I'm numb.
Some mistakes have been made by the current board and leadership, they come down to PR and Irvine conceded that. That appears to have costed the current board. I believe they should've put in place a proper management qualified CEO years ago and perhaps they've paid the price.
But in the end we have lost a Chairman and Board which worked for nothing and saved then club from the banks.
And we have elected a ticket with strong links to the De La mob who with their jobs for the boys mentality got us into 13 mil debt. The fact the results of an election were leaked last night doesn't bode well for their corporate governance standards.
Given the criticism of irvine being overseas at the time of the drugs announcement (and I believe that infamous press conference should've been delayed until he was back) I wonder if there will be the same criticism of Keogh who it was reported is overseas if he isn't at the AGM tonight.
There's fault on both sides, neither side perfect thats why I didn't vote for a ticket and chose candidates on merit, pity the bulk of members didn't.
Yes he did but its irrelevant that he did it for nothing. I wish people would stop harping on about that. His choice to do that. There's probably 50 guys on here that would have done the same thing given the opportunity.
It's a real shame how it ended for Irvine but given his mistakes and all the drama, anger and lawsuits flying around he wasn't the best candidate to take the club forward. He can now get his life back to normal and rest easy with the job he did.
There is now finally a CEO and proper management structure in place so the board can just do what it's designed for. Whilst it looks a couple more of them got in than what I would've like how about people give them a chance. They are not exactly Neville's.
That is the reason we didn't have a CEO. Simply couldn't afford it.
do you know they aren't? I said potentially.
trying to discredit the statement for own agenda fair enough. But even if you call it 10 it's still more than double 4 (just In case... 10/4 = 2.5).
that's 2.5 times more potential pain than before at best. At worst it is 7.75 times more pain.
lets just wait and see if better corporate governance is upheld as promised or if the suspected jobs for the boys prevails.
I'm numb.
Some mistakes have been made by the current board and leadership, they come down to PR and Irvine conceded that. That appears to have costed the current board. I believe they should've put in place a proper management qualified CEO years ago and perhaps they've paid the price.
But in the end we have lost a Chairman and Board which worked for nothing and saved then club from the banks.
And we have elected a ticket with strong links to the De La mob who with their jobs for the boys mentality got us into 13 mil debt. The fact the results of an election were leaked last night doesn't bode well for their corporate governance standards.
Given the criticism of irvine being overseas at the time of the drugs announcement (and I believe that infamous press conference should've been delayed until he was back) I wonder if there will be the same criticism of Keogh who it was reported is overseas if he isn't at the AGM tonight.
There's fault on both sides, neither side perfect thats why I didn't vote for a ticket and chose candidates on merit, pity the bulk of members didn't.
I know this isn't the Drug Scandal page or the Rumour Mill but I have sources that indicate ASADA are really only hammering down on two Cronulla players.
If that's true than the Sharks are only worrying about two lawsuits instead of four
:topic
How about we wait a month or two to see what Unity brings to the table before we all get up in arms about them being elected.
If they're **** then by all means abuse the hell out of them. I just think some of you could feel very silly if you abuse Unity now but in the future they turn out to be awesome for the club.
Well the members have spoken and congratulations to the new board. Whoever is saying that the litigation is going to stop now is kidding themselves. Let's hope the new board open up the finances and we can all see what has been spent and on what. I wish Douglas was gone as well. Those of you who continue to prop up what the old board did are living with blind faith. Hopefully if the old board are found to have acted outside authority action can be commenced.
Hopefully a new era for the Sharks if the Unity brochures are to be believed. I wish them good luck.
Well the members have spoken and congratulations to the new board. Whoever is saying that the litigation is going to stop now is kidding themselves. Let's hope the new board open up the finances and we can all see what has been spent and on what. I wish Douglas was gone as well. Those of you who continue to prop up what the old board did are living with blind faith. Hopefully if the old board are found to have acted outside authority action can be commenced.
Hopefully a new era for the Sharks if the Unity brochures are to be believed. I wish them good luck.
Well the members have spoken and congratulations to the new board. Whoever is saying that the litigation is going to stop now is kidding themselves. Let's hope the new board open up the finances and we can all see what has been spent and on what. I wish Douglas was gone as well. Those of you who continue to prop up what the old board did are living with blind faith. Hopefully if the old board are found to have acted outside authority action can be commenced.
Hopefully a new era for the Sharks if the Unity brochures are to be believed. I wish them good luck.
Why would people find reason to criticise, is Keogh the chairman?
Whether right or wrong I said a few weeks ago that there was a lot of anger and resentment towards Irvine and the board in the community and it looks like people have voted accordingly.
For all the good work the board did there's still some question marks over certain areas - the management structure, sponsorship. People forget we haven't hd a major sponsor since 2011. I also think the ASADA business and handling has definately exposed some limitations old board members may have had.
Definately time for some changes. Would've preferred one or two other candidates however, instead of McConnell.