Australian Rugby / RA

[Strewthcobber]

Pulver's contract is up in Feb 2018 - so there's only 6 months or so left on it anyway.

Surely any announcement will be that he won't be seeking to re-sign, and will help the board find a success over the next 6 months.

No payout required unless he's asked to go early, and even then it wouldn't be much in the scheme of things

 

[Mr Wobbly]

Pulver's contract is up in Feb 2018 - so there's only 6 months or so left on it anyway.

Surely any announcement will be that he won't be seeking to re-sign, and will help the board find a success over the next 6 months.

No payout required unless he's asked to go early, and even then it wouldn't be much in the scheme of things

Could be a pretty brutal six or so months though.

 

[daz]

Pulver's contract is up in Feb 2018 - so there's only 6 months or so left on it anyway.



No payout required unless he's asked to go early, and even then it wouldn't be much in the scheme of things

Given the ARU are one step away from asking fans to bring plastic containers, glass bottles and aluminium cans to each game for the recycling value, I'd suggest any payout at all would likely cause a utility bill at St Leonard's to go unpaid.

 

[dru]

Anyway I believe he's making a statement on his decision within the next 72 hours

Hahaha! That just gives us 6 weeks to go. ;-)

 

[RedsHappy]

Clyne declares:

- BP certainly not resigning

- no need to have him do so

- board support him

- in effect, ARU knows best what's right and wrong for the code

See:

http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport...e/news-story/c6f56515a06d5feb4c11226068befd06

The arrogance and self-satisfied insularity is breathtaking.

 

[James Pettifer]

Clyne declares:

- BP certainly not resigning

- no need to have him do so

- board support him

- in effect, ARU knows best what's right and wrong for the code

See:

http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport...e/news-story/c6f56515a06d5feb4c11226068befd06

The arrogance and self-satisfied insularity is breathtaking.

He is right in that replacing Pulver wouldn't magically fix Australian rugby's problems. There is no magic fix. It requires significant hard work, some appropriate risk taking, investment in the overall community and probably 5-10 years of time to get anywhere back to where Australian rugby used to be.
What he doesn't seem to get is that many supporters don't believe that this is possible under the current leadership. And many other supporters have just buggered off.

 

[cyclopath]

He is right in that replacing Pulver wouldn't magically fix Australian rugby's problems. There is no magic fix. It requires significant hard work, some appropriate risk taking, investment in the overall community and probably 5-10 years of time to get anywhere back to where Australian rugby used to be.
What he doesn't seem to get is that many supporters don't believe that this is possible under the current leadership. And many other supporters have just buggered off.

I actually reckon most punters that have abandoned going to or watching rugby have done so simply because the results are crap. Not directly because they take issue with the administration. Simply because they don't think it out that far. Most that I know who have lost interest fit this bill.
I appreciate that the poor results have their genesis in many factors including poor oversight, the flow on effect of poor coaching, recruitment and structures etc., but it's the actual on-field product itself that turns people off. Fair weather fans probably wouldn't bother trying to join the dots.
Just my opinion.

 

[Quick Hands]

Clyne declares:

- BP certainly not resigning

- no need to have him do so

- board support him

- in effect, ARU knows best what's right and wrong for the code

See:

http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport...e/news-story/c6f56515a06d5feb4c11226068befd06

The arrogance and self-satisfied insularity is breathtaking.

Clyne (perhaps unintentionally) gets it right when he says that the governance isn't set up for success. Pity he doesn't take the next step and link himself and the board to the governance.

Interesting that the ARU see no need to plan 8 months in advance in relation to the most important paid position in the organisation.

 

[The torpedo]

Clyne declares:

- BP certainly not resigning

- no need to have him do so

- board support him

In other news, Bill Pulver seen lining up at Chatswood Centrelink

 

[James Pettifer]

I actually reckon most punters that have abandoned going to or watching rugby have done so simply because the results are crap. Not directly because they take issue with the administration. Simply because they don't think it out that far. Most that I know who have lost interest fit this bill.
I appreciate that the poor results have their genesis in many factors including poor oversight, the flow on effect of poor coaching, recruitment and structures etc., but it's the actual on-field product itself that turns people off. Fair weather fans probably wouldn't bother trying to join the dots.
Just my opinion.

Are Australian rugby fans that shallow and fickle?

It isn't like Australia is that bad - we just play NZ a lot so we look worse. The Waratahs won super rugby a couple of years ago. The Brumbies top the Australian conference and aren't even bringing in 9000 for some of their games.

I think clearly the change to Super Rugby to 18 teams has had an impact on the competition. I admit that at the time, I didn't think it would but it definitely appears to have driven away some fans. But there is overall a lack of passion.

But crowds just don't go for winning teams. I live in Victoria. I know Richmond fans. One of them used to report to me. He was born in 1983 and between then and 2012, when I stopped working with him, they got into the finals twice. Twice in 29 years in a competition where about 40% of the teams get into the competition. He still went to every bloody game. Clearly the AFL have managed the move from a local league to an Australia wide league much better than the ARU (or the NRL for that matter) and have maintained that level of tribalism.

There just seems to be no vision in the ARU. No ability to work out how to bring out the tribalism from some of the clubs into the national game. No clue on how to create new teams with a real following.

And now this debacle. It is 68 _days_ since the ARU said that they would have this resolved in 48-72 hours.

What then saddens me more is that apparently every one of the teams is happy to go down to 4 teams (as long as it isn't them impacted). Who ever loses a team - and if the rumours that the area will also lose their NRC team - that area will be lost to rugby union for a very long time. I just can't see how anyone who considers themselves as a custodian of rugby union in Australia can think that is a good idea.

And finally, what confuses me is that the ARU are now getting an extra $27 (or so) million more per year than in 2015. We are still running the same number of teams so where is that extra money going. Apparently that amount "will enable the code to re-energise the game at grassroots level and invest in key strategic areas to ensure its future health and prosperity."

Bill's direct quote “We will also provide greater assistance to our Super Rugby clubs and member unions and will establish a future fund for the game which will ensure its long-term health and prosperity.” It is just 18 months after this.

 

[jimmydubs]

I just hope they find someone competent and less arrogant next time. I remember being happy when John O'Neil finally went... That happiness faded pretty quick.

 

[Quick Hands]

Are Australian rugby fans that shallow and fickle?

It isn't like Australia is that bad - we just play NZ a lot so we look worse. The Waratahs won super rugby a couple of years ago. The Brumbies top the Australian conference and aren't even bringing in 9000 for some of their games.

I think clearly the change to Super Rugby to 18 teams has had an impact on the competition. I admit that at the time, I didn't think it would but it definitely appears to have driven away some fans. But there is overall a lack of passion.

But crowds just don't go for winning teams. I live in Victoria. I know Richmond fans. One of them used to report to me. He was born in 1983 and between then and 2012, when I stopped working with him, they got into the finals twice. Twice in 29 years in a competition where about 40% of the teams get into the competition. He still went to every bloody game. Clearly the AFL have managed the move from a local league to an Australia wide league much better than the ARU (or the NRL for that matter) and have maintained that level of tribalism.

There just seems to be no vision in the ARU. No ability to work out how to bring out the tribalism from some of the clubs into the national game. No clue on how to create new teams with a real following.

And now this debacle. It is 68 _days_ since the ARU said that they would have this resolved in 48-72 hours.

What then saddens me more is that apparently every one of the teams is happy to go down to 4 teams (as long as it isn't them impacted). Who ever loses a team - and if the rumours that the area will also lose their NRC team - that area will be lost to rugby union for a very long time. I just can't see how anyone who considers themselves as a custodian of rugby union in Australia can think that is a good idea.

And finally, what confuses me is that the ARU are now getting an extra $27 (or so) million more per year than in 2015. We are still running the same number of teams so where is that extra money going. Apparently that amount "will enable the code to re-energise the game at grassroots level and invest in key strategic areas to ensure its future health and prosperity."

Bill's direct quote “We will also provide greater assistance to our Super Rugby clubs and member unions and will establish a future fund for the game which will ensure its long-term health and prosperity.” It is just 18 months after this.

Indeed JP, but the forelock tuggers will still assure us that the ARU are going well and that the current problems have nothing to do with them.

Your analogy to Richmond AFL is apt. What we see with the AFL is a sporting body which mostly (not always) gets it right. Everything that they do is part of a long term strategic plan. Those plans are generally well-though out and logical. As you say they have done an almost perfect job of maintaining traditional clubs (with all the advantages that it brings), while at the same time introduces new ones and a national league.

Contrast this to the ARU, who see no need to plan 8 months in advance in relation to a new or even the existing CEO. Who have never been guilty of having a long term strategic plan, and who now plan to cut and run from on of their expansion areas in direct contradiction to what they were saying less than 18 months ago.

Pulver owns S18 - he advocated it against the wishes of the 5 Australian super sides. He said it would save the game with rivers of gold, as you note. We have been told ad nauseum that his negotiating skills re broadcast deals etc, were his strong suit and why he was the right man for the job. His invisibilty now speaks volumes. Only an organisation like the ARU could even think of keeping him on.

 

[Dave Beat]

Id love to see the business side of Rod McQueen step in.

 

[lou75]

ok fellas I have a few questions:
1. Did the Alliance Agreement between ARU and WARU guarantee a WA team? And was it guaranteed that the team would play in the Super Rugby comp?
2. WHen the ARU bought the IP from WARU did this include the licence?
3. Am I wrong when I say there are only four licences on issue at the moment?
4. When Clarke and Day went to Perth with the bad news and were threatened with legal action , they quickly turned around and thought hell this is too much trouble, lets just buy out Coxy and close that franchise instead , the reason why Rebels were even in the picture?
5. If Force won the competition (I know , probably not technically possible at this stage) could the runners up declare that win void because Force don't have a licence to play in the competition?
6. Did ARU tell SANZAAR they would only have four teams or four licensed teams?

 

[Rebels3]

Indeed JP, but the forelock tuggers will still assure us that the ARU are going well and that the current problems have nothing to do with them.

Your analogy to Richmond AFL is apt. What we see with the AFL is a sporting body which mostly (not always) gets it right. Everything that they do is part of a long term strategic plan. Those plans are generally well-though out and logical. As you say they have done an almost perfect job of maintaining traditional clubs (with all the advantages that it brings), while at the same time introduces new ones and a national league.

Contrast this to the ARU, who see no need to plan 8 months in advance in relation to a new or even the existing CEO. Who have never been guilty of having a long term strategic plan, and who now plan to cut and run from on of their expansion areas in direct contradiction to what they were saying less than 18 months ago.

Pulver owns S18 - he advocated it against the wishes of the 5 Australian super sides. He said it would save the game with rivers of gold, as you note. We have been told ad nauseum that his negotiating skills re broadcast deals etc, were his strong suit and why he was the right man for the job. His invisibilty now speaks volumes. Only an organisation like the ARU could even think of keeping him on.

The AFL is the complete and utter custodian of the game. What they say goes and the state entities report back to them. We have the complete opposite, so much so that our most influential state doesn't even run the top domestic competition in its boarders. It's mind boggling, if reform was to come one of the top things needs to be either nswru gains control of the sru or the sru gains control of the nswru. It don't care which one it is, but it has to be done. All states then report to the ARU and are not allowed to be run like independent cowboys only looking at their own interests. At the moment all the states do is put their hand out and receive money in return for little cohesion and accountability. It'd be nice if the over arching body wasn't spineless at the same time. None of this will happen tho as who is big enough to let go of some of their power?

 

[cyclopath]

Are Australian rugby fans that shallow and fickle?

It isn't like Australia is that bad - we just play NZ a lot so we look worse. The Waratahs won super rugby a couple of years ago. The Brumbies top the Australian conference and aren't even bringing in 9000 for some of their games.

I think clearly the change to Super Rugby to 18 teams has had an impact on the competition. I admit that at the time, I didn't think it would but it definitely appears to have driven away some fans. But there is overall a lack of passion.

But crowds just don't go for winning teams. I live in Victoria. I know Richmond fans. One of them used to report to me. He was born in 1983 and between then and 2012, when I stopped working with him, they got into the finals twice. Twice in 29 years in a competition where about 40% of the teams get into the competition. He still went to every bloody game. Clearly the AFL have managed the move from a local league to an Australia wide league much better than the ARU (or the NRL for that matter) and have maintained that level of tribalism.

There just seems to be no vision in the ARU. No ability to work out how to bring out the tribalism from some of the clubs into the national game. No clue on how to create new teams with a real following.

And now this debacle. It is 68 _days_ since the ARU said that they would have this resolved in 48-72 hours.

What then saddens me more is that apparently every one of the teams is happy to go down to 4 teams (as long as it isn't them impacted). Who ever loses a team - and if the rumours that the area will also lose their NRC team - that area will be lost to rugby union for a very long time. I just can't see how anyone who considers themselves as a custodian of rugby union in Australia can think that is a good idea.

And finally, what confuses me is that the ARU are now getting an extra $27 (or so) million more per year than in 2015. We are still running the same number of teams so where is that extra money going. Apparently that amount "will enable the code to re-energise the game at grassroots level and invest in key strategic areas to ensure its future health and prosperity."

Bill's direct quote “We will also provide greater assistance to our Super Rugby clubs and member unions and will establish a future fund for the game which will ensure its long-term health and prosperity.” It is just 18 months after this.

Are they that fickle? Short answer, yes.
And I'm not in any way endorsing anything the ARU are doing. Quite a few people I know, who would be smack in the middle of the rugby fan demographic don't go because they reckon the games are shit. They tell me. Not one has said they stay away because the governance is bad.
The AFL analogy is only partly applicable. The tribalism is deeply rooted in many generations and it was not manufactured. It's organic. It's essentially, in Melbourne, a winter sport monoculture. I know, I lived there. No part of Australia has anything close to that culture in rugby.
I don't know what the answer is, but I don't think the NRC for example will be it. I just can't see it ever having a visceral pull for fans.

 

[cyclopath]

Indeed JP, but the forelock tuggers will still assure us that the ARU are going well and that the current problems have nothing to do with them.

Your analogy to Richmond AFL is apt. What we see with the AFL is a sporting body which mostly (not always) gets it right. Everything that they do is part of a long term strategic plan. Those plans are generally well-though out and logical. As you say they have done an almost perfect job of maintaining traditional clubs (with all the advantages that it brings), while at the same time introduces new ones and a national league.

Contrast this to the ARU, who see no need to plan 8 months in advance in relation to a new or even the existing CEO. Who have never been guilty of having a long term strategic plan, and who now plan to cut and run from on of their expansion areas in direct contradiction to what they were saying less than 18 months ago.

Pulver owns S18 - he advocated it against the wishes of the 5 Australian super sides. He said it would save the game with rivers of gold, as you note. We have been told ad nauseum that his negotiating skills re broadcast deals etc, were his strong suit and why he was the right man for the job. His invisibilty now speaks volumes. Only an organisation like the ARU could even think of keeping him on.

You know, labelling people as Forelock Tuggers because their view is in any way different to yours is cheap, and really non-contributory. It's not a black and white situation.

 

[James Pettifer]

Indeed JP, but the forelock tuggers will still assure us that the ARU are going well and that the current problems have nothing to do with them.

Your analogy to Richmond AFL is apt. What we see with the AFL is a sporting body which mostly (not always) gets it right. Everything that they do is part of a long term strategic plan. Those plans are generally well-though out and logical. As you say they have done an almost perfect job of maintaining traditional clubs (with all the advantages that it brings), while at the same time introduces new ones and a national league.

Contrast this to the ARU, who see no need to plan 8 months in advance in relation to a new or even the existing CEO. Who have never been guilty of having a long term strategic plan, and who now plan to cut and run from on of their expansion areas in direct contradiction to what they were saying less than 18 months ago.

Pulver owns S18 - he advocated it against the wishes of the 5 Australian super sides. He said it would save the game with rivers of gold, as you note. We have been told ad nauseum that his negotiating skills re broadcast deals etc, were his strong suit and why he was the right man for the job. His invisibilty now speaks volumes. Only an organisation like the ARU could even think of keeping him on.

I completely agree with the ARU but then they are also not shy of taking risks and, if they feel necessary, causing damage to long term fans - I still know Fitzroy supporters who are still bitter.

But I think it goes back to a long term strategic plan. Someone needs to come up with what they want Rugby Union to look like in 20-30 years and then move towards this over time.

And I completely disagree on the ARU being the only one to keep someone at Pulver's level of competence. I've seen more than my fair share of executives and CEOs who have no bloody idea what they are doing, continue to under deliver and somehow still stick around.

 

[James Pettifer]

The AFL is the complete and utter custodian of the game. What they say goes and the state entities report back to them. We have the complete opposite, so much so that our most influential state doesn't even run the top domestic competition in its boarders. It's mind boggling, if reform was to come one of the top things needs to be either nswru gains control of the sru or the sru gains control of the nswru. It don't care which one it is, but it has to be done. All states then report to the ARU and are not allowed to be run like independent cowboys only looking at their own interests. At the moment all the states do is put their hand out and receive money in return for little cohesion and accountability. It'd be nice if the over arching body wasn't spineless at the same time. None of this will happen tho as who is big enough to let go of some of their power?

Well, I think that is where some people want a complete destruction of the Rugby power in Australia as it is the only way they see that it can be rebuilt.

It stuns me that there is the SRU, NSWRU and the ARU. The waste in duplication. The lack of any ability to have a strategic direction.

What Rugby Union in Australia really needs is a Kerry Packer or a Frank Lowy to come in.

 

[I like to watch]

You know, labelling people as Forelock Tuggers because their view is in any way different to yours is cheap, and really non-contributory. It's not a black and white situation.

Many decisions made in the past few years were not black and white.

But the mismanagement of the Super clubs in the past few months is starkly black & white.
The ARU have been demonstrably incompetent.
So much so, that accountability for this mismanagement needs to be attributed,and corrected.
Not to do so, is either further proof of incompetence or arrogance.
Neither of which should be a feature of decision makers in this sport.