When was the broadcast deal changed? Did they get this advice prior to changing the deal?
What I am getting at is did the ARU seek advice on how to void the Alliance agreement? This would be a huge deal if true.
They asked for advice if they could chop a team before February. Answer in February was no, unless they get a new broadcast deal after 2017 which allows them to chop the Force (only the Force). Before SANZAAR, before Day of Infamy.
The new (actually renegotiated) broadcast deal was the mechanism to chop the Force, not the Force being a casualty of the new deal. It's why they didn't veto it, the wanted it, they NEEDED it.
Surely all of this contravenes contract law and the alliance agreement.
So can someone explain does this actually do anything? I know it looks bad but does it change the process that has happened? IE are there now grounds to over turn the cutting of the license should the appeal fail? No one seems to be saying anything around the impact of this "bombshell".
A group litigation for mental health and stress will gather steam and bring a sizable payout either way i am sure.
There was such a person. Unfortunately he is at least on the wrong side of the argument. At worst he is one of the conspirators. I still struggle to believe a bloke with his lofty standing is flushing it down the crapper. I hope it somehow turns out that he's not been fully aware of what's gone on.
[QUOTE=sittingbison;438580]They asked for advice if they could chop a team before February. Answer in February was no, unless they get a new broadcast deal after 2017 which allows them to chop the Force (only the Force). Before SANZAAR, before Day of Infamy.
The new (actually renegotiated) broadcast deal was the mechanism to chop the Force, not the Force being a casualty of the new deal. It's why they didn't veto it, the wanted it, they NEEDED it.
Surely all of this contravenes contract law and the alliance agreement
ARU bows to NZ pressure to cut Super Rugby franchise
10 Apr, 2017
Greg Growden
ESPN
Australia has again been revealed as the weak link in the SANZAAR relationship by bowing to pressure from several areas, including New Zealand, and agreeing to hand back one of its Super Rugby licences while getting nothing in return.
The Australian playing ranks were deeply angered when it was revealed the Super Rugby tournament would be cut back to a 15-team tournament next year and an Australian province -- almost certainly the Western Force -- would be axed.
The players will be furious to discover also that the Australian broadcaster -- Fox Sports -- told the ARU in recent days that its preferred position was the retention of the five Australian teams, including the Force, especially as Perth matches rated well on the pay-TV.
ESPN has been told by several high-ranking sources that Fox Sports executives were eager for a Super 15 format that excluded the three latest additions to the tournament -- the Jaguares, Sunwolves and Southern Kings. Fox Sports' preference is understood to be a competition involving five teams each from New Zealand, Australia and South Africa. However, Fox Sports was told by ARU officials that "pressure had been applied" to get rid of one of their Australian teams. So Fox Sports relented, opting 'to fall into line'.
http://www.espn.com.au/rugby/story/_...ugby-franchise
Pressure had been applied by whom exactly? Did Foxtel speak with SANZAAR? Did Foxtel speak with NZ? Or has the ARU used their major broadcast partner as a pawn in a grander deception?
Duping your business partners is not a good way to do business.
Still nothing coming back from the FUARU! Like most things with them ignore it and it's not there!
Probably Putting together some BS with their very busy legal people!
Hopefully they are dictating their resignation letters for the lawyers to look over too!!
This whole time line is diabolical... lucky the spanner in their works is that the Force didn't tank this year.
Imagine where we'd be if we wooden spooned again.
Thank you players.. coaches and all staff
I have been looking at this from a different angle. And I think that while these questions are important we have missed one very important point.
The Intellectual Property Rights.
1. Who first came up with the idea to go after the Western Force IPR?
2. Was there legal advice that said that buying owning one of the Teams IPR they could then legally terminate that team.
3. Why wasnt the IPR's of the Melbourne Rebels or the Brumbies acquired?
The IPR's were acquired 2 years ago. The plan to cull a team must have been in place prior to that.
What ever the outcome of Supreme Court hearing later this week (or next week). We must fight for the Western Force IPR's
to be given/purchased back.
Otherwise what ever we do next. That is continue to compete in Super Rugby or compete in the Forrest Cup. WE will continue to be tied to our owners - The ARU.
Twiggy's press conference on this link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAwaEbITFVc