Beale saga could have been avoided: Deans

Your argument just shows how desperate Beale apologists are. It isn't (or shouldn't be) about who sent the second text. One text was well and truly enough, especially after all of the priors Beale has on his rap sheet. That Michael Hooper (and you) seem willing to argue that it was the 'right thing' to stand by Beale because he didn't send a second text is a sick joke. Beale has had so many chances and sending even a single text like that in the context of all the chances he's had should have seen support from the Wallaby captain dry up. It didn't and that is wrong. It is a betrayal of the game by Hooper and the ARU. The game is much bigger than Beale and Hooper apparently doesn't get that.

And you just made absolutely no sense at all. The bank story? WTF was that? But yeah Beale has been sending rude texts to female work mates by accident for years so why wouldnt he be blamed for the 2nd text that didnt seem to come from his phone? I didnt defend Beale in my post at all. I said Hooper stood by Beale when he was being blamed for sending the 2nd text when it was from a different phone. Read first, then comment. Simple. You posted a comment about mine that had absolutely nothing to do with my post. Nothing, nothing at all. My post was about Hooper not being to blame for Beales actions and how he did the right thing by standing by his team mates. You had a big rant about Beale for some strange reason and what he did in 2010. Seriously WTF? Please read and then comment. But yeah he had a fight at a nightclub 4 years ago so he clearly sent the 2nd text. Im sorry I didnt understand that logic. Again WTF?

The article is set up in this way: "Deans, replaced by McKenzie after last year’s series defeat to the British and Irish Lions, says the Wallabies have for some time lacked the leadership to nip behavioural incidents like Beale’s in the bud." Then it provides a series of Deans quotes that gives reasons as to why WBs lack leadership - but providing reasons is not the same as admitting fault, even if the reasons imply the understanding of the fault. Anyway, I guess there is a fine line, and it doesn't matter much now whose fault it was, so long as they know what the fault was and how to fix it. It was good to get the insight at least. The insight in these quotes feels very important to the WBs culture and performance for the last 4/5 years.

Your logic is incredible. It's like saying this: I know the guy robbed a corner store. I know he robbed a bank. I know he robbed a second bank. I know he has admitted to not being able to control himself. But I just can't for a moment believe that he could have robbed a bank a third time. What is it with Beale? He isn't even that good but so many people seem willing to defend him. This is the same guy who in 2010 got into an altercation outside a club in Brisbane. The same guy who in 2011 was involved in some kind of physical disagreement with team mates in Paris. The same player that punched his captain and a team mate in a bus while he was playing for the Rebels! Sickens me to read all the BS about giving him the benefit of the doubt. I'd rather rip his contract up and use half his salary to get Nick Cummins back to Australia and the other half to help grass roots rugby which is dying because of malignant cancers like Beale.

Moore was captain at the time of the text. Where was he?

Hooper is not to blame for Kurtleys behaviour in the text drama. He, knowing more than any of us, stood by Beale when people were blaming Beale for things he didnt do from 4 months previously. Imo thats exactly what he should have done and thats exactly how you earn the teams respect "Im with you boyz through thick n thin but dont you dare put me back here in this position". If he had turned on Beale he, like McKenzie, would have lost the team.

Did you read what he said? He is accepting his part of the blame. He is saying that due to early and perhaps premature promotion of players there was a leadership vacuum. He said it was for what seemed to be valid reasons but that the Wallaby culture is suffering because of what happened on his watch but not entirely his fault.

Ethan, Deans isn't shirking responsibility. I think he is just stating the facts and circumstances for Wallaby Rugby. "Because of the profile of our group, the age of our group, we lacked the leadership within to really manage that effectively.".....Deans is right on the money here regarding leadership. Ask yourself where the team leadership was in the Beale saga.........(crickets chirping)........that's what happens when you leave the captaincy to a kid. I'm backing Cheika to sort it out though.

Im talking about the last two paras "people talk alot about culture...." Imo this a reference to mckenzie and pulver. throughout the mckenzie era we kept hearing from pulver, guys like moore and horwill as well as ex players like sharpe, horan and eales about how they had heard/witnessed a drastic improvement in the team culture. As deans says its one thing saying it its another thing implementing. Ironic that this all occurred under mckenzies watch.

It was never about deans and it isnt about mckenzie. Mckenzie and the aru made deans the scapegoat and fed the public the line that mckenzie would sort out the issues of player culture that according to them were deans' fault. Now the chickens have come home to roost for mckenzie. I have no sympathy for him

So him saying it was the result of himself and others promoting young players too early and thereby creating an unavoidable leadership vacuum due to the need for Super Rugby expansion and Wallaby success is stating the obvious? Please stop, just stop. Its clear you hate Deans and are unwilling to actually think about what hes said so just stop.

So Robbie saying that its a result of what they thought must be done is a back handed comment, to who, himself?

I feel these comments show a neat insight as to why there are issues with WB culture. Having said that, Deans can't shirk responsibility. He is the one who selected the young x-factors over some more experienced players,and in doing so, chose talent over culture, which is something the code is paying for. (Hasn't helped us beat the ABs either...) He also gave those players more than their share of chances for misbehaviour. Meaning that while he sounds all very wise in saying it now, he was not so wise when he was in the position that had influence over it. If his theory is right however, hopefully misbehaviour is something we will see less of in the future, as the current generation and the five now-well-established franchises grow up, and rookie players don't get selected quite as young.

He inherited a stinking pile...can you guess who from?

Of course the youngsters are a problem. This has always been true. But Deans is suggesting that the experienced players have no standing or ability to influence younger players. This certainly explains the fuss over the boozing in Dublin. Not to mention the carry on over Mowen. It's interesting that CCL and Genia were the ones who tried to reign Beale in on the plane. I get the sense that the Tahs players are a bit heavy on glamour. Not so good with respecting the jersey. And I wonder if that's why Giteau and others are in France. On top, we have way too many people in administration of rugby who feed this stuff. Queenslanders who want to shaft Deans now claim Link was shafted by the Tahs. And so on. this sort of crap is always going to be bad for the young players. We desperately need to put all the power at the top (ARU) and make sure that smart, dedicated rugby folk are there.

How, perceptive Robbie! Always the one too state the obvious in hindsight.

Link definitely should have nipped this in the bud straight away, once he let it escalated he had to go.

Great back handed comment by robbie. And thats the reason why mckenzie is no longer there, regardless of whether he was or wasnt aware of what was going on the fact remains that this all happened under his watch and he was a coach that came in with a mandate of improving the culture. He failed at this task and now he is gone. End of story.