Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 31 to 38 of 38

Thread: VRU, RUPA vote for ARU EGM

  1. #31
    Immortal Contributor jono's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    10,131
    vCash
    5264000
    Dry July! TWF Contributor! MO-vember Donator The Bronze Star of Faith
    Quote Originally Posted by The InnFORCEr View Post
    Iain Payten‏ @iainpayten · 40s41 seconds ago
    Correction to last tweet: ARU have responded to RUPA/VRU request by inviting voting members to meet in 7 days. An EGM would require 21 days.
    Stalling tactic by the ARU (in a roundabout way). Reading this morning that if there is a meeting in 7 days it won't be an EGM. So there won't be the opportunity to raise a no confidence motion or a spill.

    But that might even backfire as well because the stakeholders can take this meeting & if they don't like what they hear. They're in a position to let select people know they either have 21 days to resign or will be rolled @ an EGM that they are still going to hold.

    To be a fly on the wall in this meeting!!! ARU really have to lay all their cards on the table, but stakeholders don't have to play the hand that's dealt (yeah, I know, sorry - had to run that metaphor full circle)

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    I STILL HAVE FAITH!!!

  2. #32
    Legend Contributor blueandblack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    5,123
    vCash
    4656420
    Dry July! TWF Contributor! 141 Club Award TWF Competition Winner!
    http://webcache.googleusercontent.co...&ct=clnk&gl=au

    "Dick Marks: Rugby failed to care for its precious garden

    To those who know my impression of former Australian Rugby Union boss John O’Neill and his policies, it will seem strange that I write to publicly confirm the accuracy of a couple of things he has said that people might doubt and to give some free publicity to his book It’s Only A Game.

    I could easily fill the same space he was given on these pages on May 13 with what he should have and should not have done during his two tenures as ARU chief executive. These would be decisions and actions of his that might have avoided the distressing legacy left under his watch — or maybe two deficits of close to a total of $19 million ($18,857,000 according to 2012 annual report) in his final two years.

    I’ll save my enunciation of past mistakes and lost opportunities for the forthcoming summit on Australian rugby, but, to be fair to O’Neill, I must corroborate one statement from his article.

    O’Neill did in fact “sack” me on the recommendation of a board member — but why does he pass the buck? He knows better than anyone that board members don’t hire and fire — that is the prerogative of the CEO, so he did not have to do as advised.

    The fact is, it suited him. What he failed to do was to establish the motivation for the advice he received, which in truth had absolutely nothing to do with the job I was doing or even less to do with me. It was everything to do with the vacancy created.

    If I was doing such a bad job, I should hand back the prestigious Joe French trophy I was awarded for outstanding service a year after O’Neill decided to get out of rugby.

    I had objected to being ordered to write a new coaching manual for the ARU on the basis that I had to personally pay for the necessary research as well as conduct it in my own time. Was that really a “sackable” offence? Well it was good enough for those who did the deed.

    Like lion tamers, there aren’t too many jobs around for national coaching directors and when you’re portrayed as a recalcitrant, defiant employee the word gets around with cruel effect.

    Whatever are the failed actions for which I have criticised O’Neill, one deed stands above all — while in the position of CEO of the ARU he released a book in which he “rubbished” numerous rugby people who had served the game, and they included ex-presidents, chairmen and board members of major unions and, indeed, the ARU itself.

    I applaud the current ARU for encouraging outside input and being prepared to listen. As previously indicated, I shall keep my detailed opinions to myself until I get to the proposed rugby summit, but I will say one broad thing *publicly.

    The worst mistake O’Neill made was to shut off outside involvement in his administration by disbanding all the advisory committees, including the National Coaching Committee. He believed the only expertise he needed was all in-house. The reality was that just about all of the rugby brains were to be found in lucrative outside professions, careers and businesses.

    What Russ Tulloch neglected to mention in his recent article in The Australian was that the one person who did guide the CEO was a highly paid consultant who, when pressed, had to admit that even when in the middle of his initial rugby review, he had never been to as much as a Sydney club game.

    I shall give credit to O’Neill for his marketing of the best group of players this country ever had but he should remember that the likes of Eales, Horan, Little, Gregan, Roff, Wilson and most of them were in a crop that came out of a wonderfully tended garden.

    When these blooms withered with age, the subsequent crops lacked the same quality because of one simple thing. The garden in which they grew had been neg*lected and certain vital elements in the soil had been removed. The *in-house people in charge just didn’t know enough about “rugby *horticulture”.

    Getting Australian rugby out of its malaise requires a lot of smart thinking and co-operation among the stakeholders that has never existed under previous regimes who could easily be accused of using the “divide and conquer” strategy of centralists.

    My comments at the proposed summit will be pretty much confined to the technical side, but if the subject of centralism is raised I’ll simply say: we tried it and it was a costly experiment that didn’t work with nearly every major union going broke under it.

    Rugby was conned when it was told to hand over all the property and control to the peak body where it contended to increase the revenue and hand back much bigger dividends to the shareholders. The elite players and peak body administrators lived like kings, but the clubs will tell you the money just didn’t trickle down as promised.

    I haven’t seen an agenda for the forthcoming summit, but I hope it goes beyond coaching. In any case, I’ll be suggesting that the following items be added: external expertise, foreign coaches, competitions, player recruiting and retention, law changes, collective bargaining agreement, skill development centre, academies and the under-20s.

    There is so much to be achieved by getting all these elements working in the well-oiled machine we had working when the “amateurs” handed it over.

    It was just so condescending when they were told that the introduction of money relegated them to dinosaur status.

    Dick Marks is a former national coaching director at the ARU."

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Nobody screws Perth like 7

  3. #33
    Legend Contributor blueandblack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    5,123
    vCash
    4656420
    Dry July! TWF Contributor! 141 Club Award TWF Competition Winner!
    It's time for Australian Rugby Union chief executive Bill Pulver to go

    Paul CULLY - Sydney Morning Herald

    "That Bill Pulver remains as chief executive of the Australian Rugby Union suggests that he has lost sight of whether the job is a right or a privilege.

    It is more than two months since Pulver attended a Sanzaar meeting in London to decide Australia's fate in Super Rugby and here we are today, not only none the wiser but angrier, more confused, or perhaps just more apathetic.

    In South Africa, emotions are also running high as they ponder cutting two teams from Super Rugby, but the order they have brought to their process makes the ARU look like it is fumbling in the dark at 3am after a lunch that began with good intentions at 1pm.

    Indeed, if the South Africans do manage to place the two teams cut from Super Rugby into European competition, it would be an act of administrative genius (although somewhat worrying for Super Rugby's longer-term future).

    Yet in Australia the players have clearly had enough. There are obvious pressures on them in terms of livelihood but there are also unseen ones.

    Players at certain clubs don't want to be seen as the first to jump ship, particularly if they are key men at the franchises. One Wallaby will likely head overseas and then promptly return closer to his roots to avoid that stigma – all of it the ARU's doing.

    And this is written from a viewpoint that is broadly unsympathetic to Australian players' wishes and supportive of the ARU decision to cut a team.

    Four teams is the right model for the times. Clever, engaged and insightful people disagree with this and I hear their arguments. But Australia merits a fifth team in a southern hemisphere rugby competition far less than Fiji or Samoa deserves just one.

    Having four provincial high performance teams does not undersell Australia's current status. Ireland, the most recent conquerors of New Zealand, seem to get by with the same number and rugby is the third-choice sport for many athletes on the island (perhaps their centralised model explains their success, more of which at another time).

    So it is not the decision itself that is now the issue, it is the terrible way it has been handled and the doubts about whether it can even be implemented. Those are the charges the ARU and Pulver must answer.

    It's arguable which charge is worse: the handling of the axing or the inability to deliver on it (though they might be one and the same thing).

    But the more conversations I have the more I lean towards the former. There are a great many people in Australian rugby willing to work in tumultuous times and make compromises for the greater good, but the number of people who are tolerant of incompetency and lack of clarity are far fewer.

    Hence, the rage. If you get the sense that is has been building, then you are correct. It is the not knowing that causes the angst. Tom English, the Rebels centre/wing who is this season worthy of a Wallabies squad spot, might not regard himself as a spokesman, but his remarks of two weeks ago hit the spot. He urged the ARU to "rip the Band-Aid off".

    The ARU might counter that a resolution would have been found by now had the Force and Rebels not pushed back so hard against them – but did they not expect a drowning man to kick?

    It all brings us back to Pulver. The job has never seemed like an easy fit. There were too many silly statements that were divorced from reality and an inability to attach Australia to rugby's rise globally.

    It is true the ARU also faces headwinds but if accountability is still relevant then the outcome is clear. Australian rugby is floundering. It is time for Pulver to go, and go soon."

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Last edited by travelling_gerry; 19-05-17 at 12:37.
    Nobody screws Perth like 7

  4. #34
    Senior Player Herbasimplex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Valley Forge
    Posts
    507
    vCash
    7446650
    Quote Originally Posted by blueandblack View Post
    It's time for Australian Rugby Union chief executive Bill Pulver to go

    "That Bill Pulver remains as chief executive of the Australian Rugby Union suggests that he has lost sight of whether the job is a right or a privilege.

    It is more than two months since Pulver attended a Sanzaar meeting in London to decide Australia's fate in Super Rugby and here we are today, not only none the wiser but angrier, more confused, or perhaps just more apathetic.

    In South Africa, emotions are also running high as they ponder cutting two teams from Super Rugby, but the order they have brought to their process makes the ARU look like it is fumbling in the dark at 3am after a lunch that began with good intentions at 1pm.

    Indeed, if the South Africans do manage to place the two teams cut from Super Rugby into European competition, it would be an act of administrative genius (although somewhat worrying for Super Rugby's longer-term future).

    Yet in Australia the players have clearly had enough. There are obvious pressures on them in terms of livelihood but there are also unseen ones.

    Players at certain clubs don't want to be seen as the first to jump ship, particularly if they are key men at the franchises. One Wallaby will likely head overseas and then promptly return closer to his roots to avoid that stigma – all of it the ARU's doing.

    And this is written from a viewpoint that is broadly unsympathetic to Australian players' wishes and supportive of the ARU decision to cut a team.

    Four teams is the right model for the times. Clever, engaged and insightful people disagree with this and I hear their arguments. But Australia merits a fifth team in a southern hemisphere rugby competition far less than Fiji or Samoa deserves just one.

    Having four provincial high performance teams does not undersell Australia's current status. Ireland, the most recent conquerors of New Zealand, seem to get by with the same number and rugby is the third-choice sport for many athletes on the island (perhaps their centralised model explains their success, more of which at another time).

    So it is not the decision itself that is now the issue, it is the terrible way it has been handled and the doubts about whether it can even be implemented. Those are the charges the ARU and Pulver must answer.

    It's arguable which charge is worse: the handling of the axing or the inability to deliver on it (though they might be one and the same thing).

    But the more conversations I have the more I lean towards the former. There are a great many people in Australian rugby willing to work in tumultuous times and make compromises for the greater good, but the number of people who are tolerant of incompetency and lack of clarity are far fewer.

    Hence, the rage. If you get the sense that is has been building, then you are correct. It is the not knowing that causes the angst. Tom English, the Rebels centre/wing who is this season worthy of a Wallabies squad spot, might not regard himself as a spokesman, but his remarks of two weeks ago hit the spot. He urged the ARU to "rip the Band-Aid off".

    The ARU might counter that a resolution would have been found by now had the Force and Rebels not pushed back so hard against them – but did they not expect a drowning man to kick?

    It all brings us back to Pulver. The job has never seemed like an easy fit. There were too many silly statements that were divorced from reality and an inability to attach Australia to rugby's rise globally.

    It is true the ARU also faces headwinds but if accountability is still relevant then the outcome is clear. Australian rugby is floundering. It is time for Pulver to go, and go soon."
    someone finally in the media expressly states it.

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Non sunt multiplicanda entia sine necessitate

  5. #35
    Senior Player
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Reality
    Posts
    768
    vCash
    5062000
    Paul Cully can go eat a dick. Only a month ago he was publishing articles on how much better off the Tahs will be with Force or Rebels players in their team aswell as all the other crap he has published on the Super Rugby cull. Pandaram and Cully are pieces of shit.

    #strongeras5 #strongerwithoutCully #westisbest #eastisdeceased

    3 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  6. #36
    Rookie
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    146
    vCash
    5018000
    Quote Originally Posted by Kalahard View Post
    Paul Cully can go eat a dick. Only a month ago he was publishing articles on how much better off the Tahs will be with Force or Rebels players in their team aswell as all the other crap he has published on the Super Rugby cull. Pandaram and Cully are pieces of shit.

    #strongeras5 #strongerwithoutCully #westisbest #eastisdeceased
    Cully is a bluffer. Doesn't know shit from shinola.


    Quote Originally Posted by Herbasimplex View Post
    someone finally in the media expressly states it.
    Calling for Pulver's resignation? Don't think this is the first by a long shot.

    The place needs a full cleanout.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  7. #37
    Immortal GIGS20's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Rockingham
    Posts
    16,177
    vCash
    53193000
    The Bronze Star of Faith
    Paul Cully can go eat a dick, this article isn't anything about the decision to kill a franchise is freaking stupid it's all a big whinge about how long it has been for the ARU to put the knife to a team so he can see Dane Haylett-Petty or Recce Hodge in the Tahs back line.

    Pulver needs to get the sack for sure, but not for that reason!

    2 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    C'mon the

  8. #38
    Rookie
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    146
    vCash
    5018000
    Quote Originally Posted by GIGS20 View Post
    Paul Cully can go eat a dick, this article isn't anything about the decision to kill a franchise is freaking stupid it's all a big whinge about how long it has been for the ARU to put the knife to a team so he can see Dane Haylett-Petty or Recce Hodge in the Tahs back line.

    Pulver needs to get the sack for sure, but not for that reason!
    Cully doesn't even live in Sydney.

    He phones his shit in from the 'tron in Waikato.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3

Similar Threads

  1. RUPA furious at ARU
    By volvo in forum Western Force
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 11-04-17, 13:27
  2. NEW RUPA CEO APPOINTED
    By Burgs in forum Past Players
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 18-08-10, 06:19
  3. Tai - RUPA Interview
    By travelling_gerry in forum Tai McIsaac
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 28-12-09, 13:10
  4. RUPA interviews...
    By laura in forum Western Force
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 31-03-09, 12:00
  5. RUPA Code of Conduct
    By travelling_gerry in forum Rugby
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-10-07, 10:11

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •