• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

Australian Rugby's greatest day of shame....

It is what it is

John Solomon (38)
In preparing ARU’s evidence, the ARU Integrity Unit was not able to get access to Ms Patston’s mobile telephone.


Quite ambiguous.

Doesn't Ms Patston's phone become the ARU's phone the moment she resigned?
The report talks about them accessing and reviewing phone records, so it seems that the ARU own the phone.
Unless of course Ms Patston provided the phone bill for her own private phone.
 

qwerty51

George Gregan (70)
Not really - if they don't want him in the game, why would they be negotiating either?

They can't have it both ways.

They left it up to the tribunal to decide the outcome of his ARU contract - it wasn't terminated. All professional players in Australia require an ARU contract. This isn't really negotiated I don't think it, it's either registered or not. Beale's ARU top-up expires at the end of this year and that's what the negotiations with the ARU are about, the only details I think relevant in an ARU top-up would be money and length. One would think it's incredibly unlikely the ARU would give Beale a top-up given their stance in wanting his contract terminated, no top-up would put Beale out of money and leave him with options overseas. Just because they said they're opening up negotiations doesn't mean there's any chance they'll give him a top-up. Beale should be left with the same status as the rest of the non-25 top-up players. Only getting income from his Super Rugby franchise (although indirectly coming from the ARU) plus any match payments from Tests he plays.

Before this incident one would think Beale was in line for an extension of his top-up given he was a certainty in the 23 for all Tests.
 

Muglair

Alfred Walker (16)
I am just glad that the ARU has been able to correct everyone's misunderstanding of their role in the events.

Mr Hawker was able to point out that the only reason they had to say nothing all of this time was to allow the process to maintain its integrity. While that might explain him being invisible the thing that still rankles with me is Pulver raising the whole incident to Code Red for the global media in relation to Beale sending the second text. If he had showed some back bone and just told the press that more information had come to light, it was a lot more complex, more evidence had to be examined etc then we would not have had to drag the game through the mud like this.

Yes, of course there would have been a storm in the media about his silence and lack of action. Leaders have to suck that shit up. No one will ever convince me otherwise than he just saw a chance to nail Beale, take the heat off the ARU on the other issues and score some employer of choice points with his strong stance against sexual harassment.

What are we left with? The plane incident was a minor protocol breach! Which just makes this look such a massive cock up and storm in a teacup. On the other hand I am not really sure I buy that but we now all have no further information either. A beat up, or a cover up?

Beale only sent the first text message, with the less offensive image. Patston had screen shots of two messages. Did someone else send it using some technical knowhow passing it off as Beale's, or was it fabricated? We do not know because without her phone nothing can be proved. The phone could be in Patston's possession, at the ARU's offices, lost, now used by another employee, etc The ARU just remain silent, either because they will not say where it is, or do not know. They will admit to neither.

The ARU account manages to back pedal on their previous position on Beale, cast aspersions on Patston, blame Link for hiring her and presumably keeping them in the dark over issues in the Wallabies. The ARU were blissfully ignorant and totally blameless for anything here.

I am glad we can move on to the next game and will put this behind me.

Unless we find out the ARU has now lied to us in this account of events. That will be Australian Rugby's Day of Shame and at that point Alan Jones should get his wish of a block resignation of the Board.
 

Man on the hill

Alex Ross (28)
But why then after asking for his contract to be terminated did they announce that they would re-open negotiations for 2015 and beyond?:confused:

I think the simple answer is that if they didn't reopen after their position was dismissed, then it would've been seen that the ARU had walked away from negotiations - not Beale.

The negotiations were only on hold.

Now it's a lot easier in a negotiation process to say "we haven't come to terms, so there's no top up etc" than categorically walking away after a finding like last Friday's.

Think about it - they said they would reopen negotiations when? With a contract expiring in weeks and preseason ultimately not that far away either they paint Beale into a damned if you do, damned if you don't type scenario.
 

ACT Crusader

Jim Lenehan (48)
I am just glad that the ARU has been able to correct everyone's misunderstanding of their role in the events.

Mr Hawker was able to point out that the only reason they had to say nothing all of this time was to allow the process to maintain its integrity. While that might explain him being invisible the thing that still rankles with me is Pulver raising the whole incident to Code Red for the global media in relation to Beale sending the second text. If he had showed some back bone and just told the press that more information had come to light, it was a lot more complex, more evidence had to be examined etc then we would not have had to drag the game through the mud like this.

You're still beating that same old drum???

Did Pulver say it was Beale? No he didn't. It wasn't Code Red, it was just a summation of what was believed to be a more serious text to the first. Did media jump to conclusions? Yes they did, what's new.

But in my mind when Pulver held his press conference, it was clear they were investigating an alleged 2nd text message. By your reckoning it exists because Wilson and Jones know who sent it.

Beale was in my view rightly investigated as a result of his admission in the first. Same alleged target of the original text etc.
 

It is what it is

John Solomon (38)
From the ARU Summary
"Prior to these events, the ARU had not received any reports or complaints about Ms Patston’s performance".
As Sergeant Schultz would say "Interesting, very interesting".
Is " prior to these events" referring to;
a) Prior to the text messages while in the employ of the ARU
OR
b) Prior to her joining the ARU?
 

Train Without a Station

Steve Williams (59)
Fuck me how are people still painting Beale as some sort of victim and scapegoat.

If you are a professional athlete who repeatedly breaks laws, Codes of conduct and agreements you will be sacked. That's the reality of it. It's not some campaign against Beale it's the fucking cold, hard reality. If you don't want to be held to a high standard, you picked the wrong fucking career.

If Beale didn't like playing by those guidelines he can go be a labourer, factory hand or any other one of the many things people who have gained no trade or tertiary education do.

Anybody who thinks the ARU's desire to terminate the contract of a player who has been accused of assault three times, charged with drink driving, broken an alcohol ban after assaulting a team mate then being found guilty of a sexual harassment incident is harsh, check yourself into some sort of assisted living facility, because you've lost your fucking marbles.
 

SammyP

Chris McKivat (8)
Ok, I have a question (well I have a lot, most of them using pretty offensive language and posting them here would not be productive).

The ARU found Beale guilty of breaching team protocols. The tribunal found him guilty of breaching the Code of Conduct.

So my question is what is there left for him to breach?

Does it have to be something more serious for them to tear up his contract? I mean cumulative offences obviously aren't enough.
 

cyclopath

Stirling Mortlock (74)
Staff member
Ok, I have a question (well I have a lot, most of them using pretty offensive language and posting them here would not be productive).

The ARU found Beale guilty of breaching team protocols. The tribunal found him guilty of breaching the Code of Conduct.

So my question is what is there left for him to breach?

Does it have to be something more serious for them to tear up his contract? I mean cumulative offences obviously aren't enough.
Hawker made it clear the ARU wanted to "tear up his contract", but they agreed to an independent tribunal. That tribunal came to a conclusion and imposed a penalty. $45 000 and time served.
There is not much left to breach, but I think the ARU is stymied insofar as applying a further specific penalty for the same offence.
They can show disinterest in any further top-up, that is discretionary, and would probably serve the purpose. Thus far, all we have is that the contract negotiations are yet to be completed.
We'll have to wait and see.
 

Inside Shoulder

Nathan Sharpe (72)
My understanding is that the tribunal was a process established by the Collective Bargaining Agreement with RUPA.
It will be used whenever a serious issue arises.
This delay and the resultant speculation will accompany any indiscretion of sufficient magnitude.
With Beiber Boy back next year they'll be convening full time.
 

Athilnaur

Arch Winning (36)
Fair to say the Board of the ARU must have been a bit shocked that what they construed as warranting cancellation of Beale's contract was turned into a fine by the Tribunal. Even more so if the contract cancelled ended up being Pulver's...

My biggest concern now for Aussie rugby is the sexism issue. The upshot pretty loud and clear to women involved in rugby is don't speak up about sexism if your livelihood depends on it. You will be chewed up and spat out while the player isn't even suspended.

That is the issue the ARU face yet they will have no credibility as a result of a decision completely at odds with their recommendation.
 

Train Without a Station

Steve Williams (59)
Unfortunately society is generally unhappy with the penalty handed down by the tribunal.

As braveheart pointed out earlier, society deals with the same issues with the courts though.
 

Strewthcobber

Mark Ella (57)
Unfortunately society is generally unhappy with the penalty handed down by the tribunal.

As braveheart pointed out earlier, society deals with the same issues with the courts though.
The problem for the ARU is society doesn't have to rely on an unhappy public to renew memberships, buy tickets, support sponsors and watch games to stay solvent.

On an unrelated topic I just received one MMS message from my wife with two images attached.
 

cyclopath

Stirling Mortlock (74)
Staff member
The problem for the ARU is society doesn't have to rely on an unhappy public to renew memberships, buy tickets, support sponsors and watch games to stay solvent.

On an unrelated topic I just received one MMS message from my wife with two images attached.
Make sure you take it to the coach. Apparently, otherwise, you're toast.
 

Braveheart81

James Horwill (77)
Staff member
My biggest concern now for Aussie rugby is the sexism issue. The upshot pretty loud and clear to women involved in rugby is don't speak up about sexism if your livelihood depends on it. You will be chewed up and spat out while the player isn't even suspended.

This is not just rugby's problem.

It's an unfortunate fact that the victim of bullying and/or sexual harassment will rarely survive in the same workplace regardless of the outcome and/or punishment to the culprit.

There's not really any way to fix that aside from making sure the bullying and harassment don't happen to begin with.

Beale was suspended and fined a very large sum of money.
 
Top