Terms of Reference for a Senate Inquiry into the Future of Rugby Union in Australia

[The InnFORCEr]

Rebels board

Tim North, Chairman

Paul Docherty, Vice-Chairman

Lyndsey Cattermole

Bob Dalziel

Owain Stone

Neil Hay

Gary Gray



Is this also the list ISM Unit Trust holders?

[Bakkies]

Can we prove that Imperium and/or Rebels were trading while insolvent?

http://asic.gov.au/regulatory-resour...r-directors/#5

[Bakkies]

I posted links to the IP Australia site about it ... somewhere here.

Cheers. If that hasn't been sent to the Committee already it has to go asap. We need to know when they acquired it.

The timing of the Rebels board appointments needs to be raised as well

[sittingbison]

WOW..there is plenty of replies on public record in there that will bite Clyne in the arse, ASIC have to be looking into the statements provided in their fudged Annual Reports..interesting that he & Pulver go on about potential, near-term insolvency of the ARU yet no mention what so ever in Annual report. And then to top if off they seem not to care or know how Imperium spent/used their grants to avoid liquidation is outrageous. The Federal government & taxpayers should be very concerned that their/our money has been used to line the pockets of Cox and Clarke.

Fixed it for you wasmute...no charge

[sittingbison]

Cheers. If that hasn't been sent to the Committee already it has to go asap. We need to know when they acquired it....

In a letter to Pulver on July 18 2104, Winney said BidCo would take on the risk and responsibility from 2015.
“ARU exposure would be cauterised and risk beyond the end 2014 would pass to BidCo,” Winney wrote.
In his reply four days later Pulver said: “ARU purchased the Rebels marks/intellectual property for $1.3m and cannot agree to them being sold back to the Rebels for only $1.

Sooo....before July...2104

It looks like they gave the first owner the $1.3m, who of course never paid it back. Interesting that it is $500, 000 more than they bought the Force IP for....who were/are desperate to buy it back.

Also interesting is Winneys use of words..."ARU exposure would be cauterised and risk beyond the end 2014 would pass to BidCo,”...instead of cauterised ARU were further exposed for another $20m, and some as yet unamed benefactor has settled their debts and is now at risk.

[GIGS20]

I get

FORCE
Tai McIssac
Cam Shepherd
Digby Ioane
Ryan Cross
Richard Brown
David Pocock
James O’Connor
Pek Cowan
Matt Hodgson
Ben McCalman
Nick Cummins
Nathan Charles
Tetera Faulkner
Dane Haylett Petty
Adam Coleman
Kyle Godwin
Richard Harwick
Curtis Rona



REBELS
Cooper Vuna
Luke Jones
Toby Smith
Reece Hodge
Lopeti Timani
Sefanaia Naivalu
Jordan Uelese
Marika Koroibete

OK, my numbers are completely based upon that list and Wikipedia, so there might be some inaccuracy, but I can happily provide you with the calculations if you doubt me.

Force Wallabies debuts by year
Year Debut Cumulative
Year 1 2006 2 2
Year 2 2007 1 3
Year 3 2008 4 7
Year 4 2009 1 8
Year 5 2010 2 10
Year 6 2011 0 10
Year 7 2012 1 11
Year 8 2013 0 11
Year 9 2014 2 13
Year 10 2015 0 13
Year 11 2016 3 16
Year 12 2017 2 18

Rebels Wallabies Debuts by year
Year Debut Cumulative
Year 1 2011 0 0
Year 2 2012 1 1
Year 3 2013 0 1
Year 4 2014 1 2
Year 5 2015 1 3
Year 6 2016 3 6
Year 7 2017 2 8

First Home Grown Wallaby Force
Dane Haylett Petty 2016 (Year 11)

First Home Grown Wallaby Rebels
Jordan Uelese 2017 (Year 7)

Before anybody starts bleating about Dane being born overseas, so was Jordan, doesn't count.
Anybody who wants to bring up Sef Naivalu playing for Box Hill, he was 22 and apparently moved to Australia on a rugby development scholarship, played his junior rugby in Fiji (at least according to Wikipedia)

Clyne would be better to point to the first Victorian junior to debut in the modern era, that would be Digby Ioane, who has had significant input from the Force (obviously) before his debut. Of course if you argue that Digby counts for Victoria, you would have to push for Luke Jones, who was developing into a Wallaby before he was poached by the Rebels and had his game stuffed up for a couple of years. If he had stayed at the Force, it's conceivable that, under Sharpie's tuition, he would have become a Wallaby sooner.

Since those two cancel themselves out, I'd call the numbers pretty clear.

Here's a graph for those who can't see trends in tables


and



As you can see, year 6 we had 0 debutants and Year 7 we had 1
Year 6 the Rebels had 3 Debutants and Year 7 they had 2.

But those debutants were Nick Cummins (Force)
and (Year 6) Hodge, TImani and Naivalu and (Year 7) Uelese and Koroibete (Rebels)

Nick was being hailed as a potential Wallaby for a couple of years back then and was routinely rejected in favour of other options (this was 2012 for us, so some real mungbeans of wingers were selected from NSW and QLD)

by contrast, everybody but Jordan Uelese for the Rebels was a development prospect selected and parachuted into the organisation.

Even with the horribly biased selection policies for the Rebels and the Wallabies, the historical trend is consistently higher for the Force, if Clyne is basing his statements on the last 2 years, that's another area where he selects his facts very carefully to support a predetermined judgement (and in this case, worked pretty hard to find one)

Dammit, that didn't work did it?

Can anybody see the charts?

[sittingbison]

OK, my numbers are completely based upon that list and Wikipedia, so there might be some inaccuracy, but I can happily provide you with the calculations if you doubt me.

Force Wallabies debuts by year
Year Debut Cumulative
Year 1 2006 2 2
Year 2 2007 1 3
Year 3 2008 4 7
Year 4 2009 1 8
Year 5 2010 2 10
Year 6 2011 0 10
Year 7 2012 1 11
Year 8 2013 0 11
Year 9 2014 2 13
Year 10 2015 0 13
Year 11 2016 3 16
Year 12 2017 2 18

Rebels Wallabies Debuts by year
Year Debut Cumulative
Year 1 2011 0 0
Year 2 2012 1 1
Year 3 2013 0 1
Year 4 2014 1 2
Year 5 2015 1 3
Year 6 2016 3 6
Year 7 2017 2 8

First Home Grown Wallaby Force
Dane Haylett Petty 2016 (Year 11)

First Home Grown Wallaby Rebels
Jordan Uelese 2017 (Year 7)

Before anybody starts bleating about Dane being born overseas, so was Jordan, doesn't count.
Anybody who wants to bring up Sef Naivalu playing for Box Hill, he was 22 and apparently moved to Australia on a rugby development scholarship, played his junior rugby in Fiji (at least according to Wikipedia)

Clyne would be better to point to the first Victorian junior to debut in the modern era, that would be Digby Ioane, who has had significant input from the Force (obviously) before his debut. Of course if you argue that Digby counts for Victoria, you would have to push for Luke Jones, who was developing into a Wallaby before he was poached by the Rebels and had his game stuffed up for a couple of years. If he had stayed at the Force, it's conceivable that, under Sharpie's tuition, he would have become a Wallaby sooner.

Since those two cancel themselves out, I'd call the numbers pretty clear.

As you can see, year 6 we had 0 debutants and Year 7 we had 1
Year 6 the Rebels had 3 Debutants and Year 7 they had 2

But those debutants were Nick Cummins (Force)
and (Year 6) Hodge, TImani and Naivalu and (Year 7) Uelese and Koroibete (Rebels)

Nick was being hailed as a potential Wallaby for a couple of years back then and was routinely rejected in favour of other options (this was 2012 for us, so some real mungbeans of wingers were selected from NSW and QLD)

by contrast, everybody but Jordan Uelese for the Rebels was a development prospect selected and parachuted into the organisation.

Even with the horribly biased selection policies for the Rebels and the Wallabies, the historical trend is consistently higher for the Force, if Clyne is basing his statements on the last 2 years, that's another area where he selects his facts very carefully to support a predetermined judgement (and in this case, worked pretty hard to find one)

Don't let facts get in the way of a good story

Sheesh you have just reminded me of Brain-dead tenure and Foleys first year

[GIGS20]

Actually I want to correlate that with the performance of the Wallabies now.

Looking at that list, I reckon I could make a pretty good case for saying the more Rebels who debut for the Wallabies in a year, the worse the Wallabies do!

Pretty easy since the most Rebels debuts have been since the 2015 World Cup

[jackster]

Did Clyne really suggest that an ASIC investigation take place due to possible leaks of information re the ARU Board Docs? It is on record from Pulver, Clarke and North that documents turn up on desks and no one can remember who brought them, so clearly this is just another example of ARU documents turning up on desks of third parties, if anything, ASIC should be investigating Clyne on why this happens.

[Bakkies]

Badge had a couple of seasons in a row played really well but he got injured. Before he got stuffed around by Cheika Godwin was the same.

As for Sharpie I remember him having a poor run of form where he was dropped from the test side. Form was so poor he couldn't catch a line out.

[Alison]

Can we prove that Imperium and/or Rebels were trading while insolvent?

http://asic.gov.au/regulatory-resour...r-directors/#5

Technically, they weren't insolvent as the ARU gave a written undertaking that they would pay all the MRRU's debts as and when they became due and payable. That is how the directors and auditors of the MRRU were able to sign off the "going concern" aspect of the financial statements. This is an extract from the MRRU's 2014 accounts:

“….as at 31 December 2014 the Company’s [MRRU’s] current liabilities exceeded current assets by $3,132,410…and it had a deficiency of shareholders’ equity of $11,806,698…The Company [MRRU] has received a written undertaking from the Australian Rugby Union Limited (“ARU”) that it will continue to provide financial support to allow the Company [MRRU] to meet its debts as and when they fall due…..Accordingly, the directors believe it appropriate that the financial report is prepared on a going concern basis which contemplates the continuity of normal business activities and the realisation of assets and settlement of liabilities in the ordinary course of business.”

The ARU pretty much gave the MRRU a blank cheque with very few strings, and Clarke & co spent up big knowing they didn't have to worry.

[Alison]

Did Clyne really suggest that an ASIC investigation take place due to possible leaks of information re the ARU Board Docs? It is on record from Pulver, Clarke and North that documents turn up on desks and no one can remember who brought them, so clearly this is just another example of ARU documents turning up on desks of third parties, if anything, ASIC should be investigating Clyne on why this happens.

Yes! That's exactly what he said! And, by referring to current and past directors he was obviously pointing the finger at Stooke. The ARU witnesses are so dumb and so arrogant they really don't know how ridiculous they are making themselves look.

[Alison]

Rebels board

Tim North, Chairman

Paul Docherty, Vice-Chairman

Lyndsey Cattermole

Bob Dalziel

Owain Stone

Neil Hay

Gary Gray



Is this also the list ISM Unit Trust holders?

I think it's very telling that Peter Leahy is not on that list. From what I know of Mr Leahy, I believe he is a man of integrity with a very genuine interest in growing the game of rugby union in Victoria. That is why he is on the VRU board but not the MRRU board. In my humble opinion anyway.

[Kalahard]

Technically, they weren't insolvent as the ARU gave a written undertaking that they would pay all the MRRU's debts as and when they became due and payable. That is how the directors and auditors of the MRRU were able to sign off the "going concern" aspect of the financial statements. This is an extract from the MRRU's 2014 accounts:

“….as at 31 December 2014 the Company’s [MRRU’s] current liabilities exceeded current assets by $3,132,410…and it had a deficiency of shareholders’ equity of $11,806,698…The Company [MRRU] has received a written undertaking from the Australian Rugby Union Limited (“ARU”) that it will continue to provide financial support to allow the Company [MRRU] to meet its debts as and when they fall due…..Accordingly, the directors believe it appropriate that the financial report is prepared on a going concern basis which contemplates the continuity of normal business activities and the realisation of assets and settlement of liabilities in the ordinary course of business.”

The ARU pretty much gave the MRRU a blank cheque with very few strings, and Clarke & co spent up big knowing they didn't have to worry.

I would argue that the MRRU was and is insolvent. Without massive injections of extra ARU capital, what exactly and how exactly would the MRRU operate? This is a company that has had 4 owners in 7 years and massive holes in the finances that they wouldn't be able to cover without the ARUs biased funding. They have also needed massive loans and writeoffs every time they were sold or changed owners. Take out the ARUs shenanigans and everything points to an insolvent business with no means of self sufficiency. The ARU signed themselves up to the broadcast agreements and competitions that contain clauses around their obligations to provide x number of teams. Where ARU management have messed up is not putting checks and balances in place around the viability of the 5th franchise which is causing turmoil 7 years on after it started causing problems in 2011 and is basically left holding the bag for the MRRUs debts, which we now know were being siphoned off to prop up other businesses in debt. Add in 7 years of dodgy management after ignoring comprehensive forecasting not to chase a 5th franchise and the ARU have overseen the downfall of Rugby in Australia. No one forced the ARU to set up the 5th franchise, it was ARU decision. No one forced the ARU to sell to Imperium, it was ARU decision. No one was obligated to do the ARUs due diligence for them, an ARU responsibility. No one is obligated to manage ARU finances except the ARU who have a fiduciary responsibility to act in Australian Rugbys best intersts, a failure by the ARU. No one has the obligation to justify the ARUs financial decisions except the ARU. No one has the obligation to track ARU expenditure except the ARU who are legally bound to present accurate financial records. No one has an obligation to put checks and balances on ARU funding except the ARU. They have failed on every count and now Australian Rugby is $28million poorer after the ARU chose to allow so much money to be siphoned out of the MRRU without recourse.
So therefore separating the ARUs bias in funding from the MRRU and there is no evidence the MRRU could or can sustain itself. Therefore the only conclusion is that the MRRU is an insolvent entity. Im not a legal eagle but i would expect that selling an insolvent business to another insolvent business is not exactly legal.

[UAUdiver1959]

I think it's very telling that Peter Leahy is not on that list. From what I know of Mr Leahy, I believe he is a man of integrity with a very genuine interest in growing the game of rugby union in Victoria. That is why he is on the VRU board but not the MRRU board. In my humble opinion anyway.

I'm hoping your right re Leahy and maybe he can smell the stench and wants to distance himself from the new MRRU and those on the new board. Remember he asked for an in camera session with the Senate committee.......betcha he split the beans on the unit trusts and Mr's Clarke and Gray.......

Still no front of jersey sponsor and no CEO.....

Love to find out if the ARU have topped up the MRRU since the $1 sale, maybe they are waiting for the silly time wasting Senate Inquiry to go away?