Can't we have a submission that comes from TWF and we can all put our names to it as a fan group. As GIGS said it is pointless everyone of us saying the same thing and not all of us have the correct information
Can't we have a submission that comes from TWF and we can all put our names to it as a fan group. As GIGS said it is pointless everyone of us saying the same thing and not all of us have the correct information
Number of submissions can be a good thing to this. It shows the strength of community feeling.
There's noting stopping us putting in a TWF one and also a personal one, it's just better if we craft each submission fresh.
We don't want our legitimate concerns to be thrown into the same pile as the email bombs that might be created by a robot!
Folks, from this thread on The Roar (which is increasingly becoming a vehicle for ARU shills to peddle their wares) ... http://www.theroar.com.au/2017/09/08...felt/#comments
concerned supporter said | September 8th 2017 @ 5:24pm
Timeline of events
February 20
• Pending the outcome of the upcoming SANZAAR Exco meeting in London, the ARU Board resolves to reduce Australia’s Super Rugby representation to four teams on two conditions: 1.) That South Africa (SARU) is able to reduce two teams and 2.) There being no reduction in SANZAAR broadcast revenue as a result of any reduction of teams under a new competition structure.
March 10
• Mandated SANZAAR Executive Committee votes unanimously in support of reverting to a 15-team Super Rugby competition on the condition that there be no reduction in SANZAAR broadcast revenue as a result of the change. Consultation begins with broadcasters.”
So this culling was precipitated on February 20,the ARU Board resolved to reduce Australia’s Super RugbyTeams to Four, subject to rubber stamping.
The ARU resolution was passed on FEBRUARY 20,2017,A VERY IMPORTANT RESOLUTION FOR AUSTRALIAN RUGBY.
Now why did in the ARU’s Wonderful, glossy, full colour 76 page Annual Report, the pride & joy of the ARU, was this CONTRADICTARY STATEMENT made & signed off by Clyne & Pulver, over a month after they had resolved to cull an Australian Rugby Team.They also made an important and glaring omission from their now published Timeline of Events (see above).
The omission is from the 2016 ARU Concise Financial Report.,namely
Directors Report , ITEM 7 – EVENTS SUBSEQUENT TO REPORTING DATE:
In the interval between the end of the financial year (31 December 2016)and the date of this report (22 March 2017),no item,transaction or event of a material and unusual nature has arisen,in the opinion of the Directors of the Company, to affect significantly the operations of the Company,the Results of these operations,or the state of affairs of the Company in future financial years’
Sgned C, Clyne Dated 22 March 2017
Signed W. Pulver Dated 22 March 2017
The ARU Board had already resolved to cull a team on February 20,(subject to rubber stamping), yet they misled their Members, Australian Rugby Public & World Rugby by false information in this most important document.
Hope this matter is brought up at the coming Senate Enquiry.
lol if that doesn't get them nothing will
Maybe Clyne could argue that because they had already decided the team to axe/cut/cull/chop/guillotine/discontinue was only the Western Force, then it DIDNT significantly effect the operations of the ARU....after all the ARU had never paid any attention to the Force for over a decade (since fining them over player payments)
The other option is that the decision to cut the Force was actually made before 31 December 2016 and therefore the decision of the board on 20th of Feb was not an event of a material nature.
But they didn't report it either way. Pull that stunt in a listed company and you'll be sharing a cell with Bubba
Good one GIGS20:lolup:
..Attachment 5049Quote:
WALLABIES great John Eales believes a Senate inquiry into rugby is needless...He openly questioned the Senate inquiry that has been ticked to examine the state of the code in Australia with focus on the transparency or lack of it around the ARU’s decision to cut the Force.
“I would seriously question whether there is a need for that (but) it’s not me making that decision,” said Eales, a two-time World Cup winner.
“I know that there is nothing the ARU or the ARU board has got to hide.”
Eales said a detailed timeline of events and financial modelling published on the ARU’s website since late Tuesday provided answers.
“We’ve published everything. Go through that timeline and there’s detail,” Eales said.
Just wondered if you could answer this:
1. Do submissions have to be questions or can they just be relevant facts?
2. Also, the aph website states that you should only submit information that you would be ok having in the public forum - so, when does it get to the public forum? Before the Senate sees it, or after?
3. If the senate wanted to subpeona some one and they were overseas how would that work?
4. Would it matter if you shared your submission with a journalist who published the submission before the senate hearing - does that kind of thing jeopardise anything?
5. Nick Taylor wrote an article last week about the ARU leaking the Alliance Agreement with the VRU guys and in the article it states that this will be included in the investigation by the Senate - how does an article in the paper get included in the submissions?
I know some of these questions sound dopey, but, I would really appreciate answers if any of you can offer them.
Your point about the leak of the alliance agreement is one of the most relevant I have seen in regards collusion between the ARU, The VRU and a one time ARU staffer now based in Melbourne. Difficult to prove but definitely worth asking the questions under oath. This inquiry won't get the Force reinstated but might just make some people's positions untenable.
As long as your submission relates to the terms of reference, you can pretty much write what suits. Remember, that you are an example of public opinion and therefore your questions are in and of themselves, evidence of lack of transparency. The inquiry is looking to uncover the facts about the process and the costs on a national footprint. I'm sure they would prefer well written and supported facts to a bunch of questions, but pointed questions will help the members to understand what investigation is required (assume that none of them have hung off every breath of commentary like we have) As an Australian citizen, you have the right to submit whatever you feel is relevant
Some new info I hadn't read before in this article:
1. Pulver etc finally had the decency to meet with hodgo, will be interesting to hear what cane out of that
2. This mentions that NRC is likely to be gone next year
Sounds like idea of Twiggys comp is to supplement super rugby and he will not be trying to poach players from other teams etc
https://thewest.com.au/sport/rugby-union/andrew-forrest-in-secret-rugby-talks-with-aru-about-breakaway-indo-pacific-competition-ng-b88595109z
The clerk of the committee is the best person to contact about submissions. I think there is a fair bit of guidance on the Parliament website too.
http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_...ublic_Hearings
I am looking forward to see what Stooke has to say
OK, so without trying to put it too bluntly, what the actual f@#k have these jokers done with the extra 30 million dollars per annum? They can't afford to fund grass roots. they can't afford to run super rugby They apparently can't afford to run the nrc They can't afford a proper national women's como They can't get the wallabies to win a game The men's sevens isn't lighting the world on fire The wallaroos crashed out of their world cup The under 20s aren't looking too flash. Surely we're reaching the definition of criminal negligence. The code survived the last broadcast agreement on A THIRD OF THE Money for gods sake. Is nobody going to call these mungbeans to account?
How much does it cost to send the men and women on the world sevens series circuit?
I pretty much had this exact thought over the weekend.
They shouted about the current TV deal from the rooftops about how much more money would be pouring into the game yet there has been zero benefit to the game for the reasons you list despite announcement of the strategic plan for Rugby which was again shouted from the rooftops.
Cameron Clyne said in one of his media statements that the code was 2 years away from being insolvent! Where has all the money gone? If I had to guess I'd say that money pit in Melbourne that was spared the axe would be great place to start looking.
Hopefully the senate inquiry can actually get some answers out of what appears to be the board that is presiding over the doom of it's own sport.