Waratahs 2013

[Inside Shoulder]

That surely depends on how much more misinformation gets placed up here.

 

[fatprop]

That surely depends on how much more misinformation gets placed up here.

I would be happy to move that part of the thread to "What makes a good board member thread" in Everything Else if you want.

Lets just stick to rugby in this thread and leave the suits out of it

 

[Braveheart81]

Lets just stick to rugby in this thread and leave the suits out of it

Does that mean we can or can't talk about Rocky Elsom?

He's spent most of the season wearing a Waratahs suit.

 

[fatprop]

Does that mean we can or can't talk about Rocky Elsom?

He's spent most of the season wearing a Waratahs suit.

I wouldn't be bothering worrying about him in the 2013 thread at the moment

 

[RedsHappy]

The notion that 'suits' - that is, the composition, qualifications and calibre of the Tahs/NSWRU boards - should 'not be discussed' in a Waratahs 2013 thread as of relevance to the performance of the Tahs in 2013 is merely fp your own personal preference. It's not a rigorous assessment of the complete suite of factors that are in fact highly relevant to the Tahs' future performance (as they have been relevant to the Tahs' past performance). Hence, a personal preference for topical priorities within the realm of what defines a team's likely success should not IMO be imposed upon others here. If any chosen aspect of the whole Tahs 2013 debate bores you, scroll and ignore is a wonderfully convenient solution.

What you see in each rugby game is only partly a reflection of each player's capabilities and even the coach's capabilities. What you see is also very much a reflection of the total systemic conditions - Board, business, money, history, internal politics, club culture, players' histories, coaches' quality, etc - that create or envelop the playing outcome, and the ultimate quality of that outcome. But not everybody cares to understand this wide angle system view, or wants to understand it, and I am not at all arguing that they should. But I do argue that these dimensions can legitimately be debated here within the topic headline as they may well bear upon the headline's meaning.

 

[barbarian]

I would agree with you RH, but the discussion of Loane has been in very dangerous territory for a while now.

eg. her performance on radio, what she does at her childrens school etc.

This is totally irrelevant to her performance on a board (which for starters is all speculation as none of us have been inside the Tahs boardroom to make informed comment).

So I would suggest it's fine to talk about the performance of the board as a whole, but when it comes to individual members I would be very careful, as unlike players on the rugby field we have NO IDEA what each member does or how good they are at doing that.
.

 

[Braveheart81]

Can you suggest some new areas for Inside Shoulder to focus his relentless negativity?

Maybe Tah Man or the ball kids?

 

[Inside Shoulder]

I would agree with you RH, but the discussion of Loane has been in very dangerous territory for a while now.

eg. her performance on radio, what she does at her childrens school etc.

This is totally irrelevant to her performance on a board (which for starters is all speculation as none of us have been inside the Tahs boardroom to make informed comment).

So I would suggest it's fine to talk about the performance of the board as a whole, but when it comes to individual members I would be very careful, as unlike players on the rugby field we have NO IDEA what each member does or how good they are at doing that.
.

This is complete and utter balderdash. Lindommer thought it was relevant!
The issue of the structure, which is probably too strong a word, of the Tahs board is clearly relevant to the Tahs performance: it is sufficiently significant for NSWRU to have decided that it needed to be separated from the community rugby aspects of the game.
There is a wonderful symmetry between what the arbiters of relevance in this thread would wish to have discussed and the problems with rugby in NSW: no one must challenge the way it has always been done and no individual should be called to account.
You can all stand around the wishing well peering into the void and hoping for something to emerge. It won't.

 

[barbarian]

Haha yes this forum is EXACTLY like the running of the NSWRU. What a great observation.

You can whinge all you like but we are no longer discussing the personal aspects of the performance of individual board members. The discussion has veered off into unecessarily speculative and personal areas and is thus against the rules of the fourm- see rule 6.

You are more than welcome to go and start your own forum where this discussion is allowed.
.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Haha yes this forum is EXACTLY like the running of the NSWRU. What a great observation.

You can whinge all you like but we are no longer discussing the personal aspects of the performance of individual board members. The discussion has veered off into unecessarily speculative and personal areas and is thus against the rules of the fourm- see rule 6.

You are more than welcome to go and start your own forum where this discussion is allowed.
.

Speculation is rife here: without it this site would die.
Braveheart is making appointments to the boards of public companies: post #389
Warathjesus invents grants to NSW juniors: http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/community/threads/waratahs-2012.7685/page-181#post-366017

 

[wamberal]

All those in favour of privatisation, say "aye". We need a new David Clarke (RIP).

 

[barbarian]

So I will have a look at those posts and see if they fall within the rules.

But this discussion is now over. We are no longer discussing the personal aspects of the performance of individual board members.

From now on only comments directly related to the Waratahs in 2013 will be allowed on this thread. Anything else will be deleted.

 

[Braveheart81]

I will happily admit I was wrong when I said Sally Loane was a Director on the CCA board. In my haste, I misread her title as a Director of an area of the business as being a Director of the company.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

In 2013 the Tahs will win the comp, Discuss.

 

[Rob42]

In 2013 the Tahs will win the comp, Discuss.

Hooper creates a significant improvement in the pack's ability to retain the ball in unstructured play, building on the already impressive scrum and solid lineout. B. Foley moves up to fly-half, with Barnes moving either to 12 or 15, and this plus the ability to retain the ball gives the backline the confidence to play with speed and width for longer periods than the current 5-10 minutes per game. Injury levels revert to the mean.

Hmm, that was easier than I thought, IS.

 

[Lee Grant]

So - you a good guy after all IS? But it was probably tongue in cheek.

I remember writing about a month ago that the 2012 season was very much like the one of 2007, when under Link McKenzie we finished 2nd last.

It was unaccountable that we won only 3 games the whole season and in 2012 to date we have won only four. We have talked about the generalities of why the Tahs have had such a poor year and also about the particulars.

Even though I know those things as well as most it is still unaccountable to me why those generalities and particulars have been manifest this year.

Folks may remember that we made the semi finals in 2006 and went down, IIRR, to the Canes when Kaplan pinged Baxter at the end on his own scrum. Then we had the shit year and then in 2008 we made the final with the same coach.

We made the qualifying final last year and had a shit year in 2012. I've got my fingers crossed that we will bounce back in 2013 as we did in 2008.

You never know.
.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

So - you a good guy after all IS?

I think it would be dangerous to make assumptions about who is good or bad based on what they post on here - whatever good or bad, In this context, means. I certainly don't resile from anything I wrote: I posted the post to which you refer to draw a line under the conversation to that point and to signal that I accepted the umpire's decision.
Unlike the politics thread, and despite what some people have said about me, I choose to believe that everyone (including me) who posts in a Tahs thread like this (of which there are a number) genuinely has the interests of the game in NSW at heart.
Obvisouly we see the path to success differently and I think to some extent we all measure what success would look like a little differently: as I have said I do not consider the Tahs winning the comp the measure of success - indeed it is arguable they could win it and the problems in NSW rugby be generally worse than they presently are.
In one sense I really don't care what happens in 2013 because my interest is in a dynasty, like the Crusdaders have done, where there may be lesser years but there are no bad years. In my view the place to start to build that sort of culture is with attitude.

 

[Badger]

In one sense I really don't care what happens in 2013 because my interest is in a dynasty, like the Crusdaders have done, where there may be lesser years but there are no bad years. In my view the place to start to build that sort of culture is with attitude.

The Tahs should head across the Gold Members car park and have a look at the Swans setup and what goes on there. They may not be a rugby team and not quite a dynasty, but at season's end, they invariably give a good account of themselves during the year. The "Bloods culture" would be a worthy one to examine in terms of team performance both on and off the field.

 

[waratahjesus]

The Tahs should head across the Gold Members car park and have a look at the Swans setup and what goes on there. They may not be a rugby team and not quite a dynasty, but at season's end, they invariably give a good account of themselves during the year. The "Bloods culture" would be a worthy one to examine in terms of team performance both on and off the field.

A few years back they used to cross train with the swans occasionally, they don't seem to anymore, I don't know why, kicking wise it could only help.

 

[Lindommer]

I would agree with you RH, but the discussion of Loane has been in very dangerous territory for a while now.

eg. her performance on radio, what she does at her childrens school etc.

Point taken. That was me, ever the gentleman defending a lady under attack. Should've kept my reply to rugby matters.