The Powertry law is going to need tweaking. At least twice while the green lights have been on, the defending team have infringed and rather than play a decent advantage the ref has called the penalty.

Rugby Australia. Inspiring all Australians to enjoy and play our great global game.

So says the rebranded ARU’s shiny new twitter page. I would argue, however, that as custodians of the game, they are failing dismally at the moment. Forget who owes whom how much at the moment, and just consider the carnage that has followed each decision made by the incumbent board this year.

Each decision has been decisive, poorly conceived and executed with even less finesse. The board has been described by Senator Reynolds as “cowards” engaged in “bastardry”; referrals have been made to ASIC to investigate irregularities in financial reporting; and serious concerns raised about how the ARU manages staff welfare.

Regardless of which side of the Nullarbor you reside, by now you must concede that at best the ARU board are bringing the game into disrepute, and at worst in serious breach of their remit as custodians of the game. Many long paragraphs have been debated on this very website about the makeup of our test team; whether Bernard Foley or Quade Cooper should play at 10, is Hooper really a 7 or should he have a crack at 12, but these selection issues pale into insignificance when compared to the team that has been selected to manage and oversee our great game.

TWAS has pointed out that much of the evidence presented to the Senate Enquiry was biased and unbalanced, even unreliable. He is not incorrect. As chairman of the board, Cameron Clyne’s evidence was in fact biased and unreliable. So too was some of the submissions from the Force supporters, written as it was in the blue tears still streaming down their faces. But cutting through all of that, has been consistent evidence that the decisions and conduct of the ARU board have been detrimental to Rugby in Australia.

First was the multiple decisions around the awarding, transfer and then transfer of the MRRU license at strangely noncommercial terms. These transactions have been referred to ASIC for further investigation. Perhaps this investigation will result in the ATO examining the most recent sale of the MRRU license to the VRU for $1 and whether the market value substitution rules apply to the transaction, seeing that the Western Force’s license had been valued at $800,000 some twelve months prior.

Then came the cover ups. Mr Pulver’s evidence to the senate enquiry was that there were two methods by which the ARU could take back the MRRU license. The first was to buy it back, the second was in the event of an insolvency event. What he failed to admit, however, was that by all definitions, the Melbourne Rebels club had been insolvent for the entire time the Imperium Group owned the license.

For the ARU to take back the license, they only needed to stop the top-ups. Instead, the ARU assisted the VRU to acquire the license, then lied about it to the public claiming that they had no knowledge of the transaction.

Then there is the whole Twiggy/Adelaide/Who said what debacle. Some say the offer was up to $100m. TWAS disagreed with all of the evidence. The upshot? Someone lied to the Senate committee about what was said at the meeting and what the offer was. It may have been Welborn or Forrest or Vaux (who’s stories all seemed to be consistent with the emails that they presented to the committee) or it could be Cameron Clyne. I wasn’t there, but the weight of evidence suggests that the chairman may not be the right man for the job.

And here we are. RugbyWA spends all week trying to call the ARU and discuss the ongoing issue of legal fees. No one responds. But we have seen this before, as evidence tended to the senate committee suggested that during the 48-72 hours RugbyWA couldn’t get hold of anyone at ARUHQ either. We have had no statement about the senate enquiry, no statement about RugbyWA ‘s insolvency.

Regardless of who is right, and who is wrong – is this the leadership we need in our sport?

And yet Pulver testified that if there was “an insolvency event” the rebels could be cut.

Seems to me all that the ARU had to do to cut the Rebels was stop the handouts, since without them both MRRU and the Imperium Group were insolvent.

But there is no speculation in Australian Schoolboys lock Nick Frost, son of current ARU staffer (and former retention manager!!) Steve Frost, signing with the Crusaders.

Care to comment TWAS?

Nick Taylor in The West is reporting that Welbourne testified that the “ARU said the Force could be saved if:

* The Western Force and all the other four Australian Super Rugby sides received equal funding.
* The Western Force was underwritten for the remaining three years of the broadcasting contract and a further five years.
* Forrest guaranteed to ensure the Force and RugbyWA would be in a “no loss” position.
* That $6 million a year for eight years would be pumped into grassroots rugby.
* That $20 million be provided in compensation to SANZAAR for the retention of the Force.

and

If accepted, the ARU board would resign to be replaced by a new board along with a new CEO”

His testimony was that Forrest went to the meeting prepared to meet the ARUs demands.

and the clincher…

Forrest agreed, and the ARU backed down.

TWAS – accept it…no matter what the price, or benefit to Australian Rugby, the ARU had no intention of reinstating the Force.

Perhaps if the North Sydney supporters had reacted in the same manner as their Rabbitoh brethren, they would be in the NRL as well.

For everyone who tells me I should roll over and take one for the eastern states I would like to remind them of how South Sydney fought and won. We can too.

I coach U6 Rugby. Every week one of my kids gets the ball and runs at our own, undefended tryline. Our supporters shuffle in embarrassment on the sideline while their son grounds the ball on our own try line.

Even my best and most skilful player has done it.

This article is just like that. Contribution which adds nothing to the score line.

It presupposes that the Sea of Blue actually like Rugby League and that the two codes are somehow interchangeable.

To be honest I was drawing upon “Utopia” when I wrote this…

(satirical?) Transcript of the meeting between the ARU and its lawyers back in February has been released:

Lawyer: “There is no legal obligation to retain the Western Force in the Super Rugby competition following the renegotiation of the broadcast contracts. If the broadcast contracts are renegotiated with effect from the end of the 2107 Super Rugby season, the Alliance Agreement will automatically terminate at the end of the 2017 season and the obligation on the ARU to maintain the Western Force as a Super Rugby team in Perth will lapse at that point.”

Cam: Right. So if we cut the force, this will trigger the renegotiation of the broadcast agreement, which will mean that we can cut the force?

Lawyer: Yep

Cam: Do it. But since the alliance agreement says we must act in good faith, make sure it looks like we have.

Bill: How about a big spreadsheet?

Cam: Perfect. But make sure it is big as in “not email-able”, not big as in “full of meaningful data”. We can’t have it being released to the media.

Why would Twiggy think that he would be needed before now? The ARU and RWA statements in the leadup to and post signing of the alliance agreement suggested that RugbyWA would be able to purchase back the license at any time and as soon as the license was transferred to the ARU, moves were afoot to raise the capital back through the Own the Force campaign.

Of course, you would also know that FMG, Twiggy’s Iron Ore company, has been a long term supporter of the Western Force, and was front of jersey sponsor for the No 7 Jersey between naming rights partnerships…and that he was instrumental in funding the future force foundation, which replaced the old Force Academy which was centralised by the ARU to force our players into the Shute Shield.

Just because he hasn’t been standing in front of the Force shouting about his money, hasn’t meant that he hasn’t been involved.

It has been reported that the terms “in good faith” appear in the alliance agreement more than 50 times. The ARU has not acted in good faith even once, let alone 50 times in relation to this debacle.

Milan, it’s not a case of Force fans not getting behind the Force, as you claim, but of being stitched up when they sought the support of the governing body.

The Force are not the first club to seek additional funding to overcome revenue problems. The Rebels have famously secured an additional $17m over budget in 5 years, the Waratahs and Reds are provided their own special salary cap, as well as additional funding and none of these provinces were required to sign over their IP or license.

The Force were. It has been reported that the words “in good faith” appear in the alliance agreement over 50 times. It has been reported over the past year that the Force believed that the transition of the license to the ARU was a temporary measure and that the Own The Force campaign would provide a model of funding and security to allow the Force to purchase back their license in time for the 2018 season.

Pulver and Clyne have both publicly stated that they were aware that we had too many teams for at least a couple of years…certainly, it would seem, before the Rebels license was transferred to the Imperium group. If this is the case, and it sure smells like it from this side of the country, that there has been very little “good faith” applied to the Force transaction. Now that the case is off to the supreme court, pesky little things like discovery will come into play, and all will out.

And a note about Western Force supporters. In all the years of getting our arses handed to us, we have never booed our boys. Can Waratahs fans say the same?

From my understanding of the situation (I’m an avid reader), the arbitration only dealt with the definition of the broadcast agreement, and whether there was a new one in place (which the ARU argued) and whether their wasn’t (which the Force, supported by all of the SANZAAR statements suggested).

There remains a right to appeal that decision and that is being investigated.

In addition to the appeal against that decision, any other facet has yet to be explored. From my observations these might include:

Deceptive and misleading conduct – in that the ARU seem to have bought the Force with the single minded intent to close them down (RWA case)
– Lawsuit from WA Govt over commitments to Rugby before the stadium was upgraded

Breach of contract – apparently the alliance agreement states that parties will act “in good faith” more than 50 times. If Stooke’s view of the proceedings and reports that Pulver engineered the VRU buyout are solid, then the ARU has not acted in good faith. There may be grounds for legal action there.

Without knowing the full breakdown, I’d reckon at least 25% of the Force membership are kids…mine are 4 and 6 and both have been members since they were 2. a 9pm kickoff is too late for a 4 year old to come to a game – we won’t get the, home until after 1130.

Add to that the really crappy weather we have had this year as soon as a parent has to choose weather to take their kids out into the rain for a late night or not, and the choice is obvious.

The numbers in the Geoff Stooke’s resignation letter underline the real state of play. Now its time for the ARU board to show some transparency in their decision making.

#showusthespreadsheet

GeeCee

Today long-serving ARU board member Geoff Stooke, who has more than 900 club rugby games (yes, you read that right) wrote this in his resignation letter:

“I never wanted to throw any team under the bus, but to create a situation that considers retaining a team that has lost almost $30million (including nearly $17.5million additional cost to the ARU) since 2011 at the expense of a team that has incurred additional cost to the ARU of only $5.5million since 2005 is outrageous! We should be rewarding success not failure. To introduce financial criteria that have nothing to do with the financial viability of each term is less than appropriate.”

I’d take those financial figures as pretty solid.

DaveR People keep asking this, and the answer is:

1. Sponsoring Matt Hodgson’s Jersey when the naming rights partnership with Emerates ended; and

2. Helping fund the “Future Force” when the ARU closed down the Academy and forced all academy players into a centralised program. This allowed the Force players to play in WA for their clubs, rather than jet back to their Shute Shield clubs as had been the practice until then. It also resulted in the emergence of a whole raft of players, including Richard Hardwick, to make it as far as the Wallabies.

Personally, I think both are a pretty good measure of his commitment. But I could be wrong.

Full disclosure: I am a one eyed Force tragic. But let’s not let my bias stand in the way. Unfortunately Will, you have been unable to see past yours.

It’s unfortunate that once again the facts have got in the way of a good story when it comes to reporting on the sorry mess that is the cutting of a super rugby franchise.

Will argues that the Force “have been propped up financially along the way” yet the ARUs own reports show that the Western Force, between 2011 and 2016 enjoyed the least amount of ARU funding support of all of the franchises. See http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/who-do-you-think-you-are-kidding-mr-clyne-if-you-think-we-cant-do-sums/ for a full rundown of those numbers.

Over and above these numbers, RugbyWA has been able to grow grassroots in WA with less income than any other state, including Tasmania.

The one time that the Force went cap in hand over this 12 year period, they were forced to sell their License and IP back to the ARU. No other licensee (including the Rebels who have literally bled money since their inception) has been required to sell their license to obtain a handout. They have not made the finals in this period, nor have they enjoyed the financial support of the ARU, an equal salary cap, or parachuting in of star players that other franchises have.

I bet if the playing field had, in fact been level, there would have been more silver in the trophy cabinet.