• 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.

The Pulverisation of Australian Rugby

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Train Without a Station

Guest
And more importantly, somebody who earns around 20 times what our current one does, who probably does it more for the love of the sport than the pay check.

Let's put it in context though. Especially since the GFC Australian banks have all performed strongly. The market seems to all be doing well.

In Australian sport, sporting codes and bodies are all barring about 3 struggling at various levels.
 

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
^^^I'll certainly accept, without reservation, that Bill Pulver could earn much more in the corporate world that the does as the CEO of Australian Rugby.

But a high salary is no guarantee of competence - think Alan Joyce, Sol Trujillo et al.
 

Strewthcobber

Mark Ella (57)
Or you could compare the recruitment process which came up with the chariman's schoolmate and neighbour;)
Too true.

I wonder if we should disqualify any one from taking on the role if they are prepared to do it for such relatively little money.

Consider it part of the job interview.

If Bill can't even negotiate a good deal for his own salary, what hope does the aru have negotiating with broadcasters etc!
 

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
Too true.

I wonder if we should disqualify any one from taking on the role if they are prepared to do it for such relatively little money.

Consider it part of the job interview.

If Bill can't even negotiate a good deal for his own salary, what hope does the aru have negotiating with broadcasters etc!

No-one is ever going to earn more running a sport in Australia than they could in the corporate world. I think everyone recognises that BP could earn more elsewhere and there is a degree of altruism in his taking on the role.

Negotiating a TV deal, is actually something he's probably good at, and as he's not going anywhere, I hope he gets a great deal for Australian rugby.

One of the issues he may well face is that his closeness to some board members on a personal basis, may affect his ability to assert himself when the need arises - who knows?

The fact that no-one on any of these threads seems to be aware of what the ARU's overarching strategy is to advance the game on and off the field indicates that such a plan doesn't exist or it's the world's best kept secret. Maybe we need Julian Assange and Edward Snowdon to do some digging?:)
 

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
In my (probably oversimplistic) view of the world the ARU should fund and be responsible for the professional and elite levels (includes mens, womens, age groups, and sevens), administer the Super rugby funds, and distribute anything else to the member unions for their own initiatives.

Shute Shield has to come under the responsibility of the NSWRU, and as such the ARU shouldn't be funding it directly.

Whether the funding currently given to the NSWRU is sufficient is a different matter

At least you have a plan. Do the ARU?

I'd actually do away with the state unions altogether and have the ARU fund regional unions. The states are based on illogical colonial boundaries drawn up 150 or more years ago and do we eally need another level of bureaucracy to funnel money from the ARU to the grass roots?.
 

Pfitzy

Jason Little (69)
You're right. Both are underpaid for their roles. People were talking about trying to get the ex NAB CEO. Kidding. She made close to $13M in her last year.


"Made" in terms of stock options which are volatile and have conditions attached to them.

While the pollies don't rake in that much in actual salary, their allowances are fucking bananas and if you're serving Prime Minister for ONE calendar year, you get a gold card for life. Ministers after 4 years in any post (agg) and MPs after a few more - 6 maybe?

That is without mentioning the Super plan they get.

So its not just what we pay them while they're sitting in Parliament drinking our wine and eating our food, its all the perks they take on for life thereafter in the right conditions.

But this all belongs on the pollie thread...
 

I like to watch

David Codey (61)
^^^I'll certainly accept, without reservation, that Bill Pulver could earn much more in the corporate world that the does as the CEO of Australian Rugby.

But a high salary is no guarantee of competence - think Alan Joyce, Sol Trujillo et al.
I reckon he is earning the right money for a business the size of the ARU.
If you were to compare his salary with many of the CEO's of companies at the bottom of the top 200 ASX list.He is on par with most of those,which are similiar in size but much more profitable than the ARU.
 

I like to watch

David Codey (61)
True,but it's swings and roundabouts.
It's a much more prestigious role than running a financial services company,or mining company.
The scrutiny comes with that.
And it's something everyone is well aware of before they accept the role.
 
T

TOCC

Guest
I think what you are missing TOCC is that the withdrawal of the funding will significantly increase the gap between the haves and have nots.

We use that funding to send our Head Coach and Assistants into local schools to run coaching clinics etc. We are seeing that tree begin to grow fruit now.

We also use the funding to support our junior reps and had grand plans to use portions of the funding to resurrect one of our fallen junior clubs and to strengthen some of our struggling ones.

Yes we pay players, but it does not come out of the grant money. And as every player in the competition knows, if they want to be financially well rewarded for playing footy, then Parra isn't for them.

All of our planned development work for 2015 is now under review due to the withdrawal of the grant. We'd cop the withdrawal of the funding if the ARU guaranteed us that they are stepping their focus on development in the west. But they aren't. In fact they're doing the opposite. The AFL have over 20 development officers in western Sydney. Rugby has 1. And his time is spent delivering their OH&S course which they decided was mandatory. I believe he's been told his role will most likely move to a casual position for 2015 and beyond.

Fair point, maybe that's something which needs to be investigated, the grant(which isn't an entitlement) should be issued based on a clubs ability to generate its own revenue..

No doubt many of the wealthier clubs will have a case against such a ruling.
 
T

Train Without a Station

Guest
The biggest problem here is when people dismiss the club system, people come out in defense of their club, not the system.

Yes Dave and QH, I'm sure Manly does good things. The problem is there is 12 teams in the Shute Shield aren't there?

Should the ARU be subsidizing Randwick's poor management for example? Do you think it's entirely possible that this subsidization has lead to complacency in some clubs?

The Shute Shield clubs have been given a big leg up by the ARU to become more professional. They had full time employees subsidized initially and have slowly been weaned off. This has enabled them to work on becoming more professional and self-sustaining. Some have done this, others have fallen into further financial problems.

The fact is these clubs should not expect to be financially supported in perpetuity. If they want to pay players, etc. and be more professional, they need to be able to support themselves. These same clubs fought hard about the ARU pushed proposal of amateurism. Based on that fact alone, I dispute any subsidization of them.
 

Jagman

Trevor Allan (34)
Is it implied that this is a permanent cost cut? I would have thought that it would be only for 2015. What good is an increased broadcasting deal in 2016 if the ARU go into receivership? And it could be worse. All the clubs in SS are solvent now aren't they? NSWRU are about to privatize the Waratahs. There is at least money floating around somewhere as apposed to a few years ago.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Inside Shoulder

Nathan Sharpe (72)
You can't work out which clubs are wealthier then Parra?

I suppose your answer is "they all are" but we (this site) went through the easts accounts about a year ago and I'd be surprised if Parra were worse off than they were back then.
Manly look to be in good shape, and with Uni I would suspect that's about it.
I should say I'd be more than happy for, say, Parra and Penrith to get the whole of the ARU grant money in the hope that it could be spent where rugby needs to focus its efforts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top