Brumbies 2016

[Strewthcobber]

^^^

After checking. I am reliable informed that I am still ticked off.

Still can't find the constitution. Google has failed me!

To the MU supporters club part. Yes, but in the end they were forced to sell their shares as the new owner managed to acquire the majority of shares over time and once you own about 90% UK laws say the remains have to be relinquished if the majority stakeholder asks.

However, they were heavily involved in the club in the past and are still an influential group today.

The Kennedy as financial chair was from media reports and public reporting. His rise to chairman was quite rapid and surprising according to most reports.

Reports out there that Keenedy wasn't involved

"He wasn't involved, absolutely not, absolutely 100 per cent confident [Mr Kennedy wasn't involved with the transactions]," Mr Jones said.

"The only answers to questions I'm really doing is when people have drawn false conclusions or are speculating ... Rob's got nothing to do with it."

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/rug...y-not-being-investigated-20150927-gjvxb2.html

Article is 6 months old

 

[mst]

^^^ That's the odd part of this. Kennedy was a supporter of the reports and was with Jones at most meetings with stakeholder when they were told of the report and disclosure to the AFP. So what has changed is the question.

One minute he is with Jones the next against. Reports are he organised the meeting to be moved to get away from Jones last night so they could talk without him.

The unwillingness of the board to be transparent, disclose what happened to the money and why, and explain there recent and current action is rising more and more question.

It may not be who had dirty hands, but who may end up with reputational damage and credibility issues. EG: it's been reported that the Brumbies legal reps at the time advised against the deal. So why did it go ahead and what were the issues raised. The financial committee would have been heavily involved I would say so it could be clean hand but answers and recollections best forgotten or never given.

Pure speculation but the logic and associations are enough to prompt questions.

Also worth noting where else names pop up. The ex- deputy chief minister linked to UC and named in the legal action is also part of the GWS proposal for Manuka. Being a small place you can't get muddy or you will be out of a job.

 

[Groucho]

I am at that point where I wish we the supporters had a voice. Worked for the Manchester United supporters club many years ago who owned shares and fended off one R Murdoch from buying the club.

Does anyone know how to get a copy of the constitution? Can't find it anywhere.

Is it possible to hold to Board accountable for bringing the club, and ACTRU into disrepute and a no confidence motion due to a clear failure in management with the erroneous attempt to sack Jones and the resulting costs and reputational damage?

From reports the ringleader in all of this seem to be Kennedy, an accountant. who I believe, was coincidently was the chair of the financial committee during the period of the reported questionable transactions taking place.

You'd be wise not to say that in writing, mate.

...oops.

 

[mst]

You'd be wise not to say that in writing, mate.

.oops.

Oops to what? All reported in the press. Public knowledge and out there already. If you read the whole conversation there is nothing controversial, rather fact or based of media reports. The whole conversation provides context; taking parts in isolation will always look bad.

So, to clarify the comments, EG: Kennedy the ringleader - was from last night in relation to who it was who reportedly moved the meeting to Vikings away from the EGM. Reason given was he wanted to meet without Jones.

Fact - he was the Financial committee chair as reported on many occasions.

Nothing here that not already been published by a Jurno!

CBR Times:
"Instead, the board had organised a rival meeting across town in Tuggeranong to avoid confrontation with Mr Jones, with four club bosses, life members and others attending. Mr Jones was not notified of meeting.
The board was locked in its meeting for more than three hours after Mr Kennedy called for officials to meet away from Brumbies headquarters" .
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/rug...-executive-michael-jones-20160421-gobz5o.html

More history.
http://www.rugbynews.net.au/a-timeline-of-the-brumbies-saga-what-happened-and-when/

 

[Groucho]

Oops to what? All reported in the press. Public knowledge and out there already. If you read the whole conversation there is nothing controversial, rather fact or based of media reports. The whole conversation provides context; taking parts in isolation will always look bad.

So, to clarify the comments, EG: Kennedy the ringleader - was from last night in relation to who it was who reportedly moved the meeting to Vikings away from the EGM. Reason given was he wanted to meet without Jones.

Fact - he was the Financial committee chair as reported on many occasions.

Nothing here that not already been published by a Jurno!

CBR Times:
"Instead, the board had organised a rival meeting across town in Tuggeranong to avoid confrontation with Mr Jones, with four club bosses, life members and others attending. Mr Jones was not notified of meeting.
The board was locked in its meeting for more than three hours after Mr Kennedy called for officials to meet away from Brumbies headquarters" .
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/rug...-executive-michael-jones-20160421-gobz5o.html

More history.
http://www.rugbynews.net.au/a-timeline-of-the-brumbies-saga-what-happened-and-when/

Saying he was the Financial committee chair isn't libelous. Calling him the "ringleader in all this" by name in writing might be.

 

[mst]

Saying he was the Financial committee chair isn't libelous. Calling him the "ringleader in all this" by name in writing might be.

Context. The conversation is about the most recent events being the meetings last night, as observed by where my posts start.

My comment if fairly clear: "From reports the ringleader in all of this seem to be Kennedy" . This is in reference the split meeting last night. Note that I am referring to the media reports as the from where this information is derived, and as I am unsure as to the veracity of the information, I express my potential doubt by using the (misspelt) word seem(s).

A combination of my observation, opinion and based on media reporting. Fairly unambiguous. Taken in context of a forum being a conversation of parts, so context in that moment (to a particular comment) is not always readily available.

 

[Groucho]

Context. The conversation is about the most recent events being the meetings last night, as observed by where my posts start.

My comment if fairly clear: "From reports the ringleader in all of this seem to be Kennedy" . This is in reference the split meeting last night. Note that I am referring to the media reports as the from where this information is derived, and as I am unsure as to the veracity of the information, I express my potential doubt by using the (misspelt) word seem(s).

A combination of my observation, opinion and based on media reporting. Fairly unambiguous. Taken in context of a forum being a conversation of parts, so context in that moment (to a particular comment) is not always readily available.

Sure, I didn't read the thread before posting.

 

[mst]

Sure, I didn't read the thread before posting.

I am glad you raised it in case I did get it wrong. Always good to doing what is in the best interest of the site (and savings someone butt!).

 

[mst]

SHOCKING NEWS BREAKING!!!!

Brace yourself to be surprised by the predictability.

I wonder if its now all about saving face? Noting the court did say they could sack Jones, on other grounds with 5 days notice then why go through all of this now if they have grounds for sacking him?

 

[Brumby Jack]

If they sack him, then he'll sue for wrongful dismissal and then will take up more time and money in the courts.

 

[Strewthcobber]

SHOCKING NEWS BREAKING!!!!

Brace yourself to be surprised by the predictability.

View attachment 7705


I wonder if its now all about saving face? Noting the court did say they could sack Jones, on other grounds with 5 days notice then why go through all of this now if they have grounds for sacking him?

Isn't the implication that they don't have other grounds for sacking him?

 

[mst]

If they sack him, then he'll sue for wrongful dismissal and then will take up more time and money in the courts.

That's why I said if they had grounds for sacking him. If they could do it legitimately leaving Jones with no recourse to sue for wrongful dismissal I'm guessing they would have asap after yesterdays result. But instead they are trying to negotiate with him and from the sounds of what Dutton said convince him to leave on his own accord.

 

[Pedrolicus]

I must admit, while this drama is the last thing any club needs, especially my own, I am more compelled than I am with game of thrones and the walking dead combined.

Thanks for all the insight guys.

 

[JJJ]

I'm guessing the sticking point is his silence more than his walking away. I bet any sort of payout he's being offered is heavily contingent on that, since they've discovered the hard way that threats don't work. But if he quietly walks away now and the details never emerge it will be a stain on his reputation.

 

[Brumby Runner]

I'm guessing the sticking point is his silence more than his walking away. I bet any sort of payout he's being offered is heavily contingent on that, since they've discovered the hard way that threats don't work. But if he quietly walks away now and the details never emerge it will be a stain on his reputation.

But why should the details never come out? Being part of a police investigation, and assuming there is something at the bottom of the kerfuffle, I'd think it highly likely the details will come out in due course.

 

[mst]

If there is something in the report then it should come out via the AFP investigation, or if its minor, post investigation (too many people already know details for it to be kept quiet).

I wonder if this is more about integrity, genuine values and passion. Really, Jones could walk at any moment, and hanging in there he is really putting himself out there for scrutiny and under eminence pressure. The money is there if he wants to take it, but he seems to be sticking to his principals and being sufficiently professional to be continuing to do the job while the board continues to want him gone.

You have to admire the guy for sticking to his principal and position.

I just hope the truth comes out, whatever it is, who ever it involves and soon.

 

[mst]

I must admit, while this drama is the last thing any club needs, especially my own, I am more compelled than I am with game of thrones and the walking dead combined.

Thanks for all the insight guys.

View attachment 7708

You may want to put some more popcorn on - we worked in some more good plot twists for you.

Here is your highlights promo:

"I'm happy to stand by scrutiny of my record. Our crowds are up 2300 on last year, our revenue is up on last year and we're looking to make a profit this year, we're on top of the Australian conference and we're re-signing players."

It can also be revealed that boardroom voting members were asked to sign an attendance register to warrant they were entitled to vote and to keep confidential all matters discussed and documents viewed when they met with the board on Thursday night.

Mr Jones sent a letter this week to seven of the club's major sponsors to apologise for potential damage to their brands, adding that he expected to be sacked by the board on Thursday.

Mr Jones told sponsors in an email this week that he was trying to minimise the effects on sponsors, detailing ways they could remind the board of their right to invoke a reputational damage clause and hold the board liable for damages.

Mr Jones' evidence said that Mr Kennedy explained to him that there was pressure being placed on the Brumbies to terminate his contract.
Justice Refshauge said an affidavit filed by board member Angus McKerchar said the board had other concerns, including that Mr Jones was "too direct and aggressive" in relation to the club's stakeholders.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/rug...lub-sponsors-for-support-20160422-gocv7s.html

 

[JJJ]

Off-topic, but I've spent a bit of time having a look at some of the wasps forums and jeez they love George. Raving about his play-making abilities more than his pilfering. It seems that to a man the Wasps supporters have come to the very recent realisation that 7 is a specialist role. There's a hell of a lot of hyperbole floating around. Club legend after 1 season. Imagine if they win the trophy.

Certainly a good time to be an off-contract, top-class 7 with George leaving the club at the end of the season. It's hard to see the wasps going back to an English-style 7 if they can help it. Australia, lock up your opensides!

 

[Scrubber2050]

The Brumbies saga baffles me a bit - lots of smoke and mirrors,

Think I'll just wait until the Police complete their investigations and see if there has been criminal activity, who gets charged and the penalty that will follow.

 

[Tomikin]

The Brumbies saga baffles me a bit - lots of smoke and mirrors,

Think I'll just wait until the Police complete their investigations and see if there has been criminal activity, who gets charged and the penalty that will follow.

I agree with this, really the Board and all of them should have just shut up till the AFP finishes there job. Jones got a report, thought it was shady handed it off to the police, and got on with his job.

Why people attacked him, or him the board is just stupid, nothing's getting solved till that investigations finished.

 

[Brumby Runner]

The Brumbies saga baffles me a bit - lots of smoke and mirrors,

Think I'll just wait until the Police complete their investigations and see if there has been criminal activity, who gets charged and the penalty that will follow.

Easy for an outsider to say, but there seems to be a lot of tension between a couple of factions at the administrative level, which also appears to have filtered down to a split in the ranks of the JID teams. It is not a good look to say the least, and I fear if the issues aren't put to bed very quickly the performance of the Brumbies on the field will suffer.