So the Super 14 is over and done for another year, and Ewen McKenzie, the ’successful but not successful enough to keep’ Waratah coach has shuffled off into the sunset to brush up on the phrase “Oui Max, je voudrais un nouveau contrat.”

His Crusaders counterpart has taken the reins of the Wallabies, which means that all eyes are now on the national team, and the McKenzie saga is little more than a nasty memory.

If you were standing around over near Moore Park on Friday June 27, you probably would have felt a gust of wind which was the collective sigh of relief from the NSW rugby hierarchy, realising that the ‘Lunch with Link’ tribute being held at Randwick Rugby Club on that day was almost the last time they would have to worry about the dull roar of discontent emanating from the Link supporter base.

After all, it has been one hell of a circus and the board decision to seek a new coach for the 2009 series has been a gruelling process. So now that one has been appointed, surely we should all just move on?

Usually, I’d agree, except this time I have a little question irritating away at me, like an itch that needs to be scratched. A question I picked up at that very same lunch, where, incidentally, McKenzie declined to dish the dirt on any of what had happened behind the scenes at the Waratahs.

Certain parties at the Waratahs seem to be struggling to come to terms with that fact, but I was there, and I can say that if controversy was hydrogen, then putting a match to McKenzie’s comments would have elicited nothing more than a faint pop.

But back to the question.

It arises from a nondescript comment from former board member Alan Williamson, who was present at the lunch and in full voice.

Williamson, for those who don’t know him, is witheringly candid and about as subtle as a mob hit.

Predictably, this approach breeds either loyalty or loathing, depending on which side of the fence you are on, but there is no question that he is relentlessly honest, often despite the souring of relationships this can engender.

The NSW board, as you might expect, treat their ex-colleague with caution.

At the lunch, while the dignified McKenzie was straight-batting curly questions designed to get him to dump on NSW Rugby, Williamson was under no such apprehensions. Among other less accommodating phraseology, he described McKenzie’s treatment as “a disgrace”.

He also clearly stated that (and this is the kicker, so read carefully) “the decision to let McKenzie go was not a board decision.”

I beg your pardon? Did you say NOT a board decision?

I chased the man up after the lunch and quizzed him on this point: “Alan … I could have sworn you said that it wasn’t a board decision. Is that correct?”

“That’s right” he replied.

“So whose decision was it?” I pressed. An ironic smile. “Unfortunately, I can’t tell you”, he said.

Right about now, I started cursing the Chatham House rule. For the uninformed, the Chatham House rule is a rule invoked at board meetings designed to encourage free and open discourse. It states that “When a meeting, or part thereof, is held under the Chatham House Rule, participants are free to use the information received, but neither the identity nor the affiliation of the speaker(s), nor that of any other participant, may be revealed.”

Basically it means that if you were in the meeting, you can talk about what happened, but not who said it or did it.

Williamson, for all his reputation as a maverick, is nothing if not an adherent to proper board procedure, and so he refused to name names. What he did concede though was that the decision was presented to the board as a done deal by the NSW Rugby Committee.

There was no vote before McKenzie was let go.

So what can we work out from other sources?

It is well known that the Rugby Committee is made up of chairman Arvid Petersen, CEO Jim L’Estrange and board member Ed Zemancheff.

David Campese was not impressed by their credentials writing in his Telegraph column in May 2008 when he said “Jim L’Estrange? He ran Star City and last time I checked there are no rugby fields in a casino. Arvid Petersen? He ran Pepsi. Ed Zemancheff? Don’t know much about him, but it seems like a Rugby Committee pretty thin on rugby experience.”

Of these three, L’Estrange was an integral part of the recruitment process through which Todd Louden was put by the NSW Rugby Committee for the top job - behind McKenzie’s back, and without board approval.

He assured Louden that the job was his, when it clearly was not up to L’Estrange to make the offer. The assurance was later withdrawn, and Louden accepted a job in Japan.

L’Estrange is now nervous enough to be jumping at shadows – apparently hauling McKenzie into his office to answer for comments he made at the ‘Lunch with Link’.

Ridiculous, unless he is planning on taking McKenzie to task for commenting on the entree, which is about all he did.

Is it too much to hope that the chairman was beyond reproach when it comes to board matters?

In the case of Petersen, it probably is. He was rattled enough by the McKenzie saga to specifically make reference to it during the announcement of Chris Hickey’s appointment as Waratah coach which was highly inappropriate and no doubt confusing for Hickey.

To follow up, Petersen was quoted on May 8 this year as saying “We have always tried to be pretty transparent with Ewen, the other coaching staff and certainly with the media”, which was just laughable in light of the backroom dealing that went on with Louden, at the behest of the Rugby Committee, of which Petersen forms one-third.

The only possible argument for Petersen is that he was unaware of what was happening, and if that is the case, he should sack L’Estrange for keeping him in the dark and then sack himself for being horribly out of touch as chairman.

The bloke who seems to escape scrutiny in all this is Zemancheff, which is interesting given that he is the chair of the Rugby Committee.

Who is Ed Zemancheff I hear you ask?

Fair question, since he has been flying under the radar pretty much ever since this thing broke way back when. He is, however, important, since he not only heads up the Rugby Committee (responsible for the Louden fiasco), but is also part of the so called ‘Gang of Five’ which control the NSW board – Zemancheff, Petersen, Laurie Maher, Will Jephcott and Ian Ross.

So the question remains – who made the call, and why didn’t it go to the board?

Well, in the absence of anyone actually speaking, all we can do is speculate and look at the known facts. The best bet is that the process was board-by-stealth.

L’Estrange killed off McKenzie on a Monday, so you don’t have to be a brain surgeon to guess that the Rugby Committee made the call amongst themselves, a select few directors (most likely Jephcott and Ross) were informed over the weekend, and they supported the decision without demanding that the issue go to a vote.

Once this was done, Petersen headed off overseas (which was no secret), and left L’Estrange to deliver the bad news, all the while with Ross, Jephcott and Zemancheff probably in the know.

At least four directors were left to find out after the event.

One thing that is apparent is that NSW Country rep Laurie Maher, despite being part of the ‘Gang of Five’ was not informed, and was not impressed.

Former Sydney Clubs rep Williamson also freely admits that he did not have an opportunity to vote and found out via the newspaper. Incredibly, board players’ representative and respected Wallaby and Waratah Dan Vickerman, was not informed either, and this is said to be a major sticking point behind the negotiations to keep him in Australia.

All mildly interesting, but why drag this all up now you ask? After all, it’s old news and board ructions are nothing new at the viper pit which is NSW Rugby.

The first question is that if these people can’t be trusted to put something so fundamental as the head coach’s contract to a board vote, then how much can they be trusted with board procedure at all?

And secondly, Petersen and Zemancheff are a big part of the push behind the split of NSW rugby into two separate entities with separate boards. If that was to happen, Petersen would likely head up the Waratahs’ board, and the NSW Community Rugby board would probably be headed by his henchman, Ian Ross.

Ross is the Suburban rep on the board and would no doubt be delighted to see the Sydney premiership come effectively under the control of Suburban rugby.

The rest of the cronies (Zemancheff in particular, who reportedly has designs on becoming a selector) would not be forgotten.

So, as I said, why drag all this up?

Well, just remember what a horrendous mess the McKenzie-Louden saga has been, and then imagine the people in charge of that mess, distributed across two whole brand new boards. Particularly when they appear to not place too much value on proper board procedure at all.

The focus may be squarely on the Wallabies these days – but Waratahs fans shouldn’t stop worrying.

And they also shouldn’t stop asking the questions, “Who really made the McKenzie decision, and why didn’t it go to a full board vote?”

Up to now, the answers from NSW are less than satisfactory.

Like this article? Please spread the word about the Roar to your mates.

Free Email updates:

• Get Andrew Logan's articles emailed to you
• Get a daily Rugby Union email

Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...