Rebels3
Jim Lenehan (48)
They have never had them to cut them away, all they did was cut the funding which I guess funding would be the only way to make them accountable for different things (I don’t agree to the cutting btw). The ARU essentially supplements the different entities financially but there is no controlling stake in the partnerships, which is the flaw in the model. Essentially they could pull the funding as we have seen with the court decision to withdraw the Force from Super Rugby and that’s about all they can do to influence how rugby is run in the different regions. This is why we need a change in the model, the organization that makes the money is handing money to other entities that supply the resources but there is little to no controlling stake in how these resources are produced, it’s essentially someone sticking their hand out, you giving them money but you have no control over what they spend it on, or more importantly how they spend it.RA has little control over SS for example, because RA decided to cut them loose. In one of life's great ironies, since RA ceased to be involved the SS has gone from strength to strength.
The essential flaw with the schools-based methodology employed by rugby is that schools aren't rugby academies, they are schools and they play the sports demanded by students and parents. No sporting body can tell schools what to do and schools are governed by a range of education legislation at state and national level.
I want everyone to had their keys in and let one controlling body rule the roost. This is what happens in NZ, Ire and Scot. People have to suck in their pride and give up control, if they don’t think RA is that right body then another body needs to be created to execute this, you’ll still have your sub-entities but their appointments will be made through consultation with the overarching body, etc. In Ireland Munster and Leinster made the brave decision to hand most of their power to the IRFU for the benefit of all, we have seen how this has turned out