Don't believe the hype: ARU culture is not rotten

agree totally. Sun Tzu says "Now the general is the pillar of the State: if the pillar has mastered all points of war, the State will be strong; if the pillar is defective, the State will be weak."

Sandbox, That's the one, thanks. "The conclusion I come to is poor leadership, Pulver, McKenzie, Hooper. Simple as that." However, I contend that you can't divorce culture from poor leadership. Generally speaking, poor culture begets poor leadership.

maybe from the 'EM resigns as Wallaby coach' article. Lano said: "There are so many unanswered questions concerning the Beal affair it is quite impossible to apportion blame. What is apparent is the enormous gulf in the adequate explanation form the parties involved. Simple things are simply explained. Why the complexity and silence here? When things remain unexplained, the gap gets filled with parties that have other agendas. The conclusion I come to is poor leadership, Pulver, McKenzie, Hooper. Simple as that."

It's about time we dropped the anti Beale witch hunt. Personally I don't think he deserves a place in the team on performance alone, but I'm not too concerned about him wearing the wrong t-shirt. We all know he deeply regretted the text messages and apologised directly to the recipient. An apology which was accepted. I think we all need to think about that.

Not too common, I don't think a lot of these posters have ever stepped out onto the field as a player.

Also played for Eastwood

Unfortunately toxic environments exist and aren't just hyperbole. You sure you don't work for the ARU lano?

George W would say something different "fool me once, shame on......shame on you......" I do agree with the premise of the article. There's been a lot of pitch forks and burning torches towards the major players forgetting that we are all human primates who make mistakes

Simple of me I know but reading a positive article is much more heartening than all the negative tripe that gets written nowadays. I reckon Pulver was pretty close to the mark. Watching the wonderful doco on Gough Whitlam again last night showed how to counter negativity - be positive and constructive and do not be unkind. I do enjoy reading some of the articles on the roar particularly the constructive analysis of the Wallabies performance. However much of what is written is simply depressing and not worth the effort. The only positive thing about the negative articles at least proves there are a lot of rugby people out there who believe passionately about the game. Rugby is clearly far from dead, even in Australia.

Mate, given that Rod Macqueen is the most successful coach in Wallabies history, do you think it's possible that he just may have presented a better vision for how to do the job than Knuckles did? Just a thought. Also, if you think Deans was appointed for "reasons never clear" then give yourself an uppercut, in fact give yourself 2. You LITERALLY JUST SAID Knuckles should have got the job in '97 because he had a better Super Rugby record, so how the heck can you think it wasn't "clear" what possible reasons the ARU could have for wanting to appoint a a coach with 5 titles to his name? Oh wait, Robbie's not a Queenslander so it doesn't count for as much as the one minor premiership knuckles scored. Seriously, your logic is about as consistent as a poker machine. As for Dwyre, he was never relevant - I just brought it up because you opened by being a d##k about him without any other reason to be other than being a bias a--hole who just looks for any excuse he can to bag anything remotely NSW related. In fact that sums pretty well everything you say here. Your about the most bias, conspiracy toting whacko I've seen since Glen Beck had a show on Fox News. Time to suck it up champ and accept we're doing alright down here - The Tahs are the Super Rugby Champs, The Blues have Origin back, Souths won the NRL, and NSW have the Sheffield Shield to boot.

Sorry Lano, I think you highlight the flaws in your argument yourself. --"culture....starts with leadership and setting examples. Leaders must understand that they are on show all of the time and everything they do is transparent and transmits messages, albeit subliminally, to employees and staff."-- So what example do the ARU set their employees? Do the players see hard-working leaders unselfishly dedicated to the common cause of Rugby across Australia, or are they a bunch of glad-handing blazers on big salaries playing political games? --"The entire machinery of governance, a board of directors, stakeholders, employees and customer support underlies success."-- And you'd say what about the even-handedness and transparency of the governance on display? Even more so their compliance processes whenever something comes up...would you characterise them as clear, clean, fast and consistent, or a bit like discipline from a bipolar parent? --"The support for the leadership must be unequivocal...employees have to subscribe to the organisation’s DNA. It’s absolutely vital that the combination of the vision, the values and the actions all mesh....No organisation can afford misalignment, whether sporting or not. The organisation must always be the primary concern."-- So again is that what the players see from management, or is it a mass of parochial concerns all fighting their own corners to their advantage and the games detriment? They say one thing, do the other and expect the employees to toe the ever moving line. That is not a strong leadership structure, it is the hallmark of a dysfunctional company. Would it really be any wonder if their employees felt they should only look out for themselves and their mates? There is nothing I'd like to see more than an ARU that embodied all those characteristics and could reasonably ask for similar levels of commitment from the players. But rightly or wrongly we appear to be a very long, long way from that at the moment.

Yep, that for me is the empirical evidence countering an over-optimistic assessment. Right now if I had to write a one sentence statement encompassing the ARU culture, it would be "Everything is fine so long as we win and no-one upsets the players".

Failing to mention 1991 - you asked about post-Dwyer, so I started in 1995. Dwyer cocked that up. I think we all know we won a RWC in 1991. I still dont think its relevant to the question you asked. I said Knuckles had a better record than Macqueen as at 1997. Surely even you cant argue with that. Macqueen in 2011 with the Brumbies did not cover himself in glory either, but I dont see how using facts from after the relevant dates really adds anything. Deans got the job for reasons never clear: also no one else in Australia wanted it. You asked why no NSW-men had been appointed since Dwyer, I answered. In 2007, no one put their hand up. Except Alan Jones. I had specifically stated earlier that Link had coached the Tahs, so I hardly could have forgotten that, could I? I stand by my interpretation of recent events - Link was done in by a Tah clique to protect Beale, and then Hooper when Hooper gave his airport interview. If all that isnt obvious to you - even given your screen name is "TahDan" - well, I suppose the left hand side of the bell curve needs it representatives too.

No "I or me" from the players? Just because you say it doesn't make it so. The same with most of your other points. AAC, the most capped player in the squad and also the Captain were very clear in saying "I" support my Tahs mate Grubby Beale. That flies in the face of both the team and the management and sends a clear message that "we are more important than the team" It was a mix of these same players and the now departed Drew Mitchell who were conversely not supportive of their mate QC when he made the toxic claim. AAC earned his player power stripes at the Brumbies and only seems to have gained rank at the Tahs.

I did mate, and I can confidently say that with your crack-pot NSW mafia nonsense you make about as much sense as a mental patient with a mouth full of toilet paper.

Read what I actually wrote.

They coached the Tahs at one point, but almost all were working at another province when they made the Wallabies job. FOS is trying to argue that only people who coach the Waratahs ever get the Wallabies gig - something that isn't just wrong, but hilariously wrong.

So we're off to a flyer, with the crack-pot opening his conspiracy file by failing to mention Dwyre also coached an underdog Aussie team to our first RWC win. Great stuff mate, shows how rational your "thought" process is. Moving on, you then go and attack the appointment of Macqueen on the basis that Knuckles was better... wait what? Sorry, but if you'll excuse me, did you really just say that? Rod Macqueen, the man who coached the Wallabies TO THEIR MOST SUCCESSFUL PERIOD IN HISTORY shouldn't have got the job because Knuckles - who had his shot and didn't make it past the Qtrs 10 years later - was "better"? Straight out of the Ray Hadley book of logic and common sense that one. Then you move on to talk about Robbie Deans, because there's no better example of the evil NSW mafia than the appointment of a man who has less to do with NSW Rugby than Qld does. Again mate, GENIUS - such inconsistent nonsense clearly takes effort. At the very end of your rambling diatribe you then try to tie all these completely un-supporting facts to Link quitting the job, whilst also forgetting he ALSO coached the Tahs - and indeed did so for longer than he did the reds. Surely that's an important point if you're bringing up the fact that Macqueen had worked at NSW years before the Brumbies. Seriously mate, your argument couldn't be more jumbled and nonsensical if it had come out of a blender.

Hmmm. A spirited defence but some fairly sweeping statements in there that are difficult to reconcile with events and facts. 1) The McKenzie resignation - Link told us he detailed the reasons in his resignation letter. Pulver has chosen to keep this private. Understandably so in some ways, but it just adds to the intrigue. 2) The contradictory messages from Pulver's press conference on the weekend - Saturday night blaming the press, Sunday no mention of this and a perpetuation of the "occasionally getting near enough is good enough" mentality that has reigned supreme in Wallaby culture for the past decade of mediocrity. 3) Pulver's own appointment process was somewhat shrouded in mystery and given he had no qualifications or experience in professional sports management (despite the impressive business record) yet had strong personal connections with the Chairman (Hawker) and a board member (Eales) it does lead to questions. 4) The cash calls to Australian rugby supporters while there is no transparency on what elite players are paid, or coaches or CEO's for that matter. Finally not certain that "Neutron" Jack Welch, who had some issues relating to a complex personal life that impacted his public life to his detriment, and faced serious criticism of his treatment of employees and people in his quest for profits, is the best example to use in this situation!