Blues 2019
-
Another article about the changing ownership
-
-
@duluth I think Auckland, North Harbour & Northland should all take at least a chunk of that 40%.
I cant recall what Northland's cash reserves were like but they are in a pretty good position financially.
-
I would be happy with more involvement of the three unions rather than another private investor. Certain people in that Bolton group apparently got starry eye'd and tingly feels when dealing with famous ex AB's.
Rugby people wanted to sack Kirwan, the Bolton group desperately wanted to keep him.. they only let go when they got a hold of another superstar coach (a coach with a profile to engage with Auckland's complex and diverse media landscape blah blah blah bullshit)But I doubt Northland would be interested? When Rugby Holdings was created (based on previous input to the Blues franchise) they immediately sold half of their small share to Auckland
-
@duluth yeah I realise that, but wonder if that was done through needing to release some capital (around that time Northland were doing everything they could to save money) but now they seem to be on the right track, investing in the Blues at a rock bottom price might be a good idea...
-
More details.. the earlier article has been significantly updated.
John Hart might be involved.
Not a surprise after he did a fluff pr interview on Jeff Wilson's sky show a couple of months ago (lots of hypothetical questions about how he would fix a team like the Blues)
Many of his answers mirrored Redman's.. hopefully that wasn't his real views
-
Twat Bolton has his say
Bolton's blues over the Blues
Bolton Equities chairman Murray Bolton says he didn't want to sell his shares with the Blues Super rugby franchise and is not to blame for the club's poor results.
-
@duluth said in Blues 2019:
Twat Bolton has his say
Bolton's blues over the Blues
Bolton Equities chairman Murray Bolton says he didn't want to sell his shares with the Blues Super rugby franchise and is not to blame for the club's poor results.
So according to Bolton his input was on the commercial side of things and getting the training facilities built. He says the rugby side was left to the board members from the Unions.
This is completely at odds to the comments often trotted out here about him meddling in recruitment of coaches and players.
Serious question. Is there evidence anywhere that is the case or is it rumour and stories?
I'm not defending the guy just trying to understand where the rugby performance management finger should be pointed.Judging by the statements though, it is clear that there is not the clear separation of responsibility that he claims otherwise why the problems around the table in getting agreement?
-
@crucial said in Blues 2019:
This is completely at odds to the comments often trotted out here about him meddling in recruitment of coaches and players.
Player recruitment? That’s Umaga and Hanks. Who said Bolton was recruiting players?
Coaches, well his role in not wanting to sack Kirwan was widely reported. The NZRU had to mediate as the rugby decision was blocked by the Bolton group board members. Umaga was accepted as the compromise, Bolton wanted a coach with a similar media profile.
You can see the problems at the franchise when you have the private owner, ceo and head coach who don’t take responsibility. It’s always someone else’s fault. One down, two to go.
-
@duluth said in Blues 2019:
@crucial said in Blues 2019:
This is completely at odds to the comments often trotted out here about him meddling in recruitment of coaches and players.
Player recruitment? That’s Umaga and Hanks. Who said Bolton was recruiting players?
Coaches, well his role in not wanting to sack Kirwan was widely reported. The NZRU had to mediate as the rugby decision was blocked by the Bolton group board members. Umaga was accepted as the compromise, Bolton wanted a coach with a similar media profile.
You can see the problems at the franchise when you have the private owner, ceo and head coach who don’t take responsibility. It’s always someone else’s fault. One down, two to go.
Thanks. I do recall those articles around the time of Umaga being appointed but from memory they were also tinged as being leaks and guesswork rather than fact. Certainly plausible though that the commercial partner wanted a coach with profile that would generate interest. He doesn't have controlling vote on the board though so some of the rugby board members must have agreed.
If by 'taking responsibility' you mean quitting then I get your point but taking responsibility can also mean making changes to try and fix.
-
-
@duluth said in Blues 2019:
@crucial said in Blues 2019:
He doesn't have controlling vote on the board though so some of the rugby board members must have agreed.
He did at the time. The board structure changed after the NZRU mediated
OK. Thanks
-
-
This might explain why he started his career a bit later in life,
Abel took a two-year hiatus from rugby after leaving high school to undertake a Mormon MissionWestern Australia. Upon completion of his duties he linked up with the Brumbies Academy in 2012 and spent 2 years in Canberra which culminated in a brief stint playing for Northland Taniwha in New Zealand's ITM Cup in 2013.
he is a nephew of the Going brothers ,but was born in Australia. -
Last paragraph of a recent article is interesting;
“"We have worked with the Blues in terms of a full season review, it's not just a backroom review there's also ongoing reviews in the coach and playing group as well."”
Still hopefull that Tana is shown the door or demoted to Mascot
