Today we are taking the first step into launching action to change the governance of the majority shareholder of the Wests Tigers, the Holman Barnes Group (HBG). This action commenced after the HBG board (controlled by Magpies die-hards Julie Romero and Dennis Burgess) dragged its feet over introducing and adopting the full recommendations from the external review into the governance of the Wests Tigers. We fought so hard for that review in 2023 and it only came about because you supported our petition. This time, we intend to make our action much bigger and louder than the individual supporter groups and we will be working together, all Wests Tigers social and media outlets, to support this action under the banner of ‘Wests Tigers Unite’. Ahead of this action, we again ask that you take an interest in this important matter as it is the final hurdle in giving the Wests Tigers the ownership and governance that will help the club we all love thrive.
In the next couple of days we will share a link to the petition.
Good.Take no prisoners !!!!! Ive never been to a protest in my life, but if you end up having one, we need to make sure its BIG.
As i've said before, we need people to join the Wests Ashfield Club and yes I know under the current structure we cant vote for change. However if enough of the members seek the Liquor and Gaming Board to review the farcical voting capacity of Members, they might just do it.The current Structure resembles the Kremlin.You know the old joke, that someone broke into the Kremlin and stole next years result.
Im sorry to say guys, after listening to the podcast that whilst I agree with the sentiment, I do not agree with the actions and I am not on board with you guys this time.
There is an important concept in law called standing. If Garry slandered, defamed or assaulted Steve, I could not sue Garry because I am not involved and have no stake in it, I have no standing. We as Wests Tigers fans have no standing in calling for a change in teh governance or even a review of the governance of an organisation that we as WT fans have nothing to do with. Of course its not a legal case, but the concept remains and will fail on this basis.
Secondly, what are we hoping a review of the governance of HBG will mean? A review into HBG will look at the recent acquisition and development of Croydon Sports Club....so what? A review into HBG will look at the moneys spent on local associated sporting clubs and charities....so what? A review into HBG will look at the management around poker machines....so what? A review into HBG will look at adherence to RSA....so what? and so on and so on...EVEN IF they finally get around to looking at whether two old dinosaurs are actively plotting to sneak the Magpies back in, they will be looking at that through the paradigm of whether it is a good thing for WA & HBG, NOT WT.
Cant hurt to try though can it? Yes I think it is more likely to hurt than help. Again IMO it is more likely to fail due to the fact that the vast majority of petition signatories (less any WA members) have no standing and it will be ignored however will still attract a lot of negative press around the Tigers a the exact time when we should finally be attracting some positive media due to hopefully better results on the field. What impact does it have on our team to have a blowtorch of additional negative media with little hope of reward. What happens if you only get 1000 signatures? I also think that you run the risk of diluting the original petition that spawned the review because the motives were so pure on that one but by overreaching on this one I think you may attract some incorrect conclusions about your motivation.
If you guys were suggesting a petition to force the HBG board to implement the Review recommendations IN FULL, then I would be on board behind you 100% because that is something we have standing in, but for the reasons I've outlined above (and others) I cant get on board with this one.
Good luck, I hope it works.
Good.Take no prisoners !!!!! Ive never been to a protest in my life, but if you end up having one, we need to make sure its BIG.
As i've said before, we need people to join the Wests Ashfield Club and yes I know under the current structure we cant vote for change. However if enough of the members seek the Liquor and Gaming Board to review the farcical voting capacity of Members, they might just do it.The current Structure resembles the Kremlin.You know the old joke, that someone broke into the Kremlin and stole next years result.
A protest at Wests Ashfield is on the agenda, standby.
Wests Tigers Podcast - Talking everything Wests Tigers!
@tiger5150 agree completely. I have been saying for some time that WT needs to be independent of HBG. But, any change has to come from the HPG members not from a group of football club fans.
Im sorry to say guys, after listening to the podcast that whilst I agree with the sentiment, I do not agree with the actions and I am not on board with you guys this time.
There is an important concept in law called standing. If Garry slandered, defamed or assaulted Steve, I could not sue Garry because I am not involved and have no stake in it, I have no standing. We as Wests Tigers fans have no standing in calling for a change in teh governance or even a review of the governance of an organisation that we as WT fans have nothing to do with. Of course its not a legal case, but the concept remains and will fail on this basis.
Secondly, what are we hoping a review of the governance of HBG will mean? A review into HBG will look at the recent acquisition and development of Croydon Sports Club....so what? A review into HBG will look at the moneys spent on local associated sporting clubs and charities....so what? A review into HBG will look at the management around poker machines....so what? A review into HBG will look at adherence to RSA....so what? and so on and so on...EVEN IF they finally get around to looking at whether two old dinosaurs are actively plotting to sneak the Magpies back in, they will be looking at that through the paradigm of whether it is a good thing for WA & HBG, NOT WT.
Cant hurt to try though can it? Yes I think it is more likely to hurt than help. Again IMO it is more likely to fail due to the fact that the vast majority of petition signatories (less any WA members) have no standing and it will be ignored however will still attract a lot of negative press around the Tigers a the exact time when we should finally be attracting some positive media due to hopefully better results on the field. What impact does it have on our team to have a blowtorch of additional negative media with little hope of reward. What happens if you only get 1000 signatures? I also think that you run the risk of diluting the original petition that spawned the review because the motives were so pure on that one but by overreaching on this one I think you may attract some incorrect conclusions about your motivation.
If you guys were suggesting a petition to force the HBG board to implement the Review recommendations IN FULL, then I would be on board behind you 100% because that is something we have standing in, but for the reasons I've outlined above (and others) I cant get on board with this one.
Good luck, I hope it works.
I don’t agree with you because as WT members and fans it is the owners of The club (HBG) who are a large part of what has held us back. So I am impacted by the decisions they are making and I am seeking to pressure them to review their decision. They are a community organisation that has a special status in the community (eg tax exempt status) and they are accountable to the community in which they operate which I believe includes the WT community given there role as owners.
but if “standing” still bothers you, pay the $3 membership fee as become a WA member with “standing”.
https://holmanbarnesgroup.com.au/about-us/membership/
@tiger5150 agree completely. I have been saying for some time that WT needs to be independent of HBG. But, any change has to come from the HPG members not from a group of football club fans.
IMO that independence would come from the full implementation of the review recommendations and IMO that is what we should be targeting. That is something that we as WT fans have some standing in. WT fans have no standing or relevance to the management and governance of HBG and to be honest it is a little arrogant to think we do. HBG has a turnover of around $85M and its involvement in WT is less than $2M. The WT represent approximately 2.5% of HBG business.
Should WT fans have an input into an organisation that has 2.5% invested in the club? If HBG implement the review recommendations in full tomorrow, are we still wanting an "independent review" into their management? Why what would it have to do with us?
IMO we should have targeted simply the full implementation of the review, stir up media and public support for that and that would be much more effective.
I can see I am in a very small minority though so lets see how it goes. We all want the same thing so I hope its very successful.
I don’t agree with you because as WT members and fans it is the owners of The club (HBG) who are a large part of what has held us back. So I am impacted by the decisions they are making and I am seeking to pressure them to review their decision.
Serious question....which decision?
100% HBG incompetent management is what held us back and the leaders of this pod did a fantastic job with the original petition, forcing the independent review and the subsequent recommendations. Out of that a lot of good has come already. We are nearly there.
IMO the decision that needs looking at is implementation of the review recommendations because that is the only thing we have some involvement in, and what we have standing in.
This petition doesnt do that, and it doesnt do what we need. It is calling for an independent review of the management and governance of a separate organisation of which the Wests Tigers represents less than 2% of their turnover.
Is that review going to look at their poker machine management? How much they donated to community clubs (twice the Tigers grant)? Their RSA policies?
There is only one thing we need them to do and that is finish the implementation of the recommendations. That is what we should have targeted.
They are a community organisation that has a special status in the community (eg tax exempt status) and they are accountable to the community in which they operate which I believe includes the WT community given there role as owners.
100% correct and that is what this petition is calling for a review of. WT grant represents less than 2% of their revenue. How handy is it for a review into the other 98%?
but if “standing” still bothers you, pay the $3 membership fee as become a WA member with “standing”.
https://holmanbarnesgroup.com.au/about-us/membership/
Standing does bother me and should bother you because that is how things get done or ignored.
BTW if I join I dont have "standing" for 2 years.
I don’t agree with you because as WT members and fans it is the owners of The club (HBG) who are a large part of what has held us back. So I am impacted by the decisions they are making and I am seeking to pressure them to review their decision.
Serious question....which decision?
100% HBG incompetent management is what held us back and the leaders of this pod did a fantastic job with the original petition, forcing the independent review and the subsequent recommendations. Out of that a lot of good has come already. We are nearly there.
IMO the decision that needs looking at is implementation of the review recommendations because that is the only thing we have some involvement in, and what we have standing in.
This petition doesnt do that, and it doesnt do what we need. It is calling for an independent review of the management and governance of a separate organisation of which the Wests Tigers represents less than 2% of their turnover.
Is that review going to look at their poker machine management? How much they donated to community clubs (twice the Tigers grant)? Their RSA policies?
There is only one thing we need them to do and that is finish the implementation of the recommendations. That is what we should have targeted.
They are a community organisation that has a special status in the community (eg tax exempt status) and they are accountable to the community in which they operate which I believe includes the WT community given there role as owners.
100% correct and that is what this petition is calling for a review of. WT grant represents less than 2% of their revenue. How handy is it for a review into the other 98%?
but if “standing” still bothers you, pay the $3 membership fee as become a WA member with “standing”.
https://holmanbarnesgroup.com.au/about-us/membership/
Standing does bother me and should bother you because that is how things get done or ignored.
BTW if I join I dont have "standing" for 2 years.
the decision to be reviewed is the decision to elect Romero and Burgess and to sack the prior chairman and board.
I don’t agree with you because as WT members and fans it is the owners of The club (HBG) who are a large part of what has held us back. So I am impacted by the decisions they are making and I am seeking to pressure them to review their decision.
Serious question....which decision?
100% HBG incompetent management is what held us back and the leaders of this pod did a fantastic job with the original petition, forcing the independent review and the subsequent recommendations. Out of that a lot of good has come already. We are nearly there.
IMO the decision that needs looking at is implementation of the review recommendations because that is the only thing we have some involvement in, and what we have standing in.
This petition doesnt do that, and it doesnt do what we need. It is calling for an independent review of the management and governance of a separate organisation of which the Wests Tigers represents less than 2% of their turnover.
Is that review going to look at their poker machine management? How much they donated to community clubs (twice the Tigers grant)? Their RSA policies?
There is only one thing we need them to do and that is finish the implementation of the recommendations. That is what we should have targeted.
They are a community organisation that has a special status in the community (eg tax exempt status) and they are accountable to the community in which they operate which I believe includes the WT community given there role as owners.
100% correct and that is what this petition is calling for a review of. WT grant represents less than 2% of their revenue. How handy is it for a review into the other 98%?
but if “standing” still bothers you, pay the $3 membership fee as become a WA member with “standing”.
https://holmanbarnesgroup.com.au/about-us/membership/
Standing does bother me and should bother you because that is how things get done or ignored.
BTW if I join I dont have "standing" for 2 years.
the decision to be reviewed is the decision to elect Romero and Burgess and to sack the prior chairman and board.
And if the review finds they didnt breach their constitution (which is most likely)? Then what?
If the review finds that the whole debenture system is stupid (which it is) and inefficient (which it is)....then what? Guess who votes to change it or keep it the same?
Alternatively we could have petitioned and agitated media for the implementation of the final steps of the review which cuts to the heart of the matter and fixes the problem.
