Tier 3.5 - An Alternative NRC

[Train Without a Station]

ILTW thanks for being deliberately facetious.

It's the cost of administration and admin functions. If you have a number of competitions you have people in admin and co-ordination roles. How are these paid for?

Who ensures that there are smart rugby courses to role out? Who ensures that the coaching courses are in place, etc.?

It may cost X amount to hold a 1 course but that's not the cost of it. What does that person do for the rest of the week? Where is there office? Then there's employment insurances, etc. The bigger the game, the better economies of scale you get for all of this too.

Otherwise why would any code charge anything besides costs for fields/referees, etc.?

 

[RedsHappy]

Are we not forgetting: this purported letter is seemingly not just written and endorsed by Papworth alone.

Bob Dwyer for example is a man this site has been delighted to have as a prominent rugby analyst on many, many occasions. He is held in high regard by most who know him.

 

[I like to watch]

Should probably quote Pulver's response if that's the part you are worried about QH


Let's take him at his word for the moment and add in that state union contribution - we're at $12.5m or just about that 15% that England is spending..

His word is not reflected in the annual report.
So he is either Trumpesque in his explanations, or the annual report he signed is misleading in the extreme.

 

[Quick Hands]

Should probably quote Pulver's response if that's the part you are worried about QH


Let's take him at his word for the moment and add in that state union contribution - we're at $12.5m or just about that 15% that England is spending..

These figures have been well and truly canvassed on this thread. We can go over them again if you like. The simple fact is that their own financial statement indicates that they spend 2,368,000 on community rugby. They chose to put that figure there and as it is a legal document, I assume it to be correct.

https://issuu.com/australianrugbyunion/docs/aru_web?e=24291087/34741796

 

[Braveheart81]

That is the line item for Community Rugby.

There is further discussion about community rugby expenditure in notes 2 and 3 to the accounts.

Some of the expenditure that is being included in the total Pulver is claiming for grassroots expenditure comes under Corporate. Some of it also potentially comes out of other line items.

The financial statements provide an overview. You can only tell so much from an income statement in a set of financial statements because it will always be a greatly abbreviated list of income and expense items.

 

[RedsHappy]

That is the line item for Community Rugby.

There is further discussion about community rugby expenditure in notes 2 and 3 to the accounts.

Some of the expenditure that is being included in the total Pulver is claiming for grassroots expenditure comes under Corporate. Some of it also potentially comes out of other line items.

The financial statements provide an overview. You can only tell so much from an income statement in a set of financial statements because it will always be a greatly abbreviated list of income and expense items.

Haha - given the ARU's history BH you could be doing us a favour in our trace for the veracity of the declared ARU executive salaries as well. Can we get the inimitable JO'N back to help us understand the true meaning of the ARU Accounts?

Jokes aside, QH has a good point, and formally audited Accounts are meant to give a true and fair picture of an enterprise's operations. And more so in that surely the ARU's top brass would want the Community Rugby $s line to accurately reflect the real level of ARU spend in that highly sensitive area of its operations? Would someone as PR conscious as Pulver let literally $ millions of additional CR spend get buried in a myriad of impenetrable fine print as you imply?

 

[barbarian]

People are entitled to disagree with what he says (and also with what any other signatory says). It's a bit concerning when people whose default position is unquestioning defence of the ARU mount personal attacks and question the motives of people that they don't agree with.

Please stop referring to me in this way. I will no longer engage with you if you continue with this bullshit.
.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Well if he's smart, next year Billy P will roll up all the community Rugby spend, age group and high performance costs, the salaries of everyone at ARU HQ with pathways or participation in their job titles, any other grants the ARU give out, and the member unions distributions.

He'll account for the participation fees that the ARU facilitate but appear in the member unions books.

He'll roll all of this into a game development line item, we'll all have much less info and his books will look much better, but absolutely nothing on the ground will change at all.

Because for some reason people keep comparing the game development costs of other unions with the community rugby expenses in the ARU accounts.

 

[Braveheart81]

Haha - given the ARU's history BH you could be doing us a favour in our trace for the veracity of the declared ARU executive salaries as well. Can we get the inimitable JO'N back to help us understand the true meaning of the ARU Accounts?

Jokes aside, QH has a good point, and formally audited Accounts are meant to give a true and fair picture of an enterprise's operations. And more so in that surely the ARU's top brass would want the Community Rugby $s line to accurately reflect the real level of ARU spend in that highly sensitive area of its operations? Would someone as PR conscious as Pulver let literally $ millions of additional CR spend get buried in a myriad of impenetrable fine print as you imply?

If all the ARU staff salaries are included under Corporate then that is where Development Officer salaries will appear as well.

Providing more explanation can be done through the notes to the accounts which is the case here.

Giving a true and fair picture of the enterprise's operations is definitely what the audited financial statements are meant to do. I would argue that they wouldn't do that if costs were reallocated to areas which are deemed better from a PR standpoint based on criteria outside of how expenses are ordinarily categorised.

 

[Quick Hands]

Well if he's smart, next year Billy P will roll up all the community Rugby spend, age group and high performance costs, the salaries of everyone at ARU HQ with pathways or participation in their job titles, any other grants the ARU give out, and the member unions distributions.

He'll account for the participation fees that the ARU facilitate but appear in the member unions books.

He'll roll all of this into a game development line item, we'll all have much less info and his books will look much better, but absolutely nothing on the ground will change at all.

Because for some reason people keep comparing the game development costs of other unions with the community rugby expenses in the ARU accounts.

Or he could produce accounts which reflect where the money is actually spent.

 

[Train Without a Station]

But that ignores a couple of things QH.

Firstly isn't this the same reporting structure that the ARU has used since well before Pulver.

And secondly, as BH covers that's somewhat subjective.

In this discussion it might not.

But then if employees that work on community rugby programs, etc. are employed by ARU aren't they also corporate expenditure?

 

[Quick Hands]

Please stop referring to me in this way. I will no longer engage with you if you continue with this bullshit.
.

I don't think that I actually referred to you or any other particular indivdual.

It's interesting that when I have objected to be attacked on these threads in the past, you have described it as "robust debate" and implied that I'm being too sensitive.

 

[Quick Hands]

But that ignores a couple of things QH.

Firstly isn't this the same reporting structure that the ARU has used since well before Pulver.

And secondly, as BH covers that's somewhat subjective.

In this discussion it might not.

But then if employees that work on community rugby programs, etc. are employed by ARU aren't they also corporate expenditure?

The simple answer to your last question is that I don't know and unfortunately it's impossible for any of us to really know.

Strewthcobber and others on these threads are far more knowlegable than I am in relation to books and financial statements.

A number of people agreed a few pages back that the "corporate" item in particular was too broad.

But even from my limited knowledge of these matters, I'd suggest that it would be in the ARU's interest (and indeed all of our interests), for a little more detail or specificity in relation to these reports.

As you imply, I think that it's up to the organisation exactly how they categorise things in these documents. I can't be too difficult to construct the report to give us all an idea of what they spend and where they spend it. It would silence in an instant many of the complaints about allocation of funds.

 

[Train Without a Station]

But then it would not accurately reflect corporate expenditure for example. Which from a financial perspective is probably more important than community rugby expenditure.

What do you do? Break it down repeatedly by each game function?

The ARU annual reports appear to be far more detailed than other sports already. I think the AFL has 5 line items for expenditure from memory.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

I admire Pappy's passion for the game but his solutions are worse than the status quo IMHO. He seems to think (judging by previous comments) that going back to the pre-1995 days, when players mostly came from SS clubs, will magically transform the game in this country to some state of paradise.

Rubbish says I. His opinion is worth listening to, as are the others, but he's talking his book too. Let's not forget that.

Solutions to today's problems take those who understand today's and future environment rugby operates in and what it competes against.

All those who signed the open letter have a deep history in rugby's past and part of the problem is rugby has not adapted to meet modern day requirements for today's sport participants and fans who are spoilt for choice.

The game needs some of those views but also views of modern day sports administrators who can take the blinkers off and offer challenge to rugby as a product in how it meets market, customer and participant needs.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RedsHappy]

and the beat goes on:

Simon Poidevin tells ARU to take former players' letter seriously or risk 'tears'

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/u...-seriously-or-risk-tears-20161019-gs5wp1.html

 

[The torpedo]

and the beat goes on:

Simon Poidevin tells ARU to take former players' letter seriously or risk 'tears'

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/u...-seriously-or-risk-tears-20161019-gs5wp1.html

Unfortunately RH the ARU executives and board will still have their heads shoved up their arses while all and sundry are telling them to pull their heads out and face reality.

 

[Strewthcobber]

The ARU annual reports appear to be far more detailed than other sports already. I think the AFL has 5 line items for expenditure from memory.

The ARU are pretty good really.

NZRU have just 5 main line items

• Game development
• Representative teams
• Competitions (?)
• Governance and financial
• Provincial Union grants

They're much better with their governance scorecard but the accounts are pretty much a mystery.

It makes any attempt to compare between the two countries essentially meaningless.

And it's worth saying again - Game development does not equal community rugby!

 

[p.Tah]

I'm sick of this crap.
Rather than engaging in dialogue directly they're playing through this media. Again.
It's the politicking and white anting in rugby that will eventually drive me from this game.
So disappointed.

 

[Strewthcobber]

I'm sick of this crap.
Rather than engaging in dialogue directly they're playing through this media. Again.
It's the politicking and white anting in rugby that will eventually drive me from this game.
So disappointed.

Unfortunately P.tah I think this sort of thing is inevitable when it is so very difficult for our ex-wallabies, tahs and Reds to get into the governance, leadership and positions of influence within the game