We are moving on (Thanks mostly to Minderoo) but for the sake of fairness, leadership and governance of Rugby Union in Australia these matters also need to be exposed and addressed.
Printable View
We are moving on (Thanks mostly to Minderoo) but for the sake of fairness, leadership and governance of Rugby Union in Australia these matters also need to be exposed and addressed.
ASIC won't take action on unfair removal of force, that has been tested in the high court and found to be legal. As might address the governance issues, but the only teeth they have is removal of funding. Since that funding is less than 70 million I don't think the power brokers will care.
The siphoning of money out of the organisation to their mates is ASIC worthy, the falsified statements in annual reports is ASIC worthy, NY proven conflict of interest or failure to xercise directorial responsibility is ASIC worthy.
Everything else is fluff
Not the High Court.
Bolded is a very interesting point, because only the information provided to Hammerschlag has been tested, the duplicitous wording of the so called "Alliance Agreement" was found "legal" only due to a new broadcast agreement. However the subsequent information now at hand, that the ARU was actively saving the Rebels through emails amd brown paper bags of cash to activate the second PUT option BEFORE the sanzar decision could well negate that contract by ARU acting in bad faith. Hammerschlag even suggested they were skating on thin ice by their actions at the time.
This is where a visit to the High Court is now worthwhile
The NSWRU & QRU have held separate EGM's to consider this punishment. La guillotine was considered a little over the top. They toyed with the idea of wet lettuce but couldn't reach consensus (as usual).
Eventually it was proposed that expert advice was needed on the matter and Cardinal Fang Consulting Ltd have been given the nod.........
We didn't expect the Spanish inquisition
Another ARU consultant recommended the Spanish Inquisition but they failed to act on it. Eales recommended is own company to do the next review.
They failed to act on it because they hadn't expected it.
Did anyone?
At the time of the case it wasn't known that the RA instigated the Assassination Agreement after the August 2016 board meeting where it was voted on to cut a side so the RA set the Force up to be the only side to cut by taking the IP. Hansie posted on here during the Senate Inquiry they were looking for that smoking gun.Quote:
Bolded is a very interesting point, because only the information provided to Hammerschlag has been tested, the duplicitous wording of the so called "Alliance Agreement" was found "legal" only due to a new broadcast agreement.
Had this been known prior to the court case the Force might have won.
The RA also lied about the email trail sent to them by Rugby WA and delayed the share release for the Own the Force campaign.