How to fix Australian rugby, Part 8: All aboard

The issue is the states. The states are supposed to be the mechanism for the clubs and supporters being represented. They states clearly are not represented who they are supposed to.

Tell me a broadcaster that would not want 5 Australian teams in a 10 team competition?

Having a rep for e.g. clubs or sevens won't resolve the problems with the board. All those positions could still be occupied by a person from a single state and still meet the alleged diversity sort after. Based on what has happened over the past few decades it will result in the same myopic view of what is best for "Australian" rugby, which of course it was not.

Only two examples of people giving up power in recent years come to mind. De Klerk in SA, and Gorbachev in Russia. I have no idea how willing either were.

Been on a few boards Golden Eye?

La La Land...roughly half way between Iceland and Greenland?

Having been on several committees and boards I offer the following: Never have a lawyer on a board. They will always find a way to say no. Sure see lawyers but only once the deal is done. Ditto accountants. They will always find a way to stop you spending cash on a good idea. As for HR...I have no experience with them on boards, but I would use them as consultants, not decision makers. I await the barrage of responses patiently!

Having a Board comprised of single issue, self interest groups such as women's, sevens etc will never work. The current system is OK, you just need quality people on it whose objective views are for the betterment of rugby.

That is one of the big issues Frank. The SR franchises are just ‘clubs’ in a new competition, and I do not see professional rugby as viable otherwise. A state of origin reduces the whole thing to NSW and Queensland. Rugby administrators need to connect supporters who have not played for that “club” as members and supporter. A bit counter-intuitive for former players who usually maintain ties with the clubs they played for. Between 1996 and 2019 I maintained my connections with the two clubs I have played for, and emotionally connected with the Waratahs as the NSW representative team. I could not relate to the players referring to the Waratahs as a "club". Once the penny dropped, it changed the way I viewed the players and the team. With the Tahs on the Roam I then attended quite a few more games than I intended to. If the football was not so heart breaking against the Sharks, I probably would have gone to the last two games. That would have been more than I attended as a full member more in the 2018 season. I took up this issue with NSW Rugby through several touch points, but they do not get it either. Probably too many enthusiastic young marketing graduates working there.

The governance structure is poor but you are wrong about where the power lies. The changes sponsored by JON ensure that absolute power resides with the Board, and if it is weak and management strong, with management. Much more power needs to be vested in financial supporters of the game to hold rugby administration accountable for their failures.

That is one of the big issues Frank. The SR franchises are clubs. A state of origin reduces the whole thing to NSW and Queensland. Rugby administration has made no attempt to connect supporters to these "clubs". From 1996 until 2019 I emotionally viewed the Waratahs as the NSW representative team, just like 1968 (earliest conscious rugby moments) to 1995. I thought the players were wankers referring to the Waratahs as a "club". Once the penny dropped, it changed the way I viewed the players and the team. With the Tahs on the Roam I eventually attended quite a few more games than I intended to. If the football was not so heart breaking against the Sharks I probably would have gone to the last two games and attended more in the season than when I was a full member in 2018. I took up this issue with NSW Rugby through several touch points, but they do not get it either. Zero attempt at connecting rugby supporters with the Waratahs.

Hi Waxhead, How does RA battle News and their concerted effort to destroy Rugby in Australia? I've been racking my brain on this one, Raelene Castle tried and was destroyed. It appears all other Media has swallowed the News driven narrative.

How are these representatives appointed within your groups ? Boards are controlled by power blocs . I can’t see that this would negate the QLD / NSW stranglehold. It should become the Australian Rugby Council. Five positions should be filled directly from from the five franchises. These should represent and come from a franchise board made up of Clubs, Country, Junior, Women’s and the controlling interest. One representative each from the major sponsors, the players, sevens , women’s side and the Wallaby’s. Chairman elected within the Council. No state or franchise to have more than two councillors.

You don't have a rep for current international rugby but you do for club, country and provincial. ex wallabies don't count nor the players rep they have different agendas. I don't think your board works. The focus should be in 3 areas community / amateur, representative/pathway and professional. The representative / pathway is the bridge between the 2. I haven't the time to work out the number of votes each area would get and how they represent the the number of clubs/players in each geographical area and take into account future growth.

I have thoroughly enjoyed these articles Jeremy. I haven’t always agreed on some things but it’s generated great debate and highlights the passion for the game in Australia despite the slow demise of the game before our eyes. What I’ve taken from it all; * Better for Australian rugby to die standing up for itself. * There’s a deep held desire for a stand alone Australian comp * NRC was never given a real crack when up against NRL/AFL finals and teams not really reflecting area, eg Qld Country. But they were visionary in having the Drua included. My wish list; * Reduced junior sub costs. * A genuine opposition to the RL confraternity shield in Qld where rugby powerhouse schools are seemingly NRL breeding grounds. * A stand alone Australian comp. * An origin style comp. At present, Tahs and Reds are more like clubs than rep teams. Again, great to see the passion still burning, albeit softer than previous years.

I have not agreed with every step but the thrust of the articles is good. The last, number 8 is absolutely correct and must happen before any real progress will take place with Rugby in Australia. Anyone with the future of Australian Rugby in their heart should beat this drum until we are heard and the uprising takes place.

@Jeremy You've gone off into fantasy land with this article on governance. Whilst I agree with your fantasy list it's pointless to totally ignore reality. Reality is that News Corp took over RA in a coup in 2020. The game is now being run by Foxtel marketing execs with no concern for anything but their corporate view on what's best to maximise Foxtel's short term ratings. RA Board members are mere puppets and yes men for News Corp. We're already seeing that control exerted in RA's absurd decision this week to try to force 5 Aussie teams back into a trans Tasman comp in 2021. NZ, being objective and rightly concerned about playing standards and long term viability, only want 3 Aussie teams. News Corp/RA want 5 Aussie teams back again so they've got games to broadcast in 2021 on their fast failing Foxtel company. And Foxtel are in such rapid freefall it's highly unlikely they'll be operating in 3 yrs. So issue no 1 for governance is to destroy forever the News Corp control asap. How do you propose to do that Jeremy? You'll need to fully engage with reality for starters :silly: The "irresistible external force" you mention is the pay TV market where Foxtel has already lost the war. This will cause the closing down of Foxtel broadcasting in Australia. When they go kaput they'll leave RA in ruins but at least the rugby public will have it's game back.

It's a tough one. You'd like your board to be diversified, well-rounded, covering as many areas as possible with no agendas other than bettering the entire organisation and its stakeholders. The Holy Grail of Boards.

I don’t know... What is the definition of ‘country’ rugby and where would the board that runs it sit? Sydney? Women’s rugby? Aren’t they in clubs and aren’t they also in the country? Classic Wallabies? These are the guys that got paid a bundle to play and now live on a gravy train..... they get a vote? This to me sounds like a governance nightmare. Perhaps it’s the accountabilities that need to change? I don’t know - there is definitely a problem with the link between the grass roots and the lofty heights of RA, but replacing them with a new assortment of groups, that will have their own agendas, doesn’t seem to address the misalignment - it just fragments and moves it elsewhere.

You saved me from commenting with that "turkeys voting for Christmas" remark about them obviously not wanting to vote away their own power, so someone like Forrest could be the only likely candidate to be that "irresistible external force".