Where to for Super Rugby?

[hoggy]

Been thinking about the restructure required in Aus Rugby (yes a little sad as im at work).

One of the biggest issues to the franchises is lack of success. Problem with having a 15 team competition where you only had/have 33/26% of participants is that you can also have those clubs been in the bottom 50% of the competition. Luxury the NRL and AFL have is that for every terrible team and negative news story (Parramatta, Carlton, Brisbane Lions, Bulldogs, etc) there is some on the opposite end of the table, so a positive story (Richmond, West Tigers, St George, West Coast, etc.). If Super Rugby is to go forward, i legitimately believe there needs to be a championship or separate competition which involves just the participating Australian teams. Perhaps a 5 team (Force, Reds, Tahs, Rebels, Brums, perhaps a PI team), 8-10 round competition played pre Super Rugby.

Our season is the wrong way around. So play the competition from March-April culminating in a final on Australian soil. Play the first Bledisloe on ANZAC Day or the corresponding weekend, finishing with a restructure of the Rugby Championship to a 5 Nations (Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Argentina and Japan(only 4 fixtures = everyone once aka 6 nations)). Which will coincide with the dropping of the Sunwolves from Super Rugby allowing the Japanese Domestic league to be what ever it needs to be. June will still be internationals against NH teams. During this month span, the non int players go back to club rugby supporting grassroots. Only downside to this would be no NRC , however the domestic competition and non selection of wallabies players during the Bledisloe clash would allow for opportunities to young players.

Then play Super Rugby uninterrupted from July to October and finish the season with the NH internationals.

Aus Schedule

Jan - Rest
Feb - Rest
Mar - Domestic Championship
Apr - Domestic Championship + ANZAC Bledisloe
May - Rugby Championship (New 5 Nations) (Non Internationals back at club land)
Jun - SH internationals (Non Internationals back at club land)
Jul - Super Rugby/Indo Pacific (Force)
Aug - Super Rugby/Indo Pacific (Force)
Sep - Super Rugby/Indo Pacific (Force)
Oct - Super Rugby
Nov - NH internationals
Dec - Rest

NZ schedule would look like

Jan - Rest
Feb - Rest
Mar - NPC
Apr - NPC + ANZAC Bledisloe
May - Rugby Championship (New 5 Nations) (Non Internationals back at club land)
Jun - SH internationals (Non Internationals back at club land)
Jul - Super Rugby
Aug - Super Rugby
Sep - Super Rugby
Oct - Super Rugby
Nov - NH internationals
Dec - Rest

SAF (If they continue in Super Rugby)

Jan - Rest
Feb - Rest
Mar - Currie Cup
Apr - Currie Cup
May - Rugby Championship (New 5 Nations) (Non Internationals back at club land)
Jun - SH internationals (Non Internationals back at club land)
Jul - Super Rugby
Aug - Super Rugby
Sep - Super Rugby
Oct - Super Rugby
Nov - NH internationals
Dec - Rest

Argentine Schedule

Jan - Rest
Feb - Rest
Mar - New South American Professional Championship
Apr - New South American professional championship
May - Rugby Championship (New 5 Nations) (Non Internationals back at club land)
Jun - SH internationals (Non Internationals back at club land)
Jul - Super Rugby
Aug - Super Rugby
Sep - Super Rugby
Oct - Super Rugby
Nov - NH internationals
Dec - Rest

*more games for our super clubs to be exposed to (marketing opportunities)
*more content for our members to engage and build affiliation with Super club (11 homes games)
*more rest for players
*Greater emphasis on the domestic comps with the best players actually playing, each country also guaranteed a "champion" (positive news story)
*Asian dollars in the Rugby Championship and not Super Rugby
*More emphasis on Club Rugby
*Appeases TV companies (Perhaps FTA for Aus championship? TV networks a lot more interested in Reds/Tahs/Force brand than the NRC versions, non rugby fans actually have heard of them)
*No stoppages in any competition
*Multiple competitions to keep fans engaged (eg. Football)

I'm sure there is plenty of holes in this, but worth a thought anyway

Not so much a criticism, as a continuation of a current problem, so much content but no clear product. If you look at NRL/AFL they are pitching a single competition as there product, were throwing at them 5/6 different competitions and then wondering why theirs a lack of fan engagement.

 

[Tomikin]

The June internationals move to July in 2020.

Party pooper

Sent from my HTC 2PS6200 using Tapatalk

 

[Rebels3]

Not so much a criticism, as a continuation of a current problem, so much content but no clear product. If you look at NRL/AFL they are pitching a single competition as there product, were throwing at them 5/6 different competitions and then wondering why theirs a lack of fan engagement.

Thanks for the feedback Hoggy.

My rebutal;

There is only 2 products on offer here, the domestic competition and Super Rugby (counting international competition is no different to the NRL counting State of Origin, ANZAC test and end of season internationals). I actually think multiple competitions could be exciting. Its worked amazingly in Europe with football competitions, which have teams competing on 4 different comps over a season (league cup, FA Cup, European and domestic leagues), European Rugby, which has a minimum of 2 competitions and even European Basketball. American sports are a little different in that they almost have a competition within a competition, having playoff games for divisional titles, conference title and overall title. Their sports are also supplemented by massive college competitions, which most are attached to a particular team. I do understand how some people would want a very linear competition as they see domestically, however these competitions don't have the luxury we do with international caliber competition. Lets not forget the countries biggest sport is run over 3 domestic competitions and constant/multiple international series (cricket).

To me fan engagement comes with the club and not the competition, if anything multiple competitions keeps fan spirits high as there is always a chance of success, instead of a single competition where 50% of the teams by mid season are already out of contention. Our clubs aren't providing enough content to engage, this season there is 8 home games which = 15% of the year you can engage with your club (8 out of 52 weeks) that isn't enough to build a consumer base

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Been thinking about the restructure required in Aus Rugby (yes a little sad as im at work).

One of the biggest issues to the franchises is lack of success. Problem with having a 15 team competition where you only had/have 33/26% of participants is that you can also have those clubs been in the bottom 50% of the competition. Luxury the NRL and AFL have is that for every terrible team and negative news story (Parramatta, Carlton, Brisbane Lions, Bulldogs, etc) there is some on the opposite end of the table, so a positive story (Richmond, West Tigers, St George, West Coast, etc.). If Super Rugby is to go forward, i legitimately believe there needs to be a championship or separate competition which involves just the participating Australian teams. Perhaps a 5 team (Force, Reds, Tahs, Rebels, Brums, perhaps a PI team), 8-10 round competition played pre Super Rugby.

Our season is the wrong way around. So play the competition from March-April culminating in a final on Australian soil. Play the first Bledisloe on ANZAC Day or the corresponding weekend, finishing with a restructure of the Rugby Championship to a 5 Nations (Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Argentina and Japan(only 4 fixtures = everyone once aka 6 nations)). Which will coincide with the dropping of the Sunwolves from Super Rugby allowing the Japanese Domestic league to be what ever it needs to be. June will still be internationals against NH teams. During this month span, the non int players go back to club rugby supporting grassroots. Only downside to this would be no NRC , however the domestic competition and non selection of wallabies players during the Bledisloe clash would allow for opportunities to young players.

Then play Super Rugby uninterrupted from July to October and finish the season with the NH internationals.

Aus Schedule

Jan - Rest
Feb - Rest
Mar - Domestic Championship
Apr - Domestic Championship + ANZAC Bledisloe
May - Rugby Championship (New 5 Nations) (Non Internationals back at club land)
Jun - SH internationals (Non Internationals back at club land)
Jul - Super Rugby/Indo Pacific (Force)
Aug - Super Rugby/Indo Pacific (Force)
Sep - Super Rugby/Indo Pacific (Force)
Oct - Super Rugby
Nov - NH internationals
Dec - Rest

NZ schedule would look like

Jan - Rest
Feb - Rest
Mar - NPC
Apr - NPC + ANZAC Bledisloe
May - Rugby Championship (New 5 Nations) (Non Internationals back at club land)
Jun - SH internationals (Non Internationals back at club land)
Jul - Super Rugby
Aug - Super Rugby
Sep - Super Rugby
Oct - Super Rugby
Nov - NH internationals
Dec - Rest

SAF (If they continue in Super Rugby)

Jan - Rest
Feb - Rest
Mar - Currie Cup
Apr - Currie Cup
May - Rugby Championship (New 5 Nations) (Non Internationals back at club land)
Jun - SH internationals (Non Internationals back at club land)
Jul - Super Rugby
Aug - Super Rugby
Sep - Super Rugby
Oct - Super Rugby
Nov - NH internationals
Dec - Rest

Argentine Schedule

Jan - Rest
Feb - Rest
Mar - New South American Professional Championship
Apr - New South American professional championship
May - Rugby Championship (New 5 Nations) (Non Internationals back at club land)
Jun - SH internationals (Non Internationals back at club land)
Jul - Super Rugby
Aug - Super Rugby
Sep - Super Rugby
Oct - Super Rugby
Nov - NH internationals
Dec - Rest

*more games for our super clubs to be exposed to (marketing opportunities)
*more content for our members to engage and build affiliation with Super club (11 homes games)
*more rest for players
*Greater emphasis on the domestic comps with the best players actually playing, each country also guaranteed a "champion" (positive news story)
*Asian dollars in the Rugby Championship and not Super Rugby
*More emphasis on Club Rugby
*Appeases TV companies (Perhaps FTA for Aus championship? TV networks a lot more interested in Reds/Tahs/Force brand than the NRC versions, non rugby fans actually have heard of them)
*No stoppages in any competition
*Multiple competitions to keep fans engaged (eg. Football)

I'm sure there is plenty of holes in this, but worth a thought anyway

Not a bad effort at trying to map out a rough schedule. Outside of the already mentioned change in the June to July Test window it should be workable with one change in the flow of competitions. I'd do as you have suggested and start with a domestic competition. Home and away before moving forward into Super Rugby which would then split teams up into 3 groups of 6 or whatever the number necessary with the option of playing just 5 games straight or another 10 week home and away season. Top 2 from each pool progress to the finals. From there, onto your suggested international schedule. This way clubs would get 10 games each. A much more emphasised domestic scene and the international component.

 

[RedsHappy]

I'll probably spam this on a few threads, but everyone needs to read Jamie's article on the front page.

It's a long article but smashes it out of the park on the issues we're facing.

http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/australian-rugby-how-to-stop-it-failing-upwards/

Barb, it's a fine piece, very well constructed and written. And an exceptional amount of work for no gain other than the sharing of thoughtful, impassioned, insight at length and too with a compelling depth. A credit to JM and GAGR to have made and published it.

But that tragic, long, elaborate list of the toxic symptoms of a code's decay misses one fundamental point and subtly evades the truth of what change is really required to start the credible re-designing of Australian rugby from the base to the top.

It's this: the entire accumulating debacle JM describes so well is a chronicle of a death (or near-death) foretold and foreseeable and, importantly, foreseen.

Foretold by many of us here over the last 5-7 years right on these boards.

There were many, many signs over many, many years of an elite institutional Australian rugby culture breaking bad - let's just take a couple.

In 2011 JO'N used Deans' pre RWC contract renewal or stage a new 'loyalty bond' ARU CEO extended contract on enhanced terms just for himself and then semi-secretly within months of that occurring was to fly to the UK to be actively interviewed as potential CEO on GBP 1.5m pa for Manchester City football club. The entire process was dishonest and wilfully self-serving at the code's expense yet was enthusiastically approved by a supine and self-indulgent ARU board. What was that telling us, 7 years ago?

Then as JO'N was in late 2012 paid out over $2m to depart a then heavily loss-making ARU, after a 'serious global search' a new ARU CEO was found that possessed zero elite sports administration experience but was a close GPS school mate of the ARU Chair plus a golfing mate plus a rugby playing mate, plus a near neighbour in Mosman, NSW. What was that telling us, 6 years ago?

In early 2016 a grand ARU 'Strategic Plan' was unveiled that prominently screamed a 'long-term and essential' commitment to 5 Super Rugby teams here in Australia. In less than one year later, that entire structure was be abandoned based upon a sudden lurch to cull the Force in a process of laughably bumbling and damaging execution. What was that telling us, 1 year ago?

I could quote 10 or more similar factual examples as are the above.

How would a top governing body that conducts itself like this over many, many years ever possess and deliver the humility, experience and the right analysis and throughfulness to properly design an Australian rugby system that could be successful and self-sustaining? (I could make the same or similar observations regarding the QRU and NSWRU and further how these two bodies and the ARU/RA have formed an institutionally corrupt process by which each perpetuates the type of director that is supports and has appointed to the other, but that's another dimension of this code catastrophe, so for another day.)

I have long said here: no institution or company ever, ever, comes to exceed the skills and attitudinal capacity and culture of its most elite supervisory body.

JM's elucidations this week, whilst very impressive, accurate and laudable, fails to strike right deep into the dark heart of the problem. And until that heart is decisively excised and replaced there will only be a death spiral and death and decay will be the only safe predictions.

Nothing less that a radical reconstruction of the sick, self-regarding, institutionally incestuous, skills-incompetent, arrogant, insular culture and modus operandi at the cores of RA and the two major State RUs will suffice if Australian rugby is to survive and, one day far away, prosper again.

Anything less than this is little but an illusion of deceit and intellectual blindness to the most telling, most compelling, facts of executive conduct and appalling poor leadership that has wrecked Australian rugby.

Only now are many waking up to these truths. Too sad, way too late.

Australian rugby is where it is as a deeply flawed and highly damaging institutional culture was permitted to dominate its affairs and administration over a long, sustained period. The true roots of today's problems were all evident years ago.

No change to this, there will be no change enough that adequately cures and can thus start again with valid dreams and better hearts.

 

[dru]

Not a bad effort at trying to map out a rough schedule. Outside of the already mentioned change in the June to July Test window it should be workable with one change in the flow of competitions. I'd do as you have suggested and start with a domestic competition. Home and away before moving forward into Super Rugby which would then split teams up into 3 groups of 6 or whatever the number necessary with the option of playing just 5 games straight or another 10 week home and away season. Top 2 from each pool progress to the finals. From there, onto your suggested international schedule. This way clubs would get 10 games each. A much more emphasised domestic scene and the international component.

Generally liking what I see here - however i don't think a Champions League style selection for rugby would work in Australia. There is not enough talent. I would replace it with rep teams ala SOO. That way we don't have a real problem "shrinking" the number of teams, and the system being proposed covers off the national foot print.

 

[dru]

Barb, it's a fine piece, very well constructed and written. And an exceptional amount of work for no gain other than the sharing of thoughtful, impassioned, insight at length and too with a compelling depth. A credit to JM and GAGR to have made and published it.

But that tragic, long, elaborate list of the toxic symptoms of a code's decay misses one fundamental point and subtly evades the truth of what change is really required to start the credible re-designing of Australian rugby from the base to the top.

I could not agree more strongly. Completely agree an excellent piece, well considered. But RH, you have the missing ingredient.

 

[Quick Hands]

I have more faith in twiggy’s team leading reform and salvation for rugby in this country than rugby Australia


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The death spiral will continue as long as the current organisational culture of self-perpeuating cronyism, conflicts of interest and mediocrity remain. No plan, no structure or restructure can succeed as long as we are led my the sort of corporate networkers and incompetents revealed at the banking royal commission. If cataclysmic organisational failure and bankruptcy are the only way to change then bring it on.

History shows us that it's not possible to reform an organistion which is rotten to the core and does not and will not reflect the aims and wishes of its core constituency. French monarchy c 1789, Ottoman Empire c 1919, Tsarist Russia c1917,

I'm for the revolution.

 

[Quick Hands]

Those running the RFU moved with the times a decade ago (or more), overthrew the blazer wearers and the game is going gangbusters at all levels - including in non-traditional rugby areas.

Some would have us believe that only Australia has non-traditional rugby areas (part of our unique uniqueness?), but England, France, Ireland all have parts of the country where rugby was almost invisible a generation ago.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/r...disaster-claims-RFU-development-director.html

http://www.englandrugby.com/mm/Document/General/General/01/32/74/73/TouchlineDecemberWEB_English.pdf

 

[wamberal]

Those running the RFU own Twickenham. And have done since the early 1900's. It is not only a rugby venue, of course, it also hosts other events.


It is a goldmine. That makes a bit of a difference, wouldn't you say?


By the way, rugby union is the only major contact winter sport in England, and France. Compare and contrast with our situation. Or maybe that doesn't really matter?


Get real, QH.

 

[Gnostic]

The death spiral will continue as long as the current organisational culture of self-perpeuating cronyism, conflicts of interest and mediocrity remain. No plan, no structure or restructure can succeed as long as we are led my the sort of corporate networkers and incompetents revealed at the banking royal commission. If cataclysmic organisational failure and bankruptcy are the only way to change then bring it on.



History shows us that it's not possible to reform an organistion which is rotten to the core and does not and will not reflect the aims and wishes of its core constituency. French monarchy c 1789, Ottoman Empire c 1919, Tsarist Russia c1917,



I'm for the revolution.

I'll sharpen my guillotine...lets get it going...

 

[Quick Hands]

Those running the RFU own Twickenham. And have done since the early 1900's. It is not only a rugby venue, of course, it also hosts other events.


It is a goldmine. That makes a bit of a difference, wouldn't you say?


By the way, rugby union is the only major contact winter sport in England, and France. Compare and contrast with our situation. Or maybe that doesn't really matter?


Get real, QH.

You continue to perpetuate the myths and cop outs to explain away every problem.

Yes, the RFU has a greater quantum of cash than RA, it doesn't mean we can't to the same or similar things on a smaller scale with our less cash. Unfortunately thsoe who you mindlessly continue to defend have squandered millions of dollars with nothing, absolutely nothing to show for it.

Rugby league exists in both England and France, so there exists another professional contact sport in both countries. The difference being that rugby in England and France are forward thinking and have worked tireslessly at expanding the game at grass roots level into non-traditional rugby areas. It's a choice they made, while we decided to throw millions at Wendall Sailor, Lote Tiquiri, Matt Rogers et al. The RFU put a sigificiant percentage of RWC profits into club rugby - sythetic pitches, lighting, coaching, academies. How much of the ARU profit from RWC 2003 went to club rugby? Zero - it all went to the elite professional level.

In every country of the world bar New Zealand, rugby faces competition and challenges. Australia is not unique and it's about time people woke up to that and got on with playing with the hand we've been dealt and the game would be in a much stronger position. Cop outs, excuses and self-pity won't get us anywhere.

 

[Gnostic]

You continue to perpetuate the myths and cop outs to explain away every problem.



Yes, the RFU has a greater quantum of cash than RA, it doesn't mean we can't to the same or similar things on a smaller scale with our less cash. Unfortunately thsoe who you mindlessly continue to defend have squandered millions of dollars with nothing, absolutely nothing to show for it.



Rugby league exists in both England and France, so there exists another professional contact sport in both countries. The difference being that rugby in England and France are forward thinking and have worked tireslessly at expanding the game at grass roots level into non-traditional rugby areas. It's a choice they made, while we decided to throw millions at Wendall Sailor, Lote Tiquiri, Matt Rogers et al. The RFU put a sigificiant percentage of RWC profits into club rugby - sythetic pitches, lighting, coaching, academies. How much of the ARU profit from RWC 2003 went to club rugby? Zero - it all went to the elite professional level.



In every country of the world bar New Zealand, rugby faces competition and challenges. Australia is not unique and it's about time people woke up to that and got on with dealing with the hand we've been dealt and the game would be in a much stronger position. Cop outs, excuses and self-pity won't get us anywhere.

QH you are wasting your time, Management decision do not have any real effect long term, Wamberal has already informed us thusly and hence the position England and France are in is purely down to a bigger population and luck and the East India Company or some such.

 

[Quick Hands]

QH you are wasting your time, Management decision do not have any real effect long term, Wamberal has already informed us thusly and hence the position England and France are in is purely down to a bigger population and luck and the East India Company or some such.

If management has such little impact, one wonders why we pay them so much/

 

[wamberal]

Put words into my mouth, if you like, if it makes you feel better. My defense of our management has been primarily to point out that, in management terms (something that I suspect neither of you has the slightest experience or expertise in) the majority of the factors that influence the success or otherwise of the game here are out of their hands.


Believe what you like, but that is the simple truth.


I prefer to deal in facts. The simple fact is that rugby has always been far bigger in England, and France, by any measure, than it has in our country, relative to competitors, and of course in absolute terms.


There are a number of reasons that their professional competitions attract so many players from other countries, but they do.


Our pro competitions have never attracted more than the occasional one of their players, in the whole period since we went professionalism. We are poor, they are rich.

This is the reality, fark all to do with management, it is the way it is, and the way it has always been. Have we been managed by idiots for the whole history of the game here? Even when the English game was in the hands of the blazer wearers?


You two can continue to piss in each other's pockets, I have better things to do.

 

[The torpedo]

after a 'serious global search'

Australian rugby loves its carparks don't they

 

[Quick Hands]

and the way it has always been. Have we been managed by idiots for the whole history of the game here? Even when the English game was in the hands of the blazer wearers?

No actually, you're wrong again. We were very well served by our administrators in the amateur era, unfortunately our professional managers brought with them the negatives of the amateur era and left the positives behind.

England at the time were poorly run by what one England captain described as gin swilling old farts.

In the professional era, they've been well managed and we haven't. End of story. Facts are undeniable (even by you)

Interestingly the on-field results tell the story.

Between 1909 and 1999, England and Australia played 24 times. Australia won 16 times, England won 7 with 1 draw.

Between 2000 and 2017, England and Australia played 24 times. Australia have won 9 times, England won 16.

Nothing like facts to ilustrate the change in the balance is there?

 

[dru]

Those running the RFU own Twickenham. And have done since the early 1900's. It is not only a rugby venue, of course, it also hosts other events.


It is a goldmine. That makes a bit of a difference, wouldn't you say?


By the way, rugby union is the only major contact winter sport in England, and France. Compare and contrast with our situation. Or maybe that doesn't really matter?


Get real, QH.

You use the word “contact” to avoid the competition from Football?

Get real Wam.

 

[cyclopath]

No actually, you're wrong again. We were very well served by our administrators in the amateur era, unfortunately our professional managers brought with them the negatives of the amateur era and left the positives behind.

England at the time were poorly run by what one England captain described as gin swilling old farts.

In the professional era, they've been well managed and we haven't. End of story. Facts are undeniable (even by you)

Interestingly the on-field results tell the story.

Between 1909 and 1999, England and Australia played 24 times. Australia won 16 times, England won 7 with 1 draw.

Between 2000 and 2017, England and Australia played 24 times. Australia have won 9 times, England won 16.

Nothing like facts to ilustrate the change in the balance is there?

Maybe the latter part of it (80s-'95), but the game was very much in the doldrums in Australia in many ways for quite some time, except for club-land, which had little to do with "big" admin. And the admin was as entrenched and connected then - they just didn't have too much over which to preside, and bugger all money to spend either!
But the difference in the pro-era is stark, as your numbers show. That is clear.
I think you're being a little cavalier to dismiss the factor of the money the RFU has at its disposal. Undoubtedly they have established many great programs at multiple levels over there, but that just does not happen without the moolah. So they look good, but it is easier to look good with a bigger stash. Doesn't excuse the ineptitude here.
Yes, John O'Neill in particular pissed away a relative war chest, which is unforgivable. One can only imagine the position we'd be in if money gained in 2003 was invested in coaching structures at all levels, and less in JO'N's drinks cabinet and in buying and keeping superstars (although some of the earlier acquisitions probably did put some more bums on seats for a while - although longer term it was flawed).

 

[charlesalan]

Barb, it's a fine piece, very well constructed and written. And an exceptional amount of work for no gain other than the sharing of thoughtful, impassioned, insight at length and too with a compelling depth. A credit to JM and GAGR to have made and published it.

But that tragic, long, elaborate list of the toxic symptoms of a code's decay misses one fundamental point and subtly evades the truth of what change is really required to start the credible re-designing of Australian rugby from the base to the top.

It's this: the entire accumulating debacle JM describes so well is a chronicle of a death (or near-death) foretold and foreseeable and, importantly, foreseen.

Foretold by many of us here over the last 5-7 years right on these boards.

There were many, many signs over many, many years of an elite institutional Australian rugby culture breaking bad - let's just take a couple.

In 2011 JO'N used Deans' pre RWC contract renewal or stage a new 'loyalty bond' ARU CEO extended contract on enhanced terms just for himself and then semi-secretly within months of that occurring was to fly to the UK to be actively interviewed as potential CEO on GBP 1.5m pa for Manchester City football club. The entire process was dishonest and wilfully self-serving at the code's expense yet was enthusiastically approved by a supine and self-indulgent ARU board. What was that telling us, 7 years ago?

Then as JO'N was in late 2012 paid out over $2m to depart a then heavily loss-making ARU, after a 'serious global search' a new ARU CEO was found that possessed zero elite sports administration experience but was a close GPS school mate of the ARU Chair plus a golfing mate plus a rugby playing mate, plus a near neighbour in Mosman, NSW. What was that telling us, 6 years ago?

In early 2016 a grand ARU 'Strategic Plan' was unveiled that prominently screamed a 'long-term and essential' commitment to 5 Super Rugby teams here in Australia. In less than one year later, that entire structure was be abandoned based upon a sudden lurch to cull the Force in a process of laughably bumbling and damaging execution. What was that telling us, 1 year ago?

I could quote 10 or more similar factual examples as are the above.

How would a top governing body that conducts itself like this over many, many years ever possess and deliver the humility, experience and the right analysis and throughfulness to properly design an Australian rugby system that could be successful and self-sustaining? (I could make the same or similar observations regarding the QRU and NSWRU and further how these two bodies and the ARU/RA have formed an institutionally corrupt process by which each perpetuates the type of director that is supports and has appointed to the other, but that's another dimension of this code catastrophe, so for another day.)

I have long said here: no institution or company ever, ever, comes to exceed the skills and attitudinal capacity and culture of its most elite supervisory body.

JM's elucidations this week, whilst very impressive, accurate and laudable, fails to strike right deep into the dark heart of the problem. And until that heart is decisively excised and replaced there will only be a death spiral and death and decay will be the only safe predictions.

Nothing less that a radical reconstruction of the sick, self-regarding, institutionally incestuous, skills-incompetent, arrogant, insular culture and modus operandi at the cores of RA and the two major State RUs will suffice if Australian rugby is to survive and, one day far away, prosper again.

Anything less than this is little but an illusion of deceit and intellectual blindness to the most telling, most compelling, facts of executive conduct and appalling poor leadership that has wrecked Australian rugby.

Only now are many waking up to these truths. Too sad, way too late.

Australian rugby is where it is as a deeply flawed and highly damaging institutional culture was permitted to dominate its affairs and administration over a long, sustained period. The true roots of today's problems were all evident years ago.

No change to this, there will be no change enough that adequately cures and can thus start again with valid dreams and better hearts.

and to add to this, the recent appointment of Raelene Castle who does not have a wonderfully successful sporting administration background, but did tick the pc box as required by the RA Board director charged with finding a CEO and we have the perfect storm vortex that will suck the life blood out of Rugby as we know it.