An Independent Commission for Australian Rugby?

[p.Tah]

NSWRU executive director Bruce Worboys argued for the retention of the present system.

He doesn't think there is an issue that there are 14 voting members representing only 243,000 players. That's one vote for every 17,000 players or 25,000 NSW players for each NSW vote. He doesn't think that's top heavy?!

What does the NSWRU do these days? They don't look after development of junior players, the ARU does. They don't look after the Waratahs, NSW Waratahs Ltd does. They don't look after the Shute Shield, SRU does. Yet they have the highest voting power in the country.

Another level of "required" government bureaucracy to get in the way and suck up the money with more regulation in the pretence of "best practice".
If" the ARU structure is a problem, then fix the ARU.

That's the problem. The ARU can't fix the ARU because there is too much self interest by the voting states to do this on their own accord. They need their hand forced to implement this change. I wouldn't be surprised if the ARU lobbied the government to do this.

I don't think the States/territories should have 1 vote each because the smaller states could vote in a block for changes that may suit them but be detrimental to NSW and QLD.

The only logical solution in this day in age is an Independent Commission. Rugby has some of the country's best business minds as supporters. The game needs people of this calibre running the game.

The AFL has grown to the monolith it has become because they discarded the antiquated model in 1993 where the Victorian clubs essentially ran the game. Since then it hasn’t looked back and is the wealthiest and best run sport in the country. Yet we have structure that was set up in the 1920s when the game was amateur.

The fact that Worboys thinks everything is fine the way it is highlights why this system is wrong and only supports self interest.

 

[Slim 293]

The ARU can't fix the ARU because there is too much self interest by the voting states to do this on their own accord. They need their hand forced to implement this change. I wouldn't be surprised if the ARU lobbied the government to do this.

ARU to announce corporate governance review

• BY:BRET HARRIS
• From:The Australian
• April 24, 2012 12:00AM

FORMER federal minister for sport Mark Arbib and retired general Peter Cosgrove will join forces to undertake a review of Australian rugby's corporate governance.


The ARU is expected to announce the review after its annual general meeting to be held in Sydney on Friday.
Australian rugby is governed by an old-fashioned federated model, which is out of step with modern sporting governance.

The Australian revealed last week that sports that do not follow new Australian Sports Commission guidelines on governance risk losing government funding and the finger was pointed directly at rugby.

The federal government's stance on rugby's governance makes the Arbib/Cosgrove review even more important.

The ASC guidelines emphasised independence and best-practice business protocols.

It is understood ARU chief executive John O'Neill and chairman Peter McGrath support the review and that talks with the federal government were held while Arbib was minister for sport between 2010 and March this year.

Given his previous role, Arbib is well-versed in sports governance and in an ideal position to help the ARU to carry out the review, which will probably take several months.

A former Labor powerbroker, Arbib resigned from the ministry and the Senate after Kevin Rudd's unsuccessful leadership challenge against Julia Gillard.

Arbib is an avid rugby fan, having played colts at Sydney club Randwick and lower grades with Eastern Suburbs. It is understood Cosgrove, who is an ARU board member, will oversee the review, while Arbib will focus on the detail.

Arbib and Cosgrove will engage with key stakeholders in Australian rugby as part of their review.

The ARU refused to confirm that the review would be conducted when contacted by The Australian yesterday, but sources say it will definitely happen.

"It would be inappropriate to discuss anything around this until the ARU speaks to key stakeholders at the AGM on Friday," an ARU spokesman said.

The AFL Commission, which was established in 1992, is regarded as the benchmark for sporting governance in Australia.

Australia's peak soccer body, Football Federation Australia, has been run by an independent board since 2003 following the Crawford Review of soccer's governance.

The NRL is now run by an independent commission, while Cricket Australia, whose governance is even more antiquated than rugby's, is still considering recommendations from a review into its governance, which was released late last year.

The ARU's constitution was written in 1949 and is heavily weighted in favour of the two historically dominant states, NSW and Queensland.

At the ARU's annual general meeting, NSW has five votes and Queensland three, while the other states and territories have one each. AGM decisions require a 75 per cent majority, which means NSW and Queensland can prevent change if they vote as a bloc.

The state delegates also play a major role in determining the composition of the ARU's nine-member board.
NSW and Queensland nominate two directors each, while the "other states", as they are referred to, nominate one director between them.

The rest of the board is made up of the ARU chief executive, a representative of the Rugby Union Players Association and two independent directors, who are appointed by the board.

 

[Richo]

Mark Arbib? Now we're fucked.

 

[rugbysmartarse]

now I know why I never warmed to the bloke, he played for the wicks...

 

[RedsHappy]

With all due respect to Arbib and Cosgrove, what are their applicable and directly relevant qualifications for an exercise of this potentially huge significance for Australian rugby?

Arbib is a Labor/union careerist, through and through. What businesses or substantial enterprises has he run, or served in, that might equate to the community and business situation of a large professional sport like rugby? Yet, according to this article, Arbib is to be 'the details man' of this review.

General Cosgrove has served the Army with distinction as a fighting man, but, from an organisation perspective, even a cursory glance at the relevant data highlights that the Australian armed forces are a long way from a model of efficient governance and sound management structures, far from it unfortunately.

Honestly, I am befuddled as to how these sorts of ARU advisory roles are chosen for such mission critical assignments. Cricket Australia and, years back, the AFL for these purposes used seasoned senior business people with long experience of large organisations and global boards that must governed efficiently in multiple stakeholders' interests. I am not suggesting that the relevant parties for this type of task are solely business people, why not for example use one of the senior commissioners of the AFL as advisor, given the AFL is more or less 'model' status for this exercise and has demonstrated its ability to run and grow a code properly.

But a career unionist and ex Army man....? Just having played rugby and 'really loving the game' are not in themselves suitable primary qualifications for this type of major task with its far reaching, strategic implications.

 

[Karl]

I'm all for a review and it absolutely needs a restructure, but this doesn't look like the right execution team.

 

[fatprop]

Cosgrove, as a general, managed a massive, diverse organisation

Cosgrove came to national fame in 1999 when, as a Major General, he led the international forces (INTERFET) in a peacekeeping mission to East Timor. The mission's success made Cosgrove one of Australia's most respected and popular military leaders.[5] He was promoted in 2000 to Lieutenant General as Chief of the Army (CA) and in 2002 to General as Chief of the Defence Force

These guys don't get to that level without incredibly strong management skills

Arbib, meh ... a professional politician, I would prefer a guy focused on streamlining and efficiencies

But I don't expect anything out of this unless the next CEO uses it as a stick to drive change. JON won't have the mandate unless the solution has already been agreed to

 

[louie]

I'm all for a review and it absolutely needs a restructure, but this doesn't look like the right execution team.

Cosgrove was in the army.

 

[wamberal]

Cosgrove, as a general, managed a massive, diverse organisation



These guys don't get to that level without incredibly strong management skills

Arbib, meh ... a professional politician, I would prefer a guy focused on streamlining and efficiencies

This is all about politics, though. Corporate governance is not about streamlining and efficiencies, it is about the best way to structure the governing body - herding all those existing stakeholders will be a tough job that needs a wily operator. Arbib strikes me as a pretty good choice, especially if the ALP manages to hold onto power for a while yet. Maybe this project will give JON the opportunity to sell the Ballymore redevelopment to government as part of an overall restructuring package.

 

[rugbyskier]

Cosgrove is an excellent choice with his leadership and management experience, plus he has had to deal with politicians and senior bureaucrats through his roles in East Timor and as CDF. Arbib would have a good understanding of government and bureaucratic process with his ministerial experience but Cosgrove has that understanding from a slightly different perspective. The main drawback for Arbib is his lack of practical business experience, being a career politican.

 

[p.Tah]

I don't think Cosgrove and Arbib are going to sit in a room in isolation and write the report. You would expect they'll seek input from a variety of sources including seasoned business men/women.

 

[Karl]

I'm just glad something is being done. It needs to be.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Cosgrove is an excellent choice with his leadership and management experience, plus he has had to deal with politicians and senior bureaucrats through his roles in East Timor and as CDF. Arbib would have a good understanding of government and bureaucratic process with his ministerial experience but Cosgrove has that understanding from a slightly different perspective. The main drawback for Arbib is his lack of practical business experience, being a career politican.

some may see a few additional "drawbacks"


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Roundawhile]

OK I'll take the Devil's advocate role..............

Coscrove is a current board member and has established himself as a person that can take charge and make a difference.
Abib as a senior Government minister saw the writing on the wall and decided his talents were better suited to areas other than the backbench. Although I don't like the man he does have intelligence.

If we are going to establish an INDEPENDANT commision shouldn't it start with a review by people who are not part of the old school system that got us into the situation we are today? ( I love contradicting mysef, yes Coscrove is on the board, yes Abib played Sydney rugby )

Honestly, whoever you pick to review the ARU system is never going to satisfy everyone. From my reading of it Abib will do the nitty-gritty with the big C overseeing the process. At this stage any process that gets rid of JON and the rediculous system of governance that we have now will be a huge advance.

I'm actually happy that changes are happening ( especially after the quote by Worboys ) and there could definately be worse people to do the review.

Let's wait and see.

 

[Slim 293]

​

​

​

​

NSW set to lose power in ARU shake up​

April 25, 2012

​

​

Read more: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/nsw-set-to-lose-power-in-aru-shakeup-20120424-1xjd4.html#ixzz1syLWvyHr​

FORMER federal minister for sport and committed Waratahs fan Mark Arbib is awaiting directions from the Australian Rugby Union over his role in a major review that is expected to lead to a fully independent board and NSW losing its power base.
The ARU will announce at its annual general meeting on Friday that Arbib and Peter Cosgrove will conduct a review of Australian rugby's corporate governance.
Cosgrove, the chairman of the ARU's governance and policy committee, will run the review, while Arbib will be involved in discussions with leading Australian rugby stakeholders. One source said last night that Arbib will do ''the leg work''.
Advertisement: Story continues below
Arbib told the Herald he was delighted to be involved in the ARU review.
''I understand the ARU wants to modernise rugby union and look at different models for governance, but any more than that is a matter for the board. I'll await directions from the board on Friday,'' he said yesterday.
Arbib's involvement follows a recent direction that if sports did not comply with new Australian Sports Commission guidelines, which emphasise independent governance, federal government funding would be under threat.
While the AFL Commission is regarded as the benchmark in Australian sport and the NRL recently opted for an independent commission, rugby remains antiquated, particularly its voting system, which will be in operation at this week's annual general meeting.
NSW will have five votes at the meeting and Queensland three, while the other states and territories have one each. The NSW-Queensland dominance enables them to direct the vote on numerous issues, especially as decisions or changes require a 75 per cent majority.
The two states also have a considerable say on the ARU's nine-man board. NSW and Queensland have two directors each, while the ''other states'' have a representative.
The rest of the board is comprised of ARU chief executive John O'Neill, a Rugby Union Players' Association representative and two independent directors, who are appointed by the ARU board.
Suggested changes include all of the states having just one vote, which would end the NSW-Queensland domination, and an ARU board comprised entirely of independent directors.
Arbib's involvement is not surprising considering he has a great knowledge of sports governance and developed a strong relationship with the ARU while federal sports minister, which ended when he resigned from the Senate in February.
''I'm very happy to be helping out. I played rugby at school and colts level, I have been a long-time supporter of the Waratahs and rugby is a fantastic game,'' Arbib said.
''My understanding is that their [the ARU] board has already said there needs to be an overhaul and it needs to be modernised. That's sensible, because for many sporting organisations you always have to adapt with the times.
''It is a highly competitive sporting market place in Australia, and rugby is a sport that is growing, with enormous potential. Being involved in the Olympics gives rugby an excellent opportunity to take the next big step and I'm very happy to help them in getting their governance right …
''The really important thing for rugby is its inclusion in the Olympics … I really think rugby can be a powerhouse in the future.
''I'm looking forward to getting around and talking to the people in the rugby community, but I have to wait for the ARU board to determine exactly what they want me to do, the terms of reference and the processes they want to be put in place.''
The review is backed by the Rugby Union Players' Association - but it believes it should be more expansive.
Association chief Greg Harris said he ''welcomed this review, and anything which improves the standing of the game is to our advantage''.
''But there is a real need for this review to be broader,'' Harris said yesterday.
''It instead should be a review of the whole game, including talent development pathways, commercial viability … the whole box and dice.''

​

​

Read more: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/nsw-set-to-lose-power-in-aru-shakeup-20120424-1xjd4.html#ixzz1syLIlVDx​

 

[p.Tah]

The review is backed by the Rugby Union Players' Association - but it believes it should be more expansive.
Association chief Greg Harris said he ''welcomed this review, and anything which improves the standing of the game is to our advantage''.
''But there is a real need for this review to be broader,'' Harris said yesterday.
''It instead should be a review of the whole game, including talent development pathways, commercial viability … the whole box and dice.

I agree with that as well. Perhaps that can come after the review of the corporate governance review. Small steps first. It's going to be a challenge to get the voting members to support the new governance model.

 

[RedsHappy]

Whatever structures we put in place, the long term outcome will heavily depend upon the calibre, vision, experience, drive and integrity of the persons that sit at the top tier of the game's governance.

I'm sorry but ex-Wallabies, old school rugby networkers, mates of the local RUs, "bloody good blokes", etc are not as such the most desirable qualifications for top level positions in order to to build the strategic community and commercial success of a game like rugby.

The calibre of leadership as a whole must significantly increase if this intended change process is to have maximum positive impact. And good leaders never object to high standards of transparency and openness to stakeholder input.

 

[fatprop]

Whatever structures we put in place, the long term outcome will heavily depend upon the calibre, vision, experience, drive and integrity of the persons that sit at the top tier of the game's governance.

To get any major change through, the current board will have to agree, when does a sporting board member ever vote in favour of reducing their own power. Why would NSW and Queensland agree to reduce their power?

The blazer brigade will decide the guys on the board and I have never seen those guys do anything altruistic for any sport. For themselves or their association maybe, but the sport, nah.

 

[Scarfman]

Mark Arbib. Wow! The perfect appointment to eradicate the NSW-style politics from rugby.

Not!

 

[suckerforred]

This is all about politics, though. Corporate governance is not about streamlining and efficiencies, it is about the best way to structure the governing body - herding all those existing stakeholders will be a tough job that needs a wily operator. .

I suspect that it will be more difficult then herding cats.

What the Feds are attempting to achieve here is bring some of the corporate governance (read company director roles and responsibilities) requirements into the world of sport. This, in theory, should mean that selection and voting for directors (for want of a better word), voting by directors, appointments to key positions and general operational decisions will be made in accordance with the principles of corp/business laws and regulations. This will be in replacement of the ARU and can only be a good thing. The stick is that if changes are not made to bring sports into line with good corporate governance then funding will be removed or reduced. Something no sport can do without.

I know that I am thinking that the best will be done for the game and that the ARU will bite bullet and do what the 'review' recomends. I would also expect that the 'review' looks at the task ahead and doesn't get hood winked into following the party (read old boys network) line. Significant changes need to be made for the good of the code. From my knowledge of the General I am sure that he will be working along these lines. Not sure about the other bloke. I would have prefered to see a well recognised and respected business man in the role, but there are not that many of then around anymore, or at least one that come immediately to mind.

I am curious as to if we as fans and supporters of all levels of the game will be able to have some input. As much as we all crap on about our own little section of the rugby world, I think that the people on sites such at GAGR, when taken as a collective, actually have some bloody good ideas as to what is good for the code, and I am sure we are intelligent enough to accept compremises to ensure that we move forward. Does anyone have Gen Cosgrove's email address? Adn can GAGR get a submission together?