Where to for Super Rugby?

[ACT Crusader]

It's not a matter of being unable to find time for a meeting, its a matter of the ARU not even contacting him to arrange one.

This is one of Australias richest men, who is offering support and willing to support rugby union in this country and the ARU won't even display the common courtesy of returning a phone call.

I get all that and yes people of profile will always find time to meet when schedules are aligned. The time to meet isn't my point, it is that Twiggy is playing a game too. He's trying to leverage his profile with the media etc to get something he wants. ARU hasn't really engaged in his PR campaign. My comment about him being Canberra was a bit of sarcasm more than anything.

 

[Mr Doug]

Yes, public perception is a powerful thing. People will vote with their feet, e.g. not attending fixtures. However, youv've talked about launching court proceedings for "bringing the game into disrepute. I don't recall any criminal code that has this enshrined as in law. Feel free to enlighten me if you know of one.

Making this argument in court would be tantamout to describing the bad "vibe" of the situation.

BTW - if Twiggy tries that line, he can use this guy to run the case.

View attachment 9654




Wouldn't that be inciting violence? Something I believe is against the law across Australia state and territories?



Competition and Consumer Act 2010, but we're splitting hairs.

But do you really think the businesses aligned to the Western Force would do something so drastic that they could tarnish their own brand? Take a look at their partner's page for example:

https://www.westernforce.com.au/partners. some thoughts

• Three of those partners are WA government entities. Sure the WA government could attempt to restrain their trade, but I do;t think the government is in the business of stopping free enterprise in their respective. states. doesn't tend to win votes, and it takes them away from the core business of running a government. Any state government action might have an equally tough action from a federal government who doesn't want state government meddling with national sporting bodies.
• BMW - already a Wallaby partner, can't see them jeopardizing that relationship.
• BLK - the Wallabies already have an appreal partner, won't be worried about a smaller player trying
• Pindan - Wallabies already have Buildcorp, but admittedly the relationship is on shaky ground for other reasons.
• CD Dodd - not sure how to even compare this one.
• AFEX - not sure they would worry about a share trading / FX platform. Plenty of others around to use.
• Clough - see Pindan response

So, you can see the known associated business _could_ try and restrain trade, but I think it would be worth the financial effort. They would get better results with a social media campaign, and even that is questionable.

Thanks for your comprehensive reply, oztimmay.

1. The bad "vibe":
I think you're onto something, as I'm sure every Western Force supporter here, plus the players, officials, and the Rugby community across Western Australia, would all regard the Western Force as having been their Rugby "Castle". All they need is a QC (Quade Cooper) or SC who feels the same way, and a Rugby loving Magistrate, plus Twiggy's dollars, and it's all over for the ARU Board !!

2. Re Cheika suggesting tough tactics against the All Blacks, being (as you say), "inciting violence":
If he were to make those comments to the players, 'in confidence', and in the privacy of their hotel meeting room, the only way for those comments to become 'public knowledge', would be if (i) there was a representative of the media in the room; (ii) if a certain member of the backline tweeted his 'followers'; or (iii) if the All Blacks' support staffer (Mr A. Gard) had planted 'listening devices' throughout the precinct!!

3. Competition and Consumer Act 2010:
Wasn't there a new compilation of the Trade Practices Act of 1974, as amended, prepared on 1 July 2010, which includes the Competition and Consumer Act 2010, or was the former subsequently repealed in favour of the latter?
Anyway, this (as you say) is 'splitting hairs'.
It's also well off topic, and probably of no bloody interest to anyone else reading this!!

 

[Killer]

Is there any proof that nobody returned his call deliberately?


I would find that impossible to believe. Surely even the tin foil crusaders who heap all sorts of shite on the ARU might accept that there are other possible scenarios.


Why on earth would they snub him?

Are you serious?
I would think that proving that they accidentally forgot to call him back is the least of their problems.
Their chairman has been called a liar by Twiggy in the National press and by AJ on National radio. And it would seem totally justified, watching any of his interviews makes that abundantly clear. IMO he is a corporate psychopath.

 

[Killer]

I get all that and yes people of profile will always find time to meet when schedules are aligned. The time to meet isn't my point, it is that Twiggy is playing a game too. He's trying to leverage his profile with the media etc to get something he wants. ARU hasn't really engaged in his PR campaign. My comment about him being Canberra was a bit of sarcasm more than anything.

yes he is playing his hand as best he can.
That wasn't the case initially. RWA and TF have been very careful not to damage the game and not force the ARU into a corner.
But clearly they did not see Clyne as being as ruthless as he is so simply to survive the gloves are off. This has been driven by Clyne from the start, people are just reacting to his actions.

 

[stoff]

It doesn't sound like it's an appeal because there is no decision by a court or tribunal at first instance yet.

An alleged breach of contract (Alliance Agreement) appears to be what is at stake.

You are actually technically right because at this point RugbyWA are seeking leave to appeal. There is no automatic legal right to appeal against an arbitration award. Arbitration is a legally binding process and governed by legislation. Appeal is only available if the parties agree to it before hand and even then only on the basis of an 'obvious error of law', and the approval of the judge to allow the appeal.
The matter here is do the ARU need to provide WA with a team until 2020. Currently the legal position is they don't. RugbyWA are hoping to change this on Wednesday.
Who knows what future matters RugbyWA may lodge, but this is what is going to the NSW Supreme Court this week.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Killer]

You are actually technically right because at this point RugbyWA are seeking leave to appeal. There is no automatic legal right to appeal against an arbitration award. Arbitration is a legally binding process and governed by legislation. Appeal is only available if the parties agree to it before hand and even then only on the basis of an 'obvious error of law', and the approval of the judge to allow the appeal.
The matter here is do the ARU need to provide WA with a team until 2020. Currently the legal position is they don't. RugbyWA are hoping to change this on Wednesday.
Who knows what future matters RugbyWA may lodge, but this is what is going to the NSW Supreme Court this week.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

John Welborn (Wallaby #731 1996-1999) to Eales and Robinson

To Eales:
Hi John,
Powerful open letter in the Australian by Wayne Smith today. It is addressed to Bill and Cameron, but John it could have your name on it too.
Guess what? "Leadership Matters". You are currently on the wrong side of this. It's a bad decision and you must know it. There are better solutions to the funding problems. I have heard Andrew offer his unequivocal support to Cameron and be told "it's more complicated than that". Is it? The rugby talent argument behind 5 to 4 is rubbish and you know it. The decision to cut the Force is wrong. It will be turned around. Leadership matters. So can you show some leadership? Actually a wonderful opportunity for you. Come out of the shadows and broker a deal with Forrest for an outcome that ALL Australia rugby would support and cheer. Nobody wants to kill off a successful union. Or have I got that wrong? Maybe you and your fellows Directors do? At least it looks like that now because there is an obvious alternative solution. So tell me why that is? And what are you going to do about it?
Leadership Matters.
Stillas

To: Brett Robinson
Robbo,
See my text above. It remains relevant. You are on the wrong side of this at present. Powerful open letter from Wayne Smith in The Australian today. And he is right - it is as simple as changing the decision. All Australian rugby would cheer. So why not be a winner instead of a loser? Can you show some balls and get Cameron and Bill to sit down with Forest and turn this decision around? Or are they (and you) so compromised and committed that they (incorrectly) think it is too late? Newlinds QC (Quade Cooper) and Alan Myers QC (Quade Cooper) are costing Andrew tens of thousands of dollars a day! They are both very confident in the appeal. Regardless, next they will with the WA government on a recovery claim for the $120 million the State Government invested in the NiB stadium renovation for the benefit of Super Rugby. And there is more coming - deceptive conduct litigation in relation to the “Alliance” agreement (nice title btw). But wait - there will be more. I promise you Robbo it will never ever end. I say again: you are on the wrong side of this.
Hundreds of thousands, and ultimately millions, of dollars on both sides are going to lawyers that could be going to fund rugby. It's insane.
Think about it this way: For the first time in memory Australian Rugby has a major benefactor who has emerged on the scene, an individual who doesn't balk at giving away $400million to the University of WA and others, an individual who had pledged to give away the entirety of his 6 Billion fortune in his lifetime, someone who wants to help, who has simple said "This is a dud decision - can I help change it - tell me what you need". Someone who gets behind causes with passion and conviction. And above all someone who is TOTALLY DEDICATED TO BEING A WINNER AT ALL COSTS. And you guys show him the finger. Slam the door in his face. turn up the chance to have him behind you and in your team. Are you serious Robbo? And for what? Tell me Robbo how you make this decision and thus your tenure as a Director a winner?
I'm available for a call. So is Andrew.
Change the decision - it's the wrong one.
Stillas

 

[half]

That's a powerful couple of letters

 

[Quick Hands]

That's a powerful couple of letters

Glad some ex team mates are calling Robinson and Eales out.

Maybe Eales can make a TV show in 10 years time about how ashamed his was for his part in terminating the Force and his tenure on the ARU board in general?

 

[Boomer]

Glad some ex team mates are calling Robinson and Eales out.

Maybe Eales can make a TV show in 10 years time about how ashamed his was for his part in terminating the Force and his tenure on the ARU board in general?

Shamefully, he's frittering away his legacy and giving an unfortunate double meaning to his nickname.

His greatest regret is ignoring the haka. Surely it must be ignoring the game that made him rich in the country of his birth?

Un-Australian

 

[TOCC]

I get all that and yes people of profile will always find time to meet when schedules are aligned. The time to meet isn't my point, it is that Twiggy is playing a game too. He's trying to leverage his profile with the media etc to get something he wants. ARU hasn't really engaged in his PR campaign. My comment about him being Canberra was a bit of sarcasm more than anything.

ARU hold the balance of power in their control of the competition and ability to dictate which teams are included or not, Twiggy holds little power in the sphere of Australia Rugby, he holds potential through enormous wealth but his input is through indirect means.

Yes Twiggy is leveraging the media, as that represents his means of shifting the balance of power his direction. Holding discussions behind closed doors without transparency to the community and other political players achieves little when the organisation in power, refuses to engage in negotiations.

Use the media, apply indirect pressure by challenging their decision in a public arena and he actually stands a chance.

 

[TOCC]

Is there any proof that nobody returned his call deliberately?


I would find that impossible to believe. Surely even the tin foil crusaders who heap all sorts of shite on the ARU might accept that there are other possible scenarios.


Why on earth would they snub him?

Why dont you ask your mate Billy P...
Perhaps he is intimated to hold a discussion with someone who opposes his train of thought, its a rare occurrence at the ARU level for that to occur.

Coincidentally If i were an ARU board member and i had bungled as badly as the ARU have, i would be worried about being held to account as well.. In fact, i would probably tender my resignation

 

[Quick Hands]

Why dont you ask your mate Billy P.
Perhaps he is intimated to hold a discussion with someone who opposes his train of thought, its a rare occurrence at the ARU level for that to occur.

Coincidentally If i were an ARU board member and i had bungled as badly as the ARU have, i would be worried about being held to account as well.. In fact, i would probably tender my resignation

The reason that the ARU, NSWRU, QRU et al are full of mediocrity and yes men is that in so doing they rarely have anyone to question the self-evident incompetence on display.

And if these people had a shred of self-respect, they'd resign en masse.

 

[I like to watch]

Why dont you ask your mate Billy P.
Perhaps he is intimated to hold a discussion with someone who opposes his train of thought, its a rare occurrence at the ARU level for that to occur.

Coincidentally If i were an ARU board member and i had bungled as badly as the ARU have, i would be worried about being held to account as well.. In fact, i would probably tender my resignation

I you were a member of the ARU board I would suggest you might suffer from the Dunning Kruger effect...
It seems to affect them all

 

[The Honey Badger]

It doesn't sound like it's an appeal because there is no decision by a court or tribunal at first instance yet.

An alleged breach of contract (Alliance Agreement) appears to be what is at stake.

I understand that at Law the ARU had the right to cancel the Force licence because of a "NEW" broadcast agreement.

But the contract (alliance agreement) between the WARU and the ARU still should mean something.

Can't it be argued that the ARU wilfully acted against the agreement (by not using their veto at SANZAAR). Surely the Force have a case for damages against the ARU??

That would have to be Millions and Millions.

Lawyers?

Sent from my F3115 using Tapatalk

 

[wamberal]

Let's all sue each other. That's the way to save the game.

 

[The Honey Badger]

Let's all sue each other. That's the way to save the game.

We want change don't we?

Sent from my F3115 using Tapatalk

 

[I like to watch]

Let's all sue each other. That's the way to save the game.

I can see it now, we are all on a bus, and it's being driven straight towards a cliff with certain death for all onboard.
You're standing in the aisle insisting everyone keeps their seat belts on,for their own safety.......

 

[half]

Let's all sue each other. That's the way to save the game.

oldie . But you heard what the two lawyers called their baby that was born legless.

Yep they called the baby . Sue..

 

[Gnostic]

As I have posted before, it is easy to attack the individuals involved with the ARU board and executive, and I am guilty of it as well. I have no doubt that they (mostly) believe the rubbish they spout, and do not doubt at all they honestly think they are doing the best for Rugby. The problem is the whole structure we have is totally broken and they are part of it. They have no perspective and indeed they have been selected by people for continuity of the process so nothing changes. To add to it people on the board like Eales and Robinson do not have the basic experience or training to do the job they are. They have been appointed for public relations reasons using the apparent standing as players to give some standing to the board.

Not an excuse but just understanding why we are where we are, doesn't change anything and they need to go, but maybe down the track they will feel very disappointed about what they did and didn't do when in the organisation.

I also have to say I do not understand why Stooke is getting a free pass, he has been there for the ride right up to the last and has neatly washed his hands of the final decision despite being there to support the expansion and other steps along the way.

 

[Leo86]

He was recused and prior well why did NT, SA and Tas all follow... well its simple you go angainst the majority guaranteed vote and guess what next time when your head pops up. Lets face it i dunno, but if a bloke cant look himself in the mirror he is human, if he can he is a sociopath