World Rugby Board elections
-
@mofitzy_ said in World Rugby Board elections:
@sparky
Never mentioned UK League, they are the poor cousin.Too many question marks about Pichot's other interests.
The sustainability of SH rugby and the growth of the game?
Bill and Bernard will continue the slow death of the game outside the home nations and France.
Whilst I share your desire for growth of the game and certainly for the sustainability of SH rugby, I do wonder if some lessons that should have been learned have not been.
Rugby is the No 1 sport in NZ and maybe Wales and that's about it. Everywhere else it is playing second fiddle to another sport (usually soccer). What this means is that there is not an infinite market for rugby and managing a Union's expectations is a difficult thing. Up here in Europe we have a thriving domestic game, pan European game and International game - BTW I am not saying that it is all individually financially sound but that is another issue - and the constant here is the fight between the factions of less is more or more is more. With the limited market, protecting your product is extremely important, as is protecting your assets. In both cases there is a strong argument for the less is more POV. In the SH we have seen the downgrading of the domestic competitions in favour of Super Rugby with the swelling of same over the years from 10 to, at one time 18. At the same time the Tri Nations has expanded greatly and yet it is the SH, in particular NZ and Aus that are really feeling the pinch.
And the call is now for more "elite" rugby. I would ask if this is sustainable let alone a growth path. I see the reluctance to embrace the fairly radical change as not wishing to kill off what is there rather than any form of protectionism. For sure we need to nurture the game in areas that are disadvantaged in one way or another and the viability rugby in Aus and NZ MUST be ensured but to my mind a much more measured approach is the more sustainable way forward.
Where I do see an issue of the NH causing world-wide problems is the club game hoovering up imported players and this is to the detriment of both the NH and SH. The additional fact that this is financially unsustainable is mind boggling.
Solution? Fuck knows.
@Catogrande said in World Rugby Board elections:
In both cases there is a strong argument for the less is more POV. In the SH we have seen the downgrading of the domestic competitions in favour of Super Rugby with the swelling of same over the years from 10 to, at one time 18. At the same time the Tri Nations has expanded greatly and yet it is the SH, in particular NZ and Aus that are really feeling the pinch.
Just a couple of comments.
In the NH you 'had' a thriving domestic comp. Who knows what that will look like in the recession, and how many overseas players will be attracted to it if the money dries up. Your point about Rugby being second sport in most of the world was a good one - administrators don't seem to think they are really competing with anyone else but each other. Grow the game, and grow the pie. Growth comes from decent laws, marketable product and a culture around the game people want to be part of (yes, I'm idealistic and optimistic).
Secondly, couldn't agree more on 'less is more'. dragged out some info from 1997;
Super started on 28 Feb. 11 games, semis, final. Finished on 31 May.
https://super.rugby/superrugby/fixtures/archives/1997-super-rugby/ABs started on 14 June, and played 12 games, finishing 6 December (with a decent break from Aug-Nov).
http://stats.espnscrum.com/scrum/rugby/records/team/match_results.html?id=1997;team=8;type=year
Can't find anything on NPC, but from memory it only ran outside the international window. Personally, that's a schedule I can get behind - an offseason of a couple of months for international players (Dec/Jan), cricket in it's proper place, and meaningful high quality games of footy.
-
The result was as expected. I hope WR releases who voted for Beaumont and Pichot because there is clearly dissatisfaction from the SANZAAR nations with Beaumont's inability to achieve anything during his last term, particularly the Nations Championship tournament. If he doesn't deliver on some of the "promises" listed in his manifesto I expect the NH-SH divide will only get wider and WR will become irrelevant outside of the RWC. This could get messy.
-
@mofitzy_ said in World Rugby Board elections:
@sparky
Never mentioned UK League, they are the poor cousin.Too many question marks about Pichot's other interests.
The sustainability of SH rugby and the growth of the game?
Bill and Bernard will continue the slow death of the game outside the home nations and France.
Whilst I share your desire for growth of the game and certainly for the sustainability of SH rugby, I do wonder if some lessons that should have been learned have not been.
Rugby is the No 1 sport in NZ and maybe Wales and that's about it. Everywhere else it is playing second fiddle to another sport (usually soccer). What this means is that there is not an infinite market for rugby and managing a Union's expectations is a difficult thing. Up here in Europe we have a thriving domestic game, pan European game and International game - BTW I am not saying that it is all individually financially sound but that is another issue - and the constant here is the fight between the factions of less is more or more is more. With the limited market, protecting your product is extremely important, as is protecting your assets. In both cases there is a strong argument for the less is more POV. In the SH we have seen the downgrading of the domestic competitions in favour of Super Rugby with the swelling of same over the years from 10 to, at one time 18. At the same time the Tri Nations has expanded greatly and yet it is the SH, in particular NZ and Aus that are really feeling the pinch.
And the call is now for more "elite" rugby. I would ask if this is sustainable let alone a growth path. I see the reluctance to embrace the fairly radical change as not wishing to kill off what is there rather than any form of protectionism. For sure we need to nurture the game in areas that are disadvantaged in one way or another and the viability rugby in Aus and NZ MUST be ensured but to my mind a much more measured approach is the more sustainable way forward.
Where I do see an issue of the NH causing world-wide problems is the club game hoovering up imported players and this is to the detriment of both the NH and SH. The additional fact that this is financially unsustainable is mind boggling.
Solution? Fuck knows.
@Catogrande
Rugby may be #1 in NZ but it's no longer the dominant force it was, and I can easily see it being just one of many sports codes as they have in Aus if things keep going the way they do. Fair dues to the European game but it is population and geography that are the key factors in it's financial dominance, things that can't be changed. So either they realise they can look inwards except for once every 4 years or keep the status quo (and who knows, in 10 years or so the NH might even win another world cup) and slowly kill the game outside the 6N, or set up a system that means the sport doesn't die outside of the 6N. I'm not convinced the average punter in Twickenham cares too much if th ANZAC nations never play Ingerlund again as long as he can pretend walloping Italy means something.If the laws were formulated in Aus and NZ, then endless scrum resets and walls of offside players waiting to flop all over a breakdown wouldn't be the issue they are now. We wouldn't let dodgy frog refs say "we have a deal" then go on to make one of the biggest ref errors in modern rugby, meanwhile Beaumont was no doubt cheering this decision. At least Pichot would have been objective.
-
@Catogrande said in World Rugby Board elections:
In both cases there is a strong argument for the less is more POV. In the SH we have seen the downgrading of the domestic competitions in favour of Super Rugby with the swelling of same over the years from 10 to, at one time 18. At the same time the Tri Nations has expanded greatly and yet it is the SH, in particular NZ and Aus that are really feeling the pinch.
Just a couple of comments.
In the NH you 'had' a thriving domestic comp. Who knows what that will look like in the recession, and how many overseas players will be attracted to it if the money dries up. Your point about Rugby being second sport in most of the world was a good one - administrators don't seem to think they are really competing with anyone else but each other. Grow the game, and grow the pie. Growth comes from decent laws, marketable product and a culture around the game people want to be part of (yes, I'm idealistic and optimistic).
Secondly, couldn't agree more on 'less is more'. dragged out some info from 1997;
Super started on 28 Feb. 11 games, semis, final. Finished on 31 May.
https://super.rugby/superrugby/fixtures/archives/1997-super-rugby/ABs started on 14 June, and played 12 games, finishing 6 December (with a decent break from Aug-Nov).
http://stats.espnscrum.com/scrum/rugby/records/team/match_results.html?id=1997;team=8;type=year
Can't find anything on NPC, but from memory it only ran outside the international window. Personally, that's a schedule I can get behind - an offseason of a couple of months for international players (Dec/Jan), cricket in it's proper place, and meaningful high quality games of footy.
@nzzp Yup, you’re right we had a thriving comp prior to the current crisis and maybe that will change but that applies worldwide. The longer this shitshow goes on, the less anyone’s future is clear. Though in truth I feel that the thriving comps we have ought to continue as they are based on a strong and invested fan base. The financials may well be a different story and as I thought I’d pointed out , the financials are not quite so thriving and certainly not sustainable in their current form. So yeah, expect some changes and perhaps those changes will be accelerated by the mess we’re all in at present. If those changes mean less SH imports then good for us, longer term and good for you. Our domestic game has benefited tremendously by many of the SH guys but in truth we have too many for the good of our own game.
-
The result was as expected. I hope WR releases who voted for Beaumont and Pichot because there is clearly dissatisfaction from the SANZAAR nations with Beaumont's inability to achieve anything during his last term, particularly the Nations Championship tournament. If he doesn't deliver on some of the "promises" listed in his manifesto I expect the NH-SH divide will only get wider and WR will become irrelevant outside of the RWC. This could get messy.
@Bovidae
If it doesn't get messy then SH/non-6N rugby will be digging our own grave by our complicity. This is a perfect opportunity to change things for the better, everyone knows rugby in Aus is on it's deathbed and NZ isn't far off if nothing changes. -
@Bovidae
If it doesn't get messy then SH/non-6N rugby will be digging our own grave by our complicity. This is a perfect opportunity to change things for the better, everyone knows rugby in Aus is on it's deathbed and NZ isn't far off if nothing changes.@mofitzy_ said in World Rugby Board elections:
@Bovidae
If it doesn't get messy then SH/non-6N rugby will be digging our own grave by our complicity. This is a perfect opportunity to change things for the better, everyone knows rugby in Aus is on it's deathbed and NZ isn't far off if nothing changes.Genuine, non-trolling question. If rugby in Aus and NZ is on or near its deathbed, what do you think has caused it?
-
@mofitzy_ said in World Rugby Board elections:
@Bovidae
If it doesn't get messy then SH/non-6N rugby will be digging our own grave by our complicity. This is a perfect opportunity to change things for the better, everyone knows rugby in Aus is on it's deathbed and NZ isn't far off if nothing changes.Genuine, non-trolling question. If rugby in Aus and NZ is on or near its deathbed, what do you think has caused it?
@Catogrande
Many things, obviously the administration in both countries is to partially to blame. For me and many spectators, the way the game has evolved followed by the exodus of players and coaches are 1 and 2.i.e., is the game more attractive to watch now than 20 years ago?
-
@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?
