World Rugby Board elections
-
@Chris-B said in World Rugby Board elections:
@booboo said in World Rugby Board elections:
Love this from Impey.
Didn't see the Reason whinge piece but reckon you can get the gist from this response.
https://twitter.com/NZRugby/status/1252817891709186050?s=19
(Will change the thread title slightly.)
Actually, I think Reason made a decent point - he was asking how Bart Campbell hasn't got a conflict of interest.
He's just finished 7 years as Chair of the Melbourne Storm, apparently he's still the largest shareholder and a board member.
https://www.melbournestorm.com.au/news/2020/03/04/bart-campbell-to-stand-down-as-storm-chairman/
He is shit stirring because instead of simply asking NZR if that potential conflict was declared he forged ahead with his crayons and wrote a load of piffle, in effect hinting that they were either hiding something or too stupid to realise.
He is a fucktard click baiter and it astounds me that the papers can cry that we may lose journalism under Covid but still 'print' this type of tripe.@Crucial said in World Rugby Board elections:
@Chris-B said in World Rugby Board elections:
@booboo said in World Rugby Board elections:
Love this from Impey.
Didn't see the Reason whinge piece but reckon you can get the gist from this response.
https://twitter.com/NZRugby/status/1252817891709186050?s=19
(Will change the thread title slightly.)
Actually, I think Reason made a decent point - he was asking how Bart Campbell hasn't got a conflict of interest.
He's just finished 7 years as Chair of the Melbourne Storm, apparently he's still the largest shareholder and a board member.
https://www.melbournestorm.com.au/news/2020/03/04/bart-campbell-to-stand-down-as-storm-chairman/
He is shit stirring because instead of simply asking NZR if that potential conflict was declared he forged ahead with his crayons and wrote a load of piffle, in effect hinting that they were either hiding something or too stupid to realise.
He is a fucktard click baiter and it astounds me that the papers can cry that we may lose journalism under Covid but still 'print' this type of tripe.So, you declare the conflict of interest and then it's all good? The voters can then decide whether to choose Bart or the guy who kicked someone to death? (It's something like 9 nominees for 8 positions isn't it)?
While I won't disagree with your point on Reason's general modus operandi, I wouldn't have known who we nominated or what his conflicts of interest were if Reason hadn't pointed them out. So he's provided a public service to me.
And no matter how good Bart is, nor how scrupulously honest, it surprises the hell out of me that our nominee to the inner sanctum of world rugby is a guy who is donkey deep in the league hierarchy.
-
@Crucial said in World Rugby Board elections:
@Chris-B said in World Rugby Board elections:
@booboo said in World Rugby Board elections:
Love this from Impey.
Didn't see the Reason whinge piece but reckon you can get the gist from this response.
https://twitter.com/NZRugby/status/1252817891709186050?s=19
(Will change the thread title slightly.)
Actually, I think Reason made a decent point - he was asking how Bart Campbell hasn't got a conflict of interest.
He's just finished 7 years as Chair of the Melbourne Storm, apparently he's still the largest shareholder and a board member.
https://www.melbournestorm.com.au/news/2020/03/04/bart-campbell-to-stand-down-as-storm-chairman/
He is shit stirring because instead of simply asking NZR if that potential conflict was declared he forged ahead with his crayons and wrote a load of piffle, in effect hinting that they were either hiding something or too stupid to realise.
He is a fucktard click baiter and it astounds me that the papers can cry that we may lose journalism under Covid but still 'print' this type of tripe.So, you declare the conflict of interest and then it's all good? The voters can then decide whether to choose Bart or the guy who kicked someone to death? (It's something like 9 nominees for 8 positions isn't it)?
While I won't disagree with your point on Reason's general modus operandi, I wouldn't have known who we nominated or what his conflicts of interest were if Reason hadn't pointed them out. So he's provided a public service to me.
And no matter how good Bart is, nor how scrupulously honest, it surprises the hell out of me that our nominee to the inner sanctum of world rugby is a guy who is donkey deep in the league hierarchy.
@Chris-B said in World Rugby Board elections:
And no matter how good Bart is, nor how scrupulously honest, it surprises the hell out of me that our nominee to the inner sanctum of world rugby is a guy who is donkey deep in the league hierarchy.
The new Executive Committee will comprise: Sir Bill Beaumont (Chairman), Bernard Laporte (Vice-Chairman), Brett Gosper (Chief Executive), Angela Ruggiero (Independent), Lord Mervyn Davies (Independent); Mark Alexander (South African Rugby Union), Khaled Babbou (Rugby Africa), Bart Campbell (New Zealand Rugby), Gareth Davies (Welsh Rugby Union), John Jeffrey (Scottish Rugby), Bob Latham (USA Rugby) and Brett Robinson (Rugby Australia).
-
@Chris-B said in World Rugby Board elections:
And no matter how good Bart is, nor how scrupulously honest, it surprises the hell out of me that our nominee to the inner sanctum of world rugby is a guy who is donkey deep in the league hierarchy.
The new Executive Committee will comprise: Sir Bill Beaumont (Chairman), Bernard Laporte (Vice-Chairman), Brett Gosper (Chief Executive), Angela Ruggiero (Independent), Lord Mervyn Davies (Independent); Mark Alexander (South African Rugby Union), Khaled Babbou (Rugby Africa), Bart Campbell (New Zealand Rugby), Gareth Davies (Welsh Rugby Union), John Jeffrey (Scottish Rugby), Bob Latham (USA Rugby) and Brett Robinson (Rugby Australia).
-
@Chris-B When Kean resigned there were only 7 nominees left for the seven available positions on the World Rugby Executive Committee.
The Fiji Rugby Union have confirmed that their seat on the World Rugby Council will be filled by union CEO John O’Connor.
-
@Chris-B said in World Rugby Board elections:
And no matter how good Bart is, nor how scrupulously honest, it surprises the hell out of me that our nominee to the inner sanctum of world rugby is a guy who is donkey deep in the league hierarchy.
The new Executive Committee will comprise: Sir Bill Beaumont (Chairman), Bernard Laporte (Vice-Chairman), Brett Gosper (Chief Executive), Angela Ruggiero (Independent), Lord Mervyn Davies (Independent); Mark Alexander (South African Rugby Union), Khaled Babbou (Rugby Africa), Bart Campbell (New Zealand Rugby), Gareth Davies (Welsh Rugby Union), John Jeffrey (Scottish Rugby), Bob Latham (USA Rugby) and Brett Robinson (Rugby Australia).
@Bovidae said in World Rugby Board elections:
@Chris-B said in World Rugby Board elections:
And no matter how good Bart is, nor how scrupulously honest, it surprises the hell out of me that our nominee to the inner sanctum of world rugby is a guy who is donkey deep in the league hierarchy.
The new Executive Committee will comprise: Sir Bill Beaumont (Chairman), Bernard Laporte (Vice-Chairman), Brett Gosper (Chief Executive), Angela Ruggiero (Independent), Lord Mervyn Davies (Independent); Mark Alexander (South African Rugby Union), Khaled Babbou (Rugby Africa), Bart Campbell (New Zealand Rugby), Gareth Davies (Welsh Rugby Union), John Jeffrey (Scottish Rugby), Bob Latham (USA Rugby) and Brett Robinson (Rugby Australia).
Looking at that list I don't see much in the way of change flowing through to the way the game is managed, refereed or played.
-
@Crucial said in World Rugby Board elections:
@Chris-B said in World Rugby Board elections:
@booboo said in World Rugby Board elections:
Love this from Impey.
Didn't see the Reason whinge piece but reckon you can get the gist from this response.
https://twitter.com/NZRugby/status/1252817891709186050?s=19
(Will change the thread title slightly.)
Actually, I think Reason made a decent point - he was asking how Bart Campbell hasn't got a conflict of interest.
He's just finished 7 years as Chair of the Melbourne Storm, apparently he's still the largest shareholder and a board member.
https://www.melbournestorm.com.au/news/2020/03/04/bart-campbell-to-stand-down-as-storm-chairman/
He is shit stirring because instead of simply asking NZR if that potential conflict was declared he forged ahead with his crayons and wrote a load of piffle, in effect hinting that they were either hiding something or too stupid to realise.
He is a fucktard click baiter and it astounds me that the papers can cry that we may lose journalism under Covid but still 'print' this type of tripe.So, you declare the conflict of interest and then it's all good? The voters can then decide whether to choose Bart or the guy who kicked someone to death? (It's something like 9 nominees for 8 positions isn't it)?
While I won't disagree with your point on Reason's general modus operandi, I wouldn't have known who we nominated or what his conflicts of interest were if Reason hadn't pointed them out. So he's provided a public service to me.
And no matter how good Bart is, nor how scrupulously honest, it surprises the hell out of me that our nominee to the inner sanctum of world rugby is a guy who is donkey deep in the league hierarchy.
@Chris-B said in World Rugby Board elections:
@Crucial said in World Rugby Board elections:
@Chris-B said in World Rugby Board elections:
@booboo said in World Rugby Board elections:
Love this from Impey.
Didn't see the Reason whinge piece but reckon you can get the gist from this response.
https://twitter.com/NZRugby/status/1252817891709186050?s=19
(Will change the thread title slightly.)
Actually, I think Reason made a decent point - he was asking how Bart Campbell hasn't got a conflict of interest.
He's just finished 7 years as Chair of the Melbourne Storm, apparently he's still the largest shareholder and a board member.
https://www.melbournestorm.com.au/news/2020/03/04/bart-campbell-to-stand-down-as-storm-chairman/
He is shit stirring because instead of simply asking NZR if that potential conflict was declared he forged ahead with his crayons and wrote a load of piffle, in effect hinting that they were either hiding something or too stupid to realise.
He is a fucktard click baiter and it astounds me that the papers can cry that we may lose journalism under Covid but still 'print' this type of tripe.So, you declare the conflict of interest and then it's all good? The voters can then decide whether to choose Bart or the guy who kicked someone to death? (It's something like 9 nominees for 8 positions isn't it)?
That is how it usually works with boards and the like. Look at the crossovers with most business boards. If potential conflicts of interest are known up front then board members are either asked to excuse themselves from specific votes or the conflict is discussed and assessed. Nothing unusual about it.
-
@Chris-B said in World Rugby Board elections:
@Crucial said in World Rugby Board elections:
@Chris-B said in World Rugby Board elections:
@booboo said in World Rugby Board elections:
Love this from Impey.
Didn't see the Reason whinge piece but reckon you can get the gist from this response.
https://twitter.com/NZRugby/status/1252817891709186050?s=19
(Will change the thread title slightly.)
Actually, I think Reason made a decent point - he was asking how Bart Campbell hasn't got a conflict of interest.
He's just finished 7 years as Chair of the Melbourne Storm, apparently he's still the largest shareholder and a board member.
https://www.melbournestorm.com.au/news/2020/03/04/bart-campbell-to-stand-down-as-storm-chairman/
He is shit stirring because instead of simply asking NZR if that potential conflict was declared he forged ahead with his crayons and wrote a load of piffle, in effect hinting that they were either hiding something or too stupid to realise.
He is a fucktard click baiter and it astounds me that the papers can cry that we may lose journalism under Covid but still 'print' this type of tripe.So, you declare the conflict of interest and then it's all good? The voters can then decide whether to choose Bart or the guy who kicked someone to death? (It's something like 9 nominees for 8 positions isn't it)?
That is how it usually works with boards and the like. Look at the crossovers with most business boards. If potential conflicts of interest are known up front then board members are either asked to excuse themselves from specific votes or the conflict is discussed and assessed. Nothing unusual about it.
-
@Chris-B said in World Rugby Board elections:
@Crucial I don't think it's often that people sit on boards of direct competitors.
NRL isn't a direct competitor to WR. I think that is an over-reach.
NRL is a domestic competition with limited international appeal.
It gets closer at Sanzaar and NZRU levels but on the world stage and decisions about the world game, not so much.
-
@Chris-B said in World Rugby Board elections:
@Crucial I don't think it's often that people sit on boards of direct competitors.
The Goggle CEO was on the Apple board for years.
-
@Chris-B said in World Rugby Board elections:
@Crucial I don't think it's often that people sit on boards of direct competitors.
NRL isn't a direct competitor to WR. I think that is an over-reach.
NRL is a domestic competition with limited international appeal.
It gets closer at Sanzaar and NZRU levels but on the world stage and decisions about the world game, not so much.
@Crucial said in World Rugby Board elections:
@Chris-B said in World Rugby Board elections:
@Crucial I don't think it's often that people sit on boards of direct competitors.
NRL isn't a direct competitor to WR. I think that is an over-reach.
NRL is a domestic competition with limited international appeal.
It gets closer at Sanzaar and NZRU levels but on the world stage and decisions about the world game, not so much.
Very direct competitor with Australian rugby, though - and as you point out, to a lesser (though not small) extent with Sanzaar.
When WR starts discussing the commercial aspects of how they're going to rescue Sanzaar and Australian rugby is Bart going to have to leave the room?
-
@Crucial said in World Rugby Board elections:
@Chris-B said in World Rugby Board elections:
@Crucial I don't think it's often that people sit on boards of direct competitors.
NRL isn't a direct competitor to WR. I think that is an over-reach.
NRL is a domestic competition with limited international appeal.
It gets closer at Sanzaar and NZRU levels but on the world stage and decisions about the world game, not so much.
Very direct competitor with Australian rugby, though - and as you point out, to a lesser (though not small) extent with Sanzaar.
When WR starts discussing the commercial aspects of how they're going to rescue Sanzaar and Australian rugby is Bart going to have to leave the room?
@Chris-B said in World Rugby Board elections:
@Crucial said in World Rugby Board elections:
@Chris-B said in World Rugby Board elections:
@Crucial I don't think it's often that people sit on boards of direct competitors.
NRL isn't a direct competitor to WR. I think that is an over-reach.
NRL is a domestic competition with limited international appeal.
It gets closer at Sanzaar and NZRU levels but on the world stage and decisions about the world game, not so much.
Very direct competitor with Australian rugby, though - and as you point out, to a lesser (though not small) extent with Sanzaar.
When WR starts discussing the commercial aspects of how they're going to rescue Sanzaar and Australian rugby is Bart going to have to leave the room?
That I don't know as I don't know the board's 'rules of engagement'.
To think that NZR aren't aware of how that would work though and haven't thought it through is pretty insulting to them (hence the reason they felt strongly enough to publicly berate Reason)
-
Not stirring here: why not tell World Rugby to go get fucked?
It’s a closed shop and will never be anything except that - it’s in the NH teams interest to stay together and buy any support they need from poor Nations, then run rough shod over the teams which make the World Cup a truly premium product.
Why not get a few Nations together (I.e., SANZAAR, Japan, South Pacific) and start the ‘international rugby association’ (ok, that might not abbreviate that well) and just start a new World Nations competition with someone like Amazon behind us?
Stimulate it with a matching e-sports competition using players in a game derived from said World Nations competition and get way ahead in streaming and e-sports (switch etc) while they continue to focus on boomers?
-
@Chris-B said in World Rugby Board elections:
@Crucial said in World Rugby Board elections:
@Chris-B said in World Rugby Board elections:
@Crucial I don't think it's often that people sit on boards of direct competitors.
NRL isn't a direct competitor to WR. I think that is an over-reach.
NRL is a domestic competition with limited international appeal.
It gets closer at Sanzaar and NZRU levels but on the world stage and decisions about the world game, not so much.
Very direct competitor with Australian rugby, though - and as you point out, to a lesser (though not small) extent with Sanzaar.
When WR starts discussing the commercial aspects of how they're going to rescue Sanzaar and Australian rugby is Bart going to have to leave the room?
That I don't know as I don't know the board's 'rules of engagement'.
To think that NZR aren't aware of how that would work though and haven't thought it through is pretty insulting to them (hence the reason they felt strongly enough to publicly berate Reason)
@Crucial I'm sure they thought about it.
But, I certainly didn't know anything about it until Reason raised it. I'd never heard of Bart and I had no idea he was also on the board of NZ rugby.
So I think Reason has actually done them a service - and us a service - by calling Impey to account. As Impey himself notes, rugby administration (and especially its gin-swilling perception) is an old boys club, so the more the tree is shaken - the better. Transparency is a key principle of good governance.
-
Not stirring here: why not tell World Rugby to go get fucked?
It’s a closed shop and will never be anything except that - it’s in the NH teams interest to stay together and buy any support they need from poor Nations, then run rough shod over the teams which make the World Cup a truly premium product.
Why not get a few Nations together (I.e., SANZAAR, Japan, South Pacific) and start the ‘international rugby association’ (ok, that might not abbreviate that well) and just start a new World Nations competition with someone like Amazon behind us?
Stimulate it with a matching e-sports competition using players in a game derived from said World Nations competition and get way ahead in streaming and e-sports (switch etc) while they continue to focus on boomers?
Who do you think Japan voted for? They would have been one of the swing votes.
Fiji and Samoa voted for Beaumont, and maybe Oceania did too so they might be happy with the status quo and promises made.
Pichot (16 votes)
Argentina (3)
Australia (3)
New Zealand (3)
Canada (1)
United States (1)
Uruguay (1)
South America (2)
Americas North (2)Beaumont (24 votes)
England (3)
France (3)
Ireland (3)
Italy (3)
Scotland (3)
Wales (3)
Georgia (1)
Fiji (1)
Samoa (1)
Romania (1)
Europe (2)Unknown (11 votes)
South Africa (3)
Japan (2)
Africa (2)
Asia (2)
Oceania (2)Beaumont only needed an extra 4 votes so it could have been Japan and Asia that got him over the line.
-
Who do you think Japan voted for? They would have been one of the swing votes.
Fiji and Samoa voted for Beaumont, and maybe Oceania did too so they might be happy with the status quo and promises made.
Pichot (16 votes)
Argentina (3)
Australia (3)
New Zealand (3)
Canada (1)
United States (1)
Uruguay (1)
South America (2)
Americas North (2)Beaumont (24 votes)
England (3)
France (3)
Ireland (3)
Italy (3)
Scotland (3)
Wales (3)
Georgia (1)
Fiji (1)
Samoa (1)
Romania (1)
Europe (2)Unknown (11 votes)
South Africa (3)
Japan (2)
Africa (2)
Asia (2)
Oceania (2)Beaumont only needed an extra 4 votes so it could have been Japan and Asia that got him over the line.
-
Who do you think Japan voted for? They would have been one of the swing votes.
Fiji and Samoa voted for Beaumont, and maybe Oceania did too so they might be happy with the status quo and promises made.
Pichot (16 votes)
Argentina (3)
Australia (3)
New Zealand (3)
Canada (1)
United States (1)
Uruguay (1)
South America (2)
Americas North (2)Beaumont (24 votes)
England (3)
France (3)
Ireland (3)
Italy (3)
Scotland (3)
Wales (3)
Georgia (1)
Fiji (1)
Samoa (1)
Romania (1)
Europe (2)Unknown (11 votes)
South Africa (3)
Japan (2)
Africa (2)
Asia (2)
Oceania (2)Beaumont only needed an extra 4 votes so it could have been Japan and Asia that got him over the line.
@Bovidae If Beaumont ended up with 28 votes, then maths tells us SA must have voted for Gus. And you'd imagine the Sanzar countries would have voted as a bloc.
So, Bill got two of the remaining 4.
I guess if you see England playing a test against Tonga....
-
Who do you think Japan voted for? They would have been one of the swing votes.
Fiji and Samoa voted for Beaumont, and maybe Oceania did too so they might be happy with the status quo and promises made.
Pichot (16 votes)
Argentina (3)
Australia (3)
New Zealand (3)
Canada (1)
United States (1)
Uruguay (1)
South America (2)
Americas North (2)Beaumont (24 votes)
England (3)
France (3)
Ireland (3)
Italy (3)
Scotland (3)
Wales (3)
Georgia (1)
Fiji (1)
Samoa (1)
Romania (1)
Europe (2)Unknown (11 votes)
South Africa (3)
Japan (2)
Africa (2)
Asia (2)
Oceania (2)Beaumont only needed an extra 4 votes so it could have been Japan and Asia that got him over the line.
