a president appointed by parliament wont be popular. given how america's panned out, do we run the risk of someone even worse, just rich and popular getting the job? so much about that role is down to convention. direct election is probably in a dead heat with letting the monarchy keep the job for being best of a bad lot of optionsThat was the question for those may not have been around/forgotten. The referendum was the first thing I ever voted on.
From memory a large partof the 'vote no' campaign was based around ' vote no on this republic'. They knew that becoming a republic was generally viewed in a positive light, but the specification in the wording meant they could target people who wanted a republic but didn't want the President decided purely by the parliament.