Benjirific
New member
I have to completely disagree with this statement altogether. I believe that at the moment we waste too much of our time worrying about heritage, and not worrying about the future of our club, Wests Tigers. The acknowledgement of both clubs in the joint venture is right there in the name. Wests for one side, Tigers for the other. That is what was agreed upon from the start and that is where it should have ended.
I'm not saying don't acknowledge heritage, I'm a traditionalist and I think it's important to do so. My idea is use the two NRL heritage rounds to acknowledge heritage of both clubs, and then use one home game from Leichhardt and one from Campbelltown to celebrate the heritage of both sides of the joint venture.
But outside of that we need to be Wests Tigers and create our own history instead of trying to live off that of a long time ago, which to me seems to be the attitude of at least one side.
I'm not saying don't acknowledge heritage, I'm a traditionalist and I think it's important to do so. My idea is use the two NRL heritage rounds to acknowledge heritage of both clubs, and then use one home game from Leichhardt and one from Campbelltown to celebrate the heritage of both sides of the joint venture.
But outside of that we need to be Wests Tigers and create our own history instead of trying to live off that of a long time ago, which to me seems to be the attitude of at least one side.