Where to for Super Rugby?

[p.Tah]

If an Oz Super Rugby side is cut, Pulver will be handing in his keys and security pass.

 

[Braveheart81]

If an Oz Super Rugby side is cut, Pulver will be handing in his keys and security pass.

I still don't get why people think that would be his decision?

How does the ARU board avoid any scrutiny in all this?

Surely they are the ones who ultimately are making the decision for what the ARU puts forward and accepts/vetoes at the SANZAAR meeting. If they aren't, none of them should be there because this shouldn't be the CEO's decision.

 

[Rebels3]

Which one of the three journos who wrote that didn't know that Melbourne and Canberra are in the same timezone?

To be fair to the journo he does say geography and time zone, meaning. The force have the time zone, rebels have a direct flight out of South Africa

 

[Highlander35]

Melbourne Brumbies 2018

Jack Debreczini
Sefanaia Naivalu
Tevita Kuridrani
Reece Hodge
Henry Speight/Marika Koirobete
Christian Lealiifano
Joe Powell/Nic Stirzaker

Scott Sio
James Hanson
Allan Allalatola
Rory Arnold
Blake Enever
Sean McMahon
David Pocock
Lopeti Timani

Jordan Uelese
Toby Smith
Laurie Weeks
Tom Staniforth
Jarrad Butler
Nic Stirzaker/Joe Powell
Tom English
Marika Koroibete/Henry Speight

(You can probably tell I'm not a Sam Carter fan, and I rate none of the top 3 Hookers bar Hanson at either side)

 

[Simon.]

I think the clout is more the threat of legal action than anything else.

The Rebels owners don't even have to WIN the legal action - the threat they might take legal action and a quick calculation of the likely lawyers' fees would make the ARU board turn pale.

 

[TOCC]

I still don't get why people think that would be his decision?

How does the ARU board avoid any scrutiny in all this?

Surely they are the ones who ultimately are making the decision for what the ARU puts forward and accepts/vetoes at the SANZAAR meeting. If they aren't, none of them should be there because this shouldn't be the CEO's decision.

Pulver and the ARU agreed on the current format, any changes to SANZAAR requires a unanimous decision from all SANZAAR partners, meaning Pulver agreed to cut a team. Pulver and his board are playing a pivotal role in all this and deserve all the criticism they get.

 

[Dan54]

I really don't understand why Kiwi's are so outraged by the concept. You still inevitably have a majority of your teams in the final every year. You still win fucking everything. It's kind of irritating when you lot get indignant that something doesn't perfectly cater to your needs while the rest of the rugby world (our rugby world anyway) fades into non-existence.

FFS Twolims, whats wrong with suggesting that everyone plays each other. Steven Hoiles said exactly same thing on TV last night. And what the fuck is getting indignant by suggesting I think it the best idea, so what ideas are we allowed to suggest that are not going to upset , geez man you getting a touch precious!!

 

[Strewthcobber]

Pulver and the ARU agreed on the current format, any changes to SANZAAR requires a unanimous decision from all SANZAAR partners, meaning Pulver agreed to cut a team. Pulver and his board are playing a pivotal role in all this as deserve all the criticism they get.

The point is the CEO reports to and acts on behalf of the board.

The CEO carries out their direction.

(Of course Pulver is on the board so must accept his share of responsibilty as well)

 

[p.Tah]

I still don't get why people think that would be his decision?

How does the ARU board avoid any scrutiny in all this?

Surely they are the ones who ultimately are making the decision for what the ARU puts forward and accepts/vetoes at the SANZAAR meeting. If they aren't, none of them should be there because this shouldn't be the CEO's decision.

They'll be going too.

 

[Braveheart81]

Pulver and the ARU agreed on the current format, any changes to SANZAAR requires a unanimous decision from all SANZAAR partners, meaning Pulver agreed to cut a team. Pulver and his board are playing a pivotal role in all this as deserve all the criticism they get.

I am saying the criticism should be directed more towards the board than Pulver. For such huge decisions such as the expansion of Super Rugby we saw last year and the likely cutting of a team this year, this shouldn't be Pulver's decision.

If Pulver is making these decisions then the board is completely useless. They should be the ones ultimately deciding such pivotal strategic decisions that have lasting effects (good or bad) for Australian Rugby.

Pulver is one of nine directors, the others being Cameron Clyne, Brett Robinson, Elizabeth Broderick, John Eales, Pip Marlow, Paul McLean, Ann Sherry and Geoffrey Stooke.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Some sort of irony if it is the Brumbies that go - their inaugural captain will have played a key role in their disappearance.

Likewise Geoff Stooke from RugbyWA and the Force

 

[TOCC]

I am saying the criticism should be directed more towards the board than Pulver. For such huge decisions such as the expansion of Super Rugby we saw last year and the likely cutting of a team this year, this shouldn't be Pulver's decision.

If Pulver is making these decisions then the board is completely useless. They should be the ones ultimately deciding such pivotal strategic decisions that have lasting effects (good or bad) for Australian Rugby.

Pulver is one of nine directors, the others being Cameron Clyne, Brett Robinson, Elizabeth Broderick, John Eales, Pip Marlow, Paul McLean, Ann Sherry and Geoffrey Stooke.

Pulver deserves the criticism just as much as the rest of the board, if people are criticising Pulver it's also criticism of the board, he is the CEO and represents the board and is also a voting member of the board...

The CEO will and should drive the agenda for the organisation. The CEO is also the person best-placed to provide the Board with the information it requires to make effective and informed decisions. And, once those decisions are made, it will be the CEO who is tasked with implementing them.

 

[Omar Comin']

Imagine how much better everyone would be feeling about the state of rugby in Australia right now if the ARU had been uncompromising and open in their support of keeping all 5 teams from the get go. It'd have been a real confidence boost to players, coaches and supporters. Perception matters, and even if a team doesn't end up being cut this extended limbo period has damaged the game. I'm sure people within the ARU read these forums, I hope they're getting the message pretty loud and clear that they need to change course.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Any candidates for a rugby version of Frank Lowy? Maybe it's time for a reset.

We need to find another Frank Lowy......surely has some Silvertail billionaires wanting to invest. I thought James Packer went to Cranbrook which is a rugby not a league school....heaven forbid he invests in Souths NRL team...what is that about...Casino interests and typical casino patrons I guess....

 

[Slim 293]

Imagine how much better everyone would be feeling about the state of rugby in Australia right now if the ARU had been uncompromising and open in their support of keeping all 5 teams from the get go. It'd have been a real confidence boost to players, coaches and supporters. Perception matters, and even if a team doesn't end up being cut this extended limbo period has damaged the game. I'm sure people within the ARU read these forums, I hope they're getting the message pretty loud and clear that they need to change course.

Indeed......... did you know that the Waratahs and Brumbies are playing this week for the newly created 'Dan Vickerman Cup?'

It's buried somewhere underneath all those other stories speculating on who is getting axed, and who should be getting axed and why no one should be axed etc

 

[Rugbynutter39]

This just got twittered but its out of Sth Africa
Georgina Robinson Retweeted

​

1 NEWS - Sport‏Verified account @1NewsSportNZ 21m21 minutes ago

More​

#BREAKING: Three teams to be cut from @SuperRugby, including Southern Kings https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/sport/rugby/exclusive-three-teams-cut-super-rugby-including-southern-kings …

https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/spo...eams-cut-super-rugby-including-southern-kings

Crap

Sent from my EVA-L09 using Tapatalk

 

[Rugbynutter39]

You also have to take into account the overall running costs of these teams as well.

If we were to lose a franchise I would hope that the ARU would use any savings tp better resource and expand the NRC. Double its length and a greater level of promotion would go a long way.

Only if something like this happens if they cut a team will retain my interest in professional rugby.

Sent from my EVA-L09 using Tapatalk

 

[Rugbynutter39]

I doubt that would work out, it's too confusing and too obviously a development competition. Any genuine professional national comp here has to contain the Waratahs, Reds, Brumbies, Rebels and Force.

Yes you are probably right as too early in any case

Sent from my EVA-L09 using Tapatalk

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Sitting here, I"d rather it be announced that 5 teams are being dropped from Australia than 1. Maybe I'm just bloody minded and ready for a complete rebuild.

Most on here would probably support this as if dropped oz side for me would be last straw for my interest in super rugby

Sent from my EVA-L09 using Tapatalk

 

[Rugbynutter39]

I think we should merge all the Australia teams into one and base it in Alice Springs, because that's pretty close to the centre and fair for everyone to get to.
Rather than the points table being based on winning, I think it should be alphabetical order. Therefore let's name them the Alice Spring Aardvarks. Hard to beat a team with a double 'a. Guaranteed a finals position each year with that name. Winning.

I am sure saru and nzru request bend over pulver and rest of aru board will agree to it.

Sent from my EVA-L09 using Tapatalk