@tiger5150 I respect that view and of course it is only a suggestion.
FWIW I think Steve and the other admins are seeking a review of governance and I think the opinions of Cavanagh are relevant to that issue.
Anyway if the decision to include guests on the pod is a matter for the admins ultimately. Ironically, Cavanagh has just been interviewed by Jimmy Smith on SEN. Its a fascinating listen.
https://www.sen.com.au/podcasts/
He explains that the 8 person WT board should consist of
4 Ashfield
1 Campbelltown
1 Balmain
2 NRL appointed independents.
It's suggested by Cavanagh that the 4 Ashfield directors conspired to appoint for want of a better term "their own guys" in the Campbelltown and Balmain spots without following proper process. There has also been some allegations made against Cavanagh by Lee H which were investigated and saw Cavanagh's Campbelltown membership suspended for 6 months.
The interview ended with me having more questions about the governance structure which IMO at least, justifies the efforts that Podcast admins have made with the petition to get to the bottom of the issues.
@tiger5150 I respect that view and of course it is only a suggestion.
FWIW I think Steve and the other admins are seeking a review of governance and I think the opinions of Cavanagh are relevant to that issue.
Anyway if the decision to include guests on the pod is a matter for the admins ultimately. Ironically, Cavanagh has just been interviewed by Jimmy Smith on SEN. Its a fascinating listen.
https://www.sen.com.au/podcasts/
He explains that the 8 person WT board should consist of
4 Ashfield
1 Campbelltown
1 Balmain
2 NRL appointed independents.
It's suggested by Cavanagh that the 4 Ashfield directors conspired to appoint for want of a better term "their own guys" in the Campbelltown and Balmain spots without following proper process. There has also been some allegations made against Cavanagh by Lee H which were investigated and saw Cavanagh's Campbelltown membership suspended for 6 months.
The interview ended with me having more questions about the governance structure which IMO at least, justifies the efforts that Podcast admins have made with the petition to get to the bottom of the issues.
Ive heard Cavanaghs complaints previously and he raises some issues that sound like they have merit and he also to me comes across as someone who over inflates their relevance and has a grudge. Why is his opinion of the board make up important or relevant? How much money does Wests Campbelltown put into WT? Not to say that his opinion isnt valid and it might even be similar to mine, but why would his opinion be more important than mine, yours or the next fan?
Its well known that Cavanagh has a grudge against WT & WA. Thats what I mean about "fishing for a particular political outcome". Why dont they interview this bloke who hates the board, or this bloke who hates the board? You arent going to get an unbiased or balanced opinion and speaking only for myself Im not interested in hearing that on the pod. To me its creating an echo chamber.
Ive heard Cavanaghs complaints previously and he raises some issues that sound like they have merit and he also to me comes across as someone who over inflates their relevance and has a grudge.
I agree on both fronts.
He's making the claim that proper process was not followed when board members were appointed. I don't have to see / hear him interviewed on the podcast if it's going to get people offside but it's reasonable to hope that his claim would be investigated. It could well end up being baseless because he has a grudge as you say.
Ive heard Cavanaghs complaints previously and he raises some issues that sound like they have merit and he also to me comes across as someone who over inflates their relevance and has a grudge.
He's making the claim that proper process was not followed when board members were appointed.
Ive heard that claim, and on the face of it,the way he explains it, it sounds like it warrants investigation........except, in his own words, Cavanagh reported this complaint to ASIC (from memory) months ago and that is exactly the right thing to do, however if ASIC dont find any wrongdoing and dont pass any judgement on the club, then that is enough for me. What is next? Review ASIC? If Cavanaghs complaints have any merit, the correct people will deal with it (ASIC) and no witchhunt should be necessary. I find it interesting that Cavanagh is still spruiking these concerns MONTHS after reporting them to ASIC. If ASIC have ruled on it, then it is just muckraking now.
I don't have to see / hear him interviewed on the podcast if it's going to get people offside but it's reasonable to hope that his claim would be investigated. It could well end up being baseless because he has a grudge as you say.
Mate you are more than entitled to your opinion and to want him on the podcast as are others, Im just not in that camp. As Ive said above, Cavanagh did the right thing with his complaints about governance by reporting them to ASIC and that should be the end of it. If he continues to speak about these claims in the absence of an ASIC judgement, then he is simply muckracking, casting innuendoes and causing touble for the sake of his grudge.
Purely IMO but completely on the face of it, I can see why WA want nothing to do with Cavanagh.
That last sentence in your post detracted from the rest of it. It was unnecessary. You'd made your opinion known.Ive heard Cavanaghs complaints previously and he raises some issues that sound like they have merit and he also to me comes across as someone who over inflates their relevance and has a grudge.
He's making the claim that proper process was not followed when board members were appointed.
Ive heard that claim, and on the face of it,the way he explains it, it sounds like it warrants investigation........except, in his own words, Cavanagh reported this complaint to ASIC (from memory) months ago and that is exactly the right thing to do, however if ASIC dont find any wrongdoing and dont pass any judgement on the club, then that is enough for me. What is next? Review ASIC? If Cavanaghs complaints have any merit, the correct people will deal with it (ASIC) and no witchhunt should be necessary. I find it interesting that Cavanagh is still spruiking these concerns MONTHS after reporting them to ASIC. If ASIC have ruled on it, then it is just muckraking now.
I don't have to see / hear him interviewed on the podcast if it's going to get people offside but it's reasonable to hope that his claim would be investigated. It could well end up being baseless because he has a grudge as you say.
Mate you are more than entitled to your opinion and to want him on the podcast as are others, Im just not in that camp. As Ive said above, Cavanagh did the right thing with his complaints about governance by reporting them to ASIC and that should be the end of it. If he continues to speak about these claims in the absence of an ASIC judgement, then he is simply muckracking, casting innuendoes and causing touble for the sake of his grudge.
Purely IMO but completely on the face of it, I can see why WA want nothing to do with Cavanagh.
Now I start to question why you would publicly fall one way (WA) over the other (Cavanagh). Hmmmm ......
That last sentence in your post detracted from the rest of it. It was unnecessary. You'd made your opinion known.Ive heard Cavanaghs complaints previously and he raises some issues that sound like they have merit and he also to me comes across as someone who over inflates their relevance and has a grudge.
He's making the claim that proper process was not followed when board members were appointed.
Ive heard that claim, and on the face of it,the way he explains it, it sounds like it warrants investigation........except, in his own words, Cavanagh reported this complaint to ASIC (from memory) months ago and that is exactly the right thing to do, however if ASIC dont find any wrongdoing and dont pass any judgement on the club, then that is enough for me. What is next? Review ASIC? If Cavanaghs complaints have any merit, the correct people will deal with it (ASIC) and no witchhunt should be necessary. I find it interesting that Cavanagh is still spruiking these concerns MONTHS after reporting them to ASIC. If ASIC have ruled on it, then it is just muckraking now.
I don't have to see / hear him interviewed on the podcast if it's going to get people offside but it's reasonable to hope that his claim would be investigated. It could well end up being baseless because he has a grudge as you say.
Mate you are more than entitled to your opinion and to want him on the podcast as are others, Im just not in that camp. As Ive said above, Cavanagh did the right thing with his complaints about governance by reporting them to ASIC and that should be the end of it. If he continues to speak about these claims in the absence of an ASIC judgement, then he is simply muckracking, casting innuendoes and causing touble for the sake of his grudge.
Purely IMO but completely on the face of it, I can see why WA want nothing to do with Cavanagh.
Now I start to question why you would publicly fall one way (WA) over the other (Cavanagh). Hmmmm ......
Did the "IMO" give it away?
I dont fall either way between WA or Cavanagh, its not a binary comparison. I think the WA owned board is not doing a good job of running WT and there should be an independent review into the managment structures of the WT.........AND...based on listening to Cavanagh airing his personal grudges at any opportunity despite the fact that by his own words his complaint has been reviewed by the highest regulatory body and evidently no action taken, I can have an opinion on him, his grievances and his propensity to air his disproven grievances at every opportunity.
This week the media LIED about the fact that Chris Lawrence has disowned the club. This has been proven as a lie by Lawrences own actions and words. All fans correctly jump all over this section of the media for peddling false narratives about the club with the purpose of denigrating the club. If another person, lets call him say...Cavanagh goes all over social media and podcasts and repeats over and over a narrative and grievances, that by his own words have been tested by the highest regulator and found not to be incorrect does exactly the same, some people lift him up as a hero because he supports their narrative.
Using facts, point out where I have gone wrong in this analysis.
There's no facts here, only opinion. And, I was specific in expressing my opinion that your last sentence was unnecessary. Until then, it was informative and considered without being vitriolic.That last sentence in your post detracted from the rest of it. It was unnecessary. You'd made your opinion known.Ive heard Cavanaghs complaints previously and he raises some issues that sound like they have merit and he also to me comes across as someone who over inflates their relevance and has a grudge.
He's making the claim that proper process was not followed when board members were appointed.
Ive heard that claim, and on the face of it,the way he explains it, it sounds like it warrants investigation........except, in his own words, Cavanagh reported this complaint to ASIC (from memory) months ago and that is exactly the right thing to do, however if ASIC dont find any wrongdoing and dont pass any judgement on the club, then that is enough for me. What is next? Review ASIC? If Cavanaghs complaints have any merit, the correct people will deal with it (ASIC) and no witchhunt should be necessary. I find it interesting that Cavanagh is still spruiking these concerns MONTHS after reporting them to ASIC. If ASIC have ruled on it, then it is just muckraking now.
I don't have to see / hear him interviewed on the podcast if it's going to get people offside but it's reasonable to hope that his claim would be investigated. It could well end up being baseless because he has a grudge as you say.
Mate you are more than entitled to your opinion and to want him on the podcast as are others, Im just not in that camp. As Ive said above, Cavanagh did the right thing with his complaints about governance by reporting them to ASIC and that should be the end of it. If he continues to speak about these claims in the absence of an ASIC judgement, then he is simply muckracking, casting innuendoes and causing touble for the sake of his grudge.
Purely IMO but completely on the face of it, I can see why WA want nothing to do with Cavanagh.
Now I start to question why you would publicly fall one way (WA) over the other (Cavanagh). Hmmmm ......
Did the "IMO" give it away?
I dont fall either way between WA or Cavanagh, its not a binary comparison. I think the WA owned board is not doing a good job of running WT and there should be an independent review into the managment structures of the WT.........AND...based on listening to Cavanagh airing his personal grudges at any opportunity despite the fact that by his own words his complaint has been reviewed by the highest regulatory body and evidently no action taken, I can have an opinion on him, his grievances and his propensity to air his disproven grievances at every opportunity.
This week the media LIED about the fact that Chris Lawrence has disowned the club. This has been proven as a lie by Lawrences own actions and words. All fans correctly jump all over this section of the media for peddling false narratives about the club with the purpose of denigrating the club. If another person, lets call him say...Cavanagh goes all over social media and podcasts and repeats over and over a narrative and grievances, that by his own words have been tested by the highest regulator and found not to be incorrect does exactly the same, some people lift him up as a hero because he supports their narrative.
Using facts, point out where I have gone wrong in this analysis.
@tiger5150 the outcome of the ASIC investigation is something I would want to see Cavanagh asked about.
I'm not an authority on the topic but I suspect ASIC don't make it their business to investigate director's disputes in private companies because the level of public interest is low (compared to say listed companies where ASIC as a responsibility to protect the rights of shareholders)
There's no facts here, only opinion. And, I was specific in expressing my opinion that your last sentence was unnecessary. Until then, it was informative and considered without being vitriolic.That last sentence in your post detracted from the rest of it. It was unnecessary. You'd made your opinion known.Ive heard Cavanaghs complaints previously and he raises some issues that sound like they have merit and he also to me comes across as someone who over inflates their relevance and has a grudge.
He's making the claim that proper process was not followed when board members were appointed.
Ive heard that claim, and on the face of it,the way he explains it, it sounds like it warrants investigation........except, in his own words, Cavanagh reported this complaint to ASIC (from memory) months ago and that is exactly the right thing to do, however if ASIC dont find any wrongdoing and dont pass any judgement on the club, then that is enough for me. What is next? Review ASIC? If Cavanaghs complaints have any merit, the correct people will deal with it (ASIC) and no witchhunt should be necessary. I find it interesting that Cavanagh is still spruiking these concerns MONTHS after reporting them to ASIC. If ASIC have ruled on it, then it is just muckraking now.
I don't have to see / hear him interviewed on the podcast if it's going to get people offside but it's reasonable to hope that his claim would be investigated. It could well end up being baseless because he has a grudge as you say.
Mate you are more than entitled to your opinion and to want him on the podcast as are others, Im just not in that camp. As Ive said above, Cavanagh did the right thing with his complaints about governance by reporting them to ASIC and that should be the end of it. If he continues to speak about these claims in the absence of an ASIC judgement, then he is simply muckracking, casting innuendoes and causing touble for the sake of his grudge.
Purely IMO but completely on the face of it, I can see why WA want nothing to do with Cavanagh.
Now I start to question why you would publicly fall one way (WA) over the other (Cavanagh). Hmmmm ......
Did the "IMO" give it away?
I dont fall either way between WA or Cavanagh, its not a binary comparison. I think the WA owned board is not doing a good job of running WT and there should be an independent review into the managment structures of the WT.........AND...based on listening to Cavanagh airing his personal grudges at any opportunity despite the fact that by his own words his complaint has been reviewed by the highest regulatory body and evidently no action taken, I can have an opinion on him, his grievances and his propensity to air his disproven grievances at every opportunity.
This week the media LIED about the fact that Chris Lawrence has disowned the club. This has been proven as a lie by Lawrences own actions and words. All fans correctly jump all over this section of the media for peddling false narratives about the club with the purpose of denigrating the club. If another person, lets call him say...Cavanagh goes all over social media and podcasts and repeats over and over a narrative and grievances, that by his own words have been tested by the highest regulator and found not to be incorrect does exactly the same, some people lift him up as a hero because he supports their narrative.
Using facts, point out where I have gone wrong in this analysis.
I hardly think it was vitriolic
@tiger5150 the outcome of the ASIC investigation is something I would want to see Cavanagh asked about.
I agree but it would make it a very short podcast interview.
Joel; Have ASIC completed their investigation into your allegations?
Cavanagh ; yes and no action has been taken / No not yet
Joel : Thanks for your time Cav
I'm not an authority on the topic but I suspect ASIC don't make it their business to investigate director's disputes in private companies because the level of public interest is low (compared to say listed companies where ASIC as a responsibility to protect the rights of shareholders)
Cavanagh claims that the Corporations Act has been breached. Serious allegations that need investigation. He has reported it to the organisation that polices the Corporations Act. That is the right thing to do, but there is nothing else needed. If the Act has been broken ASIC will act. If it hasnt they wont. At that should be the start and end of it. Everything else is petty politics and airing grudges at every opportunity.
