independent
Stapleton (BT)
Burgess, Romero, Wayde, Andreacchio (HBG) Dorahy (WM)

What do you think is the faction that got their way is on this board?

Happy to sack Madge, install Sheens (who had sued the club!), agree to succession, then didn’t consult Sheens (HC and GM Football) & Benji (future HC) to install Fulton. What a farkin circus!

They want you to believe that Lee and Pascoe made all the decisions, which they succeeded and still do it appears. Control of the board was firmly with HBG and has been since 2016. Pascoe was out of his depth but it was what they wanted as they had him on a string. In Lee, they had a clown to be their face and voice for their ineptitude. It was perfect for them.

The supporter base has wised up now and want insurance middle managers, musicians, car salesmen, real estate agents, and John laws wannabes off the board of a professional sports organisation.

That’s right, the game is up. Welcome to a new era where the fans will no longer be blinded by confusion.

 

[Iron Fist]

...ok I'll bite here.

How about this. Instead of being antagonistic towards the HBG, perhaps look into setting up a Supporters Trust and offering to work with the football club.

These are very popular in the UK (ManUtd supporters trust has a quarter of a million members!). I am a member of 2x supporters trusts and are in place for many football, rugby and cricket clubs.

It's never been done here before to my knowledge, but this would give you something to look at instead of ranting and petitioning and could be a groundbreaking achievement

Some sporting organisations allow the supporters trust to present to the board, and sit in on some board members. Some sporting organisations invite the trust to appoint a board member.

A Trust would have a paid for subscription, which simply covers costs of running the Trust, nothing else. Perhaps $20 a year for a personal membership, $200 for a corporate membership.

The Trust would need its own constitution, and by laws, and a board to run it.

The suggestion would be the board made up of a selection of members, but perhaps including a board member of legal standing (and not already involved in sponsorship of the club).

If Wests Tigers saw a formalise supporters group, they would take the supporters groups more seriously and perhaps actually listen.

You lost me when you used Manchester United as your example. Their descent over the past decade is worse than Wests Tigers