Kurtley Beale

[TahDan]

And yet it wasn't a duck, but.....

One which apparently has caused people to keep the story going by talking about defamation.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[kiap]

At the risk of being critical without offering a solution.

How about John Eales comes on board as Team Manager. Understands the culture, has set up and run a successful consultancy firm, is a director of two listed companies.

I understand it's probably a step back for him professionally, but it would do a world of good for the game - even if he just acts in the role until the end of the world cup.

Owen Finnegan?

But like you say, high-profile existing gigs.

And it's a thankless backroom role herding self-entitled prima donna players.

 

[Beefcake]

It was 2 years at the Reds and it wasn't the same role. How can you not comprehend that being a backroom team business organiser is totally different to being a touring team manager. One is a general role, the other is a senior squad member.

There were problems from the minute she took on an increase role in the team. These problems were identified a year ago by senior squad members who had also worked successfully with her at the Reds.

The reason the players are falling in behind Beale when they should be cutting him loose is because they obviously don't think she's upto the job. Her leaving the tour early instead of Beale is evidence of this.

None of this excuses Beales actions. I think his contract should be torn up and beyond that if he has any sceric of respect for the Jersey he should apologise to the team and fans for his actions. Especially considering the way Australian Rugby has supported him since he was a teenager.

In the future the Wallabies team manager should be a person that A) Has demonstrated they can manage a private sector business, B) Understand the unique wallabies culture and professional sporting environment. Go and read Rod Mcqueens book and you'll see he was saying the same thing 10 years ago yet no one in Australian Rugby seems to fucking listen.

Hindsight is awesome -

This should have been sorted in-house, really. With a culture of accountability and consequences.

KB (Kurtley Beale) may have been suspended at the outing of text messages, regardless of the apology to Patston - reinforcing the respect for all within the team - by management.

Patston, decision to accept the apology amongst other decisions including bringing it to light with management - but didnt - for undisclosed reasons maybe team harmony, hoping KB (Kurtley Beale) acknowledges his error etc, showed her subtle experience from Reds, CMC etc

KB (Kurtley Beale), Patston and management formalise agreement - that is issue has been dealt with. signatures pls

Leadership group are included for views but cede that the gold is the highest priority.

Media made aware of incident regarding KB (Kurtley Beale) not meeting standards of gold - not part of squad until whateva, if ever. No meltdown.

Back to the developing this 'culture'.

 

[Pfitzy]

Pfitzy, your understanding of the the workplace from a legal perspective (in terms of harassment) is borderline prehistoric.

Oh no, I'm quite well aware of how this works. As I've said elsewhere: I'm in corporate. I've been involved in HR situations that were created by utterly pointless whining after the event.

In most forward-thinking, agile organisations, they move past this quickly. Only in the overly PC ones who have swollen to the point where process overrules purpose does it get legs. It's all too common, unfortunately.

I've seen the incompetent people who felt harassed by the negative wording of their performance review ("lacks proficiency" and "cannot compete assigned tasks in a reasonable time or manner" are dirty words it would appear); I've seen people dismissed for getting drunk at work functions and groping the waiting staff; I've personally been given written warnings for running a task perfectly, but not realising the change protocol got reversed and never re-approved (it advanced the project by 6 weeks).

since her side would argue (convincingly, if other cases are any indicator) that they culture was so negative towards her that she felt powerless to do anything other than accept the apology.

Which furthers my point above: if she felt THAT harassed in June, then her working relationship with Link can't have been that good. And she didn't pursue it above the team environment.

Complaining about this after the event is just fuel for the lawyers on the "ambulance-chaser" category.

In an age where we've been living in a PC, EEO, OH&S corporate setup for the last decade, claiming you were too afraid to speak up is just fucking bullshit.

If she felt unable to speak up, maybe she was in the wrong role?

Doesn't make her a bad person. Just limits her options for compensation or legal.

 

[mxyzptlk]

So because they haven't been cracked down on before, they deserve some sort of settling in period to getting used to behaving like decent adults.

I don't buy that.

Add to that, were these players able to act like responsible adults with their Super Rugby teams? No real dramas that we've seen -- at least not lately, not in the past two years.

So that suggests either these guys do know how to be adults, or they're jackasses all the time and their Super Rugby teams hide it all. Given how much the Aussie media covers (snouts!), I think it's more the former than the latter. That suggests some players either just choose not to be responsible adults when playing for the national side, or there is a lack of structure and controls at the national level that reign in those tendencies at the Super level.

 

[Thinker]

A lot of people seem to have a real issue with either comprehending job positions, or having women outside of kitchens.

Patston was not the team manager. She was the Business Manager. Essentially the same role she had at the Reds. Just because Link wants to be a bit more professional in ethos and treat the operation a little more differently doesn't mean titles mean anything. Every rugby organisation would have this position, titles would be different.

Egerton was the TEAM MANAGER when Dublin happened. His role has been absorbed by others. The need for an isolated manager in the traditional sense probably isn't required when the players are together for no great period of time. They don't need hand holders. Di would have managed the HPU and absorbed some of the responsibilities that the Manager previously would have had. Has anyone seen Di on the sideline managing subs etc? Usually the core aspect of the team manager.

How come no one is questioning Mike Doyle and is qualifications. He's listed as the Logistics Manager, a role MUCH more in-line with the traditional Team Manager role. He is the Community Operations Manager for NSW Rugby. Not a Super Rugby team manager nor a logistics guru brought in from private industry AND he was the one who told Beale to change his shirt. Yet no one questions his qualifications or whether or not he is in a relationship with McKenzie. I wonder why.

 

[rugbyskier]

I think that Stephen Moore's injury was a greater disaster than it appears. Watching the Mendoza test the flaws in Hooper's captaincy became apparent and this sorry saga has amplified it. Hooper is a great player and with more experience and maturity will be a good captain but he was put into the role too soon. He doesn't appear to realise that as captain he is no longer one of the boys and needs to pull some of the over-inflated egos into line when required.

 

[Beefcake]

A lot of people seem to have a real issue with either comprehending job positions, or having women outside of kitchens.

Patston was not the team manager. She was the Business Manager. Essentially the same role she had at the Reds. Just because Link wants to be a bit more professional in ethos and treat the operation a little more differently doesn't mean titles mean anything. Every rugby organisation would have this position, titles would be different.

Egerton was the TEAM MANAGER when Dublin happened. His role has been absorbed by others. The need for an isolated manager in the traditional sense probably isn't required when the players are together for no great period of time. They don't need hand holders. Di would have managed the HPU and absorbed some of the responsibilities that the Manager previously would have had. Has anyone seen Di on the sideline managing subs etc? Usually the core aspect of the team manager.

How come no one is questioning Mike Doyle and is qualifications. He's listed as the Logistics Manager, a role MUCH more in-line with the traditional Team Manager role. He is the Community Operations Manager for NSW Rugby. Not a Super Rugby team manager nor a logistics guru brought in from private industry AND he was the one who told Beale to change his shirt. Yet no one questions his qualifications or whether or not he is in a relationship with McKenzie. I wonder why.

Unless you can produce the job description, wondering is all thats left

 

[Rugby Is My Life]

Clearly all is not right in Wallaby land. I can't find the article but remember Link saying something along the lines of "It's no secret I like to run the show......".

In his time as head coach, we're yet to beat the AB's and constantly struggle against the Boks (something Deans despite the haters, didn't have trouble with). Throw into the mix Dublin gate and now the KB (Kurtley Beale) saga. To top it off there are constant bizarre selection decisions (Beale @ 10 vs. AB's, Skelton left out of the squad, etc) and the constant joke of keeping the team on the field at half time.

Then this afternoon you get the current Wallaby captain coming out to say this: http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-sport/beale-should-not-be-sacked-hooper-20141012-3hubv.html

Anyone in business knows things start and finish with the people in charge and as it is, there seems be a gaping hole at the top. Until that is resolved, we'll continue to be the laughing stock of the rugby world and fail to fulfil our potential.

As a huge rugby fan, it's incredibly sad to see our great game dying a slow, painful, public death.

 

[Train Without a Station]

In McKenzie's time the All Blacks have only lost 1 game. That was to the springboks. It's fair to say that there's a chance these 2 teams have strengthened.

Considering that when you review the All Blacks results excluding matches against Australia, as this would skew the results, the All Blacks win more games now, than they did in the Deans era.

 

[I like to watch]

A lot of people seem to have a real issue with either comprehending job positions, or having women outside of kitchens.

Patston was not the team manager. She was the Business Manager. Essentially the same role she had at the Reds. Just because Link wants to be a bit more professional in ethos and treat the operation a little more differently doesn't mean titles mean anything. Every rugby organisation would have this position, titles would be different.

Egerton was the TEAM MANAGER when Dublin happened. His role has been absorbed by others. The need for an isolated manager in the traditional sense probably isn't required when the players are together for no great period of time. They don't need hand holders. Di would have managed the HPU and absorbed some of the responsibilities that the Manager previously would have had. Has anyone seen Di on the sideline managing subs etc? Usually the core aspect of the team manager.

How come no one is questioning Mike Doyle and is qualifications. He's listed as the Logistics Manager, a role MUCH more in-line with the traditional Team Manager role. He is the Community Operations Manager for NSW Rugby. Not a Super Rugby team manager nor a logistics guru brought in from private industry AND he was the one who told Beale to change his shirt. Yet no one questions his qualifications or whether or not he is in a relationship with McKenzie. I wonder why.

I've got no problem with Link
A) recruiting someone he has previously worked with.
B) writing a job spec to accommodate the new recruit.
However,the difference in the media interest between her & Doyle,is that Doyle has not been at the centre of public arguments with team members. that's what makes news.

Early reports were that she was NOT in a similar role at the Reds,naturally journo's would view her LinkedIn profile to ascertain what qualities she had to warrant a job offer that was substantially more senior than her previous role.
Of course they would query the fact that her LinkedIn profile had substantial errors.

 

[Pfitzy]

One thing that came through from the amateur era to the professional one is coaches need the people they know to work with them. The downside is if a clash arises between that person and a playing asset, you need the skills to address it.

I don't think Link is the problem - he's been part of successful coaching setups both as an assistant and head coach, as demonstrated by taking the Tahs to finals, winning with the Reds, and assisting the Wallabies to several highs. BUT he has had rumblings in his time as head coach.

I don't think Beale is the problem - he was fine at the Tahs, and the Wallabies under Deans for all we understand, BUT the issues with the Rebels in particular definitely deserve to be considered.

I don't think Patston is the problem - from all reports she was fine at the Reds, and supposedly took on extra duties at the Wallabies (for which no-one, not even Link, has adequate descriptions). BUT the question is really whether her piece in the machine worked as it was supposed to, particularly if players were questioning the coach directly about her role - even those who had been in the Reds system.

I just think this is just a little storm of fucks that have clustered, and emerged into something that wouldn't even be news if it hadn't happened in a public space. What if it was in a closed training session? Or the team hotel meeting room? And NOT after a gruelling game, late night, and early morning?

I will happily agree with the belief that the players often carry on like entitled little bitches, and in that regard its part of our environment: they often come through a school system that treats them well for being in the first XV; a pool so shallow that they've never had the stuffing knocked out of them good and proper.

We have a history of picking them up on contracts worth more than the player, because we've been scared of NRL coming with the cash, and as a result they have an inflated sense of their worth - particularly with RUPA standing to benefit from it.

Another factor is the lack of equity in pay across the board. Our forwards are not compensated nearly as well as the backs, ironically because forwards can't make the transition to league as easily, and tight five play is undervalued in this nation.

But ultimately, it shouldn't be all about the money for these blokes. There is a very good video I've seen on people reaching a level of satisfaction with their pay, and once that was off the table as an issue, then they were happy to challenge themselves and dive into the role. More money didn't necessarily increase their motivation; they just wanted to be sure they received adequate value for their time.

I think this is what the ABs have - those guys go wide-eyed when they hear what some of our blokes are on. Cost of living differences aside, they do it for the jersey and for their country on a macro level, and for their personal desire to be the best, be part of a great team of top blokes, and see the world with their mates.

Our guys seem to have forgotten that its a privilege.

 

[mst]

It's not indefensible, and it is able to be justified. You're just using that as something to back your agenda of ARU mismanagement, where nothing shows neither mismanagement or untoward practice.

Even if she was poor in her role, that's not mismanagement. Plenty of well credentialed people are poor in their role. If they have been there past a probationary period you cannot just terminate them.

Sorry, I must of missed one of my post about her performance and the ARU mismanagement or did you bring that one on to suit your agenda?

Not to state the obvious, but I think a few people may have a question or two about the ARU and its management performance of late. The questions may be on top of the questions they already had.

 

[mst]

At the risk of being critical without offering a solution.

How about John Eales comes on board as Team Manager. Understands the culture, has set up and run a successful consultancy firm, is a director of two listed companies.

I understand it's probably a step back for him professionally, but it would do a world of good for the game - even if he just acts in the role until the end of the world cup.

Will that mean he will stop being the ARU's official apologist?

 

[Train Without a Station]

Sorry, I must of missed one of my post about her performance and the ARU mismanagement or did you bring that one on to suit your agenda?

Not to state the obvious, but I think a few people may have a question or two about the ARU and its management performance of late. The questions may be on top of the questions they already had.

No, you are saying how she was appointed was wrong despite this being a standard way many companies do things.

My point is even if she was terrible at her role, that doesn't mean there was mismanagement in her appointment.

 

[Quick Hands]

Just saw Michael Hooper on TEN news. He was asked about KB (Kurtley Beale). He gave a spirited defence - Did he think KB (Kurtley Beale) should be sacked from the team? An unequivocal "No."

None of the usual we'll see what happens at the hearing etc.

This has a way to run yet.

 

[Quick Hands]

A lot of people seem to have a real issue with either comprehending job positions, or having women outside of kitchens.

Patston was not the team manager. She was the Business Manager. Essentially the same role she had at the Reds. Just because Link wants to be a bit more professional in ethos and treat the operation a little more differently doesn't mean titles mean anything. Every rugby organisation would have this position, titles would be different.

Egerton was the TEAM MANAGER when Dublin happened. His role has been absorbed by others. The need for an isolated manager in the traditional sense probably isn't required when the players are together for no great period of time. They don't need hand holders. Di would have managed the HPU and absorbed some of the responsibilities that the Manager previously would have had. Has anyone seen Di on the sideline managing subs etc? Usually the core aspect of the team manager.

How come no one is questioning Mike Doyle and is qualifications. He's listed as the Logistics Manager, a role MUCH more in-line with the traditional Team Manager role. He is the Community Operations Manager for NSW Rugby. Not a Super Rugby team manager nor a logistics guru brought in from private industry AND he was the one who told Beale to change his shirt. Yet no one questions his qualifications or whether or not he is in a relationship with McKenzie. I wonder why.

Because she is the one at the centre of this incidence perhaps? And the one in June? Nothing to do with her gender, everything to do with her role.

Nothing whatsoever wrong with having a female as Team manager etc.

Everything wrong with having a back room operator running team discipline if they don't have the skills to do the role.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Just saw Michael Hooper on TEN news. He was asked about KB (Kurtley Beale). He gave a spirited defence - Did he think KB (Kurtley Beale) should be sacked from the team? An unequivocal "No."

None of the usual we'll see what happens at the hearing etc.

This has a way to run yet.

Yep. Shows just how deep the issues are with a player entitlement culture.

The facts seem very clear that Beale did what is alleged. He's guilt seems a formality.

If any player believes he deserves a further chance, then I think the players are definitely the issue, not management and administration.

 

[mst]

No, you are saying how she was appointed was wrong despite this being a standard way many companies do things.

My point is even if she was terrible at her role, that doesn't mean there was mismanagement in her appointment.

Well I think its pretty self evident that the ARU is not a standard company nor workplace and may be things shouldn't be done the standard way. Even the NRL have worked that out and changed their player and general employment contracts to suit after all the incidents they have had.

 

[Train Without a Station]

That's a pretty big accusation considering nobody has been willing to put their name behind the claim.

Edit: that's in response to muttonbird