• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

Storm in a teacup, or more serious?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Scrubber2050

Scrubber2050

Mark Ella (57)
Gnostic said:
If it was the NSWRU's money that would matter. I doubt that the Fed. Government will take it further either, even though it was their money that was lent, as I am sure some back room meetings will take place to avoid such an eventuality.

NFJ has plummeted in my esteem. Ethics are non-negotiable, but I'm sure he will justify it as he is a lawyer and we know lawyers have ethics which are at best "flexible"
Click to expand...


One would never engage a lawyer who got a High Distinction in Ethics:)
 
Dave Beat

Dave Beat

Paul McLean (56)
NTT said:
Brisbane and NZ are east of WA so that statement is correct.

My opinion is my opinion. I wont walk on eggshells to please anyone.

NSW has a long and well documented history of acting in ways that are detrimental to rugby in Australia. Nothing was done to expand rugby before 1996. Even then the great expansion was to southern NSW. When expansion happened again in 2005 a lot of effort by NSW has gone into damaging that expansion through its influence over the ARU.
While this has been happening, we have been overtaken by other sports even though we are one of world rugbys strongest nations. When is enough going to be enough?

Most people won't bother coming on here to express this opinion but believe me it is a widely held opinion. There's a reason rugby is being left in the dust by the viewers, participants and sponsors, it is because there is a lot of mistrust of the NSW influence over the ARU and NSWs desire to keep rugby an exclusive boys club. NSW Rugby is stuck in its long gone glory days of the 80s, trouble is it is 2016 and this underlying self destruction is holding everyone back from progressing.
Click to expand...


There has been allot of concern by participants of this forum across the board, and not just NSWRU about boys clubs etc, and areas that clearly frustrate you, and the state of rugby.

You are accurate in some parts with regards to your reasons and why, and i believe off in others - coming across the way you did in a couple of earlier posts will not contribute to achieving better results or changes.

Here is an article from our local paper, not sure if it made the papers over in the west.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...g/news-story/f460ba0de069e4ce71ec5e036490bfd2
Some may think media spin, closer to the ground it is not.
I've been involved in a couple things - and there are people of note doing.

There is a great article about NSWCEO here, posted a few months back.

http://www.rugbynews.net.au/waratahs-ceo-andrew-hore-explains-importance-of-restructure/

Fresh, face fresh approach - rugby is important to him.

What I have learnt since acting on a few things - there is a huge demographic, geographic, and cultural aspect that a huge National Business (ARU) needs to work with and then pass required Models down to State Unions for them to review / debate / agree accept.

Truck, i wish we could just click our fingers and it would be a perfect rugby world - but life ain't like that.

NTT -getting the shits will only frustrate you more
 
dru

dru

David Wilson (68)
Dave Beat said:
Here is an article from our local paper, not sure if it made the papers over in the west.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...g/news-story/f460ba0de069e4ce71ec5e036490bfd2
Some may think media spin, closer to the ground it is not.
I've been involved in a couple things - and there are people of note doing.
Click to expand...

And another from G&GR's very own front page.

http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/the-arus-key-constituents-meeting-the-truth/

DB, not everyone is convinced of the altruism.
 
Strewthcobber

Strewthcobber

Simon Poidevin (60)
I wonder how the ARU board, filled with independent directors, who presumably approved the strategic plan, feel about the CEO agreeing to have it reviewed?

I would not have thought that was Pulver's decision to make
 
T

TOCC

Guest
I like to watch said:
JON didn't need SS clubs influence to shut down the ARC.
He could see the money could be spent much more productively.
The cost of running the ARC was almost as much as his annual bonus ..
Click to expand...

SS were the most vocal opponents, I even remember one SS club holding a fan day on the same day the local ARC team was set to play... JON rode back into office with SS support, he was indebted to them and the ARC was always going to be shut down once he returned.

ARC costs could have been trimmed, forecasts losses for the 2nd seasons of the ARC were significantly less and decreasing further annually after the with a profit forecast for the 4th year.. none do that mattered, the ARC was a good as dead once JON came back, largely thanks to NSW power brokers..
 
Quick Hands

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
TOCC said:
QH I agree wth most of this, except on the topic of ARC, NSW personalities and stakeholders were absolutely paramount in bringing down the ARC.. It needs to be remembered there was a changing of guard at the ARU Board of Director level during the establishment and shutting down of the ARC.. Gary Flowers was responsible for the approval of the Western Force and establishment of the ARC.. but It was during the later years that he lost support of the Board, in large due to the ARC and opposition from Shute Shield stakeholders.

John O'Neill who was initially lost support from NSW Rugby stakeholders because he proposed a 3rd tier national competition, was brought back into office and supported by SS clubs because he was a cynic of the ARC and how it was run.

Now I'm not blaming NSWRU for all that, you can't point a finger at any one organsation in NSW given Waratahs, NSWRU and Shute Shield are all seperate organisations(although closely intertwined), I'm sure there were plenty who opposed some of those counter productive changes.. but certainly there were rugby union power brokers in NSW who directly or indirectly influenced those outcomes.
Click to expand...

I would agree that people at the NSWRU were involved in bring down the ARC - and I can say as someone who fully supports the NRC that the ARC was a dog's breakfast that probably needed shutting down.

But I was making the point that in the year that the ARC existed that the NSWRU onsold one of their franchises to the VRU. They may have had more that one reason for doing so, but assisting in expansion was at least in there.

Part of the reason for the demise of Flowers was white-anting by JON and cronies and no doubt they used the ARC as ammunition.
 
T

TOCC

Guest
Strewthcobber said:
I wonder how the ARU board, filled with independent directors, who presumably approved the strategic plan, feel about the CEO agreeing to have it reviewed?

I would not have thought that was Pulver's decision to make
Click to expand...

What really makes me laugh, was that the so called 'community rugby' factor included no clubs or schoolboys representatives outside of NSW.. But hey, can't say it's unexpected..
 
Hugh Jarse

Hugh Jarse

Rocky Elsom (76)
Lets not dwell on ARC and the JO'N era (or error). Can't change history, and the facts and rants for and against have already been well covered.

The thread is supposed to be about a particular issue. Much recent discussion has not been related to that, and is a rehash of stuff already posted, albeit by others with the same views as those who are posting here with passion and a belief that they have a scoop.

Slight thread hijacks and detours are OK (I'm pretty good at that) but derailments ... ... ... NO.
 
Hugh Jarse

Hugh Jarse

Rocky Elsom (76)
TOCC said:
What really makes me laugh, was that the so called 'community rugby' factor included no clubs or schoolboys representatives outside of NSW.. But hey, can't say it's unexpected..
Click to expand...
No money to fly in and provide meals and accommodation for the "foreigners".

ARU are investigating a new thing called Skype, facetime, Video Conferencing and the internet. Maybe that may save on fights, meals and accommodation costs.
 
Quick Hands

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
Strewthcobber said:
I wonder how the ARU board, filled with independent directors, who presumably approved the strategic plan, feel about the CEO agreeing to have it reviewed?

I would not have thought that was Pulver's decision to make
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with agreeing to review any policy document or strategic plan. Successful organisations do it all the time. The CEO reports to the board and one assumes that they have been consulted in the lead-up to the meeting.

If the result is a better plan, what's the problem?
 
Strewthcobber

Strewthcobber

Simon Poidevin (60)
Quick Hands said:
Nothing wrong with agreeing to review any policy document or strategic plan. Successful organisations do it all the time. The CEO reports to the board and one assumes that they have been consulted in the lead-up to the meeting.

If the result is a better plan, what's the problem?
Click to expand...

better being a pretty loaded term there QH.....

The board approved a strategic plan in April. If it is not fit for purpose already, less than 6 months later, then it's the board that needs to be reviewed, not the plan.
 
T

TOCC

Guest
Hugh Jarse said:
No money to fly in and provide meals and accommodation for the "foreigners".

ARU are investigating a new thing called Skype, facetime, Video Conferencing and the internet. Maybe that may save on fights, meals and accommodation costs.
Click to expand...

Investigating was as far as it went it seems...

No clubs or schools from QLD were involved in this meeting, be that by physical presence or Skype/conference calls..
 
Braveheart81

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
Surely this meeting was to placate Papworth and Dwyer and try to stop the sniping.

The other invited participants presumably make it so it seems more like an overall review than just a meeting with Papworth and Dwyer.

Unless you're having a summit over several days it is difficult to include too many people and still make it at all constructive.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top