Brumbies chief executive Michael Jones heads back to the ACT Supreme Court today to continue the fight to keep his job, but the longer this whole mess goes on, the worse my gut feeling about a resolution gets.
Their coach Stephen Larkham lauded the effort of his team in South Africa this week after the win over the Cheetahs in Bloemfontein.
“There was good focus this week from the boys. [There is] a bit of turmoil back home, but hopefully that will be sorted out next week when we get back,” he said.
“Internally, we just had 100per cent focus on the game.”
The prospect of the issue being resolved this week is more wishful thinking than anything. With Jones heading back to court, the only way the turmoil will end this week is if Jones has his case thrown out and the Brumbies board sack him.
With Jones still of the belief he’s done nothing wrong, it would be hard to imagine his case being so flimsy that it could be dismissed immediately.
The worry for me is that the narrative around the saga took a concerning change of direction toward the end of last week.
With an Australian federal police investigation ongoing, you would have been excused for thinking there really wouldn’t be a lot of commentary around anything related to the case, and that the primary focus of everyone even remotely linked would be to ensure that the referred 2009-2013 club transactions turned up nothing that would result in criminal charges being laid.
Instead, the overwhelming message out of last week was that if the Brumbies board carried through with its threat to issue Jones the ‘don’t come Monday’ notice, that they could actually afford the required contract payouts that would inevitably arise.
ARU CEO Bill Pulver was reported to have supported the actions of the Brumbies board early last week, flying down to Canberra to give assurances that the ARU would step in if required. Pulver was particularly keen to hose down Jones’ very real scenario of an insolvent Brumbies doing much wider damage to the game’s governing body, and the professional existence of the game itself in Australia.
Those assurances from Pulver that the Brumbies weren’t going anywhere went further than that, though.
“The Brumbies are in solid financial shape. Were there to be any issues down in Canberra at all, we would obviously do everything we could to help out. The Brumbies are a great football team, they’re performing well this year and are in good shape for the future,” Pulver told Fox Sports last week.
Pressed by Nick McArdle if that meant the ARU stepping in to pay out a contract that the Brumbies may not be able to afford clearing, Pulver reiterated.
“Yes we would. In short, we would. The Brumbies are a very important part of the Australian rugby landscape, and they’re going to be there for a long, long time to come, and we’ll do whatever we have to do to support them.”
Speaking with Tim Gavel on 666 ABC Canberra on Saturday – the source of the Jones interview on March 19 that saw rumours explode into a proper crisis – Pulver continued down this same path.
“Look, the issue of a payout for Michael Jones is not one necessarily I want to go into, I’m simply comfortable that the Brumbies’ financial situation is capable of taking care of all of their financial obligations,” Pulver said.
“So whether that included a payout, or anything else, their financial situation is solid, and quite capable of dealing with all those matters.”
But think about what’s really being said here. If push comes to shove, rather than letting the AFP investigation run its course and actually finding out if something untoward did indeed occur around the sale of their former South Canberra training base and the move to the University of Canberra, the Brumbies could in fact afford to pay out the contract of the CEO they hired to enact change in the organisation.
Jones found the “financial anomalies” while conducting his own review, and felt they needed a second opinion. The club’s lawyers took a look and presented these concerns to the Brumbies board, who then agreed to involve the ARU Integrity Unit and KPMG’s Forensic Accounting arm. The Brumbies and the Integrity Unit then agreed to refer the matter and jointly fund the AFP investigation.
But instead of waiting for this investigation, the Brumbies are quite clearly entertaining the thought of sacking the man they installed for raising a concern while doing the job he was hired to do.
And further, the Brumbies were said to be on track for a massive financial turnaround; after recording a record loss of $1.68 million in 2015, the forecast for 2016 was for a significant profit, possibly even as high as a million dollars.
The Brumbies have recorded losses in ten of the last 11 years, and yet they’re seriously considering blowing a rare and potentially large profit on paying out the change agent they had installed themselves.
The Australian Financial Review reported a month ago that of the 49 professional football clubs in Australia, only 17 of them recorded operating profits in 2015. None of those 17 clubs play Super Rugby, and only five of them recorded a profit that required a seventh digit.
The Brumbies are risking becoming the healthiest rugby franchise in Australia, just to shut the bloke up who’s asking awkward questions. It’s mind-blowing.
Of course, in terms Australian rugby, making the problem go away is often as favourable – arguably more favourable – than ever seeking proper resolution.
Think of all the major crises that have gripped Australian rugby in recent years – the Ewen McKenzie-Di Patston saga is but one – and there’s one thing they all share: the actual details at the crux of each matter never saw the light of day.
Indeed, we still don’t know the actual reason the Brumbies board stood Jones down last Monday night.
The governance of rugby in this country has perhaps never looked shakier, nor has it ever been under more scrutiny. The Western Force are said to be exploring four options of varying desperation to ensure their ongoing viability, the Queensland Reds’ downturn since winning a title is alarming, and another Waratahs CEO has vacated the corner office, this time after just one year.
And just when it seemed like the Brumbies might genuinely be matching their on-field success with some healthy front office operation, a self-interested decision could put their finances at serious risk.
Never mind solving the actual problem at hand. No, no. I’ve got the broom; lift that carpet, chaps.
How very Australian rugby of them.
Cath
Guest
Have you read the report or seen part of the results of the investigation???? How do you know it does not involve current board members, how can you say,"no Brumbies money has gone missing"? I'm sure this investigation involves a number of issues involving money, dodgy deals, real estate & politics. I wish every one would just back off, let Jones continue to do his job, let the players train & play without all this negativity, (before the truth comes out), hanging over their heads & get on with Rugby!
Chancho
Roar Rookie
I was staggered by this Brett: The Australian Financial Review reported a month ago that of the 49 professional football clubs in Australia, only 17 of them recorded operating profits in 2015. None of those 17 clubs play Super Rugby, and only five of them recorded a profit that required a seventh digit I'm assuming that's across the football codes, but irrespective, 17/49 with an operating profit!!! You'd have to imagine that's not an anomaly and is part of an ongoing situation... how will they survive? In terms of the Brumbies, thanks for the painstaking update Brett, it's been a weird one from the start and doesn't look to be resolved anytime soon... there are going to be quite a few walking away from this not looking good.
Boz the Younger
Guest
Brad Thorn rates the NRC. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-30/all-black-brad-thorn-backs-wallabies-pathways-to-increase-austr/7284430
Akari
Roar Rookie
It's misleading when you say, "So I think it’s fair to say Jones can take a lot of, if not most of the credit for the Aquis deal..". The involvement of the ACT government is the clincher in this deal rather than Jones.
RobC
Roar Guru
MrChook. Just saw 2H. Well, I did like it. A lot. This game was for the Reds to win starting at 43'. Tahs coach needs to relook seriously at how he's managing this team. Tahs can do much better. Reds fading in later half. This is because Tahs brought on the finishers (bench) when they should. Reds did not. Silly Billy. I mean Silly Nick and Matt. Bit of stoush. Good fun. But not the knees. No way. Finally 2H was a wet game. Coaches on both sides - especially Reds - should have gone for drop goal as an option instead of pushing for improbably passes. No one was going to score tries with the sweaty pill, sludgy pitch and willing defenders from both sides.
Mark Richmond
Roar Guru
Thanks Brett, although I cannot remember the details, that is what I recollect.
concerned supporter
Guest
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/canberra-club-presidents-call-brumbies-board-meeting-to-discuss-michael-jones-20160329-gntp4w.html
Old Bugger
Guest
Well there you go Brett - we may all, hopefully anyway, find out what is really under, the carpet......cheers for the updates. Now, what else can we conjure up to upset their rugby team, for this coming weekend. Not that I would be interested, in the slightest.....oh, hang on - me Chiefs side is heading over that way, to play. Bugger - probably be standing room only at the game, now that this boardroom saga, has hit the headlines. Just don't snow on the weather-front. I want McKenzie to be, at his fleet-footed best....haha!!
gatesy
Roar Guru
A cracking good read, lads - let's keep it going - beats the hell out of all the usual mush that we read - and the saga is still unfolding - this is gold!! ..and thanks for your comment about my eloquence, Sandgroper - but you want to hope that SA doesn't ever pull out of Super Rugby. If their staging post goes, so will the Force!
Brett McKay
Expert
The Govt certainly put Aquis and the Brumbies in touch with each other, Akari, which is what that article says (not the gentleman trying to claim a finder's fee). There's nothing in that article that contradicts anything I've said; I'm not sure what is misleading, either..
Akari
Roar Rookie
This is a bit misleading Brett when Michael Jones have said that "the ACT government that helped broker their record sponsorship deal with Aquis" (see http://www.canberratimes.com.au/rugby-union/brumbies/brumbies-say-act-govt-helped-broker-aquis-sponsorship-deal-20150908-gjhuqe.html).
Brett McKay
Expert
Guys, the Brumbies had had initial discussions with Aquis in late 2014, but it went nowhere for two months after the previous CEO, Doug Edwards, stood down in early Dec. Jones came on board in late January, and even then a major sponsor was a long way off being secured. I interviewed Jones in the first week of February last year (http://playcbr.com.au/rugbyunion/brumbies-ceo-michael-jones-hits-the-ground-running/), after he'd been in the chair about 10 days, and at the time he said of the search for a sponsor (he said in the interview they were advanced with one company, but weren't going to waiver on price), "The first year of a new sponsorship is at huge cost to us, with a rebranding of all the merchandise, the playing kit, the stadium. If we flinch and drop the price, we’ll be in negative margin, and with a $1.1 Million loss reported in the media last year, we’re not really in the position of giving charity to a commercial entity who wants to get a gain out of our sponsorship. “So I’m not stressed about it in any way, shape or form. We are well advanced with four parties currently, and I’m quietly confident that we’ll get it, and we’ll get it at a good price because it deserves a good price.” So I think it's fair to say Jones can take a lot of, if not most of the credit for the Aquis deal..
Brett McKay
Expert
For the sake of something resembling an update: - ACT Supreme Court Justice Richard Refshauge reserved his decision last night in the case between Michael Jones and the Brumbies et al. A decision is still expected in the next few days, however Jones is free to continue on the CEO in the meantime. - This morning, about an hour ago, the seven ACT club Presidents used their voting power to call for an extraordinary board meeting, set down now for Wed April 13. The Canberra Times is reporting, "Fed up with backroom dealings, the presidents have asked the board to present their case for standing down Jones, and there is the belief they have not acted properly in trying to remove him from the chief executive role." Link: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/canberra-club-presidents-call-brumbies-board-meeting-to-discuss-michael-jones-20160329-gntp4w.html
Mark Richmond
Roar Guru
Bakkies, the Huawei deal fell over 3 years ago, before the University of Canberra sponsorship years. UC stepped in when Huawei didn't go ahead, and sponsored the Raiders instead. Shanky, I am not saying he did all the work, I am saying that the current administration with Jones as CEO, brought it home and got it signed. You said it was signed by the previous CEO....that is patently incorrect.
sheek
Roar Guru
I'm not saying anything. Just giving you the options as they've been mentioned in the media.
HarryT
Guest
There is also a certain genius in limiting the profit so they can't afford to pay out your contract.
abdul
Guest
Thank you Brett for bringing up the elephant in the room. Has anyone ever seen RF and ME in the same room?
Sandgroper
Guest
Sheek I struggled to escape Western Sydney! Travelled the land and washed up in the best little city, now you want me to go back just because some joker in Sydney thinks it's a good idea. Nope as Gatesy so eloquently stated we Force tragics are predominantly expats from everywhere. All we want is to see some good Rugby once in a while. The Force going to Western Sydney makes no sense. Sorry to see the Brumbies mess. But hey we survived WAInc, Alan Bond, and Firepower I'm sure the Canberrans can sort it all out. Good luck.
winediamond
Guest
Omkalai What a wonderfully forensic series of questions . Some journalists ought to be "sourcing" you. Jones is as popular as a ham sandwich at a jewish picnic (my father was jewish btw) so i can say this !!!. ThIs egomaniac has trampled over all & sundry. Most are too terrified to speak out. Brett has described "a polarising personality". No . The man is a sociopath. I have described his pathology, & consistent behaviour perfectly in a previous post. The player, & team success are responsible for the sponsorship, & financial results not this self aggrandising clown, & bully.
AndyS
Guest
Maybe it is a rugby thing to invariably focus on the negatives, but it amazes me that the clubs seem blind to the opportunity represented by the NRC. With or without funding, they currently spend money that could be so much better used in their own grass roots to maintain professional training programs and pay players (and let's not pretend that isn't happening). And in practice all it has actually done is drive a wedge between them and those grassroots, reflected in support, attendances and bar take. So what the NRC offers is the chance to limit professionalism to those that are heading in that direction and allows them to share the costs of the associated programs. It also gives them a separate vehicle for paying those players - they still get paid, they still play for their club, they just get paid via the NRC team. So if the clubs were even half smart, they'd embrace the NRC and lobby the ARU for funding for wages. That way, rather than spending their own money on paying players, they'd be spending money that would come out of the Gross Player Revenue reservation.