Kurtley Beale

[Pfitzy]

I'd be happier if they were more worried about themselves being the best in the world. If more of them were concerned about there own performance instead of looking to blame others for there failings I doubt this thread would be 50+ pages and growing fast.

I'm quite sure that occupies a lot of their time. But if their coach is pissing off to give undue attention to a staff member who should be a fucking adult capable of getting themselves to the airport, what message does that send?

 

[Brumby Runner]

Here is another question for workplace lawyers.

There is an assumption at large that Beale accidentally sent the text to Patson.

Other readers have pointed to the possible guilt of the Dublin snitch.

Technically then aren't Beale and the Dublin snitch equally guilty?

If there is a McKenzie/Patson relationship is McKenzie guilty of nepotism in seeking an expanded appointment for Patson? Or are the ARU just incredibly stupid for allowing that to happen or even sanctioning it?

If that was the case there is actually no word to describe why he thought that was OK within the team environment.

The ARU, like most organisations today, are downsizing, trying to save money. In my experience, the powers at the head of the organisation make the decision to slash funds and leave it to management at the coal face to take the hard decisions needed to implement the cost savings. They just don't want to hear about how that might happen or what the consequences might be. In this case, Link probably thought Patston was doing a satisfactory job in what she was doing and loaded her with additional functions and responsibilities that had to be absorbed because there was insufficient funding to employ anyone else to do those jobs.

Don't think we should be shooting Link just yet, until and unless some evidence of real mismanagement comes to the fore. In the meantime, is it possible that the messages and images sent by KB (Kurtley Beale) might in fact constitute a breach of the telecommunications carrier laws? This might be the angle that is concerning Pulver the most.

 

[Pfitzy]

Don't think we should be shooting Link just yet, until and unless some evidence of real mismanagement comes to the fore. In the meantime, is it possible that the messages and images sent by KB (Kurtley Beale) might in fact constitute a breach of the telecommunications carrier laws? This might be the angle that is concerning Pulver the most.

In terms of PR, any supposed breaches might, sure. But there is no law against sending gossip; its more about the Acceptable Use policy within the organisation.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

I'm quite sure that occupies a lot of their time. But if their coach is pissing off to give undue attention to a staff member who should be a fucking adult capable of getting themselves to the airport, what message does that send?

The airport trip could have been an intelligence gathering mission, a further attempt to limit damage/fallout, a last ditch effort to resolve the issue in-house, an opportunity to get stories synchronised, a response to the realisation that the issue was quite important and could blow up in everyones faces, a discussion on a strategy how to handle Bill, or... ..?. .?., or anything.

Whatever the reason, it was a big call to miss training.

We may never know the reason.

 

[I like to watch]

The ARU, like most organisations today, are downsizing, trying to save money. In my experience, the powers at the head of the organisation make the decision to slash funds and leave it to management at the coal face to take the hard decisions needed to implement the cost savings. They just don't want to hear about how that might happen or what the consequences might be. In this case, Link probably thought Patston was doing a satisfactory job in what she was doing and loaded her with additional functions and responsibilities that had to be absorbed because there was insufficient funding to employ anyone else to do those jobs.

Don't think we should be shooting Link just yet, until and unless some evidence of real mismanagement comes to the fore. In the meantime, is it possible that the messages and images sent by KB (Kurtley Beale) might in fact constitute a breach of the telecommunications carrier laws? This might be the angle that is concerning Pulver the most.

Then Link should have been able to clearly define her role and responsibilities to the playing group when it was aired on last years tour.
But he didn't,instead he kicked 1/2 the touring group in the nuts by penalising them for breaking a non existent curfew.
In my experience,when someone is appointed to an existing role,but with changed responsibilities,the new responsibilities are articulated to avoid any misunderstandings.
Clearly,this has not been done,and when players have asked for clarification, it would appear that not only was none given,the boss lashed out at those asking the questions.

 

[No4918]

Jim Tucker believes Beale will only cop a fine and ban.

 

[cyclopath]

Yeah Beale is hosed. Cost of letting him go is probably 300 dollars worth of legal advice.

In my experience that equates to reading 6 emails.

 

[bobdog]

What you're saying is fine as long as her presence isn't creating issues, and the players feel that she is adequately doing her job. If they're not, they are well within their rights to approach the head honcho (which is the coach, given we apparently don't have a Team Manager) and ask WTF?

If the players felt her presence created undue issues or conflicts of interest, then they're perfectly within their rights to question it.

If the coach can't adequately explain her presence, actions, or role, then he's not doing his fucking job.

Hear Hear... Any bloody womans presence amid 32 guys, no matter what, will be disruptive simply based on the well known fact that they originate from Mars.

 

[Brumby Runner]

We'll have to disgree on this point. I haven't detected this at all and think you'll find many a Waratah fan will be just as happy to see the back of Beale.
Link has been drawn in for a couple of reasons - he is the one who brought Beale into the team as starting 5/8 and almost everyone including Waratah fans thought this was mad. He is also the one who personally appointed the Business Manager. I agree that there is little that Link could do if this was a one off incident on a plane, but it seems now that this has been festering for some time - between 2 people who he has brought into the team/squad.

Are you saying he bears no responsibilty at all? If so, he needs to move to politics where the ability to avoid any reponsibility is an art form.

At the time, there were many posts by Tahs' fans here lauding the fact that Beale had been selected at 10 against the ABs, and pointing to the (perceived) fact that he had indeed played first receiver for much of the Tahs' successful run to the S15 title. Many posts (maybe from the same few posters) actually thought he was a better option than Foley.

Never, in my wildest nightmares, did I think Beale deserved to play 10 for the Wallabies and never did I think he was a better 10 that Foley in a team sense as well as in individual skills. I was hyper critical of Link at the time for making the change and I raised the issue that he was painting himself into a corner from which he couldn't extricate himself if the gamble in Bledisloe 1 went sour, as it did. No way was he going to be able to revert to Foley at 10 for Bledisloe 2 without having so much egg on his face that he would have lost a whole heap of credibility. So Link certainly brought some of the shit on himself simply through his poor selections concerning Beale. But until there is evidence that he was involved in some sort of cover up of the text messages and images, then it is misplaced to say the least to be calling for his head. At the moment, Beale is the one in the gun sights, and rightly so for his behaviours.

 

[Braveheart81]

Jim Tucker believes Beale will only cop a fine and ban.

I don't think it will matter in the end. I can't imagine Beale will want to stay in Australian rugby even if given the chance.

Clearly he is entirely at fault for his actions (I'm not saying he's the only one at fault, but he's the only one at fault for what he has done personally.) but I'm pretty sure he will to a large degree feel he's been fucked over by the ARU and won't want to hang around the organisation any longer.

 

[I like to watch]

In my experience that equates to reading 6 emails.

Get a new lawyer,any lawyer that works that cheap,knows they are no good.....

 

[Strewthcobber]

but I'm pretty sure he will to a large degree feel he's been fucked over by the ARU and won't want to hang around the organisation any longer.

Yep - and they in turn won't exactly be beating the door down right now to offer him the money he thinks he deserves. One way or another it's almost impossible to see Kurtley playing rugby in Australia next year

 

[Brumby Runner]

It took about 50 pages, but it's nice to see that a small minority of Reds and Brumbies supporters have managed to find their usual ARU/Waratahs consiracy amongst all of this.

Nah - no conspiracy. I believe (for the moment) that the ARU wasn't aware of the business going on last June, and I certainly have no reason to think the Tahs were in any way involved in covering anything up with the ARU. My criticism is simply and entirely about the Tahs' fans putting their collective heads in the sand about Beale and still wanting (overwhelming it seems) him to stay with the Tahs next year even though his presence in any teams looks to be the poison chalice.

I'd be thankful if you wouldn't try to rewrite what I've been saying.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

In my experience that equates to reading 6 emails.

Then they'll be taking no "advice" from here.

 

[Braveheart81]

At the time, there were many posts by Tahs' fans here lauding the fact that Beale had been selected at 10 against the ABs, and pointing to the (perceived) fact that he had indeed played first receiver for much of the Tahs' successful run to the S15 title. Many posts (maybe from the same few posters) actually thought he was a better option than Foley.

Never, in my wildest nightmares, did I think Beale deserved to play 10 for the Wallabies and never did I think he was a better 10 that Foley in a team sense as well as in individual skills. I was hyper critical of Link at the time for making the change and I raised the issue that he was painting himself into a corner from which he couldn't extricate himself if the gamble in Bledisloe 1 went sour, as it did. No way was he going to be able to revert to Foley at 10 for Bledisloe 2 without having so much egg on his face that he would have lost a whole heap of credibility. So Link certainly brought some of the shit on himself simply through his poor selections concerning Beale. But until there is evidence that he was involved in some sort of cover up of the text messages and images, then it is misplaced to say the least to be calling for his head. At the moment, Beale is the one in the gun sights, and rightly so for his behaviours.

Surely there's a vast gulf between being supportive of Beale as a player and being happy with that selection at the start (which pretty much universally changed after Eden Park) and the situation happening now.

This is not a binary situation where you either support Beale on and off the field in everything he does or you hate his guts and think he's the worst player of all time.

As for McKenzie, there's a whole heap of fairly damning information being reported by just about every rugby journalist in the country and it is pretty well accepted that they all have the necessary sources within the team to know what is going on. The fact that Wallabies have not gone on the record at this stage is fairly irrelevant. Clearly this situation has a lot further to run and it is highly unlikely to stop at Beale.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Is it possible that the text affair was dealt with by senior players and Patson with the understanding that it was too trivial a matter for a player's career being jeopardized so they didn't take it any further? Or possibly they were also involved, hence, not wanting it to get further.

Makes sense that the players have sided with Kurtley and fought to keep him there. This coming out (which it eventually did), looks very bad on them too.

Which leads me to the first issue. Kurtley. How much of a fucking moron (and a disruptive one at that) is this bloke?

How has he formed a strong opinion of Di Patson in June having never dealt with her before then? She may be the biggest incompetent fuckwit anybody has ever come across. Yet Reds players have dealt with her since 2011 and test players since August 2013 yet suddenly Kurtley is involved and issues arise?

Which leads me back further and the discontent regarding Patson's role. I'm sorry, but unless she is in a performance or selection role within the environment, then the players should just fucking worry about their own jobs. This apparent and alleged sense of entitlement is exactly what's wrong with Australian rugby.

Her role seems to be a logistical and HR hybrid on the road. What exactly is she doing? Setting the itinerary based on what the coaching staff tell her they need and booking accommodation and transport. What else exactly can she be doing? Perhaps assisting in linking media with players as requested. Now her role has encompassed disciplinary matters which one can only assume is in a HR style manner. If the players have an issue with this, perhaps they shouldn't be playing a sport where their team is also a large organisation too. Because that's how things work.

Liken this to the entertainment industry. How would things go if the actors on a poorly rated TV show had issues with the role of a Producer's assistant or somebody who actually had nothing to do with the actual filming and direction of the show?

Providing that Patson was separate from any selection and performance parts of the Wallabies, the players need to seriously shut the fuck up and worry about doing their own jobs well. If Kurtley for example wants to critique her performance, he should worry about fucking learning to tackle adequately.

Fantastic post.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Hear Hear. Any bloody womans presence amid 32 guys, no matter what, will be disruptive simply based on the well known fact that they originate from Mars.

Dr Sharon Flaherty seems to have managed the challenge reasonably well with the Tahs, not to mention the swag of female physios associated with various Rugby teams and clubs?

 

[fatprop]

Jim Tucker believes Beale will only cop a fine and ban.

But he is in negotiations for a contract for next year, how this affects those negotiations .................

 

[Slim 293]

Jim Tucker didn't exactly back up that claim with any supporting information though...............

Rather, he casually stated that Beale will "probably cop a fine and a ban" in his article where he tries to shift most of the blame upon the victim, and even suggests that the texts would've been passed off as a joke 40 years ago and we now live in an overly sensitive politically-correct society..............

It would seem that Jim Tucker might want to pull his head out of his own arse.

 

[Slim 293]

Considering the seriousness off the issue, and Beale's record I can't see the ARU doing anything less than letting him go..............