Who should be the next ARU CEO?

[p.Tah]

Good one, he definitely went out of his way to breakdown the NRMA - almost into non-existence.

Not sure why you're persisting with this but as the CEO of IAG he couldn't make decisions without board approval such as rejecting the QBE take over, however he resigned when some shareholders were disgruntled with the decision. The board members however stayed. Since then he has held quite a few prominent positions because he is well regarded.

At the ARU he has brought what many thought would not happened a few years ago, he brought in a governance review that meant the NSWRU had to willingly give up power. No mean feat in my books.

Not sure why some on here want to tear down the chairman and the new CEO. Let them do their job in rugby and let's judge them on that.

 

[Sully]

Not sure why you're persisting with this but as the CEO of IAG he couldn't make decisions without board approval such as rejecting the QBE take over, however he resigned when some shareholders were disgruntled with the decision. The board members however stayed. Since then he has held quite a few prominent positions because he is well regarded.

At the ARU he has brought what many thought would not happened a few years ago, he brought in a governance review that meant the NSWRU had to willingly give up power. No mean feat in my books.

Not sure why some on here want to tear down the chairman and the new CEO. Let them do their job in rugby and let's judge them on that.

well said.

 

[whatever]

Not sure why you're persisting with this but as the CEO of IAG he couldn't make decisions without board approval such as rejecting the QBE take over, however he resigned when some shareholders were disgruntled with the decision. The board members however stayed. Since then he has held quite a few prominent positions because he is well regarded.

At the ARU he has brought what many thought would not happened a few years ago, he brought in a governance review that meant the NSWRU had to willingly give up power. No mean feat in my books.

Not sure why some on here want to tear down the chairman and the new CEO. Let them do their job in rugby and let's judge them on that.

I'm not sure whether you understand this but we are on an internet dicussion forum, not a "Whoever" positive endorsement society.

If I reckon he did a shithouse job with the NRMA then I have a right to express it, as you have a right to disagree.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

From Easts and Randwick JRU websites they each have 4 clubs, which reading between the lines, are mainly either 6-9 years or 6-12 years, with only one club in each area going on to 16s (Wallaroos and Coogee). So at least 6 year old boys in the east have a rugby club close to home to play for with their school mates. In contrast Penrith JRU have 3 teams, one at Richmond, one in the Blue Mountains and one at Rooty Hill, so most 6 year olds in that huge area of Sydney don't have a 'local' rugby team to play for that is reasonably close to their home. The result being that all their school mates play for the local league club and they do too.

I think we're in furious agreement - except for this: there is no continuity re the Wallaroos: I understand that there u15s wont be fielding a team this year. It may be that they are dropping a team and still have one. The result is kids in the east having to look elsewhere.

Its all part of the same problem, IMO, in which the schools dominate proceedings from 12-18: thats Ok if you are at a strong rugby school.

 

[p.Tah]

I'm not sure whether you understand this but we are on an internet dicussion forum, not a "Whoever" positive endorsement society.

If I reckon he did a shithouse job with the NRMA then I have a right to express it, as you have a right to disagree.

OK i'll spell it out a bit more simply for you. It's a rugby forum, feel free to leave positive or negative comments relating to rugby. If you want to discuss performances in the insurance industry, fell free to find a forum
on that and leave a comment there.

 

[whatever]

OK i'll spell it out a bit more simply for you. It's a rugby forum, feel free to leave positive or negative comments relating to rugby. If you want to discuss performances in the insurance industry, fell free to find a forum
on that and leave a comment there.

Mate, you are joking.

Michael Hawker's past work history has a link to his role as Chairperson of the ARU (why he was appointed etc, etc) and his perceived performance in this role.

Don't be so thin skinned, if only direct rugby comments were allowed on here; there would be 95% less posts on here.

I take it Michael is a mate; I'm sure he is big enough to not be hurt by a blog saying he didn't do a good job at the NRMA (he probably has heard this a zillion times).

 

[p.Tah]

Anyway as you were everyone

And no I have never met Hawker.

 

[Ruggo]

Everybody has pretty much said their piece on the appointment now. Rather than negative piss and dribble it might be worth while to add what you want out of him in the priorities for the new CEO thread.

 

[barbarian]

I have one more point on this that occurred to me this morning. And in my never ending quest to find positives I think it's one worth considering.

From what I have heard, JON is widely disliked in the sporting and business community. He is supposedly pompous and arrogant. There were persistent rumours about feuds within the ARU involving JON with names like Hawker and McKenzie. He clearly rubbed a lot of people the wrong way, which is ultimately bad for business.

The one thing I have heard from a few people who have dealt with Pulver in a business and personal sense is that he is a really nice guy. He clearly gets along well with Hawker, which has to be a good thing.

Hopefully he can bring a new openness and friendliness to ARU HQ which clearly wasn't there under JON's tenure. There was a reason the Gaddafi skit was so popular in rugby circles (even within the ARU), as it hit a bit of a nerve.

Niceness is obviously not a trait exclusive to Pulver, and I'm not suggesting other candidates wouldn't be the same. But still it's an angle that hasn't been mentioned on the thread yet, and hopefully we will see good things coming from it.
.

 

[I like to watch]

Everybody likes you until they don't give you what you want.
If Pulver is going to make a decision about anything, he will be alienating someone within the camp.
If he sides with NSW then everyone will hate him, if he sides against them he will be viewed as weak or untrustworthy by the NSW camp.
I am hoping 1/2 the blazer brigade hate his guts before he quits, as it is likely an indication that he has got things done.

 

[barbarian]

Everybody likes you until they don't give you what you want.
If Pulver is going to make a decision about anything, he will be alienating someone within the camp.
If he sides with NSW then everyone will hate him, if he sides against them he will be viewed as weak or untrustworthy by the NSW camp.
I am hoping 1/2 the blazer brigade hate his guts before he quits, as it is likely an indication that he has got things done.

I understand that, but my point was looking more at personality. JON's acerbic personality (from what I have heard) made it harder to get things done- he alienated people and caused divisions in the ranks. Not so much because of his decisions, but the way he dealt with people in making them.

Hopefully Pulver can avoid these pitfalls.
.

 

[fatprop]

I wouldn't want this job

He has little actual power and gets all the blame

It isn't like a real organisation, he doesn't have line authority over the states, and each of those has there own boards and agendas

It would be like being employed as a cat herder

 

[Braveheart81]

Pulver needs to be the guy who gets on well with people and can help transition the ARU into a new era.

If he spends a few years in the job and we end up with an independent commission rather than the current board structure as well as many of the other recommendations in the Arbib report, he'll have done a good job.

The ARU needs less of a public figurehead as CEO than we had under John O'Neill.

 

[daz]

I wouldn't want this job

He has little actual power and gets all the blame

It isn't like a real organisation, he doesn't have line authority over the states, and each of those has there own boards and agendas

It would be like being employed as a cat herder

Which is why his influencing skills would be so valuable.

He might not have the authority to order people to do things, but if he persuades them and get groups talking in a dynamic way, that is maybe even more important (and valuable long term) than simply just telling people to do things.

Engagement, communication and influencing. I'm sure I read that in a management book somewhere

 

[CTPE]

That is the typical attitude that sees this game remain a sport played mainly in the Eastern Suburbs and North Shore. If Bill doesn't get his arse out to the Western Suburbs as well as promote the game into the CCC set of schools then his appointment will be as it looks on paper - a school mate of Hawker.

I will give the bloke some time before making judgment,

As a sideline, any young halfbacks who had the dream of replacing Will Genia as the OZ No:9 down the track, may I suggest a change of position or playing a differnt code as young Angus might have the inside running for the job.

I would have thought that if you were a young and obviously quite talented halfback, that having your father as CEO of the ARU would be more a hinderance than a help given that any upwards move in the halfback hierarchy would be met with comments such as these, regardless of any meritorious performance on his behalf.

 

[ChargerWA]

I haven't commented yet, so I will say this.

From a remote perspective, I wish the ARU had broken the mould and gone for a different type of CEO. It says to me that they don't intend to change much and the development focus will remain in Eastern Sydney/Qld.

That is the outward perception. Pulver may turn out to be a revelation and i'm sure he would broaden the focus if the ARU had the funds to support it, but it appears they aren't planning on doing anything too radical in light of this appointment.

 

[whatever]

I would have thought that if you were a young and obviously quite talented halfback, that having your father as CEO of the ARU would be more a hinderance than a help given that any upwards move in the halfback hierarchy would be met with comments such as these, regardless of any meritorious performance on his behalf.

As I said in a later post, Angus is a talented no:9 and if (I hope he does) he moves into pro rugby the question we be on his Dad's influence. I therefore fully agree, it will be a hinderance and there will always be this question. I wish him the best of luck.

 

[Lindommer]

I would've thought that if you were a young and obviously quite talented halfback, that having your father as CEO of the ARU would be more of a hindrance than a help given that any upwards move in the halfback hierarchy would be met with comments such as these, regardless of any meritorious performance on his behalf.

We've had a precedent on this point in Australian rugby recently: while Richard Harry was playing for the Wallabies in the late 90s his father, Phil Harry, was the President of the ARU. The selectors seemed to be able to choose Richard on his merits, Phil's position was never mentioned as a legup for his son.

 

[It is what it is]

We've had a precedent on this point in Australian rugby recently: while Richard Harry was playing for the Wallabies in the late 90s his father, Phil Harry, was the President of the ARU. The selectors seemed to be able to choose Richard on his merits, Phil's position was never mentioned as a legup for his son.

And the Mumms.