B-dos
Referee
- Messages
- 28,165
The Genge said: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..