• Categories
Collapse

The Silver Fern

NZR review

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Sports Talk
776 Posts 54 Posters 48.5k Views
NZR review
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • WingerW Offline
    WingerW Offline
    Winger
    replied to Kirwan on last edited by
    #629

    @Kirwan said in NZR review:

    @Winger said in NZR review:

    @Kirwan said in NZR review:

    The reviewers, deemed to be experts in their field,

    People need to stop worshipping these so-called experts. Including Dylan.

    Well, we've had at least 25 years of mis-management by the status-quo, so lets get people in that have run large businesses successfully.

    Meritocracy is alweays better than jobs for the boys.

    How many women are on the NZR Board. What about the Chair.

    Did you listen to the Dave Moffett interview? He has lots of experience and formed a different viewpoint. Like me he thinks this independent directors will solve all our problems is just bullshit. Also Robs proposal doesn't work that well according to Moffett. He gave the Wales example

    Maybe the PU's took all of this into account and did the best thing. But they are mostly men so toxic masculinity... So, they can't be right I guess. Just fill the place with diversity appointments and we will be led to the promised land.

    KirwanK antipodeanA FrankF 3 Replies Last reply
    1
  • M Offline
    M Offline
    Machpants
    wrote on last edited by Machpants
    #630

    Rob Nichol told exactly what would happen, it wasn't a threat or an ultimatum. It was a declaration of what the NZRPA had decided. NZRPA board: https://www.nzrpa.co.nz/our-people/nzrpa-board
    These people know pro rugby, seem to have a better idea of business (like forcing the better SL deal on NZR), and with the little gems of PU influence that have been smuggled in under the press radar (thanks @gt12 ) you can see why they are worried

    WingerW 1 Reply Last reply
    4
  • WingerW Offline
    WingerW Offline
    Winger
    replied to Machpants on last edited by
    #631

    @Machpants said in NZR review:

    it wasn't a threat

    Sounded like it to me

    M 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • M Offline
    M Offline
    Machpants
    replied to Winger on last edited by
    #632

    @Winger said in NZR review:

    @Machpants said in NZR review:

    it wasn't a threat

    Sounded like it to me

    It was making sure the PUs knew the full result of their vote, being open and honest. NZRPA were prepared for both eventualities, and I don't have a problem with open statements.

    1 Reply Last reply
    3
  • KirwanK Offline
    KirwanK Offline
    Kirwan
    replied to Winger on last edited by
    #633

    @Winger said in NZR review:

    @Kirwan said in NZR review:

    @Winger said in NZR review:

    @Kirwan said in NZR review:

    The reviewers, deemed to be experts in their field,

    People need to stop worshipping these so-called experts. Including Dylan.

    Well, we've had at least 25 years of mis-management by the status-quo, so lets get people in that have run large businesses successfully.

    Meritocracy is alweays better than jobs for the boys.

    How many women are on the NZR Board. What about the Chair.

    Did you listen to the Dave Moffett interview? He has lots of experience and formed a different viewpoint. Like me he thinks this independent directors will solve all our problems is just bullshit. Also Robs proposal doesn't work that well according to Moffett. He gave the Wales example

    Maybe the PU's took all of this into account and did the best thing. But they are mostly men so toxic masculinity... So, they can't be right I guess. Just fill the place with diversity appointments and we will be led to the promised land.

    Why are you bleating on about DEI? Are you confused about which thread you are on?

    Meritocracy is what I'm supporting. As for Moffett, his record is pretty poor - a good example of "not fit for purpose". You have a short memory.

    WingerW 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • DuluthD Offline
    DuluthD Offline
    Duluth
    replied to Winger on last edited by
    #634

    @Winger said in NZR review:

    People need to stop worshipping these so-called experts. Including Dylan.

    @Winger said in NZR review:

    Did you listen to the Dave Moffett interview? He has lots of experience

    1 Reply Last reply
    4
  • WingerW Offline
    WingerW Offline
    Winger
    replied to Kirwan on last edited by
    #635

    @Kirwan said in NZR review:

    As for Moffett, his record is pretty poor

    Was it Moffett who was in charge when NZR made about 50 million in XR gains. whereas Aust didn't take out forward cover

    Or was it someone else

    KirwanK 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • KirwanK Offline
    KirwanK Offline
    Kirwan
    replied to Winger on last edited by
    #636

    @Winger said in NZR review:

    @Kirwan said in NZR review:

    As for Moffett, his record is pretty poor

    Was it Moffett who was in charge when NZR made about 50 million in XR gains. whereas Aust didn't take out forward cover

    Or was it someone else

    Steve Tew I believe.

    Moffett was the one who lurched from one disaster to the next in Wales and as spent the last decade or so being a backseat driver.

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • P Offline
    P Offline
    pakman
    replied to Kirwan on last edited by pakman
    #637

    @Kirwan said in NZR review:

    It seems to me that the NZRPA has planned for both vote outcomes, and been very open about what the next steps will be.

    So we'll get that professional council/board that negotiates directly with NZR to run the pro game. We'll probably end up with with more Super Rugby teams, a longer season and no contracted players in the NPC.

    The NPC will go back to be being represenative rugby of their local clubs (not Auckland club players playing in Hawkes Bay for example). Effectively the top tier of club rugby and fully amateur.

    In the current system West Coast gets a vote on how the game is run, but the Crusaders don't. That's ass backwards.

    We can't afford two professional comps, so Super Rugby will be the new NPC and will have a dedicated organisation to improve the comp (hopefully with a new name). Without the PUs voting for self interest, we'll have a competition voting for it's own self interest, and PUs can run the grassroots.

    There will have to be compromises between the NZR and the new org, but that's fine. Easier to herd 5 (up to 10) cats than 27 too.

    The change over will be messy, but will be a more sensible structure than the worst of both words we have no, and the PUs have no interest in actually fixing.

    Realistically five teams is the maximum NZ can sustain in a Super rugby of the current level.

    And without a strong NPC the foundations are undermined.

    Other than AB/Maori squad members many SR players will be available from June to September.

    This cries out to me for a streamlined/upgraded NPC, which needs to dovetail with provincial rugby.

    If the NZPRA tries to run a separate structure, then, based on the England experience that will be a financial black hole.

    1 Reply Last reply
    3
  • antipodeanA Offline
    antipodeanA Offline
    antipodean
    replied to Winger on last edited by
    #638

    @Winger said in NZR review:

    @Kirwan said in NZR review:

    @Winger said in NZR review:

    @Kirwan said in NZR review:

    The reviewers, deemed to be experts in their field,

    People need to stop worshipping these so-called experts. Including Dylan.

    Well, we've had at least 25 years of mis-management by the status-quo, so lets get people in that have run large businesses successfully.

    Meritocracy is alweays better than jobs for the boys.

    How many women are on the NZR Board. What about the Chair.

    Did you listen to the Dave Moffett interview? He has lots of experience and formed a different viewpoint. Like me he thinks this independent directors will solve all our problems is just bullshit. Also Robs proposal doesn't work that well according to Moffett. He gave the Wales example

    The same Wales Moffett helped ruin..?

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • KiwiMurphK Offline
    KiwiMurphK Offline
    KiwiMurph
    wrote on last edited by
    #639

    Moffett is a rent a quote

    1 Reply Last reply
    4
  • K Offline
    K Offline
    kev
    wrote on last edited by
    #640

    I hope the players come to their senses. All of the media coverage has been been to amplify the rhetoric of the NZRP - they wanted the review, they chose the reviewers. The public could easily turn against them if they continue to behave poorly.

    But, you would not expect anything else from Super Rugby Franchises who have never given a shit about club or NPC rugby. Also, special thanks to Blues for all the games they have player at Ōkara Park over the years - 2. Allowing private ownership of SR franchises was a big mistake.

    nzzpN 1 Reply Last reply
    3
  • nzzpN Offline
    nzzpN Offline
    nzzp
    replied to kev on last edited by
    #641

    @kev said in NZR review:

    Also, special thanks to Blues for all the games they have player at Ōkara Park over the years - 2

    Fair play, they scheduled a third but Covid munted that.

    I'd love to see more games travel around with Super, but the structure at the moment incentivises single stadiums, season memberships. Super doesn't know what it is - a feeder comp for the All Blacks, or a standalone premier competition.

    Rest period for players, no independent board (until recently) with any autonomy, weird financing arrangements with stakeholders... it's just an unusual setup. And they killed it, just like the NPC. Hopefully we see reinvigoration after the NZR vote.

    K 1 Reply Last reply
    2
  • K Offline
    K Offline
    kev
    replied to nzzp on last edited by
    #642

    @nzzp a thing that has taken away from the impact of SR for me has been the commercialisation of the game without adequate reference to it history. It started as tribal regional based competition but abandoned that quickly to become just 5 professional clubs. I don’t have a SR team, gave up tickets a long time ago.

    Then if you compare the marketing of the game to NRL it’s like night and day. The commentary, analysis and enthusiasm for their product is next level. Commentators for NPC rugby don’t know the players, frequently criticise the game, and act like it’s below them. There is no NZR love what so ever for NPC. Then at Super Rugby level you just get media jobs for the boys. The one that has stood out is the Aotearoa Rugby Podcast which is genuinely insightful.

    1 Reply Last reply
    3
  • FrankF Offline
    FrankF Offline
    Frank
    replied to Winger on last edited by
    #643

    @Winger said in NZR review:

    Did you listen to the Dave Moffett interview? He has lots of experience and formed a different viewpoint. Like me he thinks this independent directors will solve all our problems is just bullshit. Also Robs proposal doesn't work that well according to Moffett. He gave the Wales example

    Given Moffett's record, he's a bloody good contrary indicator.

    WingerW 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • WingerW Offline
    WingerW Offline
    Winger
    replied to Frank on last edited by Winger
    #644

    @Frank said in NZR review:

    @Winger said in NZR review:

    Did you listen to the Dave Moffett interview? He has lots of experience and formed a different viewpoint. Like me he thinks this independent directors will solve all our problems is just bullshit. Also Robs proposal doesn't work that well according to Moffett. He gave the Wales example

    Given Moffett's record, he's a bloody good contrary indicator.

    Could you expand on this? or have you heard this somewhere. In Wales for example he took over a Union in a =difficult position financially and had to force through some tough decision

    Welsh Rugby Union
    Moffett was the CEO of the Welsh Rugby Union (WRU) from 2002 to 2005.[5] He took up his post at the WRU on 2 December 2002 having beaten off over 100 other applicants to the job, and immediately set about controlling the WRU's finances who were by this time heavily in debt (around £55 million) due to poor management of funds and expenditure on facilities such as the Millennium Stadium. Moffett created an 18-man board of directors, replacing a 27-man committee as part of his streamlining of administration at the Union.

    Moffett also gained backing to dismiss the Wales 'A' Team, long considered an important development side playing at a level just below that of full international level, in order to save money and develop rugby players at a higher level.

    Regional Rugby
    However the most controversial decision Moffett took was the introduction of regional rugby to Wales. After much discussion with the clubs, he got his wish and for the 2003–04 season five regions were created, some jointly owned by two of the former clubs and two (Llanelli Scarlets and Cardiff Blues) were owned by only one club, prompting complaints of favouritism from supporters of the other clubs.

    1 Reply Last reply
    2
  • WingerW Offline
    WingerW Offline
    Winger
    wrote on last edited by
    #645

    and here's some more from Wikipedia

    David Moffett - Wikipedia

    Moffett's roles in sports administration have included:

    An administrator at the International Rugby Board;[1]
    One of the chief architects of SANZAR (South Africa, New Zealand and Australia Rugby) in 1996;[7]
    Executive director of the New South Wales Rugby Union, starting in 1992;[1]
    Chief executive at the New Zealand Rugby Union from 1996 to 2000,[8][7] being the first non-New Zealander to hold the role;[1]
    Chief executive at Australia's National Rugby League, starting in 1999. The appointment of a rugby union executive to oversee rugby league led to speculation that he was there to merge the two sports,[7][9] but this did not eventuate. He held this position until 2001;[citation needed]
    Chief executive of Sport England: Moffett left Sport England acrimoniously in 2002 after only 10 months in the job, and complained that he was restricted "by too many committees run by too many blazers".[4] He earned £140,000 a year in the role;[citation needed]
    Chef executive officer of the Welsh Rugby Union (WRU) from 2002 to 2005.[5]
    Moffett was offered the role of chief executive for the English Football Association in 2003, but turned the position down.[4]

    antipodeanA 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • KirwanK Offline
    KirwanK Offline
    Kirwan
    wrote on last edited by
    #646

    If you get info from Wikipedia that explains a lot.

    1 Reply Last reply
    3
  • antipodeanA Offline
    antipodeanA Offline
    antipodean
    replied to Winger on last edited by
    #647

    @Winger said in NZR review:

    and here's some more from Wikipedia

    David Moffett - Wikipedia

    Moffett's roles in sports administration have included:

    An administrator at the International Rugby Board;[1]
    One of the chief architects of SANZAR (South Africa, New Zealand and Australia Rugby) in 1996;[7]
    Executive director of the New South Wales Rugby Union, starting in 1992;[1]
    Chief executive at the New Zealand Rugby Union from 1996 to 2000,[8][7] being the first non-New Zealander to hold the role;[1]
    Chief executive at Australia's National Rugby League, starting in 1999. The appointment of a rugby union executive to oversee rugby league led to speculation that he was there to merge the two sports,[7][9] but this did not eventuate. He held this position until 2001;[citation needed]
    Chief executive of Sport England: Moffett left Sport England acrimoniously in 2002 after only 10 months in the job, and complained that he was restricted "by too many committees run by too many blazers".[4] He earned £140,000 a year in the role;[citation needed]
    Chef executive officer of the Welsh Rugby Union (WRU) from 2002 to 2005.[5]
    Moffett was offered the role of chief executive for the English Football Association in 2003, but turned the position down.[4]

    Is this to demonstrate he is supposed to have some expertise to speak of and hence we should listen to his opinion?

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • BovidaeB Offline
    BovidaeB Offline
    Bovidae
    wrote on last edited by
    #648

    In today's Sunday Star-Times.

    Peter Winchester is the Chair of Canterbury Rugby
    Opinion: This weekend Southern RFC and Green Island RFC mark their 140th year in Dunedin, and the Blues in Invercargill celebrate their 150th. Community rugby annuals are always a tremendous occasion, with old friends, old rivalries, and exceptional sportsmanship.
    These are the people and the values I voted for on Thursday when at the Rugby Union headquarters in Wellington.
    My vote, along with 75% of the provincial unions, was for what was called “Proposal 2” – a new system for recruiting, appointing, and advising the New Zealand Rugby Board. This proposal had been created by a core of unions in response to the New Zealand Rugby Board’s own “Proposal 1”.
    The proposals were almost identical, except for two main sticking points.
    Firstly, we believed it untenable that a Board of New Zealand Rugby could have no members that had spent any time in management of regional rugby.
    It is fair, reasonable and logical that some members of the Board know how their decisions impact management of provincial rugby. No other organisation, business or community, would stand to have Board members that had no experience of the field they were governing.
    We had already agreed to the biggest shift ever: that no members will be elected by the Provincial Unions. After about 150 years we have handed over control to a process that will identify and appoint the very best people that can be found. We have no influence on that panel and no control of the outcome.
    We wanted to ensure the Board would understand and appreciate the impact of their work and decisions on community rugby. We determined that the best way was for three of the members to have served on a Provincial Board at some point. It didn’t matter when, or for how long.
    The second sticking point was an appreciation of the impact and role of Māori and Pasifika, who contribute significantly to the game without formal recognition at a board level. Our proposal requires one of the Board members to be grounded in Māori rugby, and one in Pasifika.
    The independent selection, appointment and backgrounds of Board members is the modernisation of the Board that almost everyone has wanted – including provincial unions.
    We came a long way this week in updating oversight of the New Zealand game, both professional and amateur.
    The new Board will be capable of overseeing NZR’s international and commercial activity, and its management of the domestic game.
    Proposal two was supported because the heart of the game must remain anchored in the players and volunteers across Aotearoa.
    A new Board will soon be selected. We expect plenty of applications from the hundreds of talented professionals with current or previous experience running rugby Boards and clubs across the nation.
    Much has been made about the decision this week. There have been some wild claims in the heat of the discussion. Everyone who cares about rugby will commit to this democratically chosen proposal.
    This weekend 150,000 people played rugby, aided by 30,000 volunteers, and watched by tens of thousands more.
    Those are the people the Board serves, as do provincial unions.
    We’re pleased to say that their game continues.

    WingerW K 2 Replies Last reply
    5

NZR review
Sports Talk
  • Login

  • Don't have an account? Register

  • Login or register to search.
  • First post
    Last post
0
  • Categories
  • Login

  • Don't have an account? Register

  • Login or register to search.