Michael Foley should do the honourable thing and resign

[TOCC]

This is what we have been saying for years. We need additional money to pay coaches & players over and above the market rate. We are competing with all the East coast teams and if its a dollar for dollar decision 95% of rugby people will stay on the other side of the country rather than up end the family etc to come over to WA.

Right but where does this extra money come from?

What's the opportunity cost of spending more money on the Force?

 

[RugbyReg]

Couldn't agree more. Force supporters just as loyal as Queenslanders

Unfortunately WE (being the collective) cannot afford to keep propping up the West. Happy for all your mob to relocate to QLD and bring your support behind the Reds.

IMO it would take a heap of $$$$$ (several + million each year) to attract a top team of players and top coach.

It shits me a bit when you have sqillionaires like Gina (the most beautiful woman in Australia if not the world - also happens to be worth $40-50 billion bucks) who don't "invest" in such a great project as the Force.
(I suppose that argument is not only one of validity in the West)

she invests a fair bit into Australian Swimming

 

[Scrubber2050]

she invests a fair bit into Australian Swimming

Fair enough but who knows.

At least with something like the Force Hancock would get some "return" across the world (rugby countries).

Elephants like peanuts

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

It's her money, to do with as she pleases. FMG, one of the competing iron ore companies and chaired by another of Australia's richest people, is a sponsor of the Force.

 

[Scrubber2050]

It's her money, to do with as she pleases. FMG, one of the competing iron ore companies and chaired by another of Australia's richest people, is a sponsor of the Force.

A wee bit of conflict has never bothered Gina.

TBH - I understand that but I reckon some of these super rich should give REAL money (not just a limited commercial sponsorship). It's just my thought because I would love to see the Force continue, grow stronger, produce plenty of Wallabies one day but not at the expense of the other franchises. Therefore that is why I proposed the idea of a white knightess

 

[Moono75]

Nothing grows without nurturing and we are now seeing the results of having done little to nothing.

In 2006 the ARU effectively established a 'beach head' here in the West, putting a few troops on the ground to establish a presence in enemy territory and link up with the local militia, hoping they would be hard chargers, break out and establish a firm foothold. But like all arm chair generals watching from afar, they forgot to commit the tanks and artillery to support the troops and inevitably the initial battle was lost. The war, however is still there to be won.

How different would things have been if the ARU had invested in the Force when it first began and gone all out to ensure it was a success. Wins put bums on seats, sells memberships, creates a community profile, garners media attention and helps attract sponsorship investment. Unfortunately the ARU were too happy for the Firepower's and Emirates of the world do the initial heavy lifting and we are now in the position of having to spend far more to reclaim lost ground than if a smaller considered investment was made in the beginning.

Now its all well and good to speculate on things, but we can't turn back time and all the 'should of, could of' talk is pure speculation and serves little purpose other than allowing us to sling mud across state lines at each other.

Moving ahead the ARU needs to consider what it truly wants for Rugby in Australia. They can shut up shop and pool their resources in the rugby heartlands and hope that this is enough to stay off the encroachment of AFL, League and Soccer OR they can embrace their national footprint, which if supported and done correctly could turn into a cash cow for them.

Invest in the product you have, make it a truly great high quality spectacle....SUPER you might say, by ensuring the stakeholders (the 5 teams) are given the resources to compete on a level playing field. At the moment the profile of Super Rugby seems to revolve around being a feeder system for the Wallabies instead of being viewed as a stand alone kick ass product able to compete on the Australian sporting landscape.

 

[Sully]

Don't the playing numbers in the west suggest that the force has done very well?

Sent from my D5833 using Tapatalk

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

A wee bit of conflict has never bothered Gina.

TBH - I understand that but I reckon some of these super rich should give REAL money (not just a limited commercial sponsorship). It's just my thought because I would love to see the Force continue, grow stronger, produce plenty of Wallabies one day but not at the expense of the other franchises. Therefore that is why I proposed the idea of a white knightess

Without wanting to be a dick about it: why should super rich people give money to anything that they aren't personally passionate about? If the majority of rich folks in WA don't give a shit about rugby union, I'm personally not bothered if they fork over some of their hard earned or not. As it happens, there is actually quite a bit of money in the game here, it's just that it manifests itself more in the club game.

To more properly answer your point, I too would love to see some rugby mad business people step up and back the Force in the financial and management sense. There are certainly people who have done exactly that, we just need more.

 

[GaffaCHinO]

That's the problem for the Force. Australian Rugby in all quarters is still pretty much broke and if the Force require such an additional injection I (am I think many other people) looking at the side purely as a business sustainability issue cannot justify it. If the Force had made massive in-road and growth of the past 10 years you could justify it, but that isn't the case. The fanatical support group that the Force has is as passionate a crowd as anybody is ever likely to find, but the inescapable fact is that with the game on financial life support it is not going to get the funding needed to make it anything more than the drain on the budget that it is now. It is a great pity but facts are unpleasant things.

So how do you justify the aru handing over 5mil to the Rebels to keep them afloat they are producing about the same amount of local players as the force and crowds the same. At the time of the injection they were a basket case on and off the field and only now are things looking up yet no one said anything about relocation.

The force until this year has never received any money from the aru other than that which each clubs receive to to pay the players yet the aru and those on the east are supposedly propping us up.

The interview with Greg Harris was very enlighting on tje podcast especially when he said that the only involvement the force had with the aru was them telling them when they would receive a test match and when they would send over the salary cap money.

Maybe it's time the Force received the support they require just like all the other states have been receiving.

It also remiss of me to mention that wa get the same amount of funds from the aru as the northern territory and tasmania to help develop talent in the state which is about 250k a year nsw receives about 3 million...

 

[I like to watch]

.......The interview with Greg Harris was very enlighting on tje podcast especially when he said that the only involvement the force had with the aru was them telling them when they would receive a test match and when they would send over the salary cap money.

To be fair,that was the good old days when that other guy was in charge.
I'm pretty sure Pulver gets out and about much more than his predecessor.

 

[ChargerWA]

Without wanting to be a dick about it: why should super rich people give money to anything that they aren't personally passionate about? If the majority of rich folks in WA don't give a shit about rugby union, I'm personally not bothered if they fork over some of their hard earned or not. As it happens, there is actually quite a bit of money in the game here, it's just that it manifests itself more in the club game.

To more properly answer your point, I too would love to see some rugby mad business people step up and back the Force in the financial and management sense. There are certainly people who have done exactly that, we just need more.

And more to the point, the super rich aren't super rich because they give their money away.

 

[Gnostic]

So how do you justify the aru handing over 5mil to the Rebels to keep them afloat they are producing about the same amount of local players as the force and crowds the same. At the time of the injection they were a basket case on and off the field and only now are things looking up yet no one said anything about relocation.



The force until this year has never received any money from the aru other than that which each clubs receive to to pay the players yet the aru and those on the east are supposedly propping us up.



The interview with Greg Harris was very enlighting on tje podcast especially when he said that the only involvement the force had with the aru was them telling them when they would receive a test match and when they would send over the salary cap money.



Maybe it's time the Force received the support they require just like all the other states have been receiving.



It also remiss of me to mention that wa get the same amount of funds from the aru as the northern territory and tasmania to help develop talent in the state which is about 250k a year nsw receives about 3 million.

I don't justify it at all. It a true capitalist/business system the Rebels would also have to go. The ARU signing the ridiculous broadcast agreement that guarantees 5 teams, and got them the much publicised cash which seems to me going to be used almost entirely on keeping the 5 teams going to meet the terms of the contract in the first place. The word Ponzi comes to mind, well not really but damn close.

The big problem I have is that the new Super Rugby is not an improvement. The Australian and Saffa teams have been a long way off their historic competitiveness really (the Force and Rebels have a few good games but some horrible capitulations as well), and I would say have at best been static for a few years.

Somebody forgot to tell SANZAR that growing the game doesn't just mean adding more teams. I think Australian Rugby can at max support 4 teams and probably 3 very competitive sides. 4 Is a good number though as fringe players will get significant game time and can still push the game into non- core areas. 5 is suicide IMO in terms of financial support and in terms of playing performance. I am not playing favourites, the Tahs and Reds remain simply because even though they are not being run viably they have the strongest base and can be made viable. The Brumbies have a long term history and would likely be in far better shape without the intrigue. So take your pick Force or Rebels and as far as I'm concerned it comes down to a purely financial viability question, and I don't think either team is in their current location or with the current structure.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

I think we're drifting off thread here. How about taking this rather interesting and important discussion over to the Force/ARU thread. This thread should be more about what to do about the Foley situation, no?

 

[MonkeyBoy]

I have harped on about it on another thread, but with regard to the ARU's funding of development programs in this country.
1) For years many have called for a "front row/scrum school" to provide consistent technical training to scrums throughout the country at all levels. Just have a youtube search of Mike Cron and you will see school boys getting in depth coaching in technical aspects not just a meet and greet saying how great it is to see you all. So where is it? Instead we get coaches who have never been properly developed themselves, whos only qualification is being a former player in Cam and Andrew Blades.
2) Referees - since Stuart Dickenson retired we haven't had a test referee from Australia. Andrew Leeds may get some games but is there abybody below him in serious development? Where is the plan. Without high levels refs we cannot get a high level game.
3) Training in general at the elite level. Apart from the prodigious talents at each side how many players actually develop skills in which they were weak when they came onto the elite scene? I cannot think of one, excepting Beale's defence. AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) left Australia still unable to pass effectively from both hands, a cardinal sin IMO from a player who played more than 100 times for the Wallabies. Folau still cannot kick effectively under pressure. These are base skills that should have been addressed. I find it amazing that the old amateur players could kick the old leather ball further and more accurately than the modern boys can.
4. Coaches - we have many good coaches in the country that need development and mentoring to make the step up to become effective head coaches. Coaches like Michael Foley, who was at one time the premier forwards coach in the country. I do think at the time of his signing Deans was seen as a candidate to fill this mentor role, pity they didn't look deeper and find there was nothing underlying the surface success in an established world's best system. I fully expect Foley will be discarded after the Force failure, and perhaps rightly as he really hasn't learnt (but then who was there teaching him?) just as Mooney was. It is a gross waste of talent in a shallow pool.

As far as i know Andrew Lees is only ARing at International level along with James Leckie and a few others. Angus Gardiner, however just did a 6N game albeit Italy V Ireland it is still Tier 1 international rugby. He has South Africa v Ireland in June. With the introduction of NRC there is a better plan for talent ID and management. Will Houston did the U20 WC Final, Amy Perrett the Womens World Cup, Anthony Moyes on the World 7s circuit and I'd be surprised not to see Jordan Wade and Chyna Howlett on the 7s Circuit in the next year. There has been a lot more work put in to that "side" of the paddock than coaching I believe.

 

[Aussie D]

Is anyone of quality available to take over as Force Head Coach? If the board are going to sack Foley they will need to be acting already to get a replacement installed (even if they don't announce it). Even if they retain Foley they need to review the coaching structure as it seems defence-heavy with no specialist attack coach.

 

[louie]

When's Foleys contract up?

 

[Moono75]

Foley was resigned in 2015 for a further 2 years (as were his assistants) so he is at the Force until the end of the 2017 season.

 

[louie]

Foley was resigned in 2015 for a further 2 years (as were his assistants) so he is at the Force until the end of the 2017 season.

jesus why?

 

[brokendown]

because they saw the Reds re-sign RG

 

[Tomikin]

The Force need Foley out.. I dont know who to replace him with but they need a change

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk