Rugby AU publishes recommendations from 2019 Wallabies review

Develop coaching depth.... That is paramount and applies to all countries except New Zealand who have prioritized it for decades.

Curious how they've published this report but still haven't published the 'Massive Spreadsheet'

Haha won’t build a better structure. Will end up the same. Possibly worse because QLD and NSW would be more selfish this time around.

People said it had to be independent because Johnson was part of the set up at the time

We actually needed Izzy to send us broke so we could build a better structure. Although there would still be a risk that we just cobbled the existing one back together :(

I think you know it is all BS though TWAS. Too many "independent" reviewers have skin in some game somewhere (refer Yes Minister) then provide report to Board which is not published. "Independence" is only demanded when the competence and integrity of the "reviewed" is under question. Admittedly this is the case here, but there is supposed to be some accountability for the "reviewed". The administration of Australian rugby has rarely in our history been that flash. Now the stakes are huge and we are supposedly hiring top notch people at significant cost to manage that risk. We are importing people who are applying business and management principles which are failing in the business world but are, in any event, totally unsuitable for managing a sport.

None of this is revolutionary- and it ducks around the obvious question- when does RA get a board of substance? A ground up approach is vital and obvious but a board with competent oversight is also important. 5/10 for your homework chaps.

Australia has had a good record with having 2nd rowers (or is that locks) as captains!

Thanks for the report Daniel. OMG this exposes the rank incompetence and backward nature of RA. 1) the WHOLE Report and all 40 Rec's should have been publicly released for comment and submissions. 2) Of the few Rec's released the only amazing part is why they have not been a normal part of operations for at least 10 years. The fact that they have not tells everyone all they need to know about the lack of competence of RA and coaching staff over the past 5 yrs. And it explains (in part) why the WBs have dropped down to 6-7 in world rankings. 3) What has been released by RA is no more than a few Rec's on the bleeding obvious that any competent sporting body should have had in place for over a decade. We should now be on our 3rd 5 yr plan with reports presenting progress on all these Rec's and another 100. 4) RA urgently needs a comprehensive Rugby Rebuilding Strategic Plan together with an Action Plan detailing programs to implement it. Each of the Actions then need associated timing, budgets and quantifiable performance indicators. Development of all this needs to be a public process with adequate opportunity for public participation and ownership. The Action Plan also needs annual public reporting on progress in achieving the performance indicators and actions. 5) RA need to be brought into the 21st century. They are a backward joke - a bad one.

Does this also mean that if we continue failing thru to the next WC the RA Board has a scapegoat in the independent panel of Pat Howard, Nathan Sharpe and Bo Hanson for failing to make the appropriate recommendations for success.

For Nathan Sharpe to be on the panel is a sad reflection on Rugby Australia. He is one of Rugby’s genuine ‘space cadets’ yet has been tasked with identifying the code’s failings. A bit like asking a monkey to oversee a royal commission into the engineering industry

Paulo, you are right in that you cannot measure with certainty anything other than performance. It's a "gut" thing.

The problem is measuring quality, like attitude and commitment. How do you measure attitude? If you say some has more attitude than someone else, ‘more’ is a qualifiable concept, but attitude can’t be measured. You can use indicators, like number of trainings attended, length of trainings, number of extra training activities. But those could be gamed. I get where you’re coming from, but putting rubber to the road and implementing something like ‘here for the right reasons’ is actually a very difficult thing to measure tangibly and objectively.

Fair enough. And it is difficult to know precisely why it hasn’t been disclosed, unless they were to disclose it. It becomes a matter of trust, which they haven’t exactly done great with in the past with some processes, the process around the Force being good example. I’m going to try and look past the RA board and Castle, and focus on the coaching set up, selection process, and performances. That will be where we will see the changes first and performance is really the metric they want to move.

Howard went to Marist Ashgrove QLD, Sharpie The Southport School QLD, and Bo Hansen Brisbane Boys College QLD...….. How much coin do they get for coming up with 13 pages of nothing like this?

Agree with all but last sentence. Often full disclosure to the unwashed masses can be detrimental to some necessary and maybe non PC change. We shall see over the next year or two.

And that is no secret that should be kept from the Wallabies opponents. I am just your average rugby loving arm chair critic but it's pretty clear to me that the Wallabies and RA have massive deficits in the fundamentals of playing rugby and running the game. Both RA and Cheika have failed strategically. SIMPLE and DIRECT should be and should have been their style on and off the field. To much flash and not enough substance. They have done almost irrepairable damage to the lifeblood of the game. Their grassroots slowly diminishing fan base. I am hopeful that Rennies ability to connect with people might just turn things around . But they need to start winning a lot more than they lose for this to happen.

Touche :silly:

I think that's the measurable deliverable.. It's all about climate change..

Yep. I hate that word... :angry: