NRL clubs revolt

[Jethro]

.
NRL clubs revolt against plan to impose independent directors, chairmen

July 12, 2014
Adrian Proszenko
Chief Rugby League Reporter


Club powerbrokers intend to unite against the NRL's plans to impose independent directors and chairmen on their boards, as many believe their current set up best represents the needs of their membership.

Read More
.

 

[HappilyManly]

This is only for those that are not privately owned, I believe.

Knights, Tigers and Sharks already have NRL appointed people.

 

[mozgrame]

.
NRL clubs revolt against plan to impose independent directors, chairmen

July 12, 2014
Adrian Proszenko
Chief Rugby League Reporter


Club powerbrokers intend to unite against the NRL's plans to impose independent directors and chairmen on their boards, as many believe their current set up best represents the needs of their membership.

Read More
.

No news here. I've always found the other 15 clubs revolting.

 

[north coast eagle]

Not hard to figure out why Bulldogs and Roosters don't want independent scrutiny.

 

[ManlyBacker]

Sometimes I'm a dummy but this looks like a commitment to a minimum level of female board members. It gets my vote. Anyone who thinks this is a PC exercise is an idiot as it goes way beyond that. I get the best candidate thinking, but the reality is that female members provide a more balanced, a more understanding and a less aggressive view of the world. Suck it up Neanderthals!!

 

[Dan]

Sometimes I'm a dummy but this looks like a commitment to a minimum level of female board members. It gets my vote. Anyone who thinks this is a PC exercise is an idiot as it goes way beyond that. I get the best candidate thinking, but the reality is that female members provide a more balanced, a more understanding and a less aggressive view of the world. Suck it up Neanderthals!!

I somewhat agree but forcing minimum number on every board is just wrong, sure there should be a minimum number across the entire sport but not on every board. Reality is this means some better candidates will be replaced by inferior ones just to appease the rules.

The idea that they can attract women and children as a norm to the sport by changing and softening the product is silly, the reality is by softening it they are losing fans to union, something about a nose and spiting your face.

The entire business approach of the league is faulty, and they need to do some real deep analysis on their pasitioning, vision and direction.

It's suffered too long with jobs for the boys this is true but forcing people's hand rarely works out

 

[6/71]

Sometimes I'm a dummy but this looks like a commitment to a minimum level of female board members. It gets my vote. Anyone who thinks this is a PC exercise is an idiot as it goes way beyond that. I get the best candidate thinking, but the reality is that female members provide a more balanced, a more understanding and a less aggressive view of the world. Suck it up Neanderthals!!

This is actually extremely sexist and discriminatory. Can gents not be balanced?

You are answering stereotypes with stereotypes.

Equality is a fair go for all. No leg ups, everyone from scratch.

 

[ManlyBacker]

I don't even remember posting this - another late night effort I'll stand by the sentiment though. Go you gals, we need more of you at every level and on the Board is a good move. Note that the Sea Eagles have been one of the leaders in this area.

 

[globaleagle]

Each team should have 3 female players!