The Orange

I don’t normally flog almost an entire story but seeing a paid journo did it and got away, then I may as well do it too.

A former Manawatu rugby administrator has written an open letter to the NZRFU and it’s certainly worth reading. Especially so as it appears on the Manawatu Sub Standard section of Stuff and no one will find it there.

I won’t comment at this stage as there’s a lot to digest but while I’m happy to see a ten team comp, he does raise some interesting points.

Tew and Hobbs were in Palmy to see the Turbos flog Harbour but that may not be enough to sway the people that matter.

Anyway, here’s the letter in question:

Thank you you for your prompt and concise response to the letter written by Barrie Angland on behalf of all rugby followers in the Manawatu.

However, the points you emphasised about fiscal responsibility, while valid, have a rather hollow ring to rugby followers in this area.

On the one hand you expect unions to exercise financial prudence. Yet almost daily we are being told about the escalating losses expected as a result of the Rugby World Cup which, despite being underwritten by the Government to some extent, will surely lead to more substantial future losses than those sustained by the Air New Zealand Cup.

You can see therefore the reason for the cynicism of followers in this area. To make matters worse, Steve Tew has stated publicly that the New Zealand Rugby Union will make a substantial contribution to the proposed new division one competition (when and if it begins). Doesn’t that strike you as a strange decision?

You have worked in the corporate sector for some time now and surely one of the basic principles is that when any commercial entity undergoes a sustained period of financial reverses, a normal process is a comprehensive review of the entire operation, starting at the top.

I would suggest you instigate an independent review of NZRU head office. However, I would suspect most of the employees would struggle to achieve normal key performance indicators, if the last few years are anything to go by.

A lot of the financial pressures have, particularly in the last year, been caused by falling attendances at Super 14 matches. Has the board noticed this? I ask this question because, rather than cutting back on this competition, the board has agreed to an expansion.

That is a further unwise intrusion into the already limited window to play Air New Zealand Cup fixtures. Why do the Sanzar delegates from the world’s premier rugby nation seem to get over-run by South Africa and Australia when, historically, Australian teams, in particular, perform abysmally in that competition?

When you open the Manawatu books in the near future you will hopefully agree that if the organisation you chair achieves the same financial turnaround, you would be a happy man. The Turbos have captured the imagination of the entire region unlike any sporting team I have seen during a lifetime of playing, coaching and lately administering a game. For the reasons outlined above, axing the Turbos at the end of this season will be seen as a major betrayal.

You must concede that the poor attendances at this year’s Super 14 matches were due in part to the brand of rugby and also to the saturation of matches early in the year.

By contrast, the Air New Zealand Cup has produced an entertaining quality of rugby, drawn good attendances and built a bigger fan base (especially in the provinces). This competition has brought back to the game a generation of people who have felt disillusioned for some time. Axing such a format will surely undo all the good achieved in the last few years, a situation aggravated by the less-than-stellar performances of our flagship team, the All Blacks, so far this season.When your board considers the future of our national game, it should be mindful of the fact that stakeholders include not just the bigger unions which have a Super 14 franchise.

I have detected at all levels an attitude of disenchantment. If you choose to ignore this, the long-term ramifications will damage the game way beyond the 2011 World Cup.

Bill Anderson

Great to see the Shield go to Southland, 50 years after they last had it.

Amid the largely turgid offerings of the NPC, it’s an obviously stand out moment of the season.

The game itself was nothing to note in terms of entertainment – 9-3 is the type of scoreline we used to laugh about in NZ. And Canterbury’s points came from a dropped goal!!

More so, we used to get wild when Stephen Jones of the Times lauded such contests when we were pining for try-fests.

Sadly, I suspect most of the punters will miss the reality that these types of results are only possible because the AB’s were not playing.

Which of course raises a number of discussion points.

First, how do you think HB are feeling right now?  They get within a dodgy linesman (he didn’t assist the referee!) of sharing points with the Cantabs with all their ABs while the following week the Southland get the Shield, four comp points, and with it a place in the Semis against Christchurch’s best club players.  Hardly a level playing field.

Second, most people have been lauding the NPC this year for being much more interesting and particularly the achievements of the underdogs.  Again, this has come because the AB’s have largely been absent from the comp.

Frankly, the NPC is increasingly sounding and looking like a second-tier competition at best.

It doesn’t undermine the achievements of Southland in winning the Log o’ Wood nor does it reflect badly on their obvious passion.

It just shows that the NPC as our number one rugby competition is a nonsense.

There’s been a lot of biffo in the media after the Hawke Eyes were robbed of a legitimate try on Thursday.

Strange of course that it always seem the big teams like the Cantabs that get the luck of the draw.  If anything, you would have expected a home town decision.

Indeed, Chris Rattue notes in the Granny:

It even makes you wonder if reputations hold sway, whether the Canterbury aura and the presence of Richie McCaw and co subconsciously persuaded the officials not to make a tough ruling against them.

Regardless of the merits of the decision – and quite frankly, there weren’t many! – the real issue is the idiotic decision of the NZRFU to ditch the TMOs for the NPC.

It saved a couple of hundred grand but in the wider scheme of things that’s a high cost to pay for little benefit.

Indeed, as many are pointing out, with a little innovation, the same cameras that deliver the punter sitting at home a clear view could have been used by the match officials.  Indeed, this is the model used by the NFL where the same match officials use the same video footage we all see.

Heck, if you want to go the whole NFL ten years (and that’s a first down baby!) then you could even use a challenge system.  Any excitement would normally help this year’s flacid NPC.

The NZRFU apparently are justifying their decision on the basis that the officials have got it 90% right.

That clearly won’t impress a team like HB if it misses out on a home semi (or inded the semi finals) on the basis of points it could have got through a 10 % decision that was patently wrong to everyone apart from Blind Bob on the sideline.

You’d be right pissed off if you put the house on a draw or a two points spread.

Bet ya the tab won’t refund monies either – if the punter makes a mistake, the punter pays but if the NZRFU or the officials stuff up, the punters still pay.

Let’s leave the final words to Chris Rattue:

The NZRU must consider re-introducing the video referee, and this should be easier to do in a new 10-team competition. Credibility and sporting justice is suffering without the video inspection.

Yep, it’s official.  At the moment (until Winston Peter’s brother threatens legal action), the NZRFU is still threatening to drop four teams from the NPC.

Mind you, we won’t hold our breath because as Stuff tells us, the NZRFU have chickened out before:

It has happened in the past – the recent past even – when the NZRU bailed out, under threats of legal action, on its decision to downsize the top grade in provincial rugby.

However, don’t hold your breath because nothing is ever like it seems in rugby.

Talk about turkeys and Christmas:

“The reality is the unions came to us at the beginning of the year and said this competition is in trouble, none of us are able to pay our bills and collectively we’re going to lost $2.5-3 million this year across the 14 unions, on top of $3m last year and almost $4m the year before,” said Tew in an interview with Radio Sport this week.

“Everyone agreed we would not get a unanimous view on what the competition should look like – but we did get a unanimous view on what the key factors for a successful competition were and which we should apply to the decision.”

These included a desire to have professionals in it, so it couldn’t start till at least the end of Super rugby; protection of the club rugby window; the need for a full round-robin, and semifinals format; that midweek rugby was avoided; and that it would all be done and dusted by the end of October.

“You apply these factors and you end up with a 12-week window maximum, 10 teams takes up 11 weeks, and that’s where we’re at,” summed up Tew.

Funny that our mates over at Save Our Teams don’t mention any one of these points.

Why stop at 14 teams?  Why not have 21 teams in the first division.

Perhaps the problem is that only half the current comp is making any money:

Tew confirmed that seven of the 14 teams in this year’s Air NZ Cup had forecast a deficit and that the competition simply did not stack up financially in its current format.

If you really want to save our teams, take your medicine and cut four to save the rest.

Nice to see the Save Our Teams fanatics checking out the rest of the internet.

Big ups also to Kevin Hare who posted under his own name responding to my earlier post about Save Our Teams.

I’ve added their site to my blog roll – I don’t agree with them but it’s good to see some grass roots activity for a change.

Kevin makes a couple of points, first about the NZRFU choosing the size of the competition.

The NZRFU set up the 14 team Expansion. They Said it was always going to take 3-4 years to come right . IT HAS.

The reality was that the NZRFU had proposed a smaller premier division for all the reasons that are becoming evident now.  Under pressure and legal threats, the NZRFU showed all the bravery Italian armies are renowned for and backed down quicker than Shane Cameron.

To that extent, the NZRFU has only got itself to blame as if it had shown some balls (preferably adidas) a few years ago, it would never be in the pickle it now is.

The second point Kevin makes is about the local economies being impacted by the four teams being cut:

So As you see it is not Just TAKE The teams Away , If they Are moved out then the Crowds will twindle once again , People Won’t be WORKING on Match Day and Lastly as is the Common Theme we are hearing From ALL Provinces is this….

It Is Working Stop Putting $$$ ahead of RUGBY.

The problem of course is that the process was started by the same unions who are now crying wolf.  There isn’t the money in the comp to keep it afloat and NZRFU simply can’t stump up more.

The numbers are simple – say 25 players at a paltry average of say $40K and your average provincial union has to find a cool $1 million.  That’s a lot of hot dogs.

I have respect the provincial pride that many of these places have.  But provincial pride doesn’t pay professional wages and so long as the NPC is a professional comp (at least at the very top) then less is more.

I can see a few more posts coming up about the paring of the NPC.

For what it’s worth, i can’t see how the NPC can avoid dropping the four teams because the money just ain’t there.

The only possibility of 14 teams working would be as an amateur competition and we all know that won’t work.

Let’s no forget that while Northland threatened every possible legal action to avoid the drop, they also agreed that the competition could only sustain 10 teams.  Says it all for rugby administrators really.

At some stage, the NZRFU are going to have to give four teams the chop so let’s try and work out who they will be.  As we all know, it’s not performance that counts!

For starters, the Super 14 franchise bases will be safe – so that ring fences Auckland, Waikato, Wellington, Canterbury and Otago.  For the record, i see no justification for Otago retaining a S14 franchise but that’s another story and argument.

Taranaki have enough going for them to be considered safe.  Hawke’s Bay’s success over the last couple of years should likewise have done enough.

So there’s seven who won’t be voted off the island to start with.

Let’s start from the other end.

The basket cases have to go – so that’s Counties-Manakau goneburger and almost certainly Northland (unless Peters threatens the mother of all legal cases).  It does help that both Counties and Northland are at the bottom of the table.

The next team up in 11th place is Manawatu.  They have cool fans (what gives with the buckets??), a lot of local support, and the Cruden factor.  But that most likely won’t be enough to save their butt.

That leaves the following (with the current ranking going into week 10):

• Southland – 2nd
• Bay of Plenty – 4th
• Tasman – 5th
• North Harbour – 12th

On performance, you’d really have to save Harbour deserve to go down but I seriously doubt the NZRFU has the balls (if they do, they will be adidas).

Southland and Bay of Plenty have performed credibly over multiple seasons while I suspect Tasman will pay the penalty for their financial meltdown last year.  That will of course create another problem with the almost certain dissolution of the Tasman union back to the traditional Nelson Bays and Marlborough which should at least please the flat earthers at Save Our Teams.

No surprises but my four to get voted off the island would be:

• Counties-Manakau
• Northland
• Manawatu
• Tasman

I’ve stayed away from the whole NPC death match until things become clearer.

Part of the problem is that the debate has largely been on emotional rather than any attempt to consider the issues in a logical manner.

Case in point:  Save Our Teams.

The site’s mission is nothing but worthy:

The NZRU Constitution clearly states, under Objects And Powers, that the union is to “promote, foster and develop rugby throughout New Zealand”.

So help us to preserve the Air New Zealand / Heartland Championship in its current format and to convince the NZRU that the smaller unions should not be axed…

Perhaps I can help with a modified mission?

To adopt a narrow-minded, blinkered, parochial and rose-tinted view of the NPC and go back to the future.

Naturally, the will want all ABs to play, all games played in the day, ohh and no TV coverage because that was what it was like.

The issue that these flat earthers consistently over look is who’s going to pay for it?

You can have all the heritage and history you want, but at the end of the day someone has to pay for it.

The same people who demand that the NZRFU keep 14 teams in the NPC are likely to be the same who demand that the AB’s play in the NPC instead of touring the UK … when they earn the money to pay the NPC wages.

Save our teams?  Save your breath.

So will the new NPC be like Back To The Future II (sucky) or BTTF III (worthy of the original). And would Michael J Fox AND the car fit under the cap?

As far as the NZRFU is concerned – it could well be the New Zealand Rugby Fuck Ups for some of their decisions in the past) – it’s not a bad start.

The draw is out and they don’t seem to have forgotten any teams. Well done Steve Tew!

The Division One which is more like the old division 2 and 3 will play for the Meads and Lochore Cups (I might have made the last one up but you wouldn’t know would you?).

The Premier Division – which is actually the first division on steroids – will play in two pools and I just hope that the players take swimming lessons.

Now, I could go on trying to make out I’m funny when you are really dying to know what I think about the new NPC.

I am sympathetic to what the NZRFU is trying to achieve. For a number of provincial teams – particularly Hawke’s Bay and Counties – it’s famine or feast. If you’re not in Division 1, there’s no point in continuing – all the best players end up in Otago or North Harbour.

SO expanding the Premier Division could potentially be a good if not great move. It will provide opportunities for some of the breeding grounds in NZ to regain their positions on the national stage.

But the cap – all $2 million – is a joke. Either have a cap which will genuinely spread talent around or don’t bother. Given the intention, they may as well have used a draft for the NPC. It doesn’t seem to hurt the NFL.

Quite frankly, the NPC is effectively a third tier competition now, behind the All Blacks programme (they no longer play games) and definitely behind the Super 14.

There will be some winners of sorts – Hawkes Bay, Counties and Tasman will all benefit.

But if the NZRFU is serious about putting the Competition back into the NPC, it will only happen when all 14 teams have the same player and financial resources.

I’m happy to state here that the new NPC in 2006 will be won by either Canterbury or Auckland which suggests that there’s a long way to go to get an even comp.

So the NPC as we know it will be know more.

Fittingly, the winners of Division 1 and Division 2 deserved their wins.

Auckland has dominated the NPC, winning 15 of the 30 titles on offer. It was very much the case when Auckland was strong, the AB’s were strong.

More to the point, the success of this year’s Jafas has shown the blue print (that’s quite a good one if you think about it!) for attacking “total rugby”.

We saw it earlier in the year when the more expansive game of the All Blacks easily over came the Lions … or was that the Pussies?

As for Division 2, it was great to see the Magpies fly again. As an old time Bay boy, the legacy of the Magpies – particularly in the Ranfurly Shield – is easily forgotten.

However, it’s not as easy to forget players of the ilk of Tremain, Nepia, and the Brownlee brothers.

The Bay has also been the breeding ground for a host of more recent players who have left the region to play at the highest level, notably Norm “Twinketoes” Hewitt, Taine Randell and the Cooper bros to name a matching set of All Blacks.

The new NPC gives Hawkes Bay the chance to turn the clock back.

It was great to see the Otago boys win last night simply to put the Competition back into the NPC.

I’ve posted before about how boring the comp has become and the Otago dicking the Shaggers twice certainly has added some much needed spice to the NPC.

The problem is – after the Harbours inevitable implosion against the Bridge bros – it still leaves the comp as looking like a three or four horse race.

Don’t get me wrong. I still think it was great that the boys from Dunedin did the deed. But the NPC was only ever going to be one from one of six teams – Auckland, Otago, Shaggers, Wellington, Waikato and Harbour. And you’d get little money back on putting the rent on either Auckland or Canterbury to win it.

Hopefully, next year will see at least a few new teams and some interest in how the second division teams cope with the step up. Likewise, Northland might actually win a game this century.

Still, what odds on the NPC being won by either Canterbury or Auckland next year?

I hope I’m wrong but you gotta think the Auks will be too good for the O team, especially on the garden of Eden.