Pulver wants to "lead Australian rugby forward"

Mickeylives, you are one very confused puppy. Let me remind you that it was you that gave the ticks for Pulver performance and I challenged your ticks on the basis that there was no objective information or factual data [hyperbole, narrative etc don't qualify as factual data] For objectives to mean anything they need to be measurable, time bound and achievable -- none of what Pulver has said, done, promised etc would be categorized as business objectives. So back to your performance ticks you are still to provide factual data to support your marking. To assist you lets deal with your point one "Clear objective to bring Rugby finances back to the black" the factual data I would expect to see would be "The ARU achieved an operating profit of $____ for the fiscal year 2013/2014" If they didn't achieve an operating profit then they have failed to achieve the objective. So your homework is to quantify the elements relating to each of the performance areas you have identified.Good luck and have a nice day

Of course Pulver wants to keep his cushy job, however he's not advancing rugby in Australia at all, but he is making things easier for the AFL, NRL and soccer to advance their games, as the ARU doesn't do anything to make rugby popular at all (no free to air TV broadcasts of Super Rugby, only just this year having yet another go at a domestic national competition, and making the game a financial minnow ...). Unfortunately his Board of Directors must be the worst in existence in any field of endeavour. The end result - nothing will change, Pulver will stay, the Board will remain unchanged and Australian rugby will continue to be the worse for this.

And while I'm on it, 7's was contractually tied to the Gold Coast so Pulver couldn't change that. He has stated that he intends to look at changing it (probably to Sydney) when the contract ends. And the ARU has reapplied to get 7's again in Aus. Try looking things up for yourself.

@Thunderguts Points 1, 3, and 4 only need statements to prove them. Add to this the fact that Pulver was right behind all the coverage of the Sydney Convicts and other teams when the gay world cup was on. Also, articles today suggest that Rugby has broken even this year after losing 4.7million last year

What has he done, it was the clubs that paid and organised the NRC. He is enjoying a massive remuneration without any accooutability. Best gig ever

I see... So your 1 argument is to base Pulver's performance to date on one leg of the 2014 IRB 7s (note IRB not ARU) tournament. Dont' think I haven't noted that this bizarre comment lacks any "factual data". You are special.

On reading my Post, and on reading it again I was probably being a bit harsh so apologies, however I still fundamentally dis agree with much of your arguments. - Super rugby I have been a foundation member of the Rebels since day one, and have also attended aami park to watch the Force, and at no stage have I ever advocated the demise of these two teams, it is the competition that they play in that is the issue imo (Super rugby has limited appeal and ability to grow especially in new markets), what they have done is simply tap into the expatriate market that was there. The Melb Rebels have 6/7000 members this is in a city of 5.5 million and are costing the ARU 3/5 million each year, I presume the Force are similar, I love the Melb Rebels but they are an albatross around the neck of the ARU, and will continue to be so while they are competing in Super rugby. - Financial model, There is even a possibility that the ARU may go broke in 2015, the marketing budget for the NRC was about $50 this year, We have had 20 years of a professional model called Super rugby, the exact same model that for 20 years we keep getting told is the future, so where is the MONEY. - The Wallabies and there importance, (in essence the ultimate cause of the current state of rugby in Australia), the sad fact that 90% of resources of the ARU are pumped into the Wallabies to maintain there so called status, and ultimately why nothing will ever change with the code here. In the last 20 years the Wallabies have hardly been ranked outside the top 2/3 in the world. Yes kids need heroes, But the Wallabies stopped being that a long time ago, because we sold them to a pay TV company, or more specifically there support baby Super Rugby, for kids to have heroes, first they need to recognise them.???? - Yes we need top level players, but how long can the code afford to compete with cashed up clubs from overseas, we can’t fund grassroots rugby in Australia, but we can top up a Wallaby salary to supposedly encourage kids to play the game, but sadly we have to charge his club $200 to help pay that salary, and I’m sorry I just don’t buy the thinking that kids won’t play the game because it has limited future I didn’t realize it was a job, I tell you when kids will play the game is when they see their mates playing and when the see there mates playing it at school. - I do hope the NRC evolves into a genuine domestic model for Australia, and I honestly hope that one day I will watch the Force and Rebels play in it.

Gee Mikeylives, just as I suspected lots of commentary, hyperbole, motherhood statements but absolutely no quantifiable results. You are obviously taken in by all the activity but nothing in what you listed actually demonstrates how any of the objectives stated were achieved. For example if Pulver had set an objective of "We will achieve a net operating profit of $-- by the end of FY 14" then we would truly have something to clearly evaluate his performance on. As opposed to your example of womens rugby -- what additional resources were employed?? what was the return on the additional resources expressed as increased player numbers etc. In 2013 when Pulver was appointed, one of his main platforms on how to turn the ARU around was, " to exploit the opportunity that 7,s Rugby presents" the only tangible and quantifiable result was the Gold Coast 7,s which was an unmitigated disaster. The ball is still in your court to come up with some factual data to support your fantasy report card for Pulver. Perhaps third time lucky but I think not

In defence of Sheek, he has suggested Australia follows NZ's lead like pre SR.... which as I stated is BS and most NZers are glad that we have moved on from those days. What people like you fail to realise is that just because I am from NZ doesn't mean I am suggesting that NZ rugby structures are anything like Australia. In fact if you bothered to even read my post below, you would see that. What people like you also fail to realise is that rugby evolves and morphs continuously and is doing so. You don't like SR, but it has brought the game to WA and Melbourne. Have you ever attended a Force game. I have and I have taken my gf and daughter to them and they loved it. The crowds there are large and genuinely vibrant. The tickets are not cheap, but the experience is worth it. The game is growing here and the revenue is increasing. But hey who cares. Ditch them and retrench. From SR the Brumbies have also come forth and developed depth and a following in Canberra (you know fans). What people like you fail to realise is that you are so caught up in your own opinion, you don't give credit to views different to your own. You think you are on a crusade and the rest of the rugby public is ignorant or there opinion is worth nothing. And take a read of Sheeks views on what he determines is best for NZ. It has been explained to him multiple times the history of the game in NZ, by many, but he still ignores it. Now what my little jaunt down memory lane was for was an explanation of how the NRC can evolve and the colour and excitement which can come from it, not that it was a replication of NZ. It was also meant to share my own personal feelings and experiences about the changes I have seen over the years and how the game evolves. The fact it has no interest to you and only sparks a sarcastic response is fine. I also aren't following your crusade and think there is more to rugby. Maybe if Sheek had shared his personal thoughts and experiences, it may have excited you more, but then again I wasn't writing it for your sake, so am not sure what the point of your facetious opening remark was. You completely fail to read or understand what I mean about being inclusive. 4th in the code wars. Good here is an idea. Retrench, walk away from SR and hope that a local competition will attract thousands when the ARU has no budget to invest. What is your risk mitigation strategy. Don't worry about it. Go back to the good old amateur days and the money will come rolling in. You sure? What people like you and Sheek fail to do is respect the progress that has been made and the good things that have happened to allow next steps to be taken. You think the ARU is going to throw the baby out with the bath water and start a complete new competition and pray to the gods that it works and makes money. One thing Sheek has at least been honest about is he has no understanding of the economics or viability of his proposal. And that is another thing you fail to realise, economics . A wing and a prayer. The NRL can actually claim to be teh best in the world because the Kangaroos are. Soccer claims has been competitive in world cups and this attracts people and audiences. Add to that that many communities, like Greek, Lebanese, Italian etc. are much more interested in soccer than rugby union. Now you may deride the Wallabies and their importance, but if they are down the bottom of the ladder, rugby will be considered weak, nobody in their right mind would encourage their kids to play it, as it is a minority sport without any real future. There are many NZ families which come over here to send their kids to sports schools to play not union, but league. In the mean-time the top level union players would all go overseas and your domestic competition would be a flaccid little game for a few die hard fans. So finally what you fail to realise is the game may well evolve into a stronger domestic competition via the NRC, it won't be because you and Sheek have set people onto this way of thinking, no matter how important you think your crusade is.

If I dissect Chivas narrative correctly, I believe he's saying Pulver did a good job with NRC: - It was structured well contrary to sheek's opinion, even on the topic re 'artificial teams'. - His point is 'artificial teams' do thrive. NZ SR teams being an example - At the same time, traditional / smaller clubs will find a way to become successful in the new structure - Finally, he's saying the dynamics of the Rugby environment will evolve, just as it is in Sth Africa - I dont think he's saying we copy NZ. Just learn from it 2nd point: Beale saga was one sorry lesson. Move on as much as possible. But don't forget the lessons.

think Mikey has activity confused with achievement... Pulver is a myth and his mate Hawker a bigger one

Couple recommended policies in adopted the 2012 seem to remain unresolved: #12 That ARU w/Members develop a National Charter for Australian Rugby Outline roles and responsibilities of all organisations at all levels of Rugby. #13: That ARU be acknowledged as the ‘keeper of the code’ for Rugby in Australia from the grassroots to the elite level. This one is being worked on, and is still WIP: #14: That ARU recommends that Member Unions & Super Rugby teams also adopt ‘best practice’ governance structures, including an independent skills-based Board. My concern is #12 and #13. together.

Nothing?

In Aug 2012, the reform was on shareholders and powers of Unions, who have two basic responsibilities I believe: - Special Resolutions: before NSW had veto power over any special resolution. This was removed two years ago. Also any special resolution requires 75% of the member votes. - Director selection: four person committee formed each year: ARU Chair + on director + 2 rep chosen by members. The members need 2/3 vote to agree. Chair has max 2 terms Voting members are: all the states/territories (including tax and NT), RUPA. Includes Tahs, Rebs but NOT Reds Force Brumbies. Technicality I believe because the SR license is held by the RU. Since then: - There was a mini board shuffle Aug 2013 - Immediate focus (according to Chair): $ stability (ie cut cost), how the game is played (replace Deans), strengthening how WBs and 7s perform. Work closely with state RUs - 3 year priority (according to CEO): expand participation (mostly 7s I think), develop elite (WBs), unlock financial potential (TV deal)

OK Tguts - I'm no journo, but let's see what Dr Google can come up with for those with heads in the sand... Financial objective: 3.5.13 - The Australian Pulver: "One of my first challenges is to look at the cost base of the ARU and review where we are spending our money first of all with a view to getting rid of the deficit, but second of all to free up funds so we can invest in growth areas. "Getting the game moving forward is about growth in participation and growth in revenue. "They are the two key issues, growth and revenue. Can we get them through things like a Super Rugby B competition, national club championship, expanded sevens program, women in rugby? These sorts of major initiatives designed to create growth in the game. Cost of NRC: Rugby.com.au The objective of this competition (NRC) and the ARC are the same – to help develop elite talent in Australian Rugby, but the funding model is the main difference between the two competitions. The Buildcorp NRC will be self-funded, while the ARC cost Australian Rugby around $5 million in its first season, which made it financially unsustainable. Investment from broadcast partners Foxtel and FOX SPORTS, a reduced player payment model agreed with RUPA and the commercial support of new partners in Rugby, notably a number of universities, are all significant advancements on the ARC business model from 2007. Combined with the efforts of each of the NRC teams to generate additional funds through sponsorship and private investment, the Buildcorp NRC is fundamentally a financially sustainable business model. Support of women's rugby: espnscrum.com .13.5.13: Pulver: 'Also the two fastest growing components of rugby worldwide are Sevens and women. We've under-invested in both of them. So I've got to put some investment into these two areas. It involves a reallocation of an existing resource. We've taken resources that have been primarily focused largely around the Wallabies program, and moved a little bit of it so we have green shoots elsewhere. Sevens and women's rugby is not going to solve your revenue problem in 2014. But by 2015-16-17, you are going to start to see growth, particularly on the back of the Olympic Games. ' rugby.com.au 10,7,14 Australian Rugby Union CEO Bill Pulver said this is terrific news for everyone connected to women’s Rugby in Australia. “Since the last Commonwealth Games program in Glasgow was announced, women’s Rugby Sevens has gone from strength-to-strength, with the IRB introducing the IRB Women’s Sevens World Series for the 2012/13 season. Support of gay players in rugby: rugby.com.au 28.8.13 Australian Rugby Union has announced its commitment to develop an Inclusion Policy, aimed at stamping out discrimination and homophobia, to coincide with the launch of the 2014 Bingham Cup, known as the "gay Rugby World Cup." The policy will act as an extension to the ARU’s existing Member Protection Policy and continues the organisation’s commitment to eliminate discrimination in Rugby across Australia. ARU CEO, Bill Pulver, said the policy aims to ensure Australian Rugby continues to be a place where everyone involved feels safe, welcome and included regardless of race, gender or sexuality. Support of coach: abc.net.au - 13 Oct 2014 Wallabies coach Ewen McKenzie gets backing from ARU chief Bill Pulver Australia rugby boss Bill Pulver has given his support to besieged Wallabies coach Ewen McKenzie before this weekend's Bledisloe Cup Test against the All Blacks. Public criticism of Beale's behaviour: and on theroar.com.au today: “He’s had a lot of chances” – Pulver says Beale’s on his final warning By Darren Walton, 1 Nov 2014 I look forward to seeing you lay out all your facts to back up your obviously factual argument that it's all fantasy...

Well Mickeylives, still waiting on the factual data to support your ticks but I see you have now detoured into the land of fantasy and bizarre behavior which has no place in society. Perhaps if I can direct you back to the factual stuff

Most of what has happened in the last few weeks has been out of Pulver's control. McKenzie, Di and Beale have been a train wreck, but I think it panned out about right. But Tut tutters love to omit anything positive he's done and harp on about leadership... pfft. He's taken over during the rise of the sleeping giant (soccer) and followed a CEO who had lost his heart in the job and instead had his eyes on contributing to the Packer empire. The Wallabies' lay-down-sally effort in Auckland caused heaps more damage to the fan-base than the recent 'scandal' IMO. To the best of my knowledge, there have been no reports of Australian rugby players committing rape, selling class A's, sticking fingers up oppo's bums or taking selfies whilst bubbling. There's hope yet.

You are absolutely right Simon BUT nobody is listening particularly the board. Everything is just too comfortable for the canape munching, Champer swilling senior executives at the ARU. However the roosters will come home to roost in 2015 when the lack of finance will get every bodies attention.

Gee Mikey, I wish I had you as my teacher marking my exam papers. You need to get yourself a red pencil and mark according to actual achievements. Perhaps you could provide details on how you gave a Tick to "Clear objective to bring rugby finances back to the black" -- perhaps it was the objective you were marking and not the actual result. Look forward to your detailed response on the actual result.

Thank you for that wonderful little insight to some of the nuances of provincial NZ rugby, now can you please explain to me wtf that has to do with the current dismal plight of Australian rugby. What so many people like you fail to realize is that rugby union in Australia is a completely different beast than NZ? In defence of Sheek, he is highlighting the sheer stupidity of the direction the code here has taken since it turned professional. by completely ignoring history, tradition and the need to grow the game domestically, and thrusting onto everyone a competition Super rugby that is effectively killing the code in Australia all so that a level of professional rugby can be maintained to support the “golden egg” Wallabies. The biggest mistake people like you Chivas keep making is thinking that somehow if Australia mirrors the NZ set up everything will be dandy, sorry but it will not, sadly we are not experiencing some feel good stories from the Australian outback of struggling rugby unions coming good. Sheek and FOS are doing their best to remind people, that until you address the underlying issues’ of Australian rugby nothing will change, people like you Chivas somehow think that just because we have the NRC all our problems will be solved, just give it time without asking the question exactly how that is going to be achieved. You completely fail to understand what they mean by Australia needing an exclusive competition. We are 4th in the code wars in Australia, and until people start to ask the questions why without fluffing on about inclusive feel good expansion.