Will you be attending the Save the Wests Tigers March?

Will you be attending the Save the Wests Tigers rally?

  • Yes, I care about the future of Wests Tigers

    Votes: 66 35.3%

  • No, it's just not possible for me to get there but I would if I could

    Votes: 115 61.5%

  • No, I support Wests Magpies not Wests Tigers

    Votes: 2 1.1%

  • No, I don't care about the future of the Wests Tigers

    Votes: 4 2.1%
  • Total voters
    187
weststigers said:
No one is saying forget anyone, but we keep shifting the goalposts at this club.

Did we all agree to create a NEW team called Wests Tigers?

Now we want to talk about not forgetting long standing fans, yet we have fans lauding a Wests ownership over everyone and we need to push Magpie related issues.

Those fans are trying to turn this club into their old club...that's not the deal.
Click to expand...
In all honesty- it's probably not the same argument.

100% we should all be seen as Wests Tigers fans.

What is happening at board level, the arguments for & against the Magpies side of things etc- that isn't about fans so much as where history & 'fairness' for a lack of a better word come in.

We have a 90-10% split in the club. That is wholly & solely the problem in my opinion. Fix that- you fix the problem.
 
KevB said:
I don't spread propaganda. I don't think you have a clue what propaganda is...a biased or misleading nature, used to promote a particular cause, doctrine, or point of view.
Click to expand...
I am unsure of what outcome the protesters are attempting to achieve, other than to divide the club and get rid of the Western Suburbs' 90 percent ownership of the club.
Click to expand...
It was very clear what the protesters are trying to achieve. Its been stated a few times. A reinstatement of the barnier crawford report, independace for WT from HBG, a restructing of the debenture holder system or yes, for HBG to find a buyer that does not have an agenda besides success for WT.

How the HGB is structured is a matter for this club, and its members, and in my view, Wests Tigers members and supporters should have no involvement in this matter, severely damages Wests Tigers brand to prospective members and players etc.
Click to expand...
To say that concerns on the structure of HBG is something that is severely damaging the brand is just nuts. What damaged the brand this fortnight is this structure. Trying to fix it is something to make the brand far stronger in the long term - a lot of WT members are HBG members by the way.

Both these twists of logic and factual gaps certainly sounds like youre trying to promote a certain cause to me.
 
Personally I don't have an issue with people wearing Magpies or Balmain gear, it's part of the hsitory of the club and every club has a history. This is seprate from how the club is run.

And, the rally was a success, its on the mainstream media, channel 7 & 9 news.

It means it will be harder for HBG to make poor decisions, there will be more blowback now....so watch yourselves HBG!
 
Chunk said:
Personally I don't have an issue with people wearing Magpies or Balmain gear, it's part of the hsitory of the club and every club has a history. This is seprate from how the club is run.

And, the rally was a success, its on the mainstream media, channel 7 & 9 news.

It means it will be harder for HBG to make poor decisions, there will be more blowback now....so watch yourselves HBG!
Click to expand...
Tbf, when you are inept, you don’t just make poor decisions deliberately.
 
The Chad said:
In all honesty- it's probably not the same argument.

100% we should all be seen as Wests Tigers fans.

What is happening at board level, the arguments for & against the Magpies side of things etc- that isn't about fans so much as where history & 'fairness' for a lack of a better word come in.

We have a 90-10% split in the club. That is wholly & solely the problem in my opinion. Fix that- you fix the problem.
Click to expand...
OK...let's explore that.

Assume it goes 100% to Holman Barnes. Essentially Wests.

What extra decision making will they have then compared to what they have now?

Are you suggesting that Balmain 10% is blocking their success?
 
weststigers said:
OK...let's explore that.

Assume it goes 100% to Holman Barnes. Essentially Wests.

What extra decision making will they have then compared to what they have now?

Are you suggesting that Balmain 10% is blocking their success?
Click to expand...
Quite the contrary. That would exclude the Balmain hardcore.
 
KevB said:
I don't agree to independent boards having control of sporting clubs. However, I somewhat agree with you that the debenture system within licensed clubs is not the most democratic. This was set up many years ago to protect the club from being taken over by people with no interest in sports within their community, I think, much like what has happened to RSL clubs. How you fix this is above my pay grade. Cheers
Click to expand...
back in the 50's/60's and people get offended about the word - dinosaur lol
A guesstimate is 1/2 of the club supporters weren't born this century.
hbg have no interest in the sport either , the way they manipulate this club to below mediocrity
 
KevB said:
I don't agree to independent boards having control of sporting clubs. However, I somewhat agree with you that the debenture system within licensed clubs is not the most democratic. This was set up many years ago to protect the club from being taken over by people with no interest in sports within their community, I think, much like what has happened to RSL clubs. How you fix this is above my pay grade. Cheers
Click to expand...
A few ways in my mind

1. Enshrine the football goals & funding necessity into the constitution. Ensure that the constitution can only be changed through a unanimous vote on the board. Reduce the debenture holder seats on the board, rest via members vote.

2. Provide all WT members packages with a HBG membership with voting rights. They could also pay more for this privilege, ensuring the majority of members are football minded.

But we should just look to Penrith or others for the model.
 
weststigers said:
The ownership split doesn't change the decision making power outside of 1 board member on a 9 person board.

I don't think the split is the problem.
Click to expand...
It DOES increase the need for multiple independents.

Barry O'Farrell as Chair
4 x Wests
4 x Balmain

That changes things.
 
Charred said:
Ok so if the Sydney Roosters who are largely a very successful club are run by Sydney Roosters people can you explain to me why the Wests Tigers should be run by Western Suburbs Magpies people?

OR

Would it be better if it were run by independent Wests Tigers people like how it has been for the last year, quite successfully?

Additionally, bringing into question the characters of the people running the review is ridiculous. Do you seriously think a North Sydney Bears board member who's club is NOT in the NRL and was not yet announced to be in the NRL via the Perth Bears would then try and put together a faulty review. Furthermore, Gary Barnier as a fan certainly wouldn't allow that and what does his aged care executive record really have to do with anything (I don't know if you are making up that he's controversial or he actually is as well btw). Instead of attacking the people who made the report on their character maybe attack specific things within the report that got implemented and demonstrably had a negative impact on the club. As far as I'm aware since that report came out and subsequently implemented until a couple weeks ago where HBG then threw that all in the bin the club was moving in a VERY POSITIVE direction.

But regardless if the review was a bad review, then why have we failed so miserably over the decade and a bit despite having the coaches who have won the last 5 premierships at the club. Is it the players? If so how do players decide to want to join a club if getting similar money from multiple clubs, maybe their image helps or stadiums or fanbase selling out stadiums or a strong governance system and good CEO? I mean you literally said prospective members and players get swayed away when a brand is being damaged. What is damaging our brand the most? The fans or the governance system causing instability within the club?
Click to expand...
In answer to your first question, because they have a 90 percent ownership in Wests Tigers.

I can't answer the 2nd part of the question because I'm not privy to all the facts.

In terms of Tony Crawford, I don't query his credentials, it's just my opinion that, as a board member of a club that has aspirations of returning to the NRL he should have removed or recused himself from taking part in the review. Gary Barnier's controversy in health care matters was well recorded by the media, I think, around 2017. It's just my view, he was a bad choice given what was reported about his management back then. Appointing someone else to do the review may have resulted in the same outcomes.

It's merely my opinion that independent directors in a foot club where there are two owners is a recipe for disaster.

As for performance on the field, blaming HGB is subjective.
 
KevB said:
That's your opinion. I'm sure you think you are more qualified than successful businessmen and former players.
Click to expand...
These people were in power for 11 of the 12 years (last year being the first year of independent majority in the WT board).

Their success as businessmen and players is debatable (unless 23 first grade games for Wests is considered success), but let's not make it about that.

Never made a profit
Never made finals
4 or 5 home grounds each year
Drama after drama
Boardroom brawls

What was it about those 11 years, with full board control, that you are so impressed with?

A lot of defence if HBG...ok fine. I can accept someone challenging the narrative, but no one can point to why these people are the best people to run the place.

Leave ownership out of it...HBG is run by 20 people..I only refer to these people.
 
The Chad said:
It DOES increase the need for multiple independents.

Barry O'Farrell as Chair
4 x Wests
4 x Balmain

That changes things.
Click to expand...
Where did 4 Balmain come from?

Have we just discovered why all these Wests fans are shitty about have independent directors on the board? Because they think independent = Balmain?
 
Tucker said:
Let’s organise another rally to walk back the decision to extend Marshall until 2030.
It will affect the club far more than the old fools on the board will….
Click to expand...
It was the action of the fools that forced the decision Tucker. Just another payout if the team doesn't fire - that's how they roll. Easy wasting money when it doesn't come out of your hip pocket. "Owners" they say??.

Disclosure - massive fan of Benji and hope it ends up being a good decision.
 
Tucker said:
Let’s organise another rally to walk back the decision to extend Marshall until 2030.
It will affect the club far more than the old fools on the board will….
Click to expand...
Except that "the old fools on the board" chose to extend him in an attempt to take some of the heat off themselves.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Staff online

Members online

Total: 893 (members: 39, guests: 854)
Back
Top