RATHBONE: Beale drama exposes flaws in the national setup

very relevant comparison with the Cruden matter CR, seems the only 'player power' at work in the All Blacks camp is imposing discipline & accountability on the team members. Just what is needed in the Wallaby camp, instead of all this garbage from various players coming out in support of their mate, disagreeing with the way he handled things (e.g. the text & later the clash on the plane about a T-shirt) but backing him against the management. Beale needs to understand the off field responsibilities of an international footballer & at this point seems to be more like those English Premier League's spoiled brats who seem to destroy any coach that tries to implement plans that don't suit them. Is Beale another Balotelli? Seems to be an orchestrated campaign by the NSW clique to undermine McKenzie in favor of Beale & get their man into the top job. Pulver should step in, cut a few of the players down to size to ensure they aren't running the circus. Of course, he won't have the guts to do that and the senior players will be emboldened by their victory.

If this happened, timing was poor. But it's Beale's responsibility not his 'management'. Patson should be dealing with Beale, but not while he was sitting on the bench

Perhaps Zero you might want to have a look at the parenting.... more often than not it starts there...

Uhm, and what's the relevance, if in fact it's true that she approached him re the hotel bill - that she's such a "b/tch" that she deserved the offending text message? That if only she hadn't approached him about the hotel bill then none of the other stuff would have happened?

The confusion and speculation re this part of the story is representative of the whole - there is too much drip-feeding of selective "facts" into the public domain by (often) unattributed sources for us to properly assess it. Perhaps (a) DP hasselled KB about it at a key moment while KB was trying to get his head in the game, or maybe (b) she happened to mention as an aside during a break in play "hey KB, did you happen to get around to paying that hotel bill we spoke about last week", or maybe (c) KB approached DP about getting a freebie for a mate and she replied "ah, well perhaps you could fix up that hotel bill first, like I've asked you 3 times already, then we'll talk about freebies" or (d) .... It could have played out any number of ways, with various conclusions open as to who was acting inappropriately.

After all, it is just a game. How fortunate are we are to live in a country where we have the luxury to even have this conversation.

Just "all bent " sums up the writer nicely.

Again, points are interpreted out of context. At what point did I mention that a person like Lagarde should be an ARU advisor? Also, I share no opinion on her politics, her organisaton's mandate or policies. This is a Rugby site. I come from a generation of Australians that finds the concept of self-appointed, righteousness entitlement (or any form or entitlement) is as an appalling concept as it comes. It seems we share the same principle. The introduction of Lagarde is not about the ARU. It illustrates the utility of the subsequent topic; diversity-enablement Her points are: - Women (in minority situations) continue to be face challenges when they try to achieve outstanding things. The benefits are worth the perseverence - The benefits are the capabilities that women contribute to the cause. - Lagarde's example is women's oustanding ability to address crisis and tension - An apt example is how Sharon responded to your patronising comments, and successfully engaged you in meaningful conversation. Lagarde is, as many leaders, not without controversies. I could have use other examples of diverse leaders who succeed: - a black chief of staff - who waged a major war on the middle east - An immigrant, who became secretary of state, and won nobel peace price. He opened the China to the world - who blanket bombed Cambodia - A commoner who made prime minister amid a country of political elites - who radicalised his country's racial politics They all make the same point, despite their controversies: Harnessing diversity, as opposed to being blind to it, creates superior opportunities for excellence.

Exchanges like this are the main reason I enjoy reading the comments here. Thank you Sharon and Mick.

Thanks, Bakkies. I had forgotten the Caloundra era. Caloundra is a pretty sleepy resort town, and to some extent, so is Coffs. Perhaps it would be better if they plonked themselves somewhere like Parramatta and organised busloads of kids to come and watch them in the afternoons with some opportunites to get autographs and have a bit of a kick and pass too! Maybe, just maybe one of those kids might turn out to be better than any of the current mob.

Good Sharon - agreement on the things rugby needs must first rely on an easy exchange of observations and ideas specific to it. The game suffers enough from internal agendas and their is no good purpose served by accommodating irrelevant external agendas and their crusaders. I have no time for them. On 1. The best person for the job ought be the only criteria - forget quotas demanded by philosophers - focus on getting the tasks clear and simple and the selection process right. I'd waste no time on 2. and I agree with 3. - I applauded the appointment of Sally Loane most for the reason “first-rate intellects”. Incidentally, I've not noticed her chant war cries for gender. Loane just got on with covering the topical issues and never did hitch herself to any particular ideological wagon. That renders her all the more persuasive and effective. Briefly on the most pointless war of all - my wife's Asian culture is matriarchal, many of them are. The male is titular head at the womens' pleasure and he accepts specific responsibilities. He is held out to be the boss and ever so subtly, beautifully and non confrontationally is advised on the correct decisions. She and her mates are both dismissive and amused by the Western way of making something they handle with ease so damned ugly. I do not believe the second part of 4. can be achieved. One of the most honored practices in rugby is the solemn handing on of the tablets recording the tribal distrusts and allegiances. At the Mighty Woods we looked into this phenomenon, found our hands were clean and came to the only reasonable conclusion that it was probably started by those Randwick mongrels! ;) As to 5. I accept what you say. My suggestion of insult is specific to the life giving oxygen breathed into the game by anonymous footsoldiers who do it for love. The State unions and the ARU are a different story - at some point each union (usually insolvency) must answer for its sins and there are plenty of us who have been around long enough to ensure they leave none out. I never could reconcile why successive Wallaby captains were invited onto the ARU Board just a short time after their retirement. The thing they knew most about was rugby on the paddock. Neither had studied and attained relevant qualifications; and the nongs responsible almost certainly relied on the feedback from a focus group appointed by an ARU marketing manager armed with the wrong questions. On 6. it most assuredly is, but it is not unique. Increased migration from the east has revived Australian Club rugby. An interesting conversation Sharon, thank you.

I am with you PR - but why have the Facts of the Matter not yet been visibly established - with identifiable proof - so it shuts everybody up and clarifies matters - removes the vacuum wherein rumour and innuendo reign... I guess you must thank the ARU for that....

But that does not make it right does it ?? .

I am with you PR - but why have the Facts of the Matter not yet been visibly established - with identifiable proof - so it shuts everybody up and clarifies matters - removes the vacuum wherein rumour and innuendo reign... I guess you must thank the ARU for that....

"Lagarde: ... what is undisputed is her leadership"

Thanks for your comment, Mick. Please allow me to be more clear than I was. My response was to a comment by kathleen lopes involving an ARU middle-management hire. With that in mind: 1. I encourage the inclusion of women across ARU governance, management, administrative and advisory structures. I don't think gender alone is an appropriate marker for exclusion. 2. I emphatically refute the assertion in the comment I initially responded to that 'there is a place for everyone and everyone has a place and I do not think that the game of rugby – union or league – is a place for women'. These statements have a tiresome longevity. 3. In my opinion, after over three decades as a committed rugby supporter, the ARU and, in particular, the composition of its existing Board requires committed, deliberate and thoughtful refreshing. I do not resile from suggesting that this refreshing should be comprised of first-rate intellects. Gender isn't relevant in that category, but affirmatively fostering the game is. 4. There are a number of first-rate intellects amongst rugby's supporters, just as you suggest. And, just as you suggest, a number are women. Whoever has the brains to help the ARU negotiate its on-going and myriad inter-state, inter-code and international tribulations should be encouraged to do so. 5. As for my having 'high minded words [with] nothing practical to offer', I hope that's wrong (mind, I am commenting on The Roar ... ). Amongst other things, I continue to encourage the ARU to review its board appointment practices as a matter of urgency. As an adjunct, I want the ARU's management to be hiring the best possible intellects across all managerial and administrative positions. If I have an 'agenda' as you say, that would be it. Full stop. Perhaps I am wrong, but I don't see how encouraging the ARU to adopt these practices insults anyone. To me, the current state of affairs demonstrably requires substantive improvement. 6. Your club sounds great.

On the subject of intellect: - My understanding of what Sharon is saying, in a very polite way: that the people in ARU for a long time, are not smart enough*** to get things right. - Her assertion is that ARU needs smarter people, which broader knowledge and understanding, to advice - The goal would be to change the mandate, change the course, and its implementation - I would add few things to it, but her basic assertion makes a lot of sense to me ***in plan language: too stupid On the topic gender-blind / diversity-enabled: - This Im afraid, may have also escaped your attention / comprehension - We were talking about Sharon's example in the 80s and her assertion that organisations should be gender-blind - My suggestion was to replace that concept - with another that I believe captures opportunity of the modern world - It wasn't a necessarily direct reference to Rugby. Though it does apply. For example, would it be so outrageous to have a female ARU CEO in the future - because she is a woman whilst also being a good leader? Or maybe someone not from Sydney?

Or they had a good deal. Caloundra was the original base

The Wallabies were in Coffs before that and the Reds were still playing at Ballymore. As I said the funding was approved by Howard just before the 2007 election. Rudd who couldn't give two flying flutes about Rugby pulled the funding pretty much straight away. So blame Tin Tin.

Ive read your posts re the role of women before. No arguments from me for the most. And Im glad you had a glance at mine. You should also however, read more closely: - My post is a response to a statement that basically says women have NO place in Rugby. - What I am saying is YES THERE is a place for women. And it looks like YOU AGREE TO ME and others Regarding 'inclusion and spectrum'. It is not just about women. It speaks of the elitism of ARU, and ignoring - grassroots.Women is part of it, and triggered this general point. re Lagarde: people may hold different positions re IMF and decisions. Just as they would for any global institute. But what is undisputed is her leadership capability. But the fact that you disregard her and point at her white bikini probably means its going to be a TOTAL waste of my time to engage you on this.