Arbitration hearing - Western Force v ARU - 31.07.2017

[scrum]

"Former" Rugby great John Eales (ARU board member) John.Eales@chandlermacleod.com

[WFDom]

"Former" Rugby great John Eales (ARU board member) John.Eales@chandlermacleod.com

The e-mail address Lou posted for Eales last night certainly works!!!

I'm on nightshift offshore over in the North Sea and have been having some correspondence over the e-mail.

I asked regarding "criteria" & the 28mill amongst other things and got the same sketchy financial unsustainability bullshit they've all been peddling.

..... probably a generic cut and paste he's been sending to anyone that's hit him up

[RugbyReg]

We had Geoff Stooke on the GAGR podcast last night and he was very interesting to chat to. An amazingly impressive man and a loss to our game (from the national perspective, I don't think he will be lost to the game over there).

In the end he acknowledged that the Force were cut because they were the easiest to cut. it wasn't about finances or rugby performance - it was about who was easiest to cut and that was always the Force. Unfortunately.

The issue is whether we needed to cut a team at all and could have the financial resources been better applied to keep them going.

I am sure a lot of you will remember when South Sydney Rabbitohs got cut by the NRL back in the, gee was it the late 1990s? But their strong and passionate supporter base (led by some high profile individuals) kept fighting and within 2 years they were back in.

[travelling_gerry]

I am sure a lot of you will remember when South Sydney Rabbitohs got cut by the NRL back in the, gee was it the late 1990s? But their strong and passionate supporter base (led by some high profile individuals) kept fighting and within 2 years they were back in.

Good point Reg, and thats where I hope the ARU have seen the precedent and settle before the court date and fix this mess before it costs the game too much.

[GIGS20]

We had Geoff Stooke on the GAGR podcast last night and he was very interesting to chat to. An amazingly impressive man and a loss to our game (from the national perspective, I don't think he will be lost to the game over there).

In the end he acknowledged that the Force were cut because they were the easiest to cut. it wasn't about finances or rugby performance - it was about who was easiest to cut and that was always the Force. Unfortunately.

The issue is whether we needed to cut a team at all and could have the financial resources been better applied to keep them going.

I am sure a lot of you will remember when South Sydney Rabbitohs got cut by the NRL back in the, gee was it the late 1990s? But their strong and passionate supporter base (led by some high profile individuals) kept fighting and within 2 years they were back in.

I don't normally listen to the podcast Reg, but the interview with Stookey made it unmissable for me. Good job boys, I think you gave the only honest man on the board plenty of room to express his opinion. You also kept a pretty good balance IMHO, didn't sound like Force apologists, but clearly pointed out the lunacy of this decision.

I don't think I'd be prepared to wait 2 years for this to resolve, we'll only have one year left on the broadcast deal and then the hatchet men would start looking our way. We'd also have lost the valuable momentum we built with our pathways, the best coach in the country and the team spirit we have built over (admittedly) this season.

Yes we would have a powerful lobby behind us and a viscous hatred of the rest of the country, but It wouldn't be a lot better than starting at the beginning. Much of the passion that is being expressed right now is as a result of fighting TWELVE YEARS against a generally dismissive and sometimes downright abusive parent body that has NEVER, NOT ONCE considered the application of a level playing field the Heartland states get what they want, the Brumbies appear to have won the fight for hearts and minds, the Rebels somehow have the board and management by the pubes and can get away with what they want, the Force has always been the red-headed stepchild.

2 Years (while I would keep the fight for that length of time) is frankly unacceptable. It needs to be 5 next year, the ARU needs to learn frm South Africa and stand up to SANZAaR with threats to leave Quite frankly, we've been sucking up to New Zealand and South Africa for too long and it is no longer providing us with competition that helps us as a nation, is the money really worth that?

[SteveWA]

The issue is whether we needed to cut a team at all and could have the financial resources been better applied to keep them going.

With respect, I don't believe that is the issue at all. With the changes since the alliance agreement was signed (both on and off the field), Road Safety sponsorship, Own The Force and Andrew Forrest's commitments there is no doubt that the Force is financially viable going forward. At least as viable as any other Australian team. The issue is why that made no difference to the decision.

Love the podcast, thanks for your support.

[GIGS20]

With respect, I don't believe that is the issue at all. With the changes since the alliance agreement was signed (both on and off the field), Road Safety sponsorship, Own The Force and Andrew Forrest's commitments there is no doubt that the Force is financially viable going forward. At least as viable as any other Australian team. The issue is why that made no difference to the decision.

Love the podcast, thanks for your support.

I think that's pretty much what Reg was saying, the financial resources will still be required to keep the other 4 going, the fact that the Force would be likely to ADD money to the equation rather than subtract is your side of the discussion. I see them being the same point.

Now that the ARU has destroyed the only possible revenue-raising component of Super Rugby, and the only component with a GUARANTEE of no loss, you'd have to wonder where the financial gains come from. Perhaps the rumour that was floating around of Oz getting a cash payout if we kill one of our own in favour of the Sunwolves, actually has some legs.

I wonder if Stookey has a comment on that point?

[jargan83]

Perhaps the rumour that was floating around of Oz getting a cash payout if we kill one of our own in favour of the Sunwolves, actually has some legs.

I don't think it was a rumour, it was pretty widely reported that the ARU was going to receive a $30 million payment from SANZAR for killing an Aussie side back in April.

[Sheikh]

I think that's pretty much what Reg was saying, the financial resources will still be required to keep the other 4 going, the fact that the Force would be likely to ADD money to the equation rather than subtract is your side of the discussion. I see them being the same point.

Now that the ARU has destroyed the only possible revenue-raising component of Super Rugby, and the only component with a GUARANTEE of no loss, you'd have to wonder where the financial gains come from. Perhaps the rumour that was floating around of Oz getting a cash payout if we kill one of our own in favour of the Sunwolves, actually has some legs.

I wonder if Stookey has a comment on that point?

When Clyne and Pulver say it was a financial decision, and not one based on team performances, I think they are correct. But we have all made the mistake of thinking that they were taking about the finances of the franchises. I think they aren't, they are talking about the finances of the ARU.

The ARU gets money from the TV deals which pays for each team. The Force's cut is ~$6 million (I think from Alison's work). Every other team gets more due to, eg, Wallaby top-ups, but the ARU gets at least $30 million a year in TV money for running the teams.

The ARU won from SANZAAR the right to get the same TV money despite cutting a team. They can't politically cut the Waratahs, Reds or Brumbies, and can't actually cut the Rebels, so they cut the one team they can actually cut, the Force. This gives the ARU $6 million a year to spend on the Shute Shield, sorry, grassroots. It doesn't matter if the Force are making money or not, the ARU will get $18 million over the next 3 years to spend on champagne lunches, the Shute Shield and maybe grassroots in other states if there is any left over.

Maybe, if there had been either the will or the ability to cut the Rebels, they could have had more money to spend over the next 3 years, but they can now shore up support in the rugby heartlands by spending some of the Force's $18 million on grassroots and the rest on fixing the black hole in their finances.

[GIGS20]

Do you seriously think that throwing 18 million over three years at the Shute Shield will shut them up?

Do you seriously think that if 18 million went to the Shute Shield, one single cent will find its way down to a junior club?

Sure grassroots deserves more funding, I don't disagree with that, but I just don't trust this ARU to actually deliver funding to the REAL grassroots

[zed]

Reading everything that has been going on with Super rugby and the ARU these last few years, there is a high degree of ineptitude and incompetence. Frittering away money.. are they not answerable to anyone? The ARU were behind the decision to expand to 18 teams, but never factored in the $5 million needed for travel expenses to Japan and Argentina. Surely someone needs to be responsible for the lack of due diligence? And it's the expansion that has cost the Force...

[zed]

When Clyne and Pulver say it was a financial decision, and not one based on team performances, I think they are correct. But we have all made the mistake of thinking that they were taking about the finances of the franchises. I think they aren't, they are talking about the finances of the ARU.

The ARU gets money from the TV deals which pays for each team. The Force's cut is ~$6 million (I think from Alison's work). Every other team gets more due to, eg, Wallaby top-ups, but the ARU gets at least $30 million a year in TV money for running the teams.

The ARU won from SANZAAR the right to get the same TV money despite cutting a team. They can't politically cut the Waratahs, Reds or Brumbies, and can't actually cut the Rebels, so they cut the one team they can actually cut, the Force. This gives the ARU $6 million a year to spend on the Shute Shield, sorry, grassroots. It doesn't matter if the Force are making money or not, the ARU will get $18 million over the next 3 years to spend on champagne lunches, the Shute Shield and maybe grassroots in other states if there is any left over.

Maybe, if there had been either the will or the ability to cut the Rebels, they could have had more money to spend over the next 3 years, but they can now shore up support in the rugby heartlands by spending some of the Force's $18 million on grassroots and the rest on fixing the black hole in their finances.

Ok that makes a lot of sense. Worrying though as it means their decision was more logical than previously thought.

[Sheikh]

Do you seriously think that throwing 18 million over three years at the Shute Shield will shut them up?

Do you seriously think that if 18 million went to the Shute Shield, one single cent will find its way down to a junior club?

Sure grassroots deserves more funding, I don't disagree with that, but I just don't trust this ARU to actually deliver funding to the REAL grassroots

I think you may well be right, GIGS, but when the ARU claim that cutting a team was a financial decision, I think this is the financial decision they meant, not whether any individual team was in the red or black.

[RugbyReg]

I think that's pretty much what Reg was saying, the financial resources will still be required to keep the other 4 going, the fact that the Force would be likely to ADD money to the equation rather than subtract is your side of the discussion. I see them being the same point.

Now that the ARU has destroyed the only possible revenue-raising component of Super Rugby, and the only component with a GUARANTEE of no loss, you'd have to wonder where the financial gains come from. Perhaps the rumour that was floating around of Oz getting a cash payout if we kill one of our own in favour of the Sunwolves, actually has some legs.

I wonder if Stookey has a comment on that point?

yeah sorry, when I refer to the financial resources being better applied, I meant for the ARU as a whole not just the Force. Geoff was basically saying it was easiest to cut the Force, so they cut the Force. It wasn't about their financial situation. It wasn't about rugby performance. It was because they were easiest to cut.

And we cut a team because the finances were tight. Geoff, however, was adamant a better reallocation of resources could have seen all 5 teams remain and be viable.

[zed]

I think you may well be right, GIGS, but when the ARU claim that cutting a team was a financial decision, I think this is the financial decision they meant, not whether any individual team was in the red or black.

Yeah I think that's what's confused everyone. Most people are thinking they were cutting the team they deemed least viable. It kinda makes me think we're f**ked. It doesn't matter how much financial backing we have or how many wins we have, it's largely irrelevant