The_Brown_Hornet
John Eales (66)
It's a total job for the boys situation, but that shouldn't surprise where RA is concerned. Amateur hour stuff.
Australian Rugby / RA
- Thread starter Dave Beat
- Start date
PhilClinton
Mark Loane (55)
Regardless of his banking sector experience, the reality is he is severely under qualified to be the CEO of RA at this time.
Considering RA are about to embark on what could essentially be the last big push to regain top tier sporting relevance in the country as we approach RWC2027, I find it really bizarre they’ve gone with a CEO who’s essentially being picked on potential and already established connections in the game.
In saying that, there will be a lot of factors out of Waugh’s control that will have bare heavily on whether RA are successful or not. Maybe it’s a case of last man standing in terms of his appointment.
Considering RA are about to embark on what could essentially be the last big push to regain top tier sporting relevance in the country as we approach RWC2027, I find it really bizarre they’ve gone with a CEO who’s essentially being picked on potential and already established connections in the game.
In saying that, there will be a lot of factors out of Waugh’s control that will have bare heavily on whether RA are successful or not. Maybe it’s a case of last man standing in terms of his appointment.
In what way? Even now that was somewhat justifiable. He was in the system. Had success. Qld rugby was broke so couldn’t afford a name.
We are about to enter the biggest most critical time in Australian rugby. And they appoint someone who hasn’t CEO’ed and has no sports admin experience. He’s sat on the board of RA sure but his biggest contribution there was he thought banning Beale this year was too harsh.
As Barbarian I think said, this is megalomaniac McClennan getting his way with a yes man which Marinos evidently was not.
And correct, some big things have happened since McLennan has arrived. Two RWCs. Eddie Jones. But I can tell you this- there is still a whole heap of friction with the states particularly around high performance.
The exorbitant dollars thrown at an injury hit Tupou to go to Melbourne and Suallii are purely McLennan. Meanwhile Jones is now talking of leaving this year?
All doesn’t quite sit as well as we think I don’t feel.
Last edited:
Jimmy_Crouch
Peter Johnson (47)
So I have a similar thought on Waugh to the rest but I also do have to ask how do we know he wasn't the best candidate that applied or was asked to apply for the role? I don't know any of the other candidates. Maybe Waugh has a strong vision and was able to articulate that better than others who presented.
liquor box
Peter Sullivan (51)
Would Liam Gill be eligible under the Giteau law?
The Ghost of Raelene
David Codey (61)
I can already feel a Force die hard preparing to say Matt Hodgson is the only guy to save RA
liquor box
Peter Sullivan (51)
TSR
Andrew Slack (58)
We don’t - but that’s part of the point. There seems no evidence, anecdotal or otherwise, that a thorough due diligence was conducted. The board doesn’t have to reveal all of their inner workings. Maybe it’s just not being picked up in the reporting. But it seems very much like McLennan (and others to be fair) got the shits with Marinos and has manoeuvred to remove him and replace him with a person pre-ordained by him.
The_Brown_Hornet
John Eales (66)
You all know it makes sense!
Wilson
Phil Kearns (64)
I'm not sure what's worse, that Waugh was the best candidate we could get or that he was chosen above potentially better credentialled candidates, like some of the sports administrators initially linked with the role.
I guess time will tell how he goes, but it is a pretty uninspiring appointment at a time when there is so much opportunity to shape the future of the game, both here and abroad.
Wallaby Man
Nev Cottrell (35)
I think he’s a little bit more credentialed than many giving credit for, but equally isn’t as credentialed as I’d like a CEO to be. He’s been extremely influential in his work on the SCG trust board as well. So he’s been on numerous boards, which would indicate CEO is the obvious step for him in some capacity. As with all of us in our roles, you are always under qualified until someone gives you an opportunity.
I’ll reserve judgement till he’s had time in the saddle
I’ll reserve judgement till he’s had time in the saddle
Adam84
Rod McCall (65)
given the nature of the role, the organisation and key decisions that need to be made over the next 3-4 years I'd prefer someone qualified with experience rather than giving it to someone under qualified an opportunity, even if they have shown promise.
Recruitment like this, from within the network and someone who is a friend of the Chairman suggests they want stability and continuity going forward, rather then someone who might challenge the ideas and concepts that are being put forward.
Recruitment like this, from within the network and someone who is a friend of the Chairman suggests they want stability and continuity going forward, rather then someone who might challenge the ideas and concepts that are being put forward.
PhilClinton
Mark Loane (55)
I would hope they’ve be getting expert advice for any of the PE stuff, no doubt Waugh will have a seat at the table but you don’t hire a dentist to perform eye surgery.
Adam84
Rod McCall (65)
RA should be outsourcing a review of the impact of PE and potential growth opportunities generated, even with financial literacy on the board, they should be getting an independent third party to assess. It was previously reported they have outsourced the PE negotiations, but I wonder on what basis those decisions were made.
liquor box
Peter Sullivan (51)
Speaking of the Crows, David Koch would now have some free time.
liquor box
Peter Sullivan (51)
I would be happier if they considered shares for supporters to raise money rather than selling off the an international highest bidder.