Humility cuts both ways: Brett Clark and the QRU deserve the same scrutiny as Hamish McLennan

By W Evans / Roar Rookie

It has been interesting to see the reaction to Hamish McLennan’s purge this week.

It was unanimously agreed on these threads that Hammer McLennan lacked humility and wasn’t the guy to bring people together. Humility and unity in tough times cuts both ways of course which I’ll come to shortly.

There was also great excitement that a ‘Shore blazer’ had been toppled by a Brisbane Grammar alumni backed by a Chief Executive Officer straight outta Churchie. Oh the irony.

Yet few seem to have watched the press conference Brett Clark, Chairman of the QRU, appeared at on Monday. With Eddie packing for Tokyo and the Hammer ‘drinking milk’ alone in a quiet Rose Bay patisserie, there was no point I guess.

In what was perhaps a Freudian Slip, when asked about Queensland’s regional rugby community, Clark responded “our pathways, whether it be private schools, or, or, or wherever players are coming from, we haven’t been able to retain them.” Hmmm.

Notwithstanding that revealing fumble, let’s put tired private school bashing to one side for a moment. After all, the difference between Sydney and Brisbane blazers is a lesser problem than NSW and QLD parochialism as Geoff Parkes astutely noted in his article earlier this week.

The Irish Times reported on 28 October that David Nucifora, a man many would like to see become Australia’s Director of Rugby, will likely finish up in Ireland come July.

But would he want to come back to the state-against-state (there appear few mates) disaster zone that is worse than when he gave up on reforming Australian Rugby a decade ago? Arguably, a situation worse than what he found in the four proud provinces of Ireland, sectarian history and all.

It appears a case of right man, right time, wrong place when it comes to Nucifora and any other candidate for that matter.

While lauded by some, Clark and the QRU gave a tired and frankly impossibly contradictory presser on Monday.

Fair enough, McLennan lacked humility. Nobody can argue about that. But humility cuts both ways Mr Clark.

(Photo By Brendan Moran/Sportsfile via Getty Images)

Let’s take a look at some of the foundational stones in the QRU’s broader position. The important stuff.

Clark said that they’d “burn an effigy” of him at Ballymore before the QRU’s commercial assets were handed over. His predecessors had taken hard decisions he said, “got dirty and ugly and turned it around, built this amazing facility [Ballymore]”.

While it’s true that the QRU took hits on Ballymore as a depreciating asset in order to address its impact on the books, that was only possible for two reasons.

Firstly, Rugby Australia bailed the QRU out between 2015 and 2017 with multi-million dollar grants. Notably, around that time, a chunk of money funded Nick Stiles’ sacking after less than 12 months as well as a law suit brought by John ‘Knuckles’ Connolly. But hey, everyone makes mistakes.

Secondly, of the $31.5 million cost of the Ballymore revamp, federal taxpayers contributed $15 million, while the Queensland government matched that figure. For all intents and purposes, Ballymore is taxpayer-funded. A national asset as much as a state one.

It’s also worthwhile noting that Mr Clark’s predecessor as chairman wasn’t Barack Obama, Steve Jobs or Bob the Builder though you might think it based on Clark’s comments. It was none other than Jeff Miller, the CEO of Queensland Rugby and then coach of the Reds during the unexceptional period between 2001 and 2006. A period where the Reds went backward fast while the Lions won three flags, the Broncos excelled and the Titans launched. Queensland Rugby has never recovered.

I don’t believe there was ever much drinking of milk though.

Clark also provided a delusional and confused assessment of the problems afflicting rugby across Queensland.

On one hand, Clark said “we have entire first teams at schools contracted to rugby league.”

Then moments later Clark identified that “the disconnect is from club land to professional rugby through to the Wallabies and that’s the high performance piece.”

It was a revealing misstep by Clark. While seeking to justify the QRU’s position on alignment, Clark highlighted for all to see, the fatal flaw in his argument around the centralisation of commercial assets.

Clark was effectively admitting the best talent is being lost to league while those who remain unsigned go to ‘club land’ and then fail to make the grade in part because pathways aren’t open.

In other words, no money to sign school boys, no money to develop second-tier talent in ‘club land’ and limited viable high-performance pathways because there is no money. And of course no money for grassroots.

And that’s in a state that doesn’t want to share assets funded by taxpayers because it’s apparently doing really well on it its own!

Ten Joseph Sua’ali’i refunds wouldn’t change that beyond being a ‘sugar hit’ in the short term. In the context of AFL’s $900 million deal for example, it’s a drop in the ocean.

(Photo by Mark Kolbe/Getty Images)

If Nucifora did take the job, there is no money without pooling assets. At the very least there is less financial clout.

As Geoff Parkes said in his article earlier this week:

“It’s a situation Australians are well accustomed to; the shortcomings of Federation laid bare during COVID. It soon became evident that Prime Minister Scott Morrison was in fact Prime Minister of very little at all, and that jurisdiction rested with the states on substantive matters relating to health systems and law and order. Despite the setting up of a ‘national cabinet’, that united façade only ever lasted for as long as it suited the needs of each state premier; Western Australia’s Mark McGowan and Queensland’s Anastacia Palaszczuk – ‘Queensland hospitals are for Queensland people’ – notably playing the self-interest card at every opportunity.”

As far back as 2012, former Federal Sports Minister Mark Arbib found in an in-depth review:

“There is currently a worrying divide between the business models of Super Rugby teams and the ARU … As a result, the very structure of Australian rugby has become a factor inhibiting the success of both the national and the Super Rugby teams.”

Note that Arbib recommended strongly the alignment of business models, not just high-performance programs. And the reason behind that recommendation is simple.

The QRU’s position vis-a-vis its commercial assets is the equivalent of a husband and wife refusing to share assets in order to educate their kids and optimise growth in family savings as well as borrowing power.

Over time, that family unit will survive but decline across metrics in comparison to those who accept many hands are better than one, that pooled assets generate better returns and that going it alone hurts every member of the family in the long run.

When people talk of repeated QRU profits, they fail to recognise those profits seldom have exceeded six figures. Queensland Rugby is the equivalent of a small business, heavily exposed to headwinds and fluctuations.

The fundamental problem is that Clark and the QRU don’t see Australian Rugby as a ‘family’. They see it in the context of competing families or communities. Albeit competing families that have no issues seeking handouts in the tough times or accepting federal tax dollars but don’t recognise it’s a two-way street.

It was that way long before Hamish McLennan tried to hammer square pieces into round holes.

Each year the Bledisloe rolls around and we get done like a dinner. The game here is at real risk of being reduced to an amateur pastime.

Sports opinion delivered daily 

   

But hey, why worry about being world beaters when you can fly the Queensland flag on the Sydney Harbour Bridge once every few years?

The Crowd Says:

2023-12-01T08:35:20+00:00

Jacko

Roar Rookie


Best non CEO???? LOL. Best COB????? ( chairman of board )

2023-12-01T02:16:45+00:00

cs

Roar Guru


It's actually not business 101. You're merely describing a veritable economic doctrine known as 'economies of scale'. It can be, and is, used to justify every takeover or amalgamation that has ever occurred anywhere anytime. Could be used to justify Australia being taken over by another country. The doctrine should be taken as given, insofar as it's true, and put aside for substantial issues.

2023-12-01T01:52:01+00:00

cs

Roar Guru


Actually Hamish wasn't the only director to vote against his removal. Hamish was out of the room, as appropriate, an absentee for the vote, which was unanimous.

2023-12-01T01:42:39+00:00

cs

Roar Guru


the worst CEO RA has had True, and he wasn't even CEO.

2023-11-29T08:47:24+00:00

JD Kiwi

Roar Rookie


You can manage and control them together without transferring ownership

2023-11-28T07:28:51+00:00

Ozrugbynut

Roar Rookie


You are right, I did mean assets, but my point is jointly managing and controlling assets is more efficient.

2023-11-27T03:15:10+00:00

Train Without A Station

Roar Guru


3. Folau’s original lawsuit was $14million. It’s generally accepted that he settled for between $3-4million plus costs of approximately $1million. He can make any baseless claim he wants. Doesn't mean he had any chance of receiving that. At best, the maximum loss he could demonstrate would be the remaining value on his contract. Given his settlement allowed him to then sign other contracts, the negotiated settlement would have been less then that (because RA could have just put him on gardening leave if they wanted and he'd have suffered no loss). Did the entire board have Eddie around for dinner 6 months earlier?

2023-11-27T03:12:57+00:00

Train Without A Station

Roar Guru


Israel Folau’s payout (which exceeded the Sua’ali’i contract). Source please?

2023-11-27T02:57:18+00:00

Train Without A Station

Roar Guru


I don't think RA has really had any assets for 20 years. Concorde Oval was probably the last one.

2023-11-26T23:26:25+00:00

Ruckin' Oaf

Roar Rookie


1. Might take more than a couple of weeks to solve those problems. But at least some of those problems might not be repeated. 2. So there's a history of RA mismanagement. 3. Sounds like a guess to me. 4. See point 2 You've made some great arguments for the QRU to be rightly cautious about handing over assets. You might want to rethink your originating article.

AUTHOR

2023-11-26T08:57:43+00:00

W Evans

Roar Rookie


1. Not defending McLennan, advocating for a sense of context and perspective. McLennan gone, Eddie gone but problems aren’t solved. 2. Good point. I’ll lob in Gary Flowers for you and repeat my comment. Game was on the ropes long before McLennan. 3. Folau’s original lawsuit was $14million. It’s generally accepted that he settled for between $3-4million plus costs of approximately $1million. 4. McLennan and the entire board brought in Eddie. The entire board has signed off on Sua’ali’i and likely every other major commercial decision. The only guy who walked and said ‘no’ was Andy Marinos. Simple facts, lost sight of because the majority have found it easier to focus on Eddie and McLennan rather than the big picture.

2023-11-26T08:37:20+00:00

Ruckin' Oaf

Roar Rookie


I don’t really like McLennan or his style Yet you sure are spending a lot of time defending him. Hawker, Pulver, Castle Hawker - started in 2012 Pulver in 2013 Castle in 2017 But they were squandering monies from 2003. Of course they were. I think you're having a problem seeing the trees for the forest. Israel Folau’s payout (which exceeded the Sua’ali’i contract). Sure it did. The game was in pieces long before McLennan Right so accelerating the decline is the way to go. Game was in pieces already, let's really stuff it up. And if that was the case it makes much more sense for the QRU to be cautious particularly about assets. This contention very much undermines the tenor of your article.

AUTHOR

2023-11-26T06:16:10+00:00

W Evans

Roar Rookie


I don’t really like McLennan or his style but it’s inaccurate to make out as if the game was in even passable shape before he started. It certainly wasn’t the ‘unsinkable ship’ in 2019. Hawker, Pulver, Castle all did immeasurable damage whether it was the squandering of the revenue from 2003, the handling of McKenzie’s reign, the Force disaster or Israel Folau’s payout (which exceeded the Sua’ali’i contract). The game was in pieces long before McLennan and all data on and off field supports that. It’s been my point all along, he’s an easy target which has been a distraction.

2023-11-26T01:47:41+00:00

Ruckin' Oaf

Roar Rookie


McLennan was appointed captain of the titanic and drove it recklessly and hit an iceberg Just thought I'd fix that sentence for ya first. Although a better analogy might be a gas leak. Room full of unconscious people - should the first at the scene charge in and end up unconscious too ? Or hang back a little until they figure the cause out. The way RA has been running I find it hard to blame QLD for being a little cautious.

AUTHOR

2023-11-25T15:11:13+00:00

W Evans

Roar Rookie


It’s a fair observation Ruckin but I don’t think anyone could have possibly expected things would go as badly with Eddie as they did. Was it a gamble though, yes. As another analogy, McLennan was appointed captain of the titanic after it was driven recklessly and hit an iceberg. Herbert has now taken over as the passengers face two choices (a) work together to save as many as possible or (b) go it alone with life rafts partly full and only a few wearing life jackets.

2023-11-25T08:28:11+00:00

cinque

Roar Rookie


Am I the only one who picked up TWAS typing "forrest"? Have I missed something?

2023-11-24T23:55:07+00:00

Ruckin' Oaf

Roar Rookie


The last Lions tour netted $45million. Last Lions tour was 2013 ? So that inflation thing it still happening ?

2023-11-24T22:46:59+00:00

Passit2me

Roar Rookie


Wrong. Queensland made it clear to Hamish well before he left, that they did not want to hand over Ballymore as part of centralisation, and Hamish said RA accepted this position. It’s not something QLD have pulled out to stall centralisation now that Hamish has gone.

2023-11-24T10:28:30+00:00

LuckyPhil

Roar Rookie


Maybe they should figure out how to fund proper pathways.

2023-11-24T09:16:43+00:00

Busted Fullback

Roar Rookie


G’day WE. Now I know I’m late to the party and I haven’t read all 181 comments, and I apologise if I am repeating anything that’s been said already. It seems to me that a lot of people, particularly from south of the Tweed, seem to think that the Reds own Ballymore and other assets. Hate to burst the bubble, but those physical assets belong to the QRU who also own the Reds SR franchise. The way I see it is that the Reds are able to use QRU assets. If, during centralisation the RA was to takeover the Reds assets, that would include the players contracts, sponsorships put in place with the Reds, coaches, managers and... not much else. So, in effect, the QRU would still be able to use the grounds and facilities to look after the game in Q’ld. They might even be able to form a Queensland team from the Prem club competition and Q’ld Country to play NZ Provences like Manawatu, Bay of Plenty etc, just like the old days. With control of the Reds being handled from Sydney, I truely wonder, would RA want to hire QRU facilities to keep the Reds in Brisbane? And if they did, how many Queenslanders would continue to be members of this “North of Sydney” team? Or would they turn their support more to local club competitions and the Queensland team as the QRU were able to concentrate on the grass roots? Parochial? Tribal? Yes! But still able to feed to the national cause.

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar