Originally posted by theGman
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Have you ever wondered why we cannot vote??
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by John Corey View Post
That's why we are referred to as 'fans'. I'm often amazed at times by the self importance of some fans. Not to mention the pessimistic attitude.
We have had one poor year in the last 4 , yet we should all have no faith in the people that gave us that. We need a voice!
No we don't. We just need to be fans and support our team through the good times and the bad.
Ive been singing that tune for quite a while but it doesnt sit well with some.
Comment
-
Originally posted by ism22 View Post
It would be impractical and would thwart a heap of high-profile signings if every decision had to go to club members.
You speak of the board, not 'members' when you speak of voting. Sure it's a club but what's news? When you're making as much money as guys like Nick Politis and Mark Bouris (and have the business smarts/influence) then maybe you'll get an invite. Every club have their board and boards are exclusive for a reason. Pretty sure if (for example) Bill Gates decided to join the Roosters then a board membership invite would be attached to his membership letter.
Politis' Ford dealership was the club's major sponsor for a long time. Rightly or wrongly, this earned him significant control over the board. Again... I'm sure that if you owned Steggles then you'd get more of a say about who we sign because you'd be backing up your opinion with big $$$.
The current system is not setup to give a former sponsor some say its setup to give protection and control to one man
Some people like this, but the club has lost many great rugby league people over the years just because they had a different opinion to the he who shall not be named.
The man deserves a say and input, but I disagree that he deserves the current control he has at the club.
If anything happens to the one in complete control, we have no contingency and unlike every other club would be in total disarray.
I got nothing against any of them. And this has nothing to do with our terrible season this year or the premiership in 2013.
Absolute power corrupts absolutely.Last edited by redrooster; 10-24-2016, 06:25 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by itshowwedoitinthedruitt View Post
And in a democracy FoFF may make a comeback and may new party the POP's(Piss off Pearce) would get a say, how fantastic would that be, sign me up
poor analogy , the foff movement was motivated by more than just ruffling a few feathers , they were completely correct in their one agenda.
But I get your point.
No successful league team has ever operated under the true meaning of democracy.
Comment
-
Originally posted by John Corey View Post
We have had one poor year in the last 4 , yet we should all have no faith in the people that gave us that. We need a voice!
the club could win a premiership every year for the next 10 years and the many people , and yes the list is very long, would still want the clubs voting and board structure to be transparent and operate in a way that is like all companies and football clubs. Where all appointments are made in the light of day.
Board members should be selected in a transparent fashion not just on the basis of being friends with the one that matters.
The way the club is run and structured at the moment serves only one purpose and that is only to protect those on the board and keep them in power and only appoint the people they want.
Ive got nothing against any of them but the club is run as a rich mans plaything. The only difference is the powers that be dont want to openly privatise it and pay the really big dollars to do so eg like Souths. So what theyve done is they have unofficially privatised it by the constitution which doesnt allow any changes unless they approve. So they will remain in power until they decide theyve had enough or until their death.
- 1 like
Comment
-
Originally posted by redrooster View PostIve got nothing against any of them but the club is run as a rich mans plaything. The only difference is the powers that be dont want to openly privatise it and pay the really big dollars to do so eg like Souths. So what theyve done is they have unofficially privatised it by the constitution which doesnt allow any changes unless they approve. So they will remain in power until they decide theyve had enough or until their death.
And garbage.
Ask George Piggins what the true difference is.
Comment
-
Originally posted by eddie View Post
Crap.
And garbage.
Ask George Piggins what the true difference is.
ive got nothing against any of them though but if you think the club is setup in this way for any other reason than to protect those currently in power your simply wrong
Im not saying privatisation is the way to go , I would.be against that, but we are unofficially privatised as it stands currently as nothing can change unless 1 person agrees to it..
Comment
-
Originally posted by redrooster View PostIve got nothing against him or any of the current board members ..
This thread is about how and why the football club is structured in the unique way it currently is
Sorry.
Your previous posts on this thread could be read that way.
I'm a bit out of the loop these days , so to speak, but as supporters we have to have some understanding of where our bread is buttered.
Big statement to say that anyone who thinks our club is set up just to protect those currently in power, and to give the impression that privately owned rich mans toys like souffs are somehow more transparent than our model..........kinda hurts.
I am an uncle Nick defender in some fashion, because I know how much he cares about us as a sporting team with a long history, and I sometimes worry where we'd be now without him.
Saying that we are unofficially privatised is gonna rub some supporters up the wrong way.
Goodnight , don't feel well atm
Comment
Comment