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

[UAUdiver1959]

Love Submission 15.

[SinBin]

Love Submission 15.

Sounds like in may be from a respected TWF advocate perhaps

[wasmute]

Submission 15 is absolute GOLD.... Its just the vibe of it

[JSJ]

I think we just cool our hot heels until Senator Reynolds delivers her report. We should all be confident enough to believe that the findings will be nothing short of career ending and code damning.
The other Unions will use the Senate report to call an EGM of the ARU and the entire ARU Board will be rolled. An interim CEO/Board will be appointed and the first thing they will do (as I would do) would be to make all of the Board Meetings, reports and shonky dealing public information....a real 'clean the house', so that the new Board can blame everything on the old Board and we start afresh.

Doing a mail out would be potentially counter productive and may cloud any of the Inquiries findings. 4 weeks and there will be blood on the board room table.

OK.
But everybody that posts on Roar, GAGR, rugby.com.au ,the Australian, Planetrugby, facebook etc, should post the instructions on where to find the complete report. As ARU tactics are and will be to cherry pick a bit that they want to refute and ignore the rest. We want as many rugby people as possible to read the whole thing

[Kalahard]

Submission 15 is a beauty. 16 asks some pertinent questions around constitutionality. NSWRUs submission sucks a lollypop.

Hopefully Linda can decipher the cheese from the chalk and we see some action. Go Linda Go!

[The InnFORCEr]

Look at poor Linda, you would have thought she'd had enough of slimy little reptiles at the Senate Enquiry

https://twitter.com/Science_Academy/...59410720247808

[Bakkies]

Rob Clarke and the VRU's answers to their questions on notice are up as well

[Jules]

Rob Clarke and the VRU's answers to their questions on notice are up as well

Are they worth a look? I don't think my blood pressure could take reading a whole lot more BS today

[TimboL]

I share the frustration of Alision, Jules, UAUdiver and others about the media virtually ignoring the ARU skulduggery exposed so far by the Senate Inquiry.

I submitted an article to The Roar yesterday out of frustration of the media sanitation of the hearing. None of their in-house writers have gone near it.

Not my finest work, but I am hoping it will at least spark some conversation and visibility when (if) it gets published.

[Bakkies]

Are they worth a look? I don't think my blood pressure could take reading a whole lot more BS today

Haven't looked yet. Only just re-order some more popcorn.

Curious to know what's going on with Submissions 6 to 9.

[Bakkies]

I have just read Clarke and North's answers to the questions on notice. North is trying to play dumb in not knowing what the question, be pompous and not who they met. It was pretty badly written for a QC.

Clarke said he was at the Weary Dunlop Club lunch on at 6th February 2015 but can't recall who he met and who was in attendance.

[chiraag]

Not worth a look really. The only questions they "answered" were about the initial meeting / introduction to Andrew Cox.
It seems that may have perhaps been the only question on notice for Tim North and Rob Clarke, which would be very disappointing. Surely there are a lot of further questions that need to be answered by the VRU and Rob Clarke after they fronted the enquiry?!

[UnionThug]

Look at poor Linda, you would have thought she'd had enough of slimy little retiles at the Senate Enquiry

https://twitter.com/Science_Academy/...59410720247808

Are you referring to the two cute little lizards? Or did you mean the cold-blooded shrieking harpy standing next to her?

[Bakkies]

Not worth a look really. The only questions they "answered" were about the initial meeting / introduction to Andrew Cox.
It seems that may have perhaps been the only question on notice for Tim North and Rob Clarke, which would be very disappointing. Surely there are a lot of further questions that need to be answered by the VRU and Rob Clarke after they fronted the enquiry?!

I am pretty sure it was said in the Inquiry that Clarke has up to a dozen questions on notice as he was sloppy and not really credible.

[shasta]

I am pretty sure it was said in the Inquiry that Clarke has up to a dozen questions on notice as he was sloppy and not really credible.

Maybe. But he forgot all about it.