NZR review
-
@Donsteppa said in NZR review:
@Kiwiwomble said in NZR review:
which one was which again? was Prop 1 the good guys?
Now there's a loaded question
no idea what you mean
-
@Duluth said in NZR review:
@Bovidae said in NZR review:
I hope the voting details are released/leaked.
Some of it has - Taranaki, Waikato, Otago and Manawatu for proposal 1. Auckland voted for both
It will be interesting to see if there is a bit of a divide between the provinces that supported different proposals.
-
As reported the the NZHerald live feed. Nice to see some constructive talk from a leading player that's not essentially Rob Nichol taking the NZRPA ball and going home.
Blues captain Patrick Tuipulotu responds to Proposal 2 being voted in
“I’m a bit disappointed,” he said.“But it’s for the future of rugby, whatever we decide, we have to do it together.
“From here on out, the conversation has to be open. Although Proposal 1 didn’t go through, we have to work together to try and get to where we want to.”
-
@SouthernMann said in NZR review:
It will be interesting to see if there is a bit of a divide between the provinces that supported different proposals.
Or more importantly, within SR franchises. That appears to be the case at the Chiefs (Waikato/Taranaki vs BOP). I've no idea how CM voted.
-
@Donsteppa said in NZR review:
As reported the the NZHerald live feed. Nice to see some constructive talk from a leading player that's not essentially Rob Nichol taking the NZRPA ball and going home.
Blues captain Patrick Tuipulotu responds to Proposal 2 being voted in
“I’m a bit disappointed,” he said.“But it’s for the future of rugby, whatever we decide, we have to do it together.
“From here on out, the conversation has to be open. Although Proposal 1 didn’t go through, we have to work together to try and get to where we want to.”
The shareholders have made their (decisive) decision. Anyone not in alignment with this decision should step aside. Not try and continue fighting
Starting with the NZR Board. A good starting point anyway would be to appoint a new Board using this new proposal. Hopefully it can attract the required talent.
-
Well done to NZR for holding this on budget day too.
-
@SouthernMann said in NZR review:
Well done to NZR for holding this on budget day too.
And on no Rebels in Super Rugby day. And all the rest of the news headlines too...
-
@george33 said in NZR review:
Sounds like Rob Nicol has backed down on original comments
Where is that?
I see 'expressed disappointment'?
I wouldn't expect them to throw the toys today, I would expect they'll now make a decision to live with it or try to do something else?
-
@Winger said in NZR review:
@Donsteppa said in NZR review:
As reported the the NZHerald live feed. Nice to see some constructive talk from a leading player that's not essentially Rob Nichol taking the NZRPA ball and going home.
Blues captain Patrick Tuipulotu responds to Proposal 2 being voted in
“I’m a bit disappointed,” he said.“But it’s for the future of rugby, whatever we decide, we have to do it together.
“From here on out, the conversation has to be open. Although Proposal 1 didn’t go through, we have to work together to try and get to where we want to.”
The shareholders have made their (decisive) decision. Anyone not in alignment with this decision should step aside. Not try and continue fighting
Starting with the NZR Board. A good starting point anyway would be to appoint a new Board using this new proposal. Hopefully it can attract the required talent.
You understand that is exactly what the professional players have threatened?
I'm fascinated to see whether they go through with it or not.
-
Nicholl says NZRPA will now begin working with its stakeholders to establish that independent panel. "We aren't going running out of this country or anything like that," he clarified. "We're more committed to rugby and professional rugby in this country than anyone, including the community game and grass roots. "What we're talking about is a tribunal that comes together in order to ensure really good decisions on behalf of the professional game, to make sure it's effective and efficient as possible, and delivers what the game wants in this country. "We want to put something together where we come together to make sure we make really good decisions for pro rugby. What we won't do is trust New Zealand Rugby under this government structure to go off and make those decisions by themselves. The model isn't unprecedented, with French rugby currently operating with a governing body that runs the game alongside the national union. "It's coming from a perspective of what we feel the professional game is going to need in terms of connecting those stakeholders and getting them together, making good decisions and getting them on the same page getting good alignment. "So we'd be surprised if people don't want to go down the path."
-
@Duluth said in NZR review:
Nicholl says NZRPA will now begin working with its stakeholders to establish that independent panel. "We aren't going running out of this country or anything like that," he clarified. "We're more committed to rugby and professional rugby in this country than anyone, including the community game and grass roots. "What we're talking about is a tribunal that comes together in order to ensure really good decisions on behalf of the professional game, to make sure it's effective and efficient as possible, and delivers what the game wants in this country. "We want to put something together where we come together to make sure we make really good decisions for pro rugby. What we won't do is trust New Zealand Rugby under this government structure to go off and make those decisions by themselves. The model isn't unprecedented, with French rugby currently operating with a governing body that runs the game alongside the national union. "It's coming from a perspective of what we feel the professional game is going to need in terms of connecting those stakeholders and getting them together, making good decisions and getting them on the same page getting good alignment. "So we'd be surprised if people don't want to go down the path."
He gone power mad. Like Union boss that thinks it's all about him
My view this is a great day for rugby. The PU's made a stand and refused to have all the power grabbed from them. But, also realize that NZR needs a much better-quality Board. This might now happen
And Aust now only has 4 super rugby teams. It should be three but 4 is much better than 5.
Rob should accept this decision and see how it works out. If the new Board is as bad as the old one, then do his thing. If he can't do this then step aside. Because he's creating a very negative energy that NZ rugby doesn't need. Esp right now
-
"We're more committed to rugby and professional rugby in this country than anyone, including the community game and grass roots.
That's a strong statement from Mr Nichol. But it's going to be fabulous now seeing him and all of his NZRPA members out at the grounds before 8am each Saturday, giving up their time for free...
-
i think the biggest problem is you can't get two people in NZ to agree what the game should look like
-
@Winger said in NZR review:
@Duluth said in NZR review:
Nicholl says NZRPA will now begin working with its stakeholders to establish that independent panel. "We aren't going running out of this country or anything like that," he clarified. "We're more committed to rugby and professional rugby in this country than anyone, including the community game and grass roots. "What we're talking about is a tribunal that comes together in order to ensure really good decisions on behalf of the professional game, to make sure it's effective and efficient as possible, and delivers what the game wants in this country. "We want to put something together where we come together to make sure we make really good decisions for pro rugby. What we won't do is trust New Zealand Rugby under this government structure to go off and make those decisions by themselves. The model isn't unprecedented, with French rugby currently operating with a governing body that runs the game alongside the national union. "It's coming from a perspective of what we feel the professional game is going to need in terms of connecting those stakeholders and getting them together, making good decisions and getting them on the same page getting good alignment. "So we'd be surprised if people don't want to go down the path."
He gone power mad. Like Union boss that thinks it's all about him
My view this is a great day for rugby. The PU's made a stand and refused to have all the power grabbed from them. But, also realize that NZR needs a much better-quality Board. This might now happen
And Aust now only has 4 super rugby teams. It should be three but 4 is much better than 5.
Rob should accept this decision and see how it works out. If the new Board is as bad as the old one, then do his thing. If he can't do this then step aside. Because he's creating a very negative energy that NZ rugby doesn't need. Esp right now
I disagree, as has been pointed out above, the PUs voted for a structure that keeps them in power, same with the opportunity to take even more power. They've have voted for themselves, and the background of PUs which parochialism, miss-spent funds and budgeting like teenagers mean I (and NZRPA) have no trust in them. PUs are there power hungry ones. I also have no trust in NZR as a unit (see end of SR, silver lake, etc). There is to much of the amateur old days hanging around a multi billion dollar business. The share holders voted indeed, but when the shareholders are the last vestiges of pre professionalism, that's not surprising. Turkey's don't vote for Xmas, despite how good it is for everyone else...
So we are going to get a set up like the French, not ideal, but the players have run out of trust with the set up and are exercising their rights under their agreement. Hopefully this will get some balance from the old boys on the provincial boards.
But we won't see the guts required for a full rejig of our Pro player landscape now, sadly. PUs are to wielded to the NPC, which is unsustainable as a Pro comp
-
@mariner4life said in NZR review:
i think the biggest problem is you can't get two people in NZ to agree what the game should look like
THIS ^^^
i have slowly just accepted my ideal situation a) might not be possible b)...not going to happen even if it was
and the reality is i might just not watch a much pro rugby
-
@Machpants said in NZR review:
@Winger said in NZR review:
@Duluth said in NZR review:
Nicholl says NZRPA will now begin working with its stakeholders to establish that independent panel. "We aren't going running out of this country or anything like that," he clarified. "We're more committed to rugby and professional rugby in this country than anyone, including the community game and grass roots. "What we're talking about is a tribunal that comes together in order to ensure really good decisions on behalf of the professional game, to make sure it's effective and efficient as possible, and delivers what the game wants in this country. "We want to put something together where we come together to make sure we make really good decisions for pro rugby. What we won't do is trust New Zealand Rugby under this government structure to go off and make those decisions by themselves. The model isn't unprecedented, with French rugby currently operating with a governing body that runs the game alongside the national union. "It's coming from a perspective of what we feel the professional game is going to need in terms of connecting those stakeholders and getting them together, making good decisions and getting them on the same page getting good alignment. "So we'd be surprised if people don't want to go down the path."
He gone power mad. Like Union boss that thinks it's all about him
My view this is a great day for rugby. The PU's made a stand and refused to have all the power grabbed from them. But, also realize that NZR needs a much better-quality Board. This might now happen
And Aust now only has 4 super rugby teams. It should be three but 4 is much better than 5.
Rob should accept this decision and see how it works out. If the new Board is as bad as the old one, then do his thing. If he can't do this then step aside. Because he's creating a very negative energy that NZ rugby doesn't need. Esp right now
I disagree, as has been pointed out above, the PUs voted for a structure that keeps them in power, same with the opportunity to take even more power. They've have voted for themselves, and the background of PUs which parochialism, miss-spent funds and budgeting like teenagers mean I (and NZRPA) have no trust in them. PUs are there power hungry ones. I also have no trust in NZR as a unit (see end of SR, silver lake, etc). There is to much of the amateur old days hanging around a multi billion dollar business. The share holders voted indeed, but when the shareholders are the last vestiges of pre professionalism, that's not surprising. Turkey's don't vote for Xmas, despite how good it is for everyone else...
So we are going to get a set up like the French, not ideal, but the players have run out of trust with the set up and are exercising their rights under their agreement. Hopefully this will get some balance from the old boys on the provincial boards.
But we won't see the guts required for a full rejig of our Pro player landscape now, sadly. PUs are to wielded to the NPC, which is unsustainable as a Pro comp
once again...are they really "in power", it seems they just want a direct contribution to how things are run, theyre still the minority
-
@Kiwiwomble said in NZR review:
@Machpants said in NZR review:
@Winger said in NZR review:
@Duluth said in NZR review:
Nicholl says NZRPA will now begin working with its stakeholders to establish that independent panel. "We aren't going running out of this country or anything like that," he clarified. "We're more committed to rugby and professional rugby in this country than anyone, including the community game and grass roots. "What we're talking about is a tribunal that comes together in order to ensure really good decisions on behalf of the professional game, to make sure it's effective and efficient as possible, and delivers what the game wants in this country. "We want to put something together where we come together to make sure we make really good decisions for pro rugby. What we won't do is trust New Zealand Rugby under this government structure to go off and make those decisions by themselves. The model isn't unprecedented, with French rugby currently operating with a governing body that runs the game alongside the national union. "It's coming from a perspective of what we feel the professional game is going to need in terms of connecting those stakeholders and getting them together, making good decisions and getting them on the same page getting good alignment. "So we'd be surprised if people don't want to go down the path."
He gone power mad. Like Union boss that thinks it's all about him
My view this is a great day for rugby. The PU's made a stand and refused to have all the power grabbed from them. But, also realize that NZR needs a much better-quality Board. This might now happen
And Aust now only has 4 super rugby teams. It should be three but 4 is much better than 5.
Rob should accept this decision and see how it works out. If the new Board is as bad as the old one, then do his thing. If he can't do this then step aside. Because he's creating a very negative energy that NZ rugby doesn't need. Esp right now
I disagree, as has been pointed out above, the PUs voted for a structure that keeps them in power, same with the opportunity to take even more power. They've have voted for themselves, and the background of PUs which parochialism, miss-spent funds and budgeting like teenagers mean I (and NZRPA) have no trust in them. PUs are there power hungry ones. I also have no trust in NZR as a unit (see end of SR, silver lake, etc). There is to much of the amateur old days hanging around a multi billion dollar business. The share holders voted indeed, but when the shareholders are the last vestiges of pre professionalism, that's not surprising. Turkey's don't vote for Xmas, despite how good it is for everyone else...
So we are going to get a set up like the French, not ideal, but the players have run out of trust with the set up and are exercising their rights under their agreement. Hopefully this will get some balance from the old boys on the provincial boards.
But we won't see the guts required for a full rejig of our Pro player landscape now, sadly. PUs are to wielded to the NPC, which is unsustainable as a Pro comp
once again...are they really "in power", it seems they just want a direct contribution to how things are run, theyre still the minority
Not in power, but they hold a very large proportion of the power, and the ability to stall any appointment. The 3 experience on the board is bad enough (experience in running things into the ground, basically) but it's the influence in the appointments panel that's really problematic
Anyway, probably better than now, I just hope that whomever is the new board had the guts to make big changes below SR level. What will be interesting is because of the PU requirement and changes, how many truly independent members will apply
But it is what it is, NZRPA had done what it feels is needs to protect is interests, and the PUs theirs. Hopefully they can get on with it