2
![Not allowed!](images/buttons/down_dis.png)
![Not allowed!](images/buttons/up_dis.png)
I don't think the plan is to appeal the finding of arbitration. RugbyWA are starting to make clear statements about the arbitration ONLY being a finding on the wording of the alliance agreement. I think you'll find they have a plan to tie this up in various court actions until either an acceptable decision is ordered by the courts or the ARU give up through bankruptcy.
I would personally Prefer the latter now.
C'mon the![]()
![]()
Good to hear we are from roughly the same mould. My point also is these days too many people rollover and c op it up the Khyber when the going gets tough. 90% of people have those clauses in their employment contract as well. Maybe if the players did refuse to go to work or put the hard line on who are they going to be replaced by if they got sacked or the arse for that matter. The last thing the ESRU would need right now is the top players saying fuck you we're not going to work! Be some shit hot media reporting on that one and wouldn't it go over a treat as a PR exercise if they tried to fine each player. The bad press they've got already from media outside the rugby circles hasn't been flash at all and if the players walked right now I think there'd be some pretty strong public support for them.
bit of insider goss... the rebels knew almost a month ago that they were safe from the comp and this is from one of the players themselves. just shows how corrupt this whole thing is. the force should be able to individually sue members of the aru for what they have done... especially those so called head honchos who knew all along this was going to be the case but preferred to be the blind leading the blind.
The Rebels players were told the franchise was safe from the beginning. By one of the rats who have jumped ship. Everybody is aware of this. But the only way the truth of any of this effluent will be proved is under oath. Although on the evidence currently on display, that can not be relied upon either. In any event, the Rebels started emptying their roster to leave room for our players so plenty of those players have been moved on now. I hope the majority of our best ones go to the Reds and the Brumbies if it comes to that.
"The main difference between playing League and Union is that now I get my hangovers on Monday instead of Sunday - Tom David
Yeah, the statement from Bill Pulver at the time of the takeover mentions that the Western Force were effectively employees of the ARU, I wonder if something could come of this.
A couple of other interesting snippets from the original statements:
"Numerous teams across several codes are facing the same economic environment across professional sport and the ARU has been looking at ways to create a more efficient and effective way to run our Super Rugby businesses.
"The ARU and RugbyWA have collectively created a model which we believe will be more sustainable for our Super Rugby organisations in Australia.
So the Agreement was a model the ARU wanted to roll out to other Super Rugby organisations? They haven't done this, but they are promoting the corporate model of the Rebels. If the Alliance Agreement isn't the ARU's preference now, then at what time did the ARU change their mind about this model? Since the model hasn't been promoted for any other team, then what exactly was the model developed for?
"Ultimately the alliance aims to deliver financial sustainability and improved high performance outcomes for the Western Force."
The Agreement was established to help improve the performance of the Western Force.... which they've demonstrated. And Andrew Forrest has said he'll guarantee financial stability (timing is irrelevant, the ARU was still seeking confirmation about the Rebels sale as late as last week). So the Western Force have satisfied the intention of the Agreement.
Something I found odd is that the ARU approached Foxtel to change the terms of their license agreement, and therefore to change the terms of the Agreement with the Western Force. If the ARU was acting in the interests of the Alliance Agreement it would have been the other way around. The arbitrator has decided the agreement with Foxtel has changed, and the Western Force have no influence over Foxtel. The ARU also had the opportunity to veto at the SANZAAR meeting. Has the ARU used this clause to harm the Western Force?
No same person is surprised....it's why interest in Super Rugby has nosedived. Made clear as day this year with Brums hosting a final, with appropriate result in attendance.
As to the insane, it's human nature, navel gazing, in business those in a circle around a desk all too often fail to see beyond, and the weak follow the strong over cliffs like lemmings, look at all the disastrous decisions over the years that have led to bankruptcy. Most could have been avoided.
The long sobs of autumn's violins wound my heart with a monotonous languor
From our friends at nedlands...
http://nedlandsrugby.com.au/2017/08/...-dung-beetles/
Well readers, tomorrow looms as another big day in the Super Rugby saga when the Force fightback begins in the Supreme Court.
But before heading back to the heartland of community rugby this afternoon for day two of the club semi-finals, your columnist thought it was worth trying to clarify a couple of issues which the crowd at The Foreshore yesterday couldn’t make any sense of.
So here’s a couple of questions for the eight members of the ARU Board (pictured below) who on Friday decided to axe the Force from Super Rugby. Of course, there were nine members on the ARU Board before Geoff Stooke, who was sidelined by his fellow Board members, quit in disgust and claimed his former board colleagues had presided over a “totally corrupt process.”
Cameron Clyne
Brett Robinson
Bill Pulver
Elizabeth Broderick
John Eales
Pip Marlow
Paul McLean
Ann Sherry
Question 1:
Billionaire Andrew Forrest has revealed he rang ARU chairman Cameron Clyne personally last week to confirm he would stand behind the Force financially, thus ensuring the Force would be sustainable as a Super Rugby team without the need for any further financial assistance from the ARU. Given that revelation, how could it be possible for the ARU to base its case for axing the Force on financial reasons?
Question 2:
With reference to Question 1 above, on what possible basis or criteria did the ARU deem that the Rebels stacked up financially ahead of the Force? As it stands, the Rebels are incurring significant operating losses, they have no sponsors and they are now owned by an organisation (the Victorian Rugby Union1) which has no financial capacity to run a Super Rugby team. Where is the financial plan from the Rebels upon which the ARU deemed them to be financially superior to a team backed by one of Australia’s richest men?
Question 3:
Given that the ARU based its decision to axe the Force on financial grounds, can the ARU confirm no further financial funding will be provided to the Rebels throughout the Super Rugby competition?
Question 4:
The ARU claimed last week it was kept completely in the dark when the Rebels private owner Andrew Cox transferred ownership of the team to the VRU for $1. However, Wayne Smith reported in The Weekend Australian that “it was now becoming clear that the ARU actively worked to bring it about.” If that is true, then the ARU stands accused of actively working to ensure the Rebels were safe from the ARU axe, at the expense of the Force, while publically denying any knowledge. So did the ARU or its lawyers Clayton Utz have any role in the Cox-VRU deal or not
Question 5:
Did any member of the ARU Board or executive management team have any knowledge that SANZAAR planned to cut an Australian Super Rugby team when the alliance agreement was signed with the Force?
Question 6:
Andrew Forrest has called for the entire Board of the ARU to resign, a call echoed by many others including former Wallabies Jeremy Paul and Nathan Sharpe. In light of that, do the members of the ARU Board believe they have the confidence and support of the Australian rugby community?
Stay tuned for the responses….
Footnote1: For those of you wondering about the reference to the Dunsborough Dung Beetles in the headline, check out Dave Pusey’s column in The Sunday Times today.
Ideally we need to get hold of a few more whistleblowers as good as Stookes to be 'persuaded' to reveal the reality of dirt that's been going on. A couple of subpoenas on some (ex) ARU employees should do the trick. Why the hell were Rob Clarke & Day in such a rush to get out ASAP? And some formal attention on Cox's suspect business practices may reveal some clues- his creative tax dodging on share deals seems very interesting for a start. As Lou has mentioned, they've all been a cosy little bunch of pals for a while, & I'd love to have been a fly on the wall in those Friday lunches.
I am with you on that Alison.. By going into battle now in the courts will only make the other franchises turn against us the Western Force.. All we would be doing is robbing the reason we want a team... Grass Roots Nationally.. The focus now should be on the directors and the boards process in how they came to this decision and if it is financial then how the rest of the franchises survived the cutt
The focus should be on trying to bankrupt the ARU.
Scorched Earth.
What happens now is in the hands of Rugby WA, Andrew Forrest and others. When someone with Mr Forrest's resources says he's up for the fight I'm inclined to get on board. Our team has been assassinated in a very cowardly manner. So I reckon go Mark Antony's way....."Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war" - and to hell with the consequences.
"The main difference between playing League and Union is that now I get my hangovers on Monday instead of Sunday - Tom David