I think the key criteria is finacial status as opposed to governance issues. I think the NRL would face some serious penalties if they tried to ride roughshod over a finacially viable entity. HBG own is and as long as they are meeting the requirements of ASIC and Liquor and Gaming I doubt there is much that can be forced on HBG by the NRL.
For mine the revolt has to come internally and by that it is likely that the Debenture holders themselves have to come to the realisation that they need to let Wests Tigers be run independently or that their system of governance is holding HBG (and Wests Tigers) back and they relinquish the reigns.
There is an opportunity - HBG appear to be stepping outside of the constitution with the purchase of soccer clubs within and outside of the district. The constitution is primarly to support the social aspect of the cluns and Wests Tigers. There is an opportunity for members, of three years or greater, that have been given voting rights to raise questions at the AGM and push for reform. The key has to be infiltration of the membership to force change from the inside while pressure is also applied, as best it can, from the fan base who, if not members of HBG, have no say unless they don't attend games or purchase memberships. The unfortunate part of that approach is that is hurts Wests Tigers, the team we support, not HBG.
There is a way ahead but it needs to be coordinated and controlled and Darcy Byrne yelling from the rooftops is not the approach. The approach needs to to be tow pronged, subtle and internal with the right amount to external pressure applied to make the internal motions and infilatration of the Debenture Holder group effective.
