What happens to Balmain now?

[lathami]

Jee,
Settle down willow, u sound like u are gona have a heart attack!! I for one can see why the magpies have some issue with it as in the wests tigers, how many people refer to them as wests, really how many??? Most people refer to them or us as the tigers. So how is this fair on the maggies??? And really the balmain side got the better side of the equation, so why not give the dog a bone and let the state cup side be the magpies would it really hurt????
So now our state cup team wont be called the weststigers after all this but balmain/eastwood/paramatta east/dundas/richmond/mosman TIGERS!!!! Again unfair. So why arnt they called the weststigers and apparantly show the higher ground??????????? ?????

 

[Guest]

Jee,
Settle down willow, u sound like u are gona have a heart attack!! I for one can see why the magpies have some issue with it as in the wests tigers, how many people refer to them as wests, really how many??? Most people refer to them or us as the tigers. So how is this fair on the maggies??? And really the balmain side got the better side of the equation, so why not give the dog a bone and let the state cup side be the magpies would it really hurt????
So now our state cup team wont be called the weststigers after all this but balmain/eastwood/paramatta east/dundas/richmond/mosman TIGERS!!!! Again unfair. So why arnt they called the weststigers and apparantly show the higher ground??????????? ?????

I have been nothing but calm. I shake my head at those who continually fail to stick to what a topic is about and hijack it into a Wests V Balmain. **This thread is not about Wests**. If members want to voice their concerns about Wests - then start a new thread. How hard is that?

Again, I wonder if the average IQ of the human race just dropped several points. The deal Balmain got is more than fair. WT approached both clubs with the proposal to merge and have one state Cup side. Balmain said yes, Wests said no. As to the specific reasons why both organisations decided as they did - I don;t know. But as a result Wests get to continue on their own which is what they want - albeit without WT contracted players playing for them. They knew the risks and obviously the decision to continue on their own outweighed fielding a strong, combined team.

For Wests supporters whinging about this is laughable. Wests Magpies management put themselves in this position just as Balmain put themselves in this position. Both clubs were faced with a business proposal. One accepted, one did not. People need to deal with it instead of complaining to no one about it. And by no one I mean people on here, we can't do anything about it. Complain to the people who matter who is Western Suburbs Rugby League management. They might listen…

 

[tonyc]

I find this Balmain bias a bit much … ok Wests Magpies want to stay alive ... A joint venture should be respected & Wests Magpies intentions should be sidered ... good luck to Balmain who obviously control Wests Tigers & get money from Ryde Eastwood Leagues Club .... back to the thread ... yes Balmain are broke but they get everything ...

 

[Guest]

I find this Balmain bias a bit much … ok Wests Magpies want to stay alive ... A joint venture should be respected & Wests Magpies intentions should be sidered ... good luck to Balmain who obviously control Wests Tigers & get money from Ryde Eastwood Leagues Club .... back to the thread ... yes Balmain are broke but they get everything ...

Have you actually read all of the posts in this thread or is it simply another case of ignorance is bliss? :brick:

 

[Sabre]

If Wests want to go it on their own good luck to them, but nobody at Wests can complain that they arent getting their fair share when they were given the exact same offer as Balmain.

Balmain are obviously more commited to the future of the joint venture.
\
\
Posted using RoarFEED

 

[Staks]

Who said Balmain agreed to a merged State Cup team? Just more speculation? Why would they agree when they have Concord paying for the soap and toilet paper? Identity is kept and Wests Tigers take care of the bills. Win-win. Good luck to em. Yet people can't see the unjust treatment the other side of the joint venture receives.

Carry on…
\
\
Posted using RoarFEED

 

[Gary_Bakerloo]

Excluding the wages of the top 25 players, are Wests Tigers now paying for the State Cup team?

 

[Montague_Street]

As others have said, this thread is "What happens to Balmain now?"

We now know that in 2012 a Balmain (Ryde-Eastwood) Tigers side will again be the State Cup feeder side to the Wests Tigers.

And like most West Tigers fans I will be cheering them on against their opponents, including both of the Magpie sides they will play against.
\
\
Posted using RoarFEED

 

[Muffstar]

Jee,
Settle down willow, u sound like u are gona have a heart attack!! I for one can see why the magpies have some issue with it as in the wests tigers, how many people refer to them as wests, really how many??? Most people refer to them or us as the tigers. So how is this fair on the maggies??? And really the balmain side got the better side of the equation, so why not give the dog a bone and let the state cup side be the magpies would it really hurt????
So now our state cup team wont be called the weststigers after all this but balmain/eastwood/paramatta east/dundas/richmond/mosman TIGERS!!!! Again unfair. So why arnt they called the weststigers and apparantly show the higher ground??????????? ?????

I have been nothing but calm. I shake my head at those who continually fail to stick to what a topic is about and hijack it into a Wests V Balmain. **This thread is not about Wests**. If members want to voice their concerns about Wests - then start a new thread. How hard is that?

Again, I wonder if the average IQ of the human race just dropped several points. The deal Balmain got is more than fair. WT approached both clubs with the proposal to merge and have one state Cup side. Balmain said yes, Wests said no. As to the specific reasons why both organisations decided as they did - I don;t know. But as a result Wests get to continue on their own which is what they want - albeit without WT contracted players playing for them. They knew the risks and obviously the decision to continue on their own outweighed fielding a strong, combined team.

For Wests supporters whinging about this is laughable. Wests Magpies management put themselves in this position just as Balmain put themselves in this position. Both clubs were faced with a business proposal. One accepted, one did not. People need to deal with it instead of complaining to no one about it. And by no one I mean people on here, we can't do anything about it. Complain to the people who matter who is Western Suburbs Rugby League management. They might listen…

Well said Willow !

 

[magpiecol]

So you can have your say about Wests but not other people?

Sounds fair.

I spoke to Sheens a couple of years ago and he stated that he preferred to have two sides (Balmain and Wests) as he got to choose from 34 players instead of 17.

So what has happened to that scenario?

I asked members to stick to the topic. Clearly it is too difficult for some to comprehend.

In relation to your comment concerning Sheen's, it would seem the circumstances have changed - as they tend to over time. And have you considered the fact that the decision for Balmain to cease and play as under the Wests Tigers banner may have been brought about by mitigating factors other than Sheen's, or outside of his control?

It looks like Balmain are broke and Wests are not. So the WestsTigers spend money on Balmain to keep them going, when all they have to do is place the Balmain players over to Wests. Unless I am missing something, wouldn't that be better financially for the WT's? And it would keep the Magpie supporters happy.

The Magpies would be the feeder club for the WT's, the Balmain supporters would have the Tigers name in the WestsTigers (and the colours) and the Magpie supporters would have a continuance of the brand. Win/Win.

 

[redemption]

So you can have your say about Wests but not other people?

Sounds fair.

I spoke to Sheens a couple of years ago and he stated that he preferred to have two sides (Balmain and Wests) as he got to choose from 34 players instead of 17.

So what has happened to that scenario?

I asked members to stick to the topic. Clearly it is too difficult for some to comprehend.

In relation to your comment concerning Sheen's, it would seem the circumstances have changed - as they tend to over time. And have you considered the fact that the decision for Balmain to cease and play as under the Wests Tigers banner may have been brought about by mitigating factors other than Sheen's, or outside of his control?

**It looks like Balmain are broke and Wests are not.** So the WestsTigers spend money on Balmain to keep them going, when all they have to do is place the Balmain players over to Wests. Unless I am missing something, wouldn't that be better financially for the WT's? And it would keep the Magpie supporters happy.

The Magpies would be the feeder club for the WT's, the Balmain supporters would have the Tigers name in the WestsTigers (and the colours) and the Magpie supporters would have a continuance of the brand. Win/Win.

Why - because bug says so??? Or should I assume you are a forensic accountant col???

The "brand" you allude to is so irrevocably tarnished in the corporate sphere because of their posturing and unprofessionalism!!

The term "own worst enemy" springs to mind!!!!

 

[batboy]

The Magpie "Brand" isn't quite the commodity the Diehards seem to think it is, And hasn't been for 50 years!!
And some point the Diehards will stop blaming someone else and simply face the facts!!

 

[The_Nerd]

Well Said BatBoy. I wasn't around in the Magpie glory days.

When were they… The 60s??

I dont mean to offend but both Balmain Tigers and Wests Magpies dont exist anymore in he eyes of this next generation.

 

[Benjirific]

This may sound stupid, but since we now know for certain that Balmain Ryde-Eastwood Tigers are competing in the 2012 NSW Cup as the feeder club for Wests Tigers, shouldn't this thread now be closed?

 

[Gary_Bakerloo]

Why - because bug says so??? Or should I assume you are a forensic accountant col???

You don't need to be a forensic accountant to read an annual report and see losses.

http://www.tigers.org.au/uploads/File/Uploads/BLC_AnnualReport_FINAL%20WEB.pdf

The current situation is not sustainable unless Rozelle gets up and running. A quick win is to not support at rugby league team ($930k in 2010).

 

[happy_tiger]

Why - because bug says so??? Or should I assume you are a forensic accountant col???

You don't need to be a forensic accountant to read an annual report and see losses.

http://www.tigers.org.au/uploads/File/Uploads/BLC_AnnualReport_FINAL%20WEB.pdf

The current situation is not sustainable unless Rozelle gets up and running. A quick win is to not support at rugby league team ($930k in 2010).

That's not pretty reading at all I wonder what my directors would say if I returned figures like that :rant

 

[magpiecol]

Well Said BatBoy. I wasn't around in the Magpie glory days.

When were they… The 60s??

I dont mean to offend but both Balmain Tigers and Wests Magpies dont exist anymore in he eyes of this next generation.

Such a pity. It is hard to know where you are going unless you know where you came from. Balmain and Wests have been around for over 100 years. I wonder if the Weststigers will be around in another 90 years.

I hope so.

Concerning my previous post regarding the funding of Balmain. If and I repeat, if, the WT's are funding Balmain, why pay out that money when there is no need to do so. Let the Magpies fund their own team and combine the Balmain players into that team. It would be a very strong side.

Interesting times ahead, and not just in the first grade.

 

[system]

Concerning my previous post regarding the funding of Balmain. If and I repeat, if, the WT's are funding Balmain, why pay out that money when there is no need to do so.

I answered that question in the other thread in which you asked it.

 

[magpiecol]

Concerning my previous post regarding the funding of Balmain. If and I repeat, if, the WT's are funding Balmain, why pay out that money when there is no need to do so.

I answered that question in the other thread in which you asked it.

I must be losing my mind. In what other thread did I ask this question and what was your answer.