T
TOCC
Guest
I think that's a good idea, it will at least send a further signal to the ARU, I'd be interested to see how many people would sign it as well
Australian Rugby / RA
- Thread starter Dave Beat
- Start date
lou75
Ron Walden (29)
I guess the Member unions could convene another egm and this time oust the board - replace them with the President of each Member union as an interim Board - that would take 21 days just need RugbyWA and RUPA to call for the egm, say, and get SA, TAS, NT to align their votes would give them the majority - and if the eastern states either aligned their vote or failed to show up to vote, then the deed would be done.
Strewthcobber
Andrew Slack (58)
The member unions voted for exactly this outcome on at least two occasions
Sent from my D5833 using Tapatalk
Sent from my D5833 using Tapatalk
Quick Hands
David Wilson (68)
The structure is a big part of the problem because nothing can really be fixed as long at NSWRU & QRU prop up the ARU who in turn finance and support the NSWRU & QRU.
Tackennut
Bob McCowan (2)
I think the structure is a real problem for the sport and what we are seeing is a severe symptom of the state the game in Australia. A real shame, its been a problem for a long time and looking from the outside. and I admit not an expert or even claim to understand the intricacies of how it all works at the national level, it is obvious that the source of the problem is very fundamental in nature and we will never improve until we deal with these issues. I'd like to think that the Force saga may be the catalyst for change but I fear even this is not big enough to kick start that process. I suspect the the opposite will happen and the wagons will be corralled and any level of transparency that needs to come out to progress will never happen. We will never really know the full story and until we sink to a pathetic level on the field and become the whipping boys for the rest of the world nothing will happen. My prediction.....we haven't hit the bottom yet
dru
Tim Horan (67)
It's also true without being complete.
The franchises did not vote to cut a team. They voted to receive extra funds on the basis that someone else was cut. Qld, NSW and ACT were guaranteed it wasnt them, hence the ARU neatly solving the matter politically. Both Vic and WA had reasonable grounds to believe they were safe.
So yes "the member unions voted" for it, but no "It" wasnt excatly this outcome.
Especially considering the damage done to the sport as a direct consequence.
Of course none of that changes the repugnance of NSW/Qld - ARU self preservation society.
The Honey Badger
Jim Lenehan (48)
Yep, please get that one started.
Then as a protest everyone going to the Bled should wear Force Blue. SANZAAR need to see the depth of feeling here.
Strewthcobber
Andrew Slack (58)
I reckon anyone blaming NSW and Qld is giving a pretty free pass to all of the other member unions who could have stood up and opposed this.
They didn't
Sent from my D5833 using Tapatalk
They didn't
Sent from my D5833 using Tapatalk
Quick Hands
David Wilson (68)
That's true and the ACTRU shouldn't escape mention as being a major player in events. In terms of places like NT, Tas, SA they are essentially branch offices of the ARU. They have virtually no means of independent funding so are bound to go along with the ARU as a means of survival.
But it's the NSWRU and the QRU above all who like to masquerade as some sort of guardians of the traditions of the game and the heartland. They have the power to pretty much force through any change if they really want to, but as major beneficiaries of the current system they choose not to.
EDIT: The last paragraph is not meant to differentiate between the level of blame attached to NSWRU and QRU in case some people read it that way.
Why would any of the member unions act against their own self-interest?
The whole point of the ARU is to act in the national interest. Clearly there have been massive shortcomings in this area.
The current structure is better than the old structure which effectively made the ARU board representatives of the states (with Qld and NSW having the greatest representation). The major problem with that structure is that the powerful states had fairly direct control on the actions taken by the national body.
The problem from here is how to move on from this debacle. Clearly renewal is already coming at the executive level of the ARU and it is also needed at the board level.
I don't know that a different group would have made a different decision though. The mistake was backing the expansion to 18 teams with the unwieldy structure. From there everything has gone disastrously.
Clearly the Force were cut because the ARU was able to cut them. It was the path of least resistance.
It's a sad day for Australian Rugby and hopefully we can recover from it. It is maybe a long shot, but whatever the next incarnation of professional rugby that happens post 2020 (or sooner if Super Rugby capitulates) happens soon enough that WA can be brought back into the professional game at the point where they aren't starting from scratch again.
The whole point of the ARU is to act in the national interest. Clearly there have been massive shortcomings in this area.
The current structure is better than the old structure which effectively made the ARU board representatives of the states (with Qld and NSW having the greatest representation). The major problem with that structure is that the powerful states had fairly direct control on the actions taken by the national body.
The problem from here is how to move on from this debacle. Clearly renewal is already coming at the executive level of the ARU and it is also needed at the board level.
I don't know that a different group would have made a different decision though. The mistake was backing the expansion to 18 teams with the unwieldy structure. From there everything has gone disastrously.
Clearly the Force were cut because the ARU was able to cut them. It was the path of least resistance.
It's a sad day for Australian Rugby and hopefully we can recover from it. It is maybe a long shot, but whatever the next incarnation of professional rugby that happens post 2020 (or sooner if Super Rugby capitulates) happens soon enough that WA can be brought back into the professional game at the point where they aren't starting from scratch again.
ForceFan
Chilla Wilson (44)
The vote at the most recent EGM was 8:6 to reduce to 4 teams.
We do know that the VRU voted for 5 teams and MRRU voted for 4 teams.
RUPA and WARU voted for 5 teams.
Anything else is conjecture.
Quick Hands
David Wilson (68)
In theory it's a different strucutre, but in practice there's not too much different. State RUs are heavily involved in who is elected to the ARU board.
Quick Hands
David Wilson (68)
No one who is or has recently been involved on the ARU, NSWRU, QRU or ACTRU boards can be part of the solution. The whole inbred bunch of cronies need to go.
There is no structure where interested parties don't lobby to try and get the people they want on a board.
Quick Hands
David Wilson (68)
Exactly, but at least under the old system it was transparent and accountable. Under the current model it's opaque and not in the least accountable to most rugby participants.
dru
Tim Horan (67)
TOCC. It's always disappointing to not be in alignment with your views. Always respect your thinking. But here you are simply restating disagreement. It isn't actually adding info imo. The EGM motions were a repeat of "yes I want more $" and the rest of Aus rugby be damned with the consequences.
With NSW and Qld on board, by being offered the silver and not being brought to account, the vote was precast. ACT also culpable. And god knows the confusion from Vic and WA who has reasonable grounds to think themselves safe.
Yes. I'm repeating this is because the counter discussion is repeating
For the naval gazers at Qld, NSW and ACT (and if so Vic and WA) in a myopic short term manner it was in their self interest.
It is my greatest regret that we now get to watch the proof of that played out. I have a firm opinion on where it is going, but that is unimportant as we
now get to see how right the navel gazers are in the short, medium and long term.
Wilson
Michael Lynagh (62)
Daily telegraph has a bit of speculation on the new ceo here: https://amp.dailytelegraph.com.au/s...s/news-story/fee454abe7f7524004f99727738e3f86