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

Status
Not open for further replies.
https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/ca...igers-endless-soap-opera-20250115-p5l4jf.html

Can boardroom changes put an end to the Wests Tigers’ endless soap opera?

By Iain Payten
January 15, 2025 — 4.47pm

The sign that things have changed at the Wests Tigers, according to chief executive Shane Richardson on a quick greet of the media, was that none of them knew what was coming next.

“It’s a first for the Wests Tigers, we’ve kept something secret,” Richardson said.

The “secret” was soon announced, in the shape of the names of four new independent directors recruited to a new seven-person Wests Tigers board.

And though the keeping of a rugby league secret in the summer holidays sits in the same category as results in a trial game – dangerous to hang your hat on – it was still a win at the leaky Tigers, whose dirty laundry has routinely been hung out on Parramatta Road for all to inspect.

But if things go to plan, the appointment of the new directors could also end up being a win for the long-suffering fans of an embattled club that has seemingly lurched from one crisis to another since the halycon days of its 2005 premiership.

The four independent directors – former NSW Premier Barry O’Farrell, former Paralympic athlete Annabelle Williams and western Sydney-raised business figures Charlie Viola and Michelle McDowell – will join the club’s existing three directors, who represent the Balmain Tigers, the Western Suburbs Magpies and the Tigers’ majority owner, the Holman Barnes Group.

In effect, the quartet’s independence should mean the Wests Tigers board can now run the club free of pressure from the many groups attached to the merged club, who’ve long had a history of bickering, suspicion and infighting.

The Herald revealed last year aggrieved members of the Balmain Tigers board were even keen on dissolving the joint venture, worried the Wests side of the marriage was secretly planning to revive the Magpies.

A majority independent board was a key recommendation of a Wests Tigers review conducted by Tony Crawford and Gary Barnier, commissioned by the Holman Barnes Group board at the end of 2023, following another wooden-spoon season. The review’s recommendations saw then CEO Justin Pascoe and chairman Lee Hagipantelis depart, and Richardson and O’Farrell enter; the latter on an interim basis.

“This is the last piece of the puzzle, and it was always going to be probably the most difficult and the most important,” Richardson said at a press conference at the Wests Tigers’ Concord Oval headquarters.

“Because it really is a matter of that we have a truly independent board with true governance, which has all been sponsored by the Holman Barnes group. And I don’t say that lightly in any way, shape or form. And we’re working close with them to come to this resolution today.”

They may have been working closely with the Holman Barnes Group but no-one was much interested in talking about the club’s majority owner at Tigers HQ on Wednesday.

The governance of the Holman Barnes Group is currently under investigation by Liquor and Gaming NSW, following complaints about bans imposed on three directors on New Year’s Eve. Those directors – Tony Andreacchio, Rick Wayde and David Gilbert were the trio who commissioned the Crawford-Barnier review, prompting concerns about the Holman Barnes Group’s support for its recommendations.

But Richardson stressed there was no “drama about infighting” at the Wests Tigers.

“That’s a drama that’s created about the Holman Barnes board. It’s nothing to do with the West Tigers board, which I’ve pointed out enormous amounts of times,” Richardson said.

“Anything regarding Holman Barnes is not to be discussed today because it’s got nothing to do with this board. It’s a separate situation altogether. If you want comments on that, talk to the Holman Barnes board. I couldn’t be more strong of it.

“The reality, we’ve changed dramatically over the last 12 months. The noise externally has been nothing about our board.”

Holman Barnes Group chair Julie Romero had been listed by the Tigers as attending a five-person press conference, but did not participate, instead standing at the back of the room.

Asked if the investigation into the club’s majority owner could still serve as a distraction, O’Farrell said: “None. It’s not an issue for us.”

“It’s not been an issue for us this year. I’m not denying that there are issues there – I understand, I’ve read the paper that liquor and gaming is having a look at it, but that’s something that will be resolved over there,” O’Farrell said.

Does the installation of an independent board finally spell the end of in-fighting at the Wests Tigers?

“The board at West Tigers hasn’t had any infighting at least for the last 12 months. And I can say that hand on heart. All the decisions have been unanimous. There’s been no disputes,” O’Farrell said.

O’Farrell conceded there was a huge cultural change at board level compared to his first stint in 2018-19.

“It’s light years away from the way in which we used to operate,” O’Farrell said. “It’s a new chapter for West Tigers. It’s the first time since the club was put together that the board will have more independent members on it than the owners’ members. And that’s clearly a significant bonus.”

The selection criteria for the independent directors, as applied by recruitment company Elevate Talent, was “skills-based” and sought candidates with “rugby league sensitivity” and profile in Sydney’s south-west, inner-west and western Sydney. The criteria did not stretch as far as a prohibition on connection to either the Balmain Tigers or Wests Magpies, however.

O’Farrell was asked to reapply, and was one of 200 applicants for the four roles.

Richardson said while the Tigers were still rebuilding their on-field roster, they held ambitions of becoming a side consistently in the top four, starting as early as next season.

Concord Oval was otherwise quiet on Wednesday, with the laundry put away and the Tigers players also absent.

Richardson said the NRL squad was all on a plane, headed for a pre-season camp “of pain and all sorts of things”.

“We kept that a secret, too,” he added.
 
https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/ca...igers-endless-soap-opera-20250115-p5l4jf.html

Can boardroom changes put an end to the Wests Tigers’ endless soap opera?

By Iain Payten
January 15, 2025 — 4.47pm

The sign that things have changed at the Wests Tigers, according to chief executive Shane Richardson on a quick greet of the media, was that none of them knew what was coming next.

“It’s a first for the Wests Tigers, we’ve kept something secret,” Richardson said.

The “secret” was soon announced, in the shape of the names of four new independent directors recruited to a new seven-person Wests Tigers board.

And though the keeping of a rugby league secret in the summer holidays sits in the same category as results in a trial game – dangerous to hang your hat on – it was still a win at the leaky Tigers, whose dirty laundry has routinely been hung out on Parramatta Road for all to inspect.

But if things go to plan, the appointment of the new directors could also end up being a win for the long-suffering fans of an embattled club that has seemingly lurched from one crisis to another since the halycon days of its 2005 premiership.

The four independent directors – former NSW Premier Barry O’Farrell, former Paralympic athlete Annabelle Williams and western Sydney-raised business figures Charlie Viola and Michelle McDowell – will join the club’s existing three directors, who represent the Balmain Tigers, the Western Suburbs Magpies and the Tigers’ majority owner, the Holman Barnes Group.

In effect, the quartet’s independence should mean the Wests Tigers board can now run the club free of pressure from the many groups attached to the merged club, who’ve long had a history of bickering, suspicion and infighting.

The Herald revealed last year aggrieved members of the Balmain Tigers board were even keen on dissolving the joint venture, worried the Wests side of the marriage was secretly planning to revive the Magpies.

A majority independent board was a key recommendation of a Wests Tigers review conducted by Tony Crawford and Gary Barnier, commissioned by the Holman Barnes Group board at the end of 2023, following another wooden-spoon season. The review’s recommendations saw then CEO Justin Pascoe and chairman Lee Hagipantelis depart, and Richardson and O’Farrell enter; the latter on an interim basis.

“This is the last piece of the puzzle, and it was always going to be probably the most difficult and the most important,” Richardson said at a press conference at the Wests Tigers’ Concord Oval headquarters.

“Because it really is a matter of that we have a truly independent board with true governance, which has all been sponsored by the Holman Barnes group. And I don’t say that lightly in any way, shape or form. And we’re working close with them to come to this resolution today.”

They may have been working closely with the Holman Barnes Group but no-one was much interested in talking about the club’s majority owner at Tigers HQ on Wednesday.

The governance of the Holman Barnes Group is currently under investigation by Liquor and Gaming NSW, following complaints about bans imposed on three directors on New Year’s Eve. Those directors – Tony Andreacchio, Rick Wayde and David Gilbert were the trio who commissioned the Crawford-Barnier review, prompting concerns about the Holman Barnes Group’s support for its recommendations.

But Richardson stressed there was no “drama about infighting” at the Wests Tigers.

“That’s a drama that’s created about the Holman Barnes board. It’s nothing to do with the West Tigers board, which I’ve pointed out enormous amounts of times,” Richardson said.

“Anything regarding Holman Barnes is not to be discussed today because it’s got nothing to do with this board. It’s a separate situation altogether. If you want comments on that, talk to the Holman Barnes board. I couldn’t be more strong of it.

“The reality, we’ve changed dramatically over the last 12 months. The noise externally has been nothing about our board.”

Holman Barnes Group chair Julie Romero had been listed by the Tigers as attending a five-person press conference, but did not participate, instead standing at the back of the room.

Asked if the investigation into the club’s majority owner could still serve as a distraction, O’Farrell said: “None. It’s not an issue for us.”

“It’s not been an issue for us this year. I’m not denying that there are issues there – I understand, I’ve read the paper that liquor and gaming is having a look at it, but that’s something that will be resolved over there,” O’Farrell said.

Does the installation of an independent board finally spell the end of in-fighting at the Wests Tigers?

“The board at West Tigers hasn’t had any infighting at least for the last 12 months. And I can say that hand on heart. All the decisions have been unanimous. There’s been no disputes,” O’Farrell said.

O’Farrell conceded there was a huge cultural change at board level compared to his first stint in 2018-19.

“It’s light years away from the way in which we used to operate,” O’Farrell said. “It’s a new chapter for West Tigers. It’s the first time since the club was put together that the board will have more independent members on it than the owners’ members. And that’s clearly a significant bonus.”

The selection criteria for the independent directors, as applied by recruitment company Elevate Talent, was “skills-based” and sought candidates with “rugby league sensitivity” and profile in Sydney’s south-west, inner-west and western Sydney. The criteria did not stretch as far as a prohibition on connection to either the Balmain Tigers or Wests Magpies, however.

O’Farrell was asked to reapply, and was one of 200 applicants for the four roles.

Richardson said while the Tigers were still rebuilding their on-field roster, they held ambitions of becoming a side consistently in the top four, starting as early as next season.

Concord Oval was otherwise quiet on Wednesday, with the laundry put away and the Tigers players also absent.

Richardson said the NRL squad was all on a plane, headed for a pre-season camp “of pain and all sorts of things”.

“We kept that a secret, too,” he added.
Anyone who thinks there haven’t been dramas at the HBG are kidding themselves. Richo & Baz have very wisely distanced the Wests Tigers from the HBG with those quotes in the article & they’ve pretty much put the spotlight on the HBG for leaking everything.
 
“That’s a drama that’s created about the Holman Barnes board. It’s nothing to do with the West Tigers board, which I’ve pointed out enormous amounts of times,” Richardson said


I think quite a few in here need to read this bit over and over until it sinks in.
I think HBG board was mirrored in the tigers board. That was the problem
 
I'm not, after 25 years, we are Wests Tigers.

No more historical allegiances.
The idea that the club needs to distance itself from its foundation identities may sound appealing to some, but it’s simply not realistic. Unless I'm looking at this all wrong, the reality is that we cannot thrive without our juniors. The strength of the club’s future lies in its junior pathways. A joint venture needs to support and nurture both, as it's essential for the club’s long term success. It's why it’s not feasible to have all our juniors playing under the Wests Tigers name. These areas are geographically separate, each with its own historical identity, junior systems and competing financial structures. Consolidating them under one banner would create logistical chaos, undermine local engagement and risk losing the unique community connections that make both regions strong.

The club relies on the strength of both fanbases to stay relevant in an ever-evolving market - especially with two new teams purportedly coming into the competition within the next several years. Our next generation of supporters and players comes from these areas and distancing ourselves from the Western Suburbs Magpies and Balmain Tigers would weaken local engagement and brand loyalty. This could ultimately harm the Wests Tigers' position in the long run. IMO, streamlining is not possible without diluting the distinct regional identities, which would jeopardise future growth.

I imagine these local connections are also a key factor in attracting sponsors. Sponsors are often drawn to the club because of its strong community ties and severing these relationships could hurt our ability to attract and maintain valuable partnerships.

To truly unite the club, one home ground may be the only way forward...for now. A shared venue would become the central point of connection, allowing everyone to find common ground and create a shared history together.

Maybe if we were a more successful club, this could change and both regions could coexist under one umbrella. But until that point, these traditional clubs remain essential for the club's relevance and growth. Therefore, I think it's highly important to have representatives from both on the Wests Tigers board. Their presence ensures that the interests of both regions are properly represented and safeguarded as the club navigates its future. The junior pathways from these areas are the lifeblood of the club and their expertise and understanding of the local communities are invaluable. Having both voices at the decision.making table guarantees that the needs of the grassroots are not overlooked.
 
The idea that the club needs to distance itself from its foundation identities may sound appealing to some, but it’s simply not realistic. Unless I'm looking at this all wrong, the reality is that we cannot thrive without our juniors. The strength of the club’s future lies in its junior pathways. A joint venture needs to support and nurture both, as it's essential for the club’s long term success. It's why it’s not feasible to have all our juniors playing under the Wests Tigers name. These areas are geographically separate, each with its own historical identity, junior systems and competing financial structures. Consolidating them under one banner would create logistical chaos, undermine local engagement and risk losing the unique community connections that make both regions strong.

The club relies on the strength of both fanbases to stay relevant in an ever-evolving market - especially with two new teams purportedly coming into the competition within the next several years. Our next generation of supporters and players comes from these areas and distancing ourselves from the Western Suburbs Magpies and Balmain Tigers would weaken local engagement and brand loyalty. This could ultimately harm the Wests Tigers' position in the long run. IMO, streamlining is not possible without diluting the distinct regional identities, which would jeopardise future growth.

I imagine these local connections are also a key factor in attracting sponsors. Sponsors are often drawn to the club because of its strong community ties and severing these relationships could hurt our ability to attract and maintain valuable partnerships.

To truly unite the club, one home ground may be the only way forward...for now. A shared venue would become the central point of connection for both supporter bases, allowing them to find common ground and create a shared history together.

Maybe if we were a more successful club, this could change and both regions could coexist under one umbrella. But until that point, these traditional clubs remain essential for the club's relevance and growth. Therefore, I think it's highly important to have representatives from both on the Wests Tigers board. Their presence ensures that the interests of both regions are properly represented and safeguarded as the club navigates its future. The junior pathways from these areas are the lifeblood of the club and their expertise and understanding of the local communities are invaluable. Having both voices at the decision.making table guarantees that the needs of the grassroots are not overlooked.
No disrespect Lauren . But you are looking at it wrong . The issue isn’t the fans or supporters with ties to our heritage , but rather the people in positions of power using it as leverage tools to either gain more power , or maintain the status quo . These were people who were unsuited to these positions , and when the club moved on from the traditional owners in its natural maturation as a club , ie, younger supporters only supported wests tigers, these people doubled down , often arguing over trivial things like how much of each colour was on the jersey , and who sat where in which corporate box etc.
this is what needs to be distanced from . The ACTUAL people at each foundation club . Who were exploiting these ridiculous trivialities to maintain positions of power .
Not the nostalgia that people cling to .
And as for the juniors , no disrespect , but no kid is growing up being loyal to a junior association .
It’s like kids in Shellharbour or Ulladulla being loyal to The Steelers. sure they want to represent and get as high as possible , but eventually that’s to wear a dragons jersey , or put themselves in the shop window for a tigers , sharks or raiders spot .
Until the club rebrands and has a clear pipeline and transition from playing for Eagle vale or Thirlmere , or Leichhardt wanderers u6s to eventually wearing a wests tigers jersey at 4pm on a Sunday , then this confusion will continue .
Like I said , it’s not just a wests tigers issue . st George Illawarra have the same problem. It’s just never spoken about .
 
No disrespect Lauren . But you are looking at it wrong . The issue isn’t the fans or supporters with ties to our heritage , but rather the people in positions of power using it as leverage tools to either gain more power , or maintain the status quo . These were people who were unsuited to these positions , and when the club moved on from the traditional owners in its natural maturation as a club , ie, younger supporters only supported wests tigers, these people doubled down , often arguing over trivial things like how much of each colour was on the jersey , and who sat where in which corporate box etc.
this is what needs to be distanced from . The ACTUAL people at each foundation club . Who are exploiting these ridiculous trivialities to maintain positions of power .
Not the nostalgia that people cling to .
And as for the juniors , no disrespect , but no kid is growing up being loyal to a junior association .
It’s like kids in Shellharbour or Ulladulla being loyal to The Steelers. sure they want to represent and get as high as possible , but eventually that’s to wear a dragons jersey , or put themselves in the shop window for a tigers , sharks or raiders spot .
Until the club rebrands and has a clear pipeline and transition from playing for Eagle vale or Thirlmere , or Leichhardt wanderers u6s to eventually wearing a wests tigers jersey at 4pm on a Sunday , then this confusion will continue .
Like I said , it’s not just a wests tigers issue . st George Illawarra have the same problem. It’s just never spoken about .
My main point was only about the representatives from both being on the Wests Tigers board, and why I felt it was essential - namely for our pathways.
 
The idea that the club needs to distance itself from its foundation identities may sound appealing to some, but it’s simply not realistic. Unless I'm looking at this all wrong, the reality is that we cannot thrive without our juniors. The strength of the club’s future lies in its junior pathways. A joint venture needs to support and nurture both, as it's essential for the club’s long term success. It's why it’s not feasible to have all our juniors playing under the Wests Tigers name. These areas are geographically separate, each with its own historical identity, junior systems and competing financial structures. Consolidating them under one banner would create logistical chaos, undermine local engagement and risk losing the unique community connections that make both regions strong.

The club relies on the strength of both fanbases to stay relevant in an ever-evolving market - especially with two new teams purportedly coming into the competition within the next several years. Our next generation of supporters and players comes from these areas and distancing ourselves from the Western Suburbs Magpies and Balmain Tigers would weaken local engagement and brand loyalty. This could ultimately harm the Wests Tigers' position in the long run. IMO, streamlining is not possible without diluting the distinct regional identities, which would jeopardise future growth.

I imagine these local connections are also a key factor in attracting sponsors. Sponsors are often drawn to the club because of its strong community ties and severing these relationships could hurt our ability to attract and maintain valuable partnerships.

To truly unite the club, one home ground may be the only way forward...for now. A shared venue would become the central point of connection for both supporter bases, allowing them to find common ground and create a shared history together.

Maybe if we were a more successful club, this could change and both regions could coexist under one umbrella. But until that point, these traditional clubs remain essential for the club's relevance and growth. Therefore, I think it's highly important to have representatives from both on the Wests Tigers board. Their presence ensures that the interests of both regions are properly represented and safeguarded as the club navigates its future. The junior pathways from these areas are the lifeblood of the club and their expertise and understanding of the local communities are invaluable. Having both voices at the decision.making table guarantees that the needs of the grassroots are not overlooked.
Sorry Lauren.....but couldnt disagree more.
Holding on to historic allegiances in any aspect is simply going to exacerbate the divisions based on century old history rather than unite us for a cohesive medium /long term future
Understand all the short term push back from rusted on supporters /sponsors...but gotta cut the umbilical at some stage and move forward with a common brand and shared outcome for our future
Now..with uncertainty in the Board..is as good a time as any to make these difficult decisions
Dont lose this opportunity to fix the joint
And to do that ,we need a smarter Board..much smarter... with a coordinated vision for the long term benefit of WTs.and not self centred & entitled agenda pushers
 
Last edited:
The idea that the club needs to distance itself from its foundation identities may sound appealing to some, but it’s simply not realistic. Unless I'm looking at this all wrong, the reality is that we cannot thrive without our juniors. The strength of the club’s future lies in its junior pathways. A joint venture needs to support and nurture both, as it's essential for the club’s long term success. It's why it’s not feasible to have all our juniors playing under the Wests Tigers name. These areas are geographically separate, each with its own historical identity, junior systems and competing financial structures. Consolidating them under one banner would create logistical chaos, undermine local engagement and risk losing the unique community connections that make both regions strong.

The club relies on the strength of both fanbases to stay relevant in an ever-evolving market - especially with two new teams purportedly coming into the competition within the next several years. Our next generation of supporters and players comes from these areas and distancing ourselves from the Western Suburbs Magpies and Balmain Tigers would weaken local engagement and brand loyalty. This could ultimately harm the Wests Tigers' position in the long run. IMO, streamlining is not possible without diluting the distinct regional identities, which would jeopardise future growth.

I imagine these local connections are also a key factor in attracting sponsors. Sponsors are often drawn to the club because of its strong community ties and severing these relationships could hurt our ability to attract and maintain valuable partnerships.

To truly unite the club, one home ground may be the only way forward...for now. A shared venue would become the central point of connection for both supporter bases, allowing them to find common ground and create a shared history together.

Maybe if we were a more successful club, this could change and both regions could coexist under one umbrella. But until that point, these traditional clubs remain essential for the club's relevance and growth. Therefore, I think it's highly important to have representatives from both on the Wests Tigers board. Their presence ensures that the interests of both regions are properly represented and safeguarded as the club navigates its future. The junior pathways from these areas are the lifeblood of the club and their expertise and understanding of the local communities are invaluable. Having both voices at the decision.making table guarantees that the needs of the grassroots are not overlooked.

Great post.

And there is no one predominant way of fan engagement with our club.
 
My main point was only about the representatives from both being on the Wests Tigers board, and why I felt it was essential - namely for our pathways.
Why ? The kids have no intrinsic connection to the foundation clubs outside of nostalgia , and legacy , which is really only ever presented to them via someone older .
The connection they have , and quite frankly need to have , is to the brand wests tigers .
Otherwise they have misplaced loyalties , and get stuck .
What value is there for a kid to come through with undying loyalty to Balmain , only for that to not transcend to the main club .
I don’t understand the necessity for pathways to be strong on legacy .
It should all be funnelled towards the idea of wearing a wests tigers jersey , and whatever that means as a club identity.
It’s because of this separation IMHO , why the storm were able to poach Ryan Hoffman , why a kid from Camden only ever had eyes for the roosters , why kids from the Balmain district are constantly lost to Souths .
There’s no intrinsic loyalty to wests tigers because that’s the jersey they put on when they playing youth rep footy .
It’s the big advantage Penrith have . The youth train on 1 side of the field , the nrl team on the other , and it’s all borderline manipulative strategies to create a loyalty.
They’re a Penrith ride or die before they even realise it . This is what we need to get to for our juniors .
 
I can see that we need a WTs KOE team,how that gets achieved is up to the powers that be..
We have two junior pathways that should provide young up and coming talents and they are important to strengthen the NRL squad as they grow..
As far as the 2 great foundation clubs go they can be remembered in the history annals as the
2 clubs that gave us the modern day WTs ,
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top