JON but not forgotten: what now for the ARU?

Hi Rabbitz, the shareholding structure of the ARU intrigues me since your post in an earlier thread. There is paucity of information in web sites, and I’m not in Sydney. Are the shares held in the names of the member unions? Are the member union delegates constituents of the Board, or is the latter a separate body? Thanks for the cool voice of reason that you dispense in these threads. Much appreciated.

If JON really wanted to take over this aspect of the states he could have done it. The ARU has bailed out and taken financial control of the two largest Unions and those two still hold most votes. JON could have made any bail out fully dependent on compliance with ARU control of the players. If they didn't want to comply just let them go broke and start again as they wanted to structure it. The ARU started the Force and granted them the franchise and could have dictated the terms and most recently the Rebels. So I have to ask did JON push these reforms at these new Franchises? That would only have left the Brumbies to deal with and they would have fallen into line or been voted down by the "new" structure. Now I do think that wholesale reform is required, but I do not think that the NZRU is necessarily the way to go. I think that JON's suggestion echoed by many here and elsewhere before and since, of a Independent Commission type arrangement is the best structure.

Interesting idea, CH. The IRB ended up in Dublin partly to ensure that no single country (which in those days meant England) dominated it.

Actually the ARU is a registered as an Australian Public Company with ans ACN and ABN so they are certainly NOT a not for profit organisation.

Sam I think it needs someone who is not from Sydney so has no allegiance to any of the factions. Someone who is going to tell the NSW Union to start doing it's job and drive the ARU to get on with it's real role of administering and advancing the game right across the country. Dare I suggest moving ARU HQ to another city, perhaps the national capital. -- Comment left via The Roar's iPhone app. Download it now [http://itunes.apple.com/au/app/the-roar/id327174726?mt=8].

May not be a bad idea. A leaguey who had exposure to union as a youngster and had kept an eye on it might be a good call. Would be interesting to see how they would handle a drop kick like Quade Cooper and his toxic manager?

Hi Cliff - I am not aware of ever posting or writing an article criticising JON as I always felt he was the best available. He made a big gamble that Robbie Deans would take the Wallabies up to a level where they could compete with the AB's and that has caused the coffers to fill a lot slower than he had hoped and therefore the impacts on other areas like development to not keep up. I am also a fan of RObbie Deans but I have always criticised his use of the bench and some of his tactics in the RWC. I now believe his days are numbered after the European tour and they will give it to Link which to my mind is an error. Still I think Deans will leave Australia with the team in a better state than when he took it over. Dreaming? Yeah could be a fair cop as I am always dreaming of the great days under MacQueen. Never thought they would be hard to replicate.

Wispy - Yes it was a significant investment. Mate I have heard these sort of retorts many times at rugby clubs where they try to buy themselves out of issues with money they can't afford arguing that you have to invest to reap rewards. My own rugby club is broke due to well meaning ideas based on hope rather than facts.

You may have stumbled on something here. If you wanted someone who would know none of the bad blood between Nsw and Qld, was an excellent administrator and, if he vouches he has the stomach and stamina for it, John Quayle could be a good short term fix for 3-4 years.

Nor even a monachy, constitutional or otherwise! Your comparisong with a federation of colonial states is a good one. Take that further to a Confederation - the Confederate states lost the American Civil War in large part because they would not surrender their independence to a central authority whould could direct and co-ordinate the war-effort at all levels.

stillmissit Having been actively involved on the creation and implementation of the ARC on the 'inside' - I know the facts. Yes, the ARC was a significant investment and after the set-up costs in year 1 did need some re-working. What visionary product launch does not coome with some challenges? No, the ARU was not broke or anywhere near broke as sponsors dipped their toe in the water on year 1 of the ARC and many others were waiting in the wings to join up in year 2 if it was a success. It was a success, but JON killed it off for political expediency and that money never had the chance to flow into ARU coffers. Finally, the media storm around the ARC was created by JON and his backers from Sydney Uni, Randwick and Easts at the time...knife Flowers and reinstate JON was the ultimate goal. They are the facts.

Sheek Hand on heart not the other thing to say Rugby in 2003 was essentially a quarter or say 20% of the football code market beggars disbelief... for a start in 2003 there was no national domestic football competition as the NSL had gone broke... however both AFL & NRL were huge ... Today 17% or 15% ... HMMMMM ... based on what ... Registered Player Numbers Ratings FTA TV Ratings PayTV Media deal size Number of Professional teams, i.e AFL 18, NRL 16, A-L 10, RU 5... Number of matches played... Still think the number is way to high...

I know it's a chicken or egg situation regarding an extra super 15 team or a third tier. I don't believe you could sell a third tier to tv and the public and make as much money as you can off another super 15 side. I appreciate that while the Australian conference has a number of injury issues, they are spread a little thin across the 5 teams, but on the positive side there is a lot of room for development and this is more likely to continue with another super 15 team than a third tier. I think Johnno's point about imports has some validity in the short term to cover off the thinness in the super 15 ranks. I think 5 is too much... maybe 2 per side. I think people still want an aussie product. Just as an aside NZ really struggles with the 3rd tier. It is not a huge money spinner, and it has dropped off from it's hey day before the super 12 started. So you need to get money in the game to develop other areas. I also appreciate that there is a huge gap between school boy rugby and super 15 and that is the real issue, developing the young talent, but for now a decently structured club competition can still cope, can't it. Once again I think Johnnos point about players going back to a club side inside the franchise within which they are playing has merit, because it means the young guys from those provinces are rubbing shoulders with experienced players. Without something like this rugby in Australia will continue to draw there stocks from a handful of clubs. All in all, I really do believe JON had a vision alongside the commercial realities of football. What I am most concerned about is losing such a great negotiator. There are a lot of challenges and decisions which still need to be made.

Ma- do you think there is demand for free to air super rugby? The australian schoolboys just beat the worlds strongest rugby schooll system- for the second year running, so they are definitely producing talent. Today's gold coast sevens results also suggest we have talent.

Donizetti. I read somewhere that gallop used to either play or watch rugby in his former years. Maybe him at the helm of the arising so strange after all. I always wondered why he stuck atriums at the arl after defending atrocity after atrocity.

It seems odd to me that so many people believe that changing the CEO will have any effect on the day to day fortunes of the Wallaby's or the overall running of the States or even any effect what so ever on the grassroots. O'Neil is a good administrator and has turned the financial fortunes of the ARU and Soccer around. That is what he was put in there to do. The CEO of any organisation (well any organisation big enough to have a genuine CEO) has very little, if anything, to do with the day to day operations of the organisation. The CxO's and Boards of big organisations are there to maintain and control the financial and corporate functions. They shouldn't be anywhere near the coalface. So changing CEO will really change very little as far as the stuff that we punters are concerned with. As a corporate officer I believe O'Neil did a good job and should be thanked for leaving the corporate side of the ARU in a better state than it was in when he was appointed.

David Gallop - CEO of the ARU. Now that would be interesting.

true crosscoder

Not taking into account mobile and internet rights to be added, Emric,

Oh -- you have never knocked JON during second term Stillmissit --- dreaning I suppose???