NZR review

[KiwiMurph]

@Winger said in NZR review:

And why should the PU's give it all up?

Because they organised an expert independent review whose findings clearly outline the changes that are needed and why.

[nzzp]

@KiwiMurph said in NZR review:

@Winger said in NZR review:

And why should the PU's give it all up?

Because they organised an expert independent review whose findings clearly outline the changes that are needed and why.

Are they (the experts) right though? Honest question - I think a lot of people have seen well meaning but fundamentally wrong reviews come back. I have some sympathy for the PU - it's their game after all, but they have made a right mess of it recently.

NZR governance has also been utterly woeful over the last few years.

[Duluth]

@KiwiMurph said in NZR review:

@Winger said in NZR review:

And why should the PU's give it all up?

Because they organised an expert independent review whose findings clearly outline the changes that are needed and why.

Everyone agreed that there would be a review and it's recommendation would be voted on

The review came back and all stakeholders said they agreed with the findings

Then there was 6 months of silence, then there was counter recommendations floated. Everything since the review has been about sabotaging the process. I would have more time for the PU's if they promptly voted it down in 2023

The fact this wasn't voted on last year is proof that the admin of the game in NZ is incompetent and self serving

[Winger]

@Duluth said in NZR review:

@Winger said in NZR review:

@Duluth said in NZR review:

@Winger said in NZR review:

@Duluth said in NZR review:

@Winger said in NZR review:

A professional proposal

They haven't finished writing it yet. Very professional.

Ops. I was referring to Pilkington. I don't know about the PU proposal (I haven't seen it). I was just comparing the 2 that have been published

Pilkington seems VG to me. Esp compared to NZR

You seem a bit confused

Why? (the comment you referenced was 19 days back)

Nothing has changed about the proposals in 19 days

You support and oppose one proposal. You support and haven't read the other

But I'm referring to the process of the people making this decision. I might agree with Rob. But I'm not and he's not some God like infallible superman.

Let the vote take place. And trust the process and see it out. Without these childish threats. And accept that sometimes you win. And sometimes not. And sometimes you get only a % of what you won't. That's life.

[KiwiMurph]

@Duluth said in NZR review:

@KiwiMurph said in NZR review:

@Winger said in NZR review:

And why should the PU's give it all up?

Because they organised an expert independent review whose findings clearly outline the changes that are needed and why.

Everyone agreed that there would be a review and it's recommendation would be voted on

The review came back and all stakeholders said they agreed with the findings

Then there was 6 months of silence, then there was counter recommendations floated. Everything since the review has been about sabotaging the process. I would have more time for the PU's if they promptly voted it down in 2023

The fact this wasn't voted on last year is proof that the admin of the game in NZ is incompetent and self serving

Good summary

[Donsteppa]

More of an aside on Phil Gifford's historical "Since when have rugby provinces in this country ever put the nation first, the province second?"

To give some due, provincial unions and their constituencies at least show an interest and support the game well below Super Rugby level. I might not hold my breath on seeing that locally from the Chiefs, NZRU, let alone any pro Players Association.

I know that's not always where their immediate priorities are, nor need to be in some cases. But the conveyor belt to "the nation" and the All Blacks doesn't begin halfway along at some Academy either.

[Machpants]

Fight, fight, fight, fight....
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/sport/517494/lies-provincial-unions-hit-back-at-players-association-in-governance-stoush

[Dan54]

@Duluth said in NZR review:

@KiwiMurph said in NZR review:

@Winger said in NZR review:

And why should the PU's give it all up?

Because they organised an expert independent review whose findings clearly outline the changes that are needed and why.

Everyone agreed that there would be a review and it's recommendation would be voted on

The review came back and all stakeholders said they agreed with the findings

Then there was 6 months of silence, then there was counter recommendations floated. Everything since the review has been about sabotaging the process. I would have more time for the PU's if they promptly voted it down in 2023

The fact this wasn't voted on last year is proof that the admin of the game in NZ is incompetent and self serving

Can't say I agree, thestakeholder said they agreed in princale to the report, but they had to take it back to their stakeholders too, the clubs etc. It's how PUs work. I don't see it as incompetent or self serving, just the PUs wanting a say in how game is run. I think you will find the board in general is all for the changes, it won't see much change in board members, just the PU members, rest will hold ther positions in all honesty.
I genuinely thank NZR do alright in running the game here anyway, as with all boards follower's of the game are generally seeing the game not being run as they would like, it's a fact of life with anything.

[Dan54]

@Machpants said in NZR review:

Fight, fight, fight, fight....
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/sport/517494/lies-provincial-unions-hit-back-at-players-association-in-governance-stoush

Well it's easy to see what is happening, Nicholls is saying either our way or we will wreak havoc in the game. I not sure if threats they making is from an organisation that should have the only say in how game is run?

[Tim]

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/350286296/new-zealand-rugby-says-nzrpa-threat-wont-impact-all-blacks

New Zealand Rugby has attempted to play down the prospect of disruption to the All Blacks’ season following an extraordinary letter from the New Zealand Rugby Players’ Association (NZRPA) that has threatened to split the game in two.

The NZRPA letter - signed by David Kirk, Richie McCaw, Tammi Wilson Uluinayau, Sam Cane, Scott Curry, Les Elder, Sarah Hirini, Ruby Tui, Patrick Tuipulotu, Samuel Whitelock, Will Jordan, Scott Ireland and Rob Nichol - said that professional players would simply refuse to recognise NZ Rugby’s right to govern the game if its preferred proposal is blocked.

However, the split in game throughout the country has been highlighted by Taranaki supporting the NZRPA-backed proposal, and sharply criticising the alternative put forward by a group of provincial unions including Wellington.

In an email to TRFU stakeholders, chair Dan Radcliffe wrote: “Having observed the process for forming this proposal, we do not believe this proposal is anywhere near robust enough - it is a compromised version of the recommendations made by the review panel.

[Tim]

I imagine that Wellington RFU are particularly opposed to ceding any power, as they consistently spend way beyond their means on their NPC team.

[mariner4life]

@Tim said in NZR review:

professional players would simply refuse to recognise NZ Rugby’s right to govern the game if its preferred proposal is blocked

so now we have sovereign rugby players? this is getting out of hand

[mariner4life]

@Tim said in NZR review:

I imagine that Wellington RFU are particularly opposed to ceding any power, as they consistently spend way beyond their means on their NPC team.

lol then that's been money well spent hasn't it?

[SouthernMann]

@Tim said in NZR review:

I imagine that Wellington RFU are particularly opposed to ceding any power, as they consistently spend way beyond their means on their NPC team.

That's what I found hilarious. WRFU stomping up and down, despite being one of the worst PUs in terms of financial failure.

[Paekakboyz]

@mariner4life I hear the new franchise "The Sheriffs" has already been registered!

[Winger]

@Dan54 said in NZR review:

Well it's easy to see what is happening, Nicholls is saying either our way or we will wreak havoc in the game. I not sure if threats they making is from an organisation that should have the only say in how game is run?

Both Dame Patsy and RN have both behaved like entitled children. Whereas the PU are looking OK based on media reporting. RN especially comes across very poorly.

---

Poole described the Players' Association's threat to split with NZR if governance reforms don't go ahead as needless and unhelpful.

"Irresponsible is a word that comes to mind. Unnecessary is another one. It smacks of 'if I don't get my own way I'm going to take my toys, my bat and my ball and go somewhere else'. It's an unnecessary reaction and in our view an overaction."

The New Zealand Rugby board, led by chair Dame Patsy Reddy, are committed to proposal one, with Reddy earlier saying she would resign if the plan wasn't accepted at the SGM.

While not certain, Poole believes the PUs' proposal will prove more popular at next week's SGM.

---

and this

However, Wellington Rugby chair Russell Poole said claims that the PUs' proposal doesn't align with the principles of the independent report weren't true.

"We have openly taken on board the ideal of an independently selected, appointed board. So anything that says something else is absolutely untrue and that's the worst part of the NZRPA document yesterday, it has so many lies in it, so many things that are factually incorrect.

"There is no difference between proposal one and proposal two on how people are elected and the process that they go through.

"The difference is that in proposal two, the provincial unions have a line in there that says that three members on the NZR board at any given time must have spent some time on a provincial rugby board. Given the fact that one of the roles of that NZR board is to look after the game on behalf of the 150,000 participants, and that's just the players, not the infrastructure and other people that go around that, I don't think that's unfair."

Nichol and the NZRPA believe the game in this country is struggling and he told RNZ the provincial unions' proposal was unacceptable.

"We all accepted the report, we all accepted the findings that the governance model was not fit for purpose. To get to this stage and then turn around and say 'no we just want to keep the status quo', we can't afford to do that.

"The game's in trouble, it needs support, it needs help, it needs expertise and we need an independent board."

Poole said the PUs had tried to speak with the NZRPA about their concerns.

[Tim]

@Paekakboyz Don't forget the "Posse", and the "Freemen on the land".

[kev]

@Winger said in NZR review:

@Duluth said in NZR review:

@Winger said in NZR review:

@Duluth said in NZR review:

@Winger said in NZR review:

@Duluth said in NZR review:

@Winger said in NZR review:

A professional proposal

They haven't finished writing it yet. Very professional.

Ops. I was referring to Pilkington. I don't know about the PU proposal (I haven't seen it). I was just comparing the 2 that have been published

Pilkington seems VG to me. Esp compared to NZR

You seem a bit confused

Why? (the comment you referenced was 19 days back)

Nothing has changed about the proposals in 19 days

You support and oppose one proposal. You support and haven't read the other

But I'm referring to the process of the people making this decision. I might agree with Rob. But I'm not and he's not some God like infallible superman.

Let the vote take place. And trust the process and see it out. Without these childish threats. And accept that sometimes you win. And sometimes not. And sometimes you get only a % of what you won't. That's life.

Better summary

[Duluth]

@kev Nah Winger doesn't even know which proposal is which

[gt12]

Unless I'm mistaken, the NZRPA represents professional players on NZ, Super, Provincial, and U20s contracts.

The most recent available agreement is here.

I'd be interested in a lawyer's interpretation of the NZRPA's position as I can't see how it aligns with the text of the contract.