Dctarget
John Eales (66)
Does this bode well for Cadbury staying on with the men too?
Australian Rugby / RA
- Thread starter Dave Beat
- Start date
stillmissit
Chilla Wilson (44)
In my time in Western Sydney, Penrith were about the most dysfunctional team I had any dealings with. A few good men and women doing 90% of the work. The local sponsors became disenchanted and one of them said he stopped being a director after they spent 30 mins arguing about who was going to provide the oranges for the Saturday game!
LeCheese
Peter Johnson (47)
Wasn’t it announced to be a victim of McLennan’s ousting? The women’s deal seems to be at odds with that though obviously
Harvey Norman finished up. I think it was only a coincidence that it concluded at the same time as McLennan's exit.
Wilson
David Codey (61)
There were rumours they'd go but Cadbury came out and put them to bed. I think it was mostly McLennan trying to get out in the papers and hold the game hostage when his head was on the chopping block.
LeCheese
Peter Johnson (47)
Yeah that's it - got my wires crossed. McLennan did try to paint it as though Harvey Norman was a direct outcome (“Look at what the boneheads have done,” McLennan told this masthead. “They are arrogant and dopey." lol), but Gerry Harvey put that to bed.
All time shit show. We're not perfect now, but boy am I glad we've moved past that period.
All time shit show. We're not perfect now, but boy am I glad we've moved past that period.
stillmissit
Chilla Wilson (44)
I am hoping for some decent rugby from the Wallabies, not world beaters but heading in the right direction. I admit I have held this hope before so I'm trying to keep my enthusiasm under a small blanket. No not a wet one!!!!!
Pone's Mullet
Alex Ross (28)
Quite fitting Cadbury continuing as sponsor. seeing as the RA board are a useful as a chocolate teapot
stillmissit
Chilla Wilson (44)
Tend to disagree Pone. I think they are doing the best they can at a very demanding time for Union in Australia.
We have had too many buy our way to success (the McLennans), sell our way out (investment?), borrow our way out and then add on the well-meaning but mostly incompetent ones trying to please everyone in a hostile political environment group.
Pone's Mullet
Alex Ross (28)
I see your point, however the current board have been around for many years, it could be argued the "demanding time" as you put it has been a result of their work.
I'm doing "my best" all the time, and that often is a let down for Mrs Pone
Strewthcobber
Mark Ella (57)
But more flesh on the bones of Ross Tulloch's board spill proposal
Seems completely fanciful for a 6 person interim board to achieve what he is proposing in the timeframes he is setting, and not a fan at all of member unions (or Super Rugby teams) appointing directors
'Definition of madness': Rugby reform must start with total cleanout of RA board - and this should happen next
Last week I wrote an article in The Roar which articulated the dreadful shortcomings of the Rugby Australia Board over the past few years.…
www.theroar.com.au
Seems completely fanciful for a 6 person interim board to achieve what he is proposing in the timeframes he is setting, and not a fan at all of member unions (or Super Rugby teams) appointing directors
Imagine just signing the biggest sponsorship deal in the history of the women's game. Something quite ground breaking. And still being negative about it.
LeCheese
Peter Johnson (47)
I immediately check out every time he rolls out the following as a sleight when it's just peak hypocrisy. Funnily enough, the people with the skills to run a successful business are often those who have experience running successful businesses...But more flesh on the bones of Ross Tulloch's board spill proposal
'Definition of madness': Rugby reform must start with total cleanout of RA board - and this should happen next
Last week I wrote an article in The Roar which articulated the dreadful shortcomings of the Rugby Australia Board over the past few years.…www.theroar.com.au
Seems completely fanciful for a 6 person interim board to achieve what he is proposing in the timeframes he is setting, and not a fan at all of member unions (or Super Rugby teams) appointing directors
There's also a failure to acknowledge that 1/3 of the current board are ex-players (including of course the Phil 'the banker' Waugh), with most of the remainder having been very active within the rugby community for an extended period - all 'rugby people'. The group may, as they say, have no formal barrow to push, but they certainly seem to be familiar with self-gratification.
As you note Cobber, the proposed timeframe and tasks of the proposed interim board are nigh-on impossible - there's also an enormous discrepancy between the 'blow it all up and start again' approach proposed and the key goal of 'spending within our means'. Ultimately it's entirely likely we'd end with half-arsed programs and interventions that would leave us in the exact same, or worse, state.
"Professional board operatives". Every corporate governance model ever will tell you that a board needs some independent directors who essentially fit this description.
"Two Directors selected by the above four to help complete the skill mix." - will these be wholly independent directors with no connection to the various states etc. because otherwise you're really lacking in that regard?
It will be interesting to see whether they get any traction whatsoever. I highly doubt it.
"Two Directors selected by the above four to help complete the skill mix." - will these be wholly independent directors with no connection to the various states etc. because otherwise you're really lacking in that regard?
It will be interesting to see whether they get any traction whatsoever. I highly doubt it.
Strewthcobber
Mark Ella (57)
In the interests of the discussion, I don't think the board is the problem anyway, and an approach like the above would probably fall foul of ASC requirements for independence and Olympic funding.
What should happen is constitutional change in the voting membership. Ditch the Super Rugby teams
What should happen is constitutional change in the voting membership. Ditch the Super Rugby teams
D-Box
Ron Walden (29)
Give every registered player and super rugby member over 18 one vote (cant get two by being both). When voting at an AGM you can vote on your own or give your proxy to an organisation - say your state association.
Would this not effectively be the model of large publicly listed company AGMs?
Would this not effectively be the model of large publicly listed company AGMs?
I guess on the basis that the larger states would get more votes much as large shareholders of public companies control the bulk of the voting power.
Trying to manage the process would be a nightmare though and would come at huge cost to Rugby Australia to somewhat give the states the same power they already have.
All of this comes back to the current members (the states, Super Rugby teams, RUPA) deciding that the current constitution should be torn up and rewritten.
Wilson
David Codey (61)
SOARR would probably love that, given they have no interest in funding 7s (or women's rugby). Not sure anyone explained to them that tier 1 world rugby status is contingent on that whole of game commitment.
Tomikin
Simon Poidevin (60)
I do like that your profile picture is giving that a middle finger