Australian Rugby / RA

[formerflanker]

Has the great Phil Waugh been captured by the RA bureaucracy?

He justified the Board's decision to delay any action to "going through a process".
Geeze mate, you've had aeons to think through your options and make a decision.
With your extensive corporate experience and admirable academic credentials, you could have done an "if....then" scenario analysis BEFORE the spring tour.
But no. You support "50 second" Clyne in his deferment of action until before Christmas.

Bring back the rugged, uncompromising breakaway I remember so vividly and transfer those skills into fixing the Board's decison making process.

 

[new recruit_ brisbane]

Has the great Phil Waugh been captured by the RA bureaucracy?

He justified the Board's decision to delay any action to "going through a process".
Geeze mate, you've had aeons to think through your options and make a decision.
With your extensive corporate experience and admirable academic credentials, you could have done an "if..then" scenario analysis BEFORE the spring tour.
But no. You support "50 second" Clyne in his deferment of action until before Christmas.

Bring back the rugged, uncompromising breakaway I remember so vividly and transfer those skills into fixing the Board's decison making process.

His linkedin profile says "non executive director of RA"

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

Has the great Phil Waugh been captured by the RA bureaucracy?

He justified the Board's decision to delay any action to "going through a process".
Geeze mate, you've had aeons to think through your options and make a decision.
With your extensive corporate experience and admirable academic credentials, you could have done an "if..then" scenario analysis BEFORE the spring tour.
But no. You support "50 second" Clyne in his deferment of action until before Christmas.

Bring back the rugged, uncompromising breakaway I remember so vividly and transfer those skills into fixing the Board's decison making process.

I've argued for a long time that Phil is a company man through and through. Practically every time some controversial issue has been raised and he's asked for his opinion, it's the party line 100%

 

[Dave Beat]

I've argued for a long time that Phil is a company man through and through. Practically every time some controversial issue has been raised and he's asked for his opinion, it's the party line 100%

One of the huge problems in this country at present - whether it be in business, politics or sport.

 

[Dave Beat]

I started this thread because the ARU (Boardroom) was out of touch with Australian Rugby (Players and Supporters) - unfortunately there hasn't been allot of change and even the tragic's are wavering.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

Yep. Refer my previous comments over the last couple of days.

 

[wamberal]

I started this thread because the ARU (Boardroom) was out of touch with Australian Rugby (Players and Supporters) - unfortunately there hasn't been allot of change and even the tragic's are wavering.

Mate, everybody is out of touch with each other, from what I can see. Is there a local sport that is more diverse and splintered than rugby?


Maybe loig, but then again they have enough dosh to paper over the cracks.

 

[Quick Hands]

Has the great Phil Waugh been captured by the RA bureaucracy?

He justified the Board's decision to delay any action to "going through a process".
Geeze mate, you've had aeons to think through your options and make a decision.
With your extensive corporate experience and admirable academic credentials, you could have done an "if..then" scenario analysis BEFORE the spring tour.
But no. You support "50 second" Clyne in his deferment of action until before Christmas.

Bring back the rugged, uncompromising breakaway I remember so vividly and transfer those skills into fixing the Board's decison making process.

Phil Waugh has an executive position at Westpac. He's part of the clique and therefore (unfortunately) part of the problem.

 

[Froggy]

Re the comments on Phil Waugh.
Phil is a member of a board, and as such, while he may argue his point vigorously within that board, if a vote is taken and he is defeated, it is his obligation to support the board decision. If you feel you can't support the board decision (yes, I've been on a few boards) you either get leave from the board to promote an opposing point of view, or if they won't grant that, you should resign from the board.
Just as an aside, I spoke to Phil at a CBA function (where he works in asset finance) just after Cheika's appointment, interestingly he wasn't a great supporter from day one.
Not suggesting he does or doesn't support the process Clyne is suggesting, just adding a few points.

 

[Quick Hands]

^^Fair points Froggy^^

 

[Quick Hands]

Mate, everybody is out of touch with each other, from what I can see. Is there a local sport that is more diverse and splintered than rugby?


Maybe loig, but then again they have enough dosh to paper over the cracks.

I wouldn't say 'diverse' as rugby's lack of appeal to the diverse groups which now make up Australian society (or lack of real effort to appeal to non-traditional supporters) which is part of the problem.

Splintered, absolutely yes at all levels and all geographic areas.

 

[Derpus]

How did bankers become so intertwined with Rugby administration? Does it go back to the non-professional days?

It's kind of odd, really. Bankers are not notoriously successful administrators (see GFC, among a long list of other calamities).

 

[Derpus]

I wouldn't say 'diverse' as rugby's lack of appeal to the diverse groups which now make up Australian society (or lack of real effort to appeal to non-traditional supporters) which is part of the problem.

Splintered, absolutely yes at all levels and all geographic areas.

My subbies comp is pretty diverse. My team has a wide range of ethnicities/nationalities playing for it. There is also a predominantly gay team and a predominantly Jewish team.

It's just the top end that lacks diversity.

 

[formerflanker]

Re the comments on Phil Waugh.
Phil is a member of a board, and as such, while he may argue his point vigorously within that board, if a vote is taken and he is defeated, it is his obligation to support the board decision. If you feel you can't support the board decision (yes, I've been on a few boards) you either get leave from the board to promote an opposing point of view, or if they won't grant that, you should resign from the board.

You raise a good point.
You have also added to my frustration!
If the Board can operate so professionally at a process level, they should also be capable of decisive action.

 

[Quick Hands]

How did bankers become so intertwined with Rugby administration? Does it go back to the non-professional days?

It's kind of odd, really. Bankers are not notoriously successful administrators (see GFC, among a long list of other calamities).

Seats on the boards of major sports is now part of the corporate gravy train, like directorships of large companies. The same faces rotate around and most are just corporate hacks.

There was a time when those who ran large companies had an interest in their staff and customers as well as shareholders. Now when bonuses are tied to shareholder return, the easiest fix is to shaft the workers and the customers. This is how boards like RA, NSWRU, QRU now work too. Most of us are now part of the shafted, while the few at the top are doing the shafting.

 

[Quick Hands]

Y
If the Board can operate so professionally at a process level, they should also be capable of decisive action.

They're all about process and not about outcomes. RA, NSWRU et al could go for Olympic gold at waffling on about processes, unfortunately they'd struggle to get out of the heats in the outcomes event.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

Seats on the boards of major sports is now part of the corporate gravy train, like directorships of large companies. The same faces rotate around and most are just corporate hacks.

There was a time when those who ran large companies had an interest in their staff and customers as well as shareholders. Now when bonuses are tied to shareholder return, the easiest fix is to shaft the workers and the customers. This is how boards like RA, NSWRU, QRU now work too. Most of us are now part of the shafted, while the few at the top are doing the shafting.

Yep. The pre-requisite for sitting on a corporate board these days is attendance at the right GPS school or knowing David Gonski.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

Re the comments on Phil Waugh.
Phil is a member of a board, and as such, while he may argue his point vigorously within that board, if a vote is taken and he is defeated, it is his obligation to support the board decision. If you feel you can't support the board decision (yes, I've been on a few boards) you either get leave from the board to promote an opposing point of view, or if they won't grant that, you should resign from the board.
Just as an aside, I spoke to Phil at a CBA function (where he works in asset finance) just after Cheika's appointment, interestingly he wasn't a great supporter from day one.
Not suggesting he does or doesn't support the process Clyne is suggesting, just adding a few points.

Fair points Froggy, but my view on his toeing the party line extend back well before his tenure on the Board (which according to his LinkedIn profile started in July 2018). It may be what got him appointed in the first place

I've not been on a board myself, but have worked with plenty in my consulting work and get what you're saying though.

 

[Quick Hands]

Fair points Froggy, but my view on his toeing the party line extend back well before his tenure on the Board (which according to his LinkedIn profile started in July 2018). It may be what got him appointed in the first place

Yes indeed. Shore school and a bank executive - there's that diversity that RA are famous for.

 

[formerflanker]

Yes indeed. Shore school and a bank executive - there's that diversity that RA are famous for.

Now you are being school-ist and career-ist. (in this day of identity grievances, any identity can be named!)
Phil should understand the frustration of the rugby public - he has had his fair share of rugby grief himself. Injury, WC loss, and missing a school premiership. He has also been at the bottom of enough rucks to understand danger and courage.
His background makes him just the bloke to take RA by the horns and turn Australian rugby around.
His failure to do so is very frustrating.