|
|
 |
|
 |
|
| Features > | |
 |
|
Thirteen years ago I was living in Auckland and running Lion Nathan's operations. New Zealand's finest, Steinlager, was the official sponsor of the All Blacks and we were very proud of that partnership. The linkage between New Zealand's finest beer and New Zealand's finest team was credible and authentic. The All Blacks provided a terrific platform for Steinlager's expansion overseas, which was focused on rugby playing countries where New Zealand values and heritage were respected and admired. I'll never forget Sean Fitzpatrick calling me from Sydney and briefing me confidentially on the fast moving developments of Kerry Packer and the World Rugby initiative. We had to respond quickly and many people played a part in putting together an alternative which we believed would be best for New Zealand rugby, for the country, for the grassroots game, and for the players. Central to this was the partnership with Rupert Murdoch and Sky, the move to professionalism, the introduction of the Tri-Nations and the Super 12, and the cornerstone of New Zealand's competitive advantage; the central contracting of players. All objectives were achieved initially and for a time the Tri-Nations and Super 12 were the premier tournaments in the world for both players and fans. However, as in all things, nothing stands still and appetites change. The decline really set in three years ago and all parties have been struggling to find a go-forward position that will re-ignite player and fan interest. Whilst this struggle has continued (with New Zealand focus switching to the Rugby World Cup) the Northern Hemisphere has accelerated from a state of denial, through to a standing start and now to leadership. The 6 Nations is the most vibrant international competition in the world; the English Premiership is now profitable, competitive and attractive to fans and players all over the world; the Heineken Cup is probably the most exciting competition in the world after the Rugby World Cup; the French Championship combines the best of grassroots parochialism with global competitiveness. And all the players are migrating there because as Willy Sutton once famously said, "That's where the money is." And this money is being used ruthlessly at international and club level to dilute the strength of Southern Hemisphere rugby by creaming off all our talent; players, coaches, support staff, etc. Commercially, sponsors and media owners are driven into the Northern Hemisphere because of the size of the prize. England, France, and Italy represent significantly bigger market opportunities than New Zealand, Australia and South Africa. And with the U.S. and Japan still dormant the Southern Hemisphere really has no primary attack weapon to bring to bear. We are at an exciting and dangerous tipping point. The great All Black exodus, as Wynn Gray labeled it, is exactly the exodus we were trying to combat in 1995. Having senior All Blacks leave to go overseas at the end of their careers is one thing; having guys like McAllister and Evans go in the prime of their careers is a completely different thing altogether. Wynn reported that 20 1st 5/8ths of New Zealand origin were currently playing for overseas clubs. Add Dan Carter and Nick Evans to the list and you can see the problem. I know that the great minds of Southern Hemisphere rugby are all struggling with this issue right now but I'm concerned that time is moving fast and we might be fiddling while Rome is burning. Making incremental change to the game in the Southern Hemisphere is one approach and is one that should definitely be thought through carefully. But I wonder if incremental improvements will be enough. The Northern Hemisphere was trying desperately in the mid 90's to ignore the pace of change and incrementally improve the amateur game. And for a decade they suffered from this view. Could this happen to us? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
If we do plump for incremental change then I think we have to come to terms with doing whatever it takes to bring Argentina into the Tri-Nations. This tournament is key to our current strategy and it needs new life blood. I know all the problems commercially and in terms of travel and player location. We've got to put those to bed and bring Argentina into the fold immediately for the sake of the fans and the Tournament itself. We also need to reduce the number of games played in this Tournament. Home and away is enough without a third game. Underneath the Tri-Nations I think the Super 14 needs an overhaul but not an expansion overhaul in numbers. It needs a change of focus. I don't believe the focus should be country driven. It should be market driven. To make this commercially successful I believe we need to change the rules and to:
I believe all of these franchises should have minority ownership from the home unions and majority ownership from the private sector. Fresh capital and investment needs to be injected into the game and I have no doubt that major investors could be found for all of these franchises. This would bring to the table two new huge media markets and two huge commercial markets for sponsors—the USA and Japan. All franchises would be free to select players from any of the Southern Hemisphere unions and pay them under a centrally administered salary cap. I'd also like to see a second tournament played in one location over a two week period involving Fiji, Tonga, Samoa, USA, Japan, and Canada. This would develop players in these regions and provide a one shot commercial opportunity at lowest possible cost. I'm sure there are many variations and a lot of thinking being done on the incremental change. But what if this isn't enough. If we were to go for a similar transformation to 1995 I think we should look no further than professional football as the model. Soccer is probably the most successful game in the world today and has evolved over a 100 years into a growing phenomenon for fans, players and commercial interests everywhere it is played. Key elements to the model include:
The clubs are owned privately or are taken onto the stock market. The game thrives internationally, at club level and at grassroot levels where national leagues still do well. The primary funding comes from private interests, media companies and business. I wonder if it's time for rugby to look at embarking on a similar program? England and France are already there. Should we consider joining them? The All Blacks would end up like Brazil. The premier team in the world with the premier players and the most appeal. We would select all New Zealand born players for the team irrespective of their club side and would be a formidable force with great value wherever we played. It's ironic in many ways that the very things we were fighting against in 1995 seem to be coming more and more viable, practical, acceptable and perhaps even desirable. Woody Allen said that "Relationships are like sharks, once they stop moving and stand still they die." Sport is the same.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
COPYRIGHT NZEDGE.COM IP HOLDINGS LIMITED
1998-2009. |
|
|
|
|
|
