Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Shaggy" data-source="post: 452074" data-attributes="member: 43400">Well I guess if your preferred means of sorting issues out (negotiation) has failed after 8 years, your counterparts, such as Australia&#039;s John O&#039;Neill also failing, the players association being threatened with lockout when they want to discuss the issue, and the dead line of the next world cup also approaching, he now feels that ONLY way to get the IRB to the negotiating table is to go public, and that the fact that the current world cup is in progress will also maximise the exposure to this issueIf i&#039;m reading your comment correctly, then you are saying that you would have made the same comments if the English union chairman had raised the same issue Steve Tew had? ... or have I got that wrong?Regardless of who has raised the issue, it&#039;s still advocating discussing change/reform, which has to be a good thing right? ... while Steve Tew is advocating a complete review of the financial model, other parties who want to be at the table, such as the players association want a completely different board, where the representatives are not the members of their nations boards, and aren&#039;t subject to conflicts of interest.... This is where I see the irony, both Tew and the players association are advocating change of an organisation you are obviously critical of (the IRB)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Shaggy, post: 452074, member: 43400"] Well I guess if your preferred means of sorting issues out (negotiation) has failed after 8 years, your counterparts, such as Australia's John O'Neill also failing, the players association being threatened with lockout when they want to discuss the issue, and the dead line of the next world cup also approaching, he now feels that ONLY way to get the IRB to the negotiating table is to go public, and that the fact that the current world cup is in progress will also maximise the exposure to this issue If i'm reading your comment correctly, then you are saying that you would have made the same comments if the English union chairman had raised the same issue Steve Tew had? ... or have I got that wrong? Regardless of who has raised the issue, it's still advocating discussing change/reform, which has to be a good thing right? ... while Steve Tew is advocating a complete review of the financial model, other parties who want to be at the table, such as the players association want a completely different board, where the representatives are not the members of their nations boards, and aren't subject to conflicts of interest. ... This is where I see the irony, both Tew and the players association are advocating change of an organisation you are obviously critical of (the IRB) [/QUOTE]

Verification