Michael Tyler resigns

[B-dos]

A few points which may help:

Firstly, very good post and thanks for your input. You obviously have some solid knowledge of the issue.

I will comment on a few points though...

2. Some of them do have business skills and work in business - T Crowe for example.

wow, so the club is safe?? i manage a business, does that mean i have the ability to run a multi million $$ club?

3. Phil Gardner has been descibed in the Clubland as having a BIG case of small man syndrome - and if you meet him you will understand why - it is often about ego.

this isnt about Gardner. are you saying the NRL guys dont like Gardner and this has a infulence on their decision making?? im even more convinced these guys should go.

4. I have nodoubt that Wests want controll of the Knights - they blew it with Superleague when they had the Mariners - and would not support the Knights back then when they wanted their help - so ten years latter they are pushing for the Knights.

this isnt about wests. something tells me you have a allegiance to the NRL and something against Wests?

5. Yes Vince is a tough old nut - but has a big heart.

absolutely irrelevant.

8. The Newcastle Rugby League (NRL) helped to establish the Knights - perhaps it would have been better if they had just set the Knights up as a sub company with the NRL holding 100% of the shares - then their would be now issue with NRL directors on the board.

Im not sure what you are saying here but imo things have changed immensely since the clubs foundation year in '88. The whole league has turned professional which is a far cry from how things were in 88.

I honestly cannot see the club becoming a success if it were being controled by NRL alone.

I imagine we woiuld have next to zero chance of securing major sponsors without respected and experienced businessmen involved. imo the club would not have survived this long had the NRL has full control.

9. The NRL only appoints 4 directors of a 9 member board - 5 other directors either supported the motion or failed to vote (well one voted but were where the other 4?)

Harragon and Fitzgibbon left the meeting (i find it ridiculous that votes like this can be passed with 2/9 not present.) McKeown and Tyler voted against. That makes 9.

11. The NRL only has 4/9 of the Knights board - at Newcastle Leagues Club they have 5/9!

Any thoughts.....

i dont understand this point either... are you comparing the Newcastle Knights to the sh*thole that is the Newcastle Leagues Club?


Edit: added a few more comments..

 

[Newie is God's Country]

Conway is the laughing stock of the NRL. Honestly, if he were a man, he would have left himself the moment Mike Tyler was sacked. This club is in the crap it is because there are people who use our club for their public fame by posing as people who pretend that their motives are maintaining The Knights as a community owned club. Do you think that the people of Chelsea and Manchester give a toss about whether their club is owned by the people. That is why they sit 1 and 2 on the Premier league table. Sadly, money is all that matters in sport today. We have a mere 8000 members of which I am one. I for sure don't think I am god's gift because I have a membership. I do it because I put my faith in the club's owners to do what is right by me and my fellow supporters. I am yet to see that except for Mike T. He went to Wests because he wanted to keep the club as the people's club, but also was realistic enough to see we were shuffling deck chairs on the titanic, hence the need for money from Wests.

 

[B-dos]

...

 

[macavity]

I know I can lose it sometimes (see above) but on reflection its time for cool heads.

what we really want to know is what was the motivation for the spill.

WHY did the NewcRL guys do this -

for mine it was either -

a) there is a big-picture plan
b) they don't like the wests influence
c) Tyler stepped out of line one too many times (he is a bit too media friendly, and doesn't mind taking the credit for everything....)
d) personal agenda / ego play / self interest

or some combination of the above.

my feeling is that its a combo of b and c - with a tiny bit of d.

who is "the genge" when he is at home....

 

[B-dos]

i fully agree Mac.

although i think its b + d with a bit of c.

i cannot see how this type of thing could be part of a "bigger picture plan" without its also being a hell of a lot about personal agenda.

 

[macavity]

more to the point, if this is a 'big picture' move, they have done it in possibly the worst way.

they have destroyed any political capital and public sympathy they may otherwise have had, and have virtually signed their own death warrants as far as board positions go.

they really need to reveal their motivation and quick - and for mine a good way to discount personal agenda would be to agree that the board needs reform - and offer to cut the NewcRL positions to two at the next AGM - that would also give them the breathing space to implement what they want to, whether that is to revise the deal with Wests, make some staffing changes, whatever.

anything else - and it is going to look like an ego trip, no matter the motivation.

but whatever happens, it has to be nipped in the bud - and now - or we will be calling on that Wests guarantee.....

 

[The Genge]

wow, so the club is safe?? i manage a business, does that mean i have the ability to run a multi million $$ club?

No this was more a comment to people saying the NRL directors have no business skills

this isnt about wests. something tells me you have a allegiance to the NRL and something against Wests?

Not a fan of the NRL or Wests. I would just hate to see the Knights owned by Wests - they already have their own team to own.

Im not sure what you are saying here but imo things have changed immensely since the clubs foundation year in '88. The whole league has turned professional which is a far cry from how things were in 88.

No more to do with clubs like the bulldogs, panthers owned by the leagues club. The Newcastle Rugby League Ltd id a company and if people are all pushing for privatetisation then it is logic that it could have been better if the Knights had been a prive company to start with - or even list on the Newcastle Stock Exchange or ASX ie go public - though I doub if you would get a good share price!

I honestly cannot see the club becoming a success if it were being controled by NRL alone.

I imagine we woiuld have next to zero chance of securing major sponsors without respected and experienced businessmen involved. imo the club would not have survived this long had the NRL has full control.

Could have done if it had the right people involved - not saying that the current NRL people are the right people

Harragon and Fitzgibbon left the meeting (i find it ridiculous that votes like this can be passed with 2/9 not present.) McKeown and Tyler voted against. That makes 9.

True right! The meeting should have been held off to another date - votes like this should not have been taken without the FULL board present.

i dont understand this point either... are you comparing the Newcastle Knights to the sh*thole that is the Newcastle Leagues Club?

Newcastle Leagues Club is an alright place for what it is - ie small club in city - point was thigs could have been worse - NRL could have total control of the Knights board, as in Newcastle Leagues. By the way the Newcastle Leagues Club is in profit - the Knights have a net worth of minus $?????? several million from memory - check the Knights annual reports.

For those who want to know "the genge" is a Novacastrian, Knights member, and former longtime poster on the old Knights forum. If a meeting of Knights members was called I would be happy to support a change to the Knights board - as suggested by Cheif. I do however feel that the Knights have a strong postion/role in the Newcastle Rugby League and they should work togeather. The Knights are about much more than one first grade side and other stakeholders should be represented ie players, members, the Real NRL.

I feel this spate is about individual differences. Its a shame perssonal differences get involved in the operations of such a valuable part of the Newcastle community.

For the record I would not support the Knights been privately owned - esp. if by a private company, or individual. - The club is too much a part of the community for that.

 

[cram]

Ok well here is a spin and a bit of conspiracy theory for you.

Firstly the question I pose is this. What is the Real NRL and in particular the renegade board members association with one Con Constantine?

Some time ago it was proposed that the Newcastle Rugby League Club be moved from its present location to the top floor of the old Pink, or more appropriately named White, Elephant Markets.

This building is owned by Con Constantine. Former suitor of the Knights who, I believe would love to get his fingers right into the club and has in the past expressed a desire to own the club.

Now I am not sure why the proposal to move the club did not eventuate, however, I am starting to wonder whether there is a link between the fighting going on between the Knights and Con re EAS, the fact that there is no love loss between the Real NRL clubs and Wests, the fact that the REAL NRL at some point in the past had a business relationship with Con and his long held interest to control the Knights.

I know I am drawing a long bow but there are some questions to be asked and answered here.

 

[Gene Krupa]

If the real NRL has such a representation on the board, why don't they ante up with some running cash?

 

[Alex28]

A few points which may help:
9. The NRL only appoints 4 directors of a 9 member board - 5 other directors either supported the motion or failed to vote (well one voted but were where the other 4?

The Telegraph reported that Corcoran "crossed the floor" to make up the 5 person majority...

 

[The Genge]

Con offered the Newcastle Leagues Club the top floor of "The Store" several years ago. The members of NLC were generally in support of this as were some of the NRL directors. The more was however blocked beacuse: several members of the NRL board were opposed to the move (the NRL gets abouk $50k rent a year from NLC), some did not trust Con, the NSW government chnaged the laws part way through the process no longer allowing pokermachines to be in shopping centres.

Everyone in Newie knows Con wnated the Knights - it appears that the NRL directors were opossed to anyone owning the knights - Con or Wests.

The Knights sold Con their sports club - now Newcastle United sports club.

It is a shame that 20 years ago the Knights, NRL and NLC did not do a deal and start building their own meaga club back then - before gaming machines became a bad word. I think it also has to be remembered that no one expected the Knights to become so big. Back in the 80's NBN use to show NRL games on Sunday arvo and replay the "sydney" comp late at night.

 

[antonius]

Theres a fair bit from the other side in todays paper, basically saying it all stemed from wanting Tyler to justify some of his expenses!!! That to me seems to be a bit of a smoke screen, I also think Genge may well be touching on some of the real reasons behind all this. I personally do not think the NRL should have four members, and if a meeting of members to decide this is held then I certainly will vote for a reduction. I also think it's time for Conway to go, it seems every time there is some sort of crisis in the club he is lurking there in the background saying little but ensuring his own stability, the man appears to sneaky for mine, he also had a very poor admin record in the club industry has no outward persona, and certainly does and says some stupid things (think the Johns fiasco re Parra last year) The overall support from mr general public definately is on Tyler and Harragons side if you read the letters in todays paper, and as I mentioned according to the staff at the club all yesterdays phone calls were pro Tyler. The four directors and Corcoran are on borrowed time IMO.

 

[Alex28]

I would think that the NRL's representation on the board should be in line with what they contribute to the club - the members have 5 representatives and contribute millions into the club.

What exactly does the club get from the NRL?

 

[The Genge]

What exactly does the club get from the NRL?

Andrew Johns, Mat Johns, the Cheif, Owen Cragie, their whole SG Ball, Jersay flegg sides, just about every player who plays for the Knights who played juniors in Newcastle had their career developed through the NRL.

Lets face it players don't wake up one day at 19 years old and walk out to first grade for the Knights, they first learn the game at a local level - from U/7 - first grade. Lets remember who the NRL is - it's the local clubs - Wests, Central, Kurri, Lakes etc, junior league - Stockton, Cardiff, Kotora, Greta, 2nd divison - westy, east maitland, referees etc etc - basiclly rugby league in Newcastle and Maitland is the NRL - not many people know but the first name for the Knights - before the "Knights" was chosen was "Newcastle & Coalfields RLFC" - or something like that.

The NRL is rugby league in Newcastle, Lake and Coalfields. Unless the Knights buy all their players from other clubs they must be developed somewhere - and it is the NRL who developes all the local players.

Their has been some comments both in the media and here that their are 8000 knights members but the NRL has four on the board - well keep in mind that the NRL represents everyone in Newcastle involved in rugby league - this includes the captain of Wests first grade, to the young kinds playing their firts game, as well as the trainners, coaches, parents etc - much more than 8000.

Though as stated before I would be happy to see a reduction in their number - though I don't really care - what I hate is that the Knights board now has a "them and us" - remember the cheif was once a part of the NRL! It is much better taht they work together - with the Knights being the flagship for League in Newcastle and the NRL developing players and having a good strong loacl comp - which is already far better than Metro Cup or the Jim Beam Cup - in fact I'll go out on a limb and say that the NRL comp is the best comp in the CRL, far better than anything that the NSWRL has to offer and most likely the best comp after the National RL level in Australia.

 

[Alex28]

With the greatest respect, Owen Craigie came from Group 19 and the Knights brought him to Newcastle.

What other league has such a dominant representation on a clubs board? Are you suggesting the NRL would have nothing to do with the Knights if they booted them off the board completely?

I would think not...

 

[cram]

When looking at the History of the Knights we first and foremost have to remember that the NRL was never that excited about fielding a team in the Sydney Comp. After the first season in 1908 they walked away from the Sydney Comp and in the early 80's they kept up their resistance of entering a team into the then Winfield Cup.

Two men ensured Newcastle made it into the Sydney Comp. Leigh Maughan and Michael Hill. These two lobbied and brokered the deal that resulted in the Real NRL deciding to vote to enter a team into the Winfield Comp. These two, in my opinion, are the Knights.

No matter what side of the fence you are on you would be naive not to acknowledge that there is politics involved here. This is about philosophies and ideals. What you have to acknowledge is that the only way a club survives in the modern era is to have cash flow. Michael Hill acknowledged a couple of years ago you can't keep moving forward without the funding. I wonder whether the Real NRL realises this. As one person put it today in a letter to the editor, (parapharase) the knights have had Souths to protect them from seeing how inept their management is. What are they going to do now?

For me I would like to know what Leigh and Michael think of recent developments. These two know the history of the club, they know the politics of the NRL. Lets hear their opions.

If you want to read more about how the Knights came to be grab a copy of Neil Jameson's book....."Our Town, Our Team The Story of the Newcastle Knights".

 

[IanG]

The last thing we needed was to have a boardroom spat before the start of the season. Though did anybody hear what Leigh Maughn had to say on NBN News last night? Basically he was saying it's a situation that's been brewing for quite some time and it's a good oportunity to clear the air as it were.

 

[Medievalknight]

Question for everyone to ponder on.................IF Wests group pull there funding of the Knights are the real NRL going to come in and put there money where there mouth is.........I doubt it as they had that opportunity afforded to them BEFORE Wests became our saviour.


THINK PEOPLE

 

[cram]

The answer to that is simple, the Real NRL don't have that type of money and the only club that is truly financial is Wests. Some of the others have a few bucks but not enough to throw the type of money at the club that Wests has.

 

[CJKnight]

What does this mean for our major sponsors?

Does this mean that in '08 when Joey retires we are not going to have any money to throw at name players?

Just who will be paying the roster when Tyler is gone and can't get us those valuable sponsors?