• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

Are ther NZRU not listening or watching ....

Tasman Makos continue to embarrass the NZRU

Tasman 12 - Auckland 8

Just walked back from this game, and what an excellent game it was. The Makos outscored Auckland two tries to one.

(Oh how embarrassing this must be for Tewbacca and his numb-skull cronies at the NZRU.)

The four point margin flattered Auckland, who were well beaten in all phases of the game; possession, territory, scrums, lineouts, rucks & mauls and turnovers. Additionally, the Makos had to overcome some awful refereeing, include a Wayne Barnesesque effort where he missed an obvious forward pass that lead directly to Auckland's only try. I was seated in the old stand directly in line with the 22 and it was clearly forward.

Never mind, Tasman won, and the embarrassment for the NZRU continues.
2funny.gif
 
William signed.

Further evidence the heartland aren't going to take this without some lubricant, portions highlighted

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div>
Source Peter Lamp - Manawatu Standard

All Blacks great Sir Colin Meads can't see any sense in chopping what has turned out to be New Zealand's most interesting competition.

In the fourth year of the Air New Zealand Cup, the lesser teams have come right, and all have become competitive, he said.

"Now they want to chop it all out again," Sir Colin said from his Te Kuiti home.

Cities like Palmerston North are getting huge crowds to games and the fans are loving it, he said.

He was at FMG Stadium on August 20 when Manawatu beat Otago and revelled in the atmosphere.

"Teams have come on this year. Northland, Tasman and Manawatu are playing pretty good rugby," he said.

His feeling is that the "big boys" are dictating the reduction in teams from 14 to 10. And he's heard the announcement from the New Zealand Rugby Union that all 14 unions are in favour of the cut being made.

"To me that's bullshit. I think we'll see a lot more water under the bridge before it happens.

"I wouldn't go past there being court action." He'd prefer to see 14 teams retained and the competition costs cut.

Former All Black selector Peter Thorburn said the NZRU has millions of dollars in reserves and some of that should be used for the good of the game.

"I believe it is their obligation to find funding for it, for the asset that is this competition."

But he wonders if the national body has a real intention of doing what's good for the game.

By his reckoning, there are close to 50 players in the threatened teams â€" Manawatu, Tasman, Northland and Counties-Manukau â€" who are good enough to be playing premier rugby. And a good proportion of them should be on the verge of Super 14, he said.

"The second-tier competition won't provide a competition for these guys to learn quicker than they are now. They won't be playing tough teams."

Former All Black selector, Earle Kirton, has been impressed at how the former division-two provinces have stepped up and provided a greater pool of players. He says it's just a matter of getting the organisation and the finances right.

WHAT THE EXPERTS SAY

Sir Colin Meads, former All Black: "It's terribly sad; Manawatu have been playing pretty good rugby. There are going to be a lot of problems if they put four teams down. There will be some hard words said to the NZRU."

Gary Knight, Manawatu's former All Black prop: "Places like Auckland, if they are down the bottom, should get the chop. Those big Super 14 places have got unfair money and will keep plucking players because they have got the money."

Hamish McKay, TV3 sportscaster: "It would be an absolute insanity if the Turbos were gone. They have proved themselves on the paddock and I'm not going to take this lying down. I'd be filthy and I'd be down there boots and all."

Sir Brian Lochore, former All Black coach: "The positivity of all teams from one to 14 has been absolutely brilliant. They've been well coached and have played for the unions they represent and that's what it's all about."

David Kirk, former All Black: "I watched every game I could during the (Manawatu) Ranfurly Shield era and I remember the names of every player. I was there when we finally lost. Manawatu rugby has made a huge contribution to New Zealand rugby over the years and deserves the chance to keep doing so."

Peter Thorburn, former All Black selector: "If two teams went down it would probably be too many. The NZRU should be finding a way to keep the status quo because there is so much talent coming through. The main reason they're doing this is to fit in the Super 14."[/b]

As stated the reduction in teams to accomodate a grandiose S15 is simply insanity, Tewbacca and the muppets on the NZRU board need to go. S15 is not a sustainable competition as dropping viewers numbers both on tellie and at the games would tend to indicate. The conference system has inherent flaws, the ARU have been very quiet on the expat situation for example, and even the Aussies on this board seem blaise at best about a major backer for the expansion into Victoria pulling the pin. Instead the NZRU are going to alienate the rural heartland to accomodate a competition that has a definite use by date, that coming very close to expiry.

I can see this ending up in a legal mad woman's breakfast. As to the mid year agreement between the unions and NZRU, snigger, didn't that involve a two up two down promotion system, since abandoned by the NZRU in another example of not being able to find their own arses with both hands. Would make the rest of the agreement non-binding I would have thought.

Overall my belief is that the majority of New Zealand rugby supporters are not for four teams being demoted and definitely, outside the top five, are not in favour of the S15 concept. The NZRU has lost touch with grass roots rugby supporters and will eventually pay the price for that both in the boardroom and on the rugby pitch. Almost at a stage of "Save New Zealand Rugby" folks.
 
Steve Tew is going to be on Radio Sport for the next hour. This is going to be interesting.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (William18 @ Oct 1 2009, 07:53 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
Steve Tew is going to be on Radio Sport for the next hour. This is going to be interesting.[/b]


Well I have just listened to that. None of his answers satisfy me I'm afraid he still has no idea what this competition means to Provincial NZ. And just as I thought, the Provincial Unions did NOT agree that four teams will be culled.

Interesting also that my Union, Tasman, is projecting a profit this year, regardless of whether they make the top four or not, and if they do make the semis, that will be a bonus. But they are still likely to get chopped anyway. Madness!

Perhaps someone could explain to me why the ANZC MUST fit into a 12 week window?

What's so special about 12 weeks.?
 
Actually good point Smart Cooky. If the All Blacks aren't there, (for example end of year tour) it'd be no different than the start of the comp. Plus if there were injuries on the end of year tour, there'd be form players to pick from.
 
mmmm some interesting points, just to all who say that NZRU should give them another 3 years, all teams were told in 2006 that the comp would be reviewed 3 years later and teams judged on performance on and off the field, that time has come and its too late to atart winning now lol. Tasman, Manawatu, Southland, Hawkes Bay I agree all performing well, but none will win the ANC, history has shown that one of the bigger unions will win the ANZ cup.

I'm a heartland supporter and am looking forward to the new round robin format for Heartlands 2010, over 4 years East Coast has only played 11 homes games and 19 away, because the draw is created on a seeding basis from the pevious year, 2010 will bring back the home and away draws of old, an example East Coast has played Wanganui 3 times in last 4 years all in Wanganui, damn their players are screaming for trip up the Coast.

ANZ cup still huge arguments for and against change but for Heartland Im very happy with the decision to change the format from the top.
 
Last 10 years of NPC

Auckland 5 championships
Canterbury 3
Wellington 1
Waikato 1

Hawkes Bay one of the better teams in last 3 ANZ Cups nothing to show for it.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (smartcooky @ Oct 1 2009, 10:03 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (William18 @ Oct 1 2009, 07:53 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Steve Tew is going to be on Radio Sport for the next hour. This is going to be interesting.[/b]


Well I have just listened to that. None of his answers satisfy me I'm afraid he still has no idea what this competition means to Provincial NZ. And just as I thought, the Provincial Unions did NOT agree that four teams will be culled.

Interesting also that my Union, Tasman, is projecting a profit this year, regardless of whether they make the top four or not, and if they do make the semis, that will be a bonus. But they are still likely to get chopped anyway. Madness!

Perhaps someone could explain to me why the ANZC MUST fit into a 12 week window?

What's so special about 12 weeks.?
[/b][/quote]
I guess it is so that it can fit into a special time period as it should not overlap on the Super14 or club rugby. Honestly, all provinces agreed to the principles (I have not heard any one say from the provinces that they did not have a fair say in the principles) that the competition must be 12 weeks long, have a full round robin, semi finals and no mid week games. If you follow those principles you have to get rid of four teams. I don't think any union which agreed to the principls can disagree with the cullling of four teams. As soon as you look at the principles you realise that 4 teams have to be dropped.

Super rugby must be kept because if it was not rugby in Australia would die. I don't agree with the Super 15 rubbish, super 12 would be much better but it must be kept in some form. Bledisloe cup tests are major earners in New Zealand. If we did not have Super rugby we would not have those tests, thus that money could not be redistributed through the provinces. The strength of rugby in Australia is an important concern to the NZRU.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NgatiDread @ Oct 1 2009, 11:32 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
mmmm some interesting points, just to all who say that NZRU should give them another 3 years, all teams were told in 2006 that the comp would be reviewed 3 years later and teams judged on performance on and off the field, that time has come and its too late to atart winning now lol. Tasman, Manawatu, Southland, Hawkes Bay I agree all performing well, but none will win the ANC, history has shown that one of the bigger unions will win the ANZ cup.

I'm a heartland supporter and am looking forward to the new round robin format for Heartlands 2010, over 4 years East Coast has only played 11 homes games and 19 away, because the draw is created on a seeding basis from the pevious year, 2010 will bring back the home and away draws of old, an example East Coast has played Wanganui 3 times in last 4 years all in Wanganui, damn their players are screaming for trip up the Coast.

ANZ cup still huge arguments for and against change but for Heartland Im very happy with the decision to change the format from the top.[/b]

Firstly, you can not criticize Hawkes Bay. They got promoted and have done very well, they do not need to win it to be a success.

I get what you are saying about the Heartland Championship. Other members could accuse me of not caring about the lower ANZC unions but I think the current format does nothing for those Heartland teams.

I hope to get to an East Coast game. I will be in the Coromandel when East Coast are playing so fingers crossed i can get there. I normally try and make one Heartland game each season.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NgatiDread @ Oct 1 2009, 08:32 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
mmmm some interesting points, just to all who say that NZRU should give them another 3 years, all teams were told in 2006 that the comp would be reviewed 3 years later and teams judged on performance on and off the field, that time has come and its too late to atart winning now lol. Tasman, Manawatu, Southland, Hawkes Bay I agree all performing well, but none will win the ANC, history has shown that one of the bigger unions will win the ANZ cup.

I'm a heartland supporter and am looking forward to the new round robin format for Heartlands 2010, over 4 years East Coast has only played 11 homes games and 19 away, because the draw is created on a seeding basis from the pevious year, 2010 will bring back the home and away draws of old, an example East Coast has played Wanganui 3 times in last 4 years all in Wanganui, damn their players are screaming for trip up the Coast.

ANZ cup still huge arguments for and against change but for Heartland Im very happy with the decision to change the format from the top.[/b]

If the NZRU want to be fair dinkum it would mean Otago and North Harbour should be demoted ahead of Manawatu and Tasman, crowd numbers, finances etc. Not going to happen, so how exactly is propping up the big five fair to the rest of New Zealand and how exactly does this promote the game nation wide as the NZRU charter requires?

After a three year review period I would have though the resounding result would be the competition is in order, let's give it another three years.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (William18 @ Oct 1 2009, 11:50 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (smartcooky @ Oct 1 2009, 10:03 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (William18 @ Oct 1 2009, 07:53 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Steve Tew is going to be on Radio Sport for the next hour. This is going to be interesting.[/b]


Well I have just listened to that. None of his answers satisfy me I'm afraid he still has no idea what this competition means to Provincial NZ. And just as I thought, the Provincial Unions did NOT agree that four teams will be culled.

Interesting also that my Union, Tasman, is projecting a profit this year, regardless of whether they make the top four or not, and if they do make the semis, that will be a bonus. But they are still likely to get chopped anyway. Madness!

Perhaps someone could explain to me why the ANZC MUST fit into a 12 week window?

What's so special about 12 weeks.?
[/b][/quote]
I guess it is so that it can fit into a special time period as it should not overlap on the Super14 or club rugby. Honestly, all provinces agreed to the principles (I have not heard any one say from the provinces that they did not have a fair say in the principles) that the competition must be 12 weeks long, have a full round robin, semi finals and no mid week games. If you follow those principles you have to get rid of four teams. I don't think any union which agreed to the principls can disagree with the cullling of four teams. As soon as you look at the principles you realise that 4 teams have to be dropped.

Super rugby must be kept because if it was not rugby in Australia would die. I don't agree with the Super 15 rubbish, super 12 would be much better but it must be kept in some form. Bledisloe cup tests are major earners in New Zealand. If we did not have Super rugby we would not have those tests, thus that money could not be redistributed through the provinces. The strength of rugby in Australia is an important concern to the NZRU.
[/b][/quote]

Well the Victorian proposal for a Super rugby team has all but fallen through, leaving only the Southern Spears for the 15th spot.

Do we reeeaaally need another Saffa team. The Cheetahs are doing enough themselves to diminish the reputation of South African rugby. I cant see another team being competitive anytime in the next ten years. How about Steve Tew grows some balls and tells SANZAR to scrap the super 15 and keep it at 14 teams. How come the South Africans can stand up for the Currie Cup but noone in NZ will stand for the ANZC.

Super rugby keeps the same schedule, ANZC keeps the same schedule, everyone's happy.
 
YES, IT'S BROKE INSISTS TEW

Steve Tew could be forgiven for feeling a bit like rugby's version of the grim reaper this year.

The New Zealand Rugby Union's decision to remodel its National Provincial Championship by culling four teams from the 14-team competition has become about as popular as a stubbed toe in recent weeks.

Close games, big crowds in the provinces, higher TV ratings and a general return to the good old days.

So, why not follow the age-old adage, if it ain't broke?

Tew argues that's exactly where the case against a revamp falls over. The NPC is broke, and badly, when you examine its financial state.

The losses in recent years make dire reading â€" $3.7 million in 2007, $3 million in 2008 and a projection of $2.7 million this year.

"That's a 10 million hit over four years ... on the asset reserves of the collective provincial unions and it's not sustainable," Tew said. "What we are signalling is that too much money is spent on too many players. In the end the revenue being driven from this competition sends you the best piece of customer research you can get."

OK, but how did you decide on a 10-team premier division?

The provinces and the Players' Association agreed on six principles and they included a round-robin that finishes by October. Super rugby finishes in July, so there were only 11 to 12 weeks to to fit in the NPC.

So, if everyone agreed, why is there so much dissent now?

"We all agree on the characteristics, but not everyone agrees with how they pan out. If you talk to the biggest unions they would probably want a six to eight teams.

"If you talk to the group in the middle, it depends where they sit. You talk to the guys in danger of being put in Division 1 and clearly they would prefer a 14-team comp. "You can never get a totally unanimous structure because there are simply there are too many self interests."

Why not just rein in spending by slashing the $2 million salary cap? Tew says unions could have been doing that all along, but treated the cap as a target rather than a cap with many living beyond their means.

So there are too many fulltime professional players?

"We can't sustain five professional Super rugby teams and then another 10 to 14 professional teams.

"The ANZC has to be a blend of players who are fully professional and those who get paid enough to have a real crack to aspire to professionalism.

"With the All Blacks out you have the remainder of the 140 professional players playing in it and the rest get paid enough that they can have a decent go to fulfil their aspirations to be a professional player the following year."
Ad Feedback

Have you already decided which four teams will be demoted?

"No."

So are some teams genuinely playing for their place in the top division?

"You could say that because there is still room for unions to move up or down [the rankings] ... there has certainly been a shuffling of ranks as we've signed off the player registrations for the year.

"They aren't just playing for it, they have also been working for it ... It could do [come down to where they finish], but it could also come down to the financial criteria."

Are you going to cut Manawatu simply because there are too many teams in the Hurricanes franchise?

"There is absolutely no sense to that comment, nor are there any facts behind it."

Won't the promoted Heartland teams get thrashed in Division 1?

"There is a challenge in that regard and work to be done and we may have to help, but people also said that about the teams that came up to the current first division.

"People who were making those comments wouldn't have imagined Tasman beating Auckland and Bay of Plenty beating Wellington."

Will you get a TV deal for Division 1 and will fans still follow it?

"We are talking to the broadcasters about how we treat Division 1 and working damn hard to make sure it gets meaningful coverage ... We hope supporters who have stuck with their unions over the last couple of years will stick with them so they can win this competition and get back up."

Will rugby die in the four demoted unions?

"Rugby didn't die in those regions when they were in Division 2 ..."

Won't top players just immediately leave the four demoted teams?

"We'd like a system where players are not financially disadvantaged for playing their rugby wherever they are, provided their union is raising enough money to pay the bills."

'DONT WRITE MANAWATU OFF'

The axe is hovering over Manawatu. Chief executive John Knowles expalins how he plans to dodge the blade.

Q: Why should Manawatu be retained in the NPC?

A: The smaller provinces relate to it. It has been a really good competition this year and it has taken three years to bed down. To come this far and have it all whipped away would be a disaster. We don't want to be a feeder union.

Q: Is the Save the Turbos campaign working?

A: Manawatu Rugby is not part of the campaign that's trying to save the 14-team competition. We're going around all the local businesses and knocking on every door and saying if you want to keep the Turbos competitive we have to be solvent. The whole Turbos team has just been out and they've done the whole CBD. The Turbos are bloody economically important to the region.

Q: Your finances rated you ninth of 14 teams last year, where do you believe you sit at present?

A: We were sitting ninth and we had a $454,00 hole. Don't write us off. Everybody in New Zealand has made comments about Manawatu being one of the four that's gone. Sure, we were 14th in the competition last year, that makes it difficult but there are a number of unions with problems. Steve Tew said there were seven unions that won't break even this year. If we can get our house in order then we might be okay.

Q: The NZRU carries out a solvency test on October 31. What are you hoping to achieve before then?

A: Give it a last ditch effort. We've made a lot of advances this year. We've pulled in our expenditure big time and by improving our gates we've got a lot of money coming through. One thing in our favour is we haven't gone to the NZRU for long-term loans whereas a number of the other unions have done that.

Q: How do you rate your chances of staying in the NPC?

A: We only know what the media puts out, saying Manawatu, Counties, Northland and Tasman are gone. You'd have to assume that is correct but then where does Bay of Plenty sit? They've had three loans from the NZRU over the last three years. You'd have to say that we aren't that favourable, you don't have to be a rocket scientist to work that out because of results on the field and we've got a small population. But I still think it will come down to finances.

Q: The NZRU says all the provinces accepted the need for a 10-team NPC. Is this true?

A: When the chairmen and CEOs met in April they came up with a set of principles around which a competition should be built. To a large extent the big fellas [unions] drove that. Then we were told we've only got a 12-week window which was put in by Steve Tew. That brought it to a point where it was just about game, set, match. But there's an argument that why do you have to play against every team? There's a lot of people saying why don't you play this in two lots of seven and have a playoff at the end?

Q: What will your players do if Manawatu are demoted?

A: We only have 14 players contracted [for next year] and I'm not contracting anybody at the moment. Certainly we have to reduce player payments, regardless of what competition we're in.

Q: Would a six-team first division competition be relevant?

A: No. Playing five teams home and away, that's not a viable competition and you're not playing the big fellas and that's really sad. If you're Josh Bradnock or Aaron Cruden, you're not going to keep those players because they want to test themselves.

Q: Are you working together with other at-risk provinces?

A: There's good dialogue going on and we're having a chat next week. A lot of provinces have similar needs and the community recognises that. They don't have the same opportunity to relate to the Super 14 that the metropolitan areas do. It's a pity that they're chopping this into two competitions and I don't agree with it. It has been a bloody struggle for me. Knocking on doors is not my style but you have to do these things. We need to give this every shot.

THE FACTS AND FIGURES

What? The NZRU propose to cut four teams from the current NPC to create a new 12-week, two division competition with automatic promotion-relegation next year.

Why? The current 14-team NPC loses too much money, costs too much to run and is deemed unsustainable after years of collective losses.

The proof: 2006 - $460,000 profit after (driven by a one-off payment in 2005 from the British Irish Lions tour and big foreign exchange gains) - 2007 - $3.7 million loss - 2008 - $3 million loss - 2009 - $2.7 million projected loss

Who asked for change? The provinces asked the NZRU for change and agreed on six guiding principals. - no overlap with Super rugby - professional players, other than All Blacks to be available - a full round-robin - a semi and a final - promotion-relegation - was finished by the end of October.

Why are they fighting it then? Provinces agreed to the principles, but some, especially those in line to be in Division 1, believe that can be achieved within a 14-team format. Some are convinced they will not recover financially and will lose their top players if demoted next season.

Who will get cut? No decision's been made, but Counties-Manukau, Tasman, Northland and Manawatu are thought to be the most vulnerable. Two teams will come up from the Heartland Championships to create a six-team Division 1.

What's the criteria? Finance, on-field performance, player registrations, player development, population base. When's the decision? Second week of December.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/sport...NPC-need-fixing

From this mornings Dom Post. A good piece on the issue, I would say.
 

Latest posts

Top