Where to for Super Rugby?

[Killer]

Nope. the ARU are 1/4 of SANZAAR and SANZAAR's decisions are distinct from the ARU's. It's a joint venture.

yes but we are in the tent, we are part of the family, they are not going to try and screw us. We just need balls and explain the issues.

 

[FiveStarStu]

You all know that the “bait and switch” of Cox selling the Company. Transferring the License happened after the ARU reacted to press rumours and stated categorically that “the license could not be transferred without the ARU’s written approval”. When it actually happened a few days later for the princely price of $1 there was again a public statement by the ARU that this was not legal and that they would be immediately and urgently looking into it. At that point Andrew called Clyne and suggested to him that this was his opportunity to revoke the Rebels license and get the 4 team outcome that the ARU so desperately wanted.

This has been covered several times but the put option was, and is, legal without needing to notify the ARU.

The ARU's posturing after the transfer was just that, because, for the millionth time in this stupid saga, they simply got played.

If you want to look into how the debt was cleared, that would be a genuine enquiry. If you want to look into why the ARU were stupid enough to cede the right to both operate and transfer control of a franchise when they supposedly knew that five weren't sustainable, that would be a genuine enquiry. What the Rebels did, however, was all above board.

The Force are using the right method of appealing the decision - the idea that the ARU purchased the IP/licence with the indirect goal of shutting it down.

I wouldn't be surprised if Twiggy chucked the Sunwolves an offer as well.

 

[I like to watch]

Nope. the ARU are 1/4 of SANZAAR and SANZAAR's decisions are distinct from the ARU's. It's a joint venture.

Yes and no.
It's not like we only have 25% of the say.
Everyone has a right of veto, the only way an Ozzie franchise can be kicked out, is with the agreement from ARU

 

[Derpus]

Yes and no.
It's not like we only have 25% of the say.
Everyone has a right of veto, the only way an Ozzie franchise can be kicked out, is with the agreement from ARU

Which was given...

i don't really get the argument.

 

[Killer]

Which was given.

i don't really get the argument.

yes but is not enforceable. Explain the short term predicament and the upside and they will help as we would for them.
Clyne is the problem.

 

[Derpus]

yes but is not enforceable. Explain the short term predicament and the upside and they will help as we would for them.
Clyne is the problem.

This remains to be seen. As i've already pointed out earlier in the thread, if the Force lose it is entirely enforceable. If they win, it may still be enforceable. The remedy for the breach of contract by the ARU may not be further injunctive relief. The validity of the SANZAAR agreement will have to be tested etc.

It could just end up being, 'well yes they couldn't cut you but the Courts can't force SANZAAR, not a party to the contract, to accept you back into Super rugby. Therefore, damages awarded (money only)'.

The Force have almost certainly been cut at this point.

Edit: To clarify, this is how the agreements work:

Force <---contract---> ARU <---Joint Venture---> SANZAAR
___________________ARU <---agreement-----> SANZAAR
Force <---------------- No agreement------------ > SANZAAR

All three are legally distinct entities.

Whilst ARU have veto power and are a member of SANZAAR it's decisions and agreements are distinct from the ARU's. Once ARU entered into an agreement with SANZAAR a seperate agreement came into existence.

the validity of the Force '<---contract---> ARU' contract is in question now. If invald, the 'ARU <---agreement-----> SANZAAR' is likely still valid.

 

[Killer]

This remains to be seen. As i've already pointed out earlier in the thread, if the Force lose it is entirely enforceable. If they win, it may still be enforceable. The remedy for the breach of contract by the ARU may not be further injunctive relief. The validity of the SANZAAR agreement will have to be tested etc.

It could just end up being, 'well yes they couldn't cut you but the Courts can't force SANZAAR, not a party to the contract, to accept you back into Super rugby. Therefore, damages awarded (money only)'.

The Force have almost certainly been cut at this point.

maybe, I don't know? but why do this, it is not good for Aus rugby, therefore it is not good for sanzaar.
The upside with TF is huge, why the short term viewpoint. The vast majority of supporters seem to be fully behind the force.
Clyne should be working to ensure the best outcome for Aus. IMO he is just being stubborn and has backed himself into a corner with TF.
Reports say the board wants to engage with TF, why doesn't it? Clyne?

 

[Derpus]

^^^^
Because the ship has sailed.

 

[Braveheart81]

The ARU think the best outcome for them financially and for the strength of the four remaining Super Rugby teams is to cut a team.

The proposed contribution by Forrest is to the ARU Foundation which would not assist with funding the Super Rugby teams.

 

[Killer]

ref your clarification;
The ARU and sanzaar can do as they please, that includes working together for the benefit of all.
They are a team and are dependant on each other to succeed.
It seems obvious to me that the best outcome for all is to have a strong Aus rugby, if you(ARU)think that is better with TF and the Force involved then speak to sanzaar. It can be arranged!

 

[Killer]

The ARU think the best outcome for them financially and for the strength of the four remaining Super Rugby teams is to cut a team.

The proposed contribution by Forrest is to the ARU Foundation which would not assist with funding the Super Rugby teams.

Of course it would, many millions invested anywhere in rugby will be beneficial.
Do you think TF will make big investments at grassroots and let super rugby die?

 

[Killer]

^^^^
Because the ship has sailed.

that's Clynes view, not the boards imo and not sanzaars imo.
They would have all contingencies planned for thus none would be more advanced than another.

 

[Gnostic]

A few comments.



2) We don't need to burn it all down. Read this here article by fitzy. There is an existing, strong fan base that is waiting, practically begging for anyone with half a clue to connect with them. The Shute Shield is just one example. There is a strong base in Brisbane. A smaller on in Canberra. A rapidly developing one in Perth. It exists. We exist. It's the failed launch into professionalism that needs to be cut free. No free to air? fuck that. Alienation of those with lower socio-economic status? fuck that. Top down economics and funds channeled away from roots to Izzy Folau? Fuck that. Rugby is not dying. It just needs a reboot.

I respectfully assert that you are completely wrong with this point. Fundamentally because without the totally destruction of the ARU/NSWRU/QRU axis (Axis of Evil if you will) meaningful reform will never happen as their "completely selfish" self interest will always prevent anything that doesn't benefit them first and foremost in the first instance, regardless if long term effects would be for their benefit. As with a lot of Corporate Management and certainly Politics short termism rules and we have no real interest in anything outside 5-7 years because those managers in the seat now are not impinged, it is outside their bonus window and they will be gone. If the results are not to be seen in their window of operation they are not relevant.

The fan bases below the Pro level and to a certain degree at the pro level are irrelevant to their structures. This is all about dividing the broadcast pie as the primary revenue stream, and they believe they can grow the other from the bits of carcass of the Force they want to retain. The fans are required so only so far as they contribute to viewer numbers on the broadcaster.

 

[Derpus]

Theres also another TV rights deal in place. There are just too many legal obligations working against the Force coming back into the fold. I can't see it happening.

Edit: i hope i'm wrong.

 

[Killer]

Theres also another TV rights deal in place. There are just too many legal obligations working against the Force coming back into the fold. I can't see it happening.

Edit: i hope i'm wrong.

Fox prefer 5 Aus teams, as with any deal the participants work together to make it work.
Business is business, it is the same all over the world assuming there is no all consuming short term self interest = Clyne.

All these problems are easily solvable.
The problem is Clyne has backed himself into a corner first by saying he will resign if they can't cut a team and secondly by shunning TF.
In addition he probably knows that with a committed benefactor rugby will thrive without him.
Therefore he would rather take the chance of rugby failing and he remaining in power, he can always claim TF would have been as unsuccessful as himself.
The upshot is he has no alternative other than to continue on this current path.
He needs to go.

 

[Derpus]

Fox prefer 5 Aus teams, as with any deal the participants work together to make it work.
Business is business, it is the same all over the world assuming there is no all consuming short term self interest = Clyne.

I don't think you appreciate the differing level of dificulty presented in changing an agreement before its been formally entered into and changing an agreement after all the formalities are completed.

 

[Braveheart81]

Killer: you are avoiding the point that the ARU think it's in the best interests of Australian rugby and the remaining four Super Rugby teams to cut a team.

It is close to irrelevant at this point whether they can reverse that decision or whether it is actually what is best for Australian rugby.

If the Force win their court case we will probably find out how feasible it is to reverse that decision because the ARU and subsequently SANZAAR might not have a choice in the matter. If they don't win the case though, the ARU will proceed as planned.

 

[Derpus]

I respectfully assert that you are completely wrong with this point. Fundamentally because without the totally destruction of the ARU/NSWRU/QRU axis (Axis of Evil if you will) meaningful reform will never happen as their "completely selfish" self interest will always prevent anything that doesn't benefit them first and foremost in the first instance, regardless if long term effects would be for their benefit. As with a lot of Corporate Management and certainly Politics short termism rules and we have no real interest in anything outside 5-7 years because those managers in the seat now are not impinged, it is outside their bonus window and they will be gone. If the results are not to be seen in their window of operation they are not relevant.

The fan bases below the Pro level and to a certain degree at the pro level are irrelevant to their structures. This is all about dividing the broadcast pie as the primary revenue stream, and they believe they can grow the other from the bits of carcass of the Force they want to retain. The fans are required so only so far as they contribute to viewer numbers on the broadcaster.

I don't think we are in disagreement. I fully endorse jettisoning all professional aspects of the game. I don't think Shute Shield is affiliated with NSWRU is it? or maybe im way off here.

 

[Killer]

I don't think you appreciate the differing level of dificulty presented in changing an agreement before its been formally entered into and changing an agreement after all the formalities are completed.

Probably, but what then, you do what is not best for Aus rugby.
The potential upside imo is huge, surely it is worth the effort.
It will not happen though while Clyne is involved, see my last post.

 

[Killer]

Killer: you are avoiding the point that the ARU think it's in the best interests of Australian rugby and the remaining four Super Rugby teams to cut a team.

It is close to irrelevant at this point whether they can reverse that decision or whether it is actually what is best for Australian rugby.

If the Force win their court case we will probably find out how feasible it is to reverse that decision because the ARU and subsequently SANZAAR might not have a choice in the matter. If they don't win the case though, the ARU will proceed as planned.

No I think this is Clynes view, otherwise he has to resign. See my 2 posts up.