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

[Jules]

Also he said if they didn't want the Force they would have let us go broke instead of the non alliance agreement but I recall past posts that Rugby WA had other options so more BS? And he mentioned that they had explored private ownership in WA recently. Anyone confirm this or more smoke and mirrors?

[Bakkies]

Can Rugby WA go back to The senate to refute all of his crap or is it just up to them to go through and work it out?

They can supply stuff to the committee to further support their responses to the questions on notice. The Rugby WA responses to the questions on notice are the only ones posted up on the Inquiry website so far.

The timing of this hearing is perfect as de Clyne couldn't attend the first hearing due to the fact he was 'overseas' and Reynolds said they will look forward to meeting him at a later date. The later date after the allegations and dirty laundry had been aired was perfect as it gave them more ammo to nail de Clyne.

[sittingbison]

Their version of "exploring" isn't like the National Geographic Society. It's more like reading a few headlines....like Four Business Men Want To Buy Force etc

Let us go broke? Yet, as that twit TWAS keeps saying, they had a contractual obligation to enter FIVE teams, so they COULDN'T let the Force fold. You can't have it both ways

Not wanting the Force? we were told here at TWF that there were several options available, the ARU only wanted to persue the alliance agreement model. Which gave them ownership. They wanted us all right otherwise they would have given us a loan like they gave Reds Tahs Brums (not the Rebels "loan" though). And included the infamous clause that allowed us getting cut. And got legal advice that was the only way to chop us.

[sittingbison]

.... The later date after the allegations and dirty laundry had been aired was perfect as it gave them more ammo to nail de Clyne.

Other than being egotistical narcissists, I can't understand how Clyne Pulver and Clarke didn't get their few facts straight, and claim no knowledge to the rest. The nest of vipers all told different stories, and threw the others under the bus. One example is the oft quotes $50m....make that $68m....make that $86m....nah, let's use banker speak, and make it "well north of $100m". What Welborn said was "Forrest agreed to meet their demands, which they then reneged" so it didn't matter the precise doller value - and begs the questions why have the meeting if (1) they are at polar opposites with offers and (2) they hadn't agreed to save the Force if offer was met.

[Bakkies]

Other than being egotistical narcissists, I can't understand how Clyne Pulver and Clarke didn't get their few facts straight, and claim no knowledge to the rest. The nest of vipers all told different stories, and threw the others under the bus. One example is the oft quotes $50m....make that $68m....make that $86m....nah, let's use banker speak, and make it "well north of $100m". What Welborn said was "Forrest agreed to meet their demands, which they then reneged" so it didn't matter the precise doller value - and begs the questions why have the meeting if (1) they are at polar opposites with offers and (2) they hadn't agreed to save the Force if offer was met.

It must be in the ARU job description as a company director to not know your annual reports. That alone should be referred to ASIC. I am pleased that they are continually showing the arrogant Sydney attitude towards the Senate Committee which pisses them off even further.

[sittingbison]

As Clyne pointed out, NO other sports have had a senate Enquiry. And he is chairman of the board, ex chief of NAB, and has already fronted another Senate Enquiry. Yet the silence in the fourth estate is deafening. Sheesh, if it was Demetriades and the Essendon drug scandal it would be front page....oh wait....even THAT didn't crack a Senate Enquiry.

Yes Patsy, you have made history. The opposite is true, your perfidy is the only one in Aus sport that has warranted the Enquiry

[Bakkies]

I am sure Soccer Australia faced a Senate Inquiry where they were told to reform or we will slash your funding.

[sittingbison]

The $50m becomes well north of $100m
The Rebels loans forgiven
Sale of license $1
Two put options
$6m given to Cox without strings
Imperium consulting fees more than player wages
Imperium unit trust
VicGov offer less than expected
Lies about OTF subscription
Lies about Force sponsor
Lies about WAGov offers
Lies about Force insolvency
Lied all clubs had been given loans etc, Force had never been given a loan
Lies all clubs been in black at various times (Force only went there in 2016)
Lied that Super grants were yearly dependant, included Wallaby top ups etc (untrue) when Rebels always got more than Force.
Couldn't remember participating rates with grass roots grants

Flogging a dead horse here:

follow the money

[Kalahard]

http://www.rugby.com.au/news/2017/10...senate-inquiry

The ARU would have needed ‘well north of $100 million’ to consider reversing its decision to axe the Western Force, ARU chairman Cameron Clyne told a senate inquiry on Monday night. The ARU had the option to buy back the Rebels for $1 as part of the 2 put options written into the sale agreement. The ARU chose to facilitate the sale back to the VRU opening the ARU back up to more unnecessary financial risk. This also negates Clynes claim of an open minded approach to the meeting in Adelaide as the ARU had already been actively working towards an inferior solution.

Clyne said he, along with directors Brett Robinson and John Eales, had gone to meet with WA billionaire Forrest and former Wallaby and businessman John Welborn, with an ‘open mind’, after discussions with fellow board members.

He denied a claim that he had set a dollar figure ahead of the meeting that would guarantee the ARU would go to SANZAAR and ask for a move to a 16-team model, to keep the Force in the competition. Two separate entities have testified there was a dollar amount put forward by the ARU prior to the Adelaide meeting

“We said we’ll go with an open mind,” he said.

“The only number provided ahead of the meeting, was, ‘We actually don’t know but based on the (discussions), it’s going to be well north of $100 million’, because you’re dealing with an inferior competition, higher travel costs and compensation from potentially every other team.

“We went into that meeting saying, ‘if there is a substantial offer, we’ll listen to it’. It clearly wouldn’t have met the costs.” What costs? Buying the Rebels would have cost $1 and the travel grants were already budgeted for negating any serious blowouts. Where is the detailed analysis and consultation with the various stakeholders on what legal threats were imminent and why the fixtures could not be changed to say Force instead of Rebels. TV revenue was already agreed upon to hold a 15 team tournament. Nowhere has it ever been stated which teams are supposed to make up the competition only that SA provide 4 teams, Aus 4 teams, NZ 5, Arg and Japan 1

Clyne also said Forrest’s offer was in the form of a trust to be set up in the Australian Rugby Foundation, something the chairman said would have restricted its ability to help the Western Force and may also have jeopardised the foundation’s status. The money would have had to be used for grassroots programs limiting the ARUs ability to siphon off millions into Melbourne. The Force were guaranteed no loss by Andrew Forrest therefore using this foundations money to help the Force is moot. Nowhere in history has it ever happened that donating money to a foundation jeopadised the foundations abilities to operate, in fact donating money is what foundations thrive on. Ridiculous logic.

The chairman also maintained Victoria’s financial package was far superior to that from WA, with only ‘vague promises’ coming from the west. Again, revealed during the inquiry and acknowledged by Clyne that the WA government had offered a better support package and when coupled with Andrew Forrests generous offers, WAs bids blew Victorias out of the water.

Clyne claimed in their forecast, released after RugbyWA lost its Supreme Court appeal, the ARU had modelled a best-case scenario based on continuing sponsorship from the Road Safety Commission and a fully subscribed ‘Own the Force campaign’.

That ‘Own the Force’ campaign had, Clyne said, received $1.7-2 million in subscriptions, well short of the $5-10 million target. So there is another $5 million from OTF and $6 million sponsorship that could have been bonus money to help the game out on top of WA Governments offer of over $20 million and Andrew Forrests offer of up to $68 million. Adding that $11 million to the $20 million and the $68 million gives us a figure of $99 million. Thats a lot of money to ignore to tie yourself to the "superior offer" of less than $20 million

Though Clyne said he couldn’t recall specifics, he admitted that there may have been discussions as early as April 2016 about the possible reduction of a team, but only as part of a broader strategic conversation, looking at multiple forecasts.

“Management are constantly making a series of recommendations, as you’d expect,” he said.

“The board’s always asking them to explore strategic options around how to improve the game.

“Certainly, there was no decision made by the board to go from five to four until April 2017.” Decision wasn't made but all of the preparation and groundwork to remove a team had been completed and the target selected in the 12 months prior. Many external reports show that discussion around reduction was already happening.

Negotiations over the sale of the Rebels in 2015 again came under the spotlight, Clyne saying he had no knowledge of a unit trust established in the sale or any insolvency issues in the New Zealand arm of Andrew Cox’s business. An admission that the ARUs due diligence into Imperium was appalingly bad for such a big sale

Senator Linda Reynolds said Clyne should sack whomever completed the due diligence of that sale at ARU headquarters, given their failure to pick up what she considered critical elements of the deal.

Listen to the audio of the hearing here.

The inquiry's final recommendations will be handed down on November 13, 2017.

[shasta]

One point the senators let Clyne spout spin on quite a few times, when comparing the Rabble's financial track record, was his assertion that the ARU board considered "private ownership to be worth exploring, as it works in other sports/countries". The immediate question should have been..... WHY. Why would you want to explore that any further? Please explain the reasons why the board thought that, in the face of so many reasons it looked foolhardy at best, sinister at worst. The VRU had previously been handed the licence back after a failed private ownership. The ARU had to take over the running of the franchise back then - the VRU had no money to fund it. Why would you then have another go at it? And if you were crazy enough to do that why would you not undertake absolutely comprehensive due diligence? When a simple on-line search would reveal your preferred owner was insolvent you still went ahead, losing tens of millions in the process, handing over even more unconditional millions whilst ignoring a bid which would not cost you a cent?

I hope that will be hammered home in the report. I said before these hearings started that I'd be satisfied just to see these questions aired and these liars be exposed, but wasn't confident any further action would eventuate. Still think that but I'm far from satisfied. I hope I'm the pessimist here and all the optimists are right.

You really couldn't make this stuff up.

[Hansie]

Who amongst you are skilled in the art of tax and fair value?

Is the Rebels licence really only worth $1.00??? I believe ARU nominated a seven figure sum to an alternative buyer when negotiating with Cox.

How does the ATO view assets being undersold and sold for less than fair value? There would have to be at least 34c in every GST dollar they get for us in WA?

[wholetruth]

Here's that eight days again in perspective

Senate hearing: Did ARU investigate axing before Force alliance?
Nick Taylor

The Australian Rugby Union was investigating axing a side from Super Rugby before Western Force signed the controversial alliance agreement with the governing body, the senate hearing into the future of the sport in Australia heard yesterday.
Cutting a side was discussed by the ARU board as late as August 18 last year – eight days before the agreement was finalised.
Senator Linda Reynolds questioned whether RugbyWA should have been told about the discussions before they signed the agreement that ultimately led to their demise.
Senator Reynolds said the ARU board was given a briefing by former chief operating officer Rob Clarke and head of professional rugby Anthony French on cutting the Australian sides from five to four.
"You can understand Western Force's concerns that they were not aware of these discussions. Is that not something you should have disclosed to Western Force?" she asked ARU chairman Cameron Clyne.
"Given that you were actively, for some months, considering the option of cutting a team, I believe Western Force had a right to know because what the alliance document did by accident or design was gave you an opportunity to cut them."

Plenty more here
https://thewest.com.au/sport/rugby-u...-ng-b88631072z

[Wickerman]

Here's that eight days again in perspective

Senate hearing: Did ARU investigate axing before Force alliance?
Nick Taylor

The Australian Rugby Union was investigating axing a side from Super Rugby before Western Force signed the controversial alliance agreement with the governing body, the senate hearing into the future of the sport in Australia heard yesterday.
Cutting a side was discussed by the ARU board as late as August 18 last year – eight days before the agreement was finalised.
Senator Linda Reynolds questioned whether RugbyWA should have been told about the discussions before they signed the agreement that ultimately led to their demise.
Senator Reynolds said the ARU board was given a briefing by former chief operating officer Rob Clarke and head of professional rugby Anthony French on cutting the Australian sides from five to four.
"You can understand Western Force's concerns that they were not aware of these discussions. Is that not something you should have disclosed to Western Force?" she asked ARU chairman Cameron Clyne.
"Given that you were actively, for some months, considering the option of cutting a team, I believe Western Force had a right to know because what the alliance document did by accident or design was gave you an opportunity to cut them."

Plenty more here
https://thewest.com.au/sport/rugby-u...-ng-b88631072z

'Page not found' has the story been pulled?

[SPaRTAN]

Here's that eight days again in perspective

Senate hearing: Did ARU investigate axing before Force alliance?
Nick Taylor

The Australian Rugby Union was investigating axing a side from Super Rugby before Western Force signed the controversial alliance agreement with the governing body, the senate hearing into the future of the sport in Australia heard yesterday.
Cutting a side was discussed by the ARU board as late as August 18 last year – eight days before the agreement was finalised.
Senator Linda Reynolds questioned whether RugbyWA should have been told about the discussions before they signed the agreement that ultimately led to their demise.
Senator Reynolds said the ARU board was given a briefing by former chief operating officer Rob Clarke and head of professional rugby Anthony French on cutting the Australian sides from five to four.
"You can understand Western Force's concerns that they were not aware of these discussions. Is that not something you should have disclosed to Western Force?" she asked ARU chairman Cameron Clyne.
"Given that you were actively, for some months, considering the option of cutting a team, I believe Western Force had a right to know because what the alliance document did by accident or design was gave you an opportunity to cut them."

Plenty more here
https://thewest.com.au/sport/rugby-u...-ng-b88631072z

Umm has this story been pulled? Wtf.

There is a google cache so it did exist an hr ago. I am getting so angry at our media right now

[SPaRTAN]

6PR is a talkback radio station in Perth and all things wa should matter. Surely they can get one person from media just to update the process. The ARU are getting away with anonymity because of Perth media and people remaining quiet. We need to keep at them to ensure the skullduggery and bastard act of the ARU is not forgotten.

They have treated us unfairly! We should be heard and bother stations like 6pr until they listen. We are a community that is being dismissed and I am furious at this.

In fact I never thought it would affect me so emotionally as a supporter but it is on my mind constantly.

I have taken note and fired a heap of emails to as many media outlets (Radio & Print) as I could get the contact details for with a scathing letter about their lack of coverage of the ARU senate inquiry. I, like yourself Mothy, am extremly upset by the stunned silence hanging over our media right now.