Rugby fiddles while Otago Rugby Football Union burns
Roar Pro By Michael Warren, 2 Mar 2012 Michael Warren is a Roar Pro
So it’s come to this. A Rugby Union that is over 120 years old will be left to burn. The Otago Rugby Football Union has been a New Zealand rugby icon for 120 years, and could have shared the slogan of its local amber liquid counterpart as The Pride of the South.
It has now been forced to sit in a corner awaiting euthanasia. Over the fence and in many other parts of the country there lie Otago’s cussie-bros, many hiding behind clubroom fences wondering if they are the next to go.
Rugby has been in a progressive downward spiral since the mothers rose up and stated that they no longer wanted their little boys hurt by the sprig-raking ruffians of the Sir Colin Mead’s era. The real men of rugby were lost forever.
Gradually we have moved our game into the sanitised, over-paid, over-played, over-ruled and over-everything-elsed situation where nobody wants to support a game that creates frustration with every play.
Yes, rugby was for the hard player who played the game hard, and has been watered down over the years to where interpretations of rules are seen differently by player, coach, ref and fan. The fan, who funds the operation,has slowly become too bored to bother going to games and to pay the money that kept unions afloat.
Simply put, the expenditure exceeds the income because the fan won’t turn the turnstile.
In my columns over the years I have shouted in thunder that the rules need to change to provide the game its necessary income. The excitement needs to come back and the spectacle needs lifting to have the fan return.
Rugby should be a gladiatorial game where the fan literally bays for blood and pays to see it happen. The game has lost its pizzazz and rules need to change to bring it back now before the predictability sets in.
We saw the problem looming a year or two ago and could have gone a long to fixing it with the Experimental Law Variations, until the stodgy Northern Hemisphere over-votes killed them off.
Penalties and drop-goal points need reducing. Ejecting the mess currently called a ruck and bring back real rucking. Move both back lines back five metres behind the rear feet at ruck or scrum, letting the ball go immediately on tackle, with a quick tap along or behind the penalty line, move to crouch, touch, engage.
These are just a few of the many rules that need to change to bring back the speed and excitement of the game that will in turn bring back the fan with his pocket full of dollars.
The ORFU dilemma is only the start of many to come unless we overhaul the cause. To sit on our hands and say we have no need will means no fans, no money, no rugby.
Make the game worth going to and the money will flow.
We need a decisive and resolute policy to fix it now, not the fiddle mumble we are currently hearing from the rule committees, who would like you to know that the meek shall inherit the earth, if that’s quite alright with the rest of you.
March 2nd 2012 @ 8:59am
allblackfan said | March 2nd 2012 @ 8:59am | Report comment
Forces are gathering. I understand the wait is for the liquidation process to take place.
Remember, the debt is about NZ$2m. I will freely concede my ignorance of business matters (especially NZ rugby business) but $NZ2m doesn’t sound like an especially big debt. I could be wrong.
March 2nd 2012 @ 12:14pm
Jiggles said | March 2nd 2012 @ 12:14pm | Report comment
Isn’t it $NZ2m negative equity?
March 2nd 2012 @ 12:31pm
King of the Gorgonites said | March 2nd 2012 @ 12:31pm | Report comment
my understanding is the 2M is owed to trade suppliers. nothing to do with equity.
March 2nd 2012 @ 7:33pm
Jiggles said | March 2nd 2012 @ 7:33pm | Report comment
The first report I saw said negative equity but I could be wrong as I haven’t looked at it since a few days back. Things change quickly in insolvency so you could very well be right.
March 2nd 2012 @ 9:20am
King of the Gorgonites said | March 2nd 2012 @ 9:20am | Report comment
tell that to the local catering company who is owed 50K or the plumber owed 10K. these are big debts owed to these small business people.
Whilst 2M is not a huge corporate collapse like a HIH or Enron, it is still signifcant considering the size of the local community.
Whats the bet that the debt actually grows. i bet the tax office is owed more then initially thought.
March 2nd 2012 @ 9:57am
Matt said | March 2nd 2012 @ 9:57am | Report comment
The world has changed since the OTFU was formed. Rugby too needs to change with the times.
At the top of the tree the players are now professionals, but the issue has been that administrators have not acted professionally to match.
What worked for the better part of 125 years was never going to be enough to keep Unions like Otago afloat.
In many ways it was a set of unique circumstances that have led to this. Most as fault, I believe, has been the NZRU. They have created a competitive and unregulated player market and systematically eroded the value of the provincial game.
The NZRU held full cotnrol over the NPC. They undermined the provinces from Day 1 by creating Super Rugby.
Then they have continuously expanded the caledar of the AB’s so the top players are never seen at NPC level.
Then the NZRU expanded the competition anyway, creating 19 professional sides in NZ, where some Unions had a larger say than others and hoarded all the best talent. Then the NZRU said they were cutting the 4 worst teams, so everyone overspent to try and stay alive. Then the NZRU didn’t cut them, so all that extra money just went into the players pockets and the community game and local unions suffered. Then the NZRU threatened to do it again, so the Union armed up again. Then the NZRU cut the NPC to a 7/7 split and also dramatically expanded Super Rugby.
And now after ALL of that we have the ORFU going into liquidation, while all the others Unions were pushed to the brink and cling on perilously. It seems like there has NEVER been a coherent and well planned out strategy for the professional and provincial representative side of the game in NZ. All the NZRU has cared about in the All Blacks winning, so everything else has suffered.
The future of the game is Sevens, Women and Children. Rucking does nothing for the latter two groups as participants or fans. It will keep them away. But something does have to change to get more engagement from the general public. The All Blacks have got it and the World Cup nailed it big time. I personally believe rugby needs less quantity and more marquee events. The reason Super Rugby worked so well initially was because it was a novelty, now it’s a monotony where people take it or leave it in equal measures.
March 2nd 2012 @ 11:22am
kingplaymaker said | March 2nd 2012 @ 11:22am | Report comment
Matt Super rugby was a diastrous format for everyone, but perhaps worst for New Zealand. Where rugby is the lifeblood of a country, cutting out half (more) of the provinces or teams in aid of broad representative groups was never going to give everyone what they wanted.
No one in the following areas can identify with a team: BOP, Manawatu, Hawke’s Bay, Taranaki, Northland, Southland, the very small regions or areas within Auckland.
New Zealand and Sydney both have a population of 4.5 million. The NRL divides this into 9 teams normally and this gives 500,000 per area, a reasonable amount. The crowds are good.
If New Zealand had entered an international competition with 10 teams I think it would have captured the interest of New Zealand much more because everyone would have felt involved and the old local rivalries would have remained.
Frankly the standard of the teams would probably have been almost as high as many more players would have got a chance and been developed, probably most of rugby league’s current players could be in union, fewer would have needed to go abroad, and there might be more foreign imports allowed.
To make matters yet worse, by not allowing single private ownership they probably lose millions from the game and so have desperate problems paying for it, and indeed lose money every year.
A catastrophe, and one for Australia and South Africa. I think had there been 10 teams in Australia the standard would now be similar. The extra five would have been: Western Sydney, Northern Sydney, Gold Coast, Newcastle, Adelaide. The first four are heartlands who already produce masses of players who go to league. They would have produced their own top players by now.
A disaster and very tough to change now! Getting from 5 to 10 would be a colossal leap. And there’s no private ownership.
Things are in a pretty bad state and this Otago calamity is one of the first symptoms: the plumeting financial reserves of the NZRU over the past few years is another.
The absurdity of the NZRU’s supposed focus on the All Blacks, is that by doing things the way they have the All Blacks are in fact less rather than more strong. Fortunately for them even that is still good enough to be the best in the world.
March 2nd 2012 @ 11:51am
Sam said | March 2nd 2012 @ 11:51am | Report comment
This article ran in the Otago Daily times (ironically) last October. Briefly, the NZRU have been considering private ownership like the Rebels model to divest provincial unions of the financial responsibility of Super Franchises.
http://www.odt.co.nz/sport/rugby/180812/put-super-franchise-ownership-private-hands-review
March 2nd 2012 @ 11:59am
kingplaymaker said | March 2nd 2012 @ 11:59am | Report comment
Sam let’s hope it’s done as soon as humanly possible, and likewise in Australia.
Every year millions are lost in each country with the current set-up.
Also I think both in NZ and Australia they are unnecessarily fearful of losing control if there is private ownership.
Both in England and France the unions have full control of what the clubs do in reality with private ownership.
March 2nd 2012 @ 10:31am
Rugbug said | March 2nd 2012 @ 10:31am | Report comment
The Union is 131 years old.
Reports on 3 Mid day news state that the two biggest creditors are the BNZ and the Dunedin city council and both are looking at writing off portions of the debt to save the Union. various fundraising events have been touted including a North vs South rugby match, this in itself would create huge interest and could just be the catalyst for an annual fixture or serious.
There are approximately 180 small business creditors and they are top of the list for financial reimbursement if the union can stay afloat.
It seems there is a hell of a lot of goodwill for the ORFU and the NZ public is getting right in behind them at this stage.
In saying that at 4pm we will know what will happen to the Union.
Can’t wait to see what happens tomorrow night at the Highlanders vs Crusaders game, I hope Dunedin gets in behind their team, yes I know they are seperate from the ORFY but a sellout would go along way to showing that they give a dam about rugby in their area!
March 2nd 2012 @ 10:47am
Jock M said | March 2nd 2012 @ 10:47am | Report comment
What a tragedy-a great Union brought down by the corporate sector that have removed Rugby’s soul.
I have always wondered how long it would take for New Zealand Rugby to be destroyed beause our great game has been vialated.
How long will it be before the breakdown lasw are addressed?
March 2nd 2012 @ 12:00pm
Brett McKay said | March 2nd 2012 @ 12:00pm | Report comment
Jock, the breakdown laws don’t force Unions to spend more than they earn…
March 2nd 2012 @ 11:03am
Rough Conduct said | March 2nd 2012 @ 11:03am | Report comment
The provincial unions are too small and the franchises are unloved, the current sitiation is unsustainable. Someone at the NZRU must start making some decisions – this fence-sitting is helping no one. Either kill the franchises and make the provinces more like SR i.e. top-tier, fully professional, or relegate the provinces and make the franchises more NPC i.e actually representative of someone or something, one of them has to go. There are 19 professional rugby teams in NZ, 19! How did anyone think this would work?
March 2nd 2012 @ 11:16am
Rugbug said | March 2nd 2012 @ 11:16am | Report comment
By making the Franchises more representitive of the areas the NZRU risks cutting off a lot of fans, with over 100 years of rugby in most of New Zealand you could not expect those from the Hawkes Bay to start barracking for Wellington as can already be seen in SR franchises, The NZRU tried to include everybody but now you are suggesting they possibly cut provinces out completely.
The CC is also starting to be affected by SR so something will have to give sooner or later.
One only has to visit Keos site to see this.
Unfortunately we are stuck with SR it pays the bills in all three SANZAR nations including SA, the CC is not financiallu sustainable on its own either.
What needs to happen in NZ is the salary caps need to be reduced significantly, the larger unions can not and should not be able to stock pile talent, the All Blacks MUST be involved in the ITM and the fans need to be priced back into the game, at the moment it is daylight robery just to attend a match have a couple of drinks and buy yourself a hotdog or pie, your looking at anything up to $70-80 depending on where you sit. That is basically your Sky subscription for the month.
New Zealand needs the NPC.
Can it remain fully professional?
I don’t believe it can under the current status quo, however the NZRU is stuck between a rock and a hard place, no matter what NZ rugby stands to suffer astronomically if the domestic competition is not saved.
March 2nd 2012 @ 12:10pm
Matt said | March 2nd 2012 @ 12:10pm | Report comment
There is misinformation about Super rugby being a profitable competition Rugbug. The fact is that it, like the NPC, it is actually a financial loser overall. If it wasn’t for the All Blacks making big profit then Super Rugby would not be able to exist. Test matche revenue still carries both Super Rugby and the ITM Cup.
This is why the NZRU wants to introduce private equity to Super Rugby, because it actually is a net loss for them to run it. They want to offload the losses to someone else.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=10756584
In 2010 Super Rugby contributed $1M to the NZRU’s $9.4M operating loss. That’s frankly not good enough and if “Super Rugby New Zealand Ltd” existed as an independently run company you’d be asking serious questions!
Personally I don’t think there is a large risk of fan dissatisfaction, should some provinces be moved to a fully amateur level.
Inevitably you get behind a team if you want to be a part of a competition, quite often because people see others enjoying it and want to get on board. I know PLENTY of fellow NZers who are passionate NSW or Queensland supporters come Origin time. Why? They’re not born there, haven’t lived there and couldn’t tell a single street name in Sydney or Brisbane?
Similarly, if my province (Manawatu) were deemed to be not one of the best 8 placed provinces to compete at a pro level then I’d still watch them in the 2nd division. But I’d also adopt a Division 1 team to get behind and watch (probably Hawkes Bay).
But the fact would be that the historic provinces, who NZers really associate with, would remain and kids would have all the amateur pathways left to reach the top of the game. Maybe that’s what the NZRU are aiming for? Eventually the NPC will be strictly amateur and NZ will only have 5 pro teams. I’d argue that wouldn’t be enough spots for sufficient depth, but maybe that’s just the way it is?
March 2nd 2012 @ 1:59pm
Brady-Aj said | March 2nd 2012 @ 1:59pm | Report comment
This is why the NZRU need to grow a back bone look at what the Afl did back in the 80s when it went From the VFL to the AFL. Say to the ARU were going to start up a new comp run separately to the NZRU and the ARU you can ether get on board or we will set it up ourselves. Where do you think more money will come from if super rugby goes? An NPC style comp (like the PSC I wrote about) with teams from Australia or a APC, Fox Sports knows that over half the people who watch Rugby in Australia are Kiwis so where do you thick they will put there Money.
Negotiate the TV deal separate to Test Rugby TV deal, so money made from this comp can go back in to this comp and pay players wages, this will gage how much they should get paid.All money raised from Test matches to go to grass roots rugby and Players will only receive Match payments when they play for the ABs or Australia.
March 2nd 2012 @ 7:44pm
Ian Whitchurch said | March 2nd 2012 @ 7:44pm | Report comment
Brady-Aj,
Actually thats about the complete opposite of how the VFL turned into the AFL.
They certaintly didnt make the dumb mistake of starting up an entirely new competition.
March 2nd 2012 @ 11:14am
Brett McKay said | March 2nd 2012 @ 11:14am | Report comment
Michael, while I completely agree it’s a sad situation to see a 120+ year-old Union going into liquidiation, with respect, changes to the rules won’t make an iota of difference. Otago have, as you say, got themselves to where “the expenditure exceeds the income”. It shouldn’t matter if they’re selling tickets to games of marbles, practical business means not spending more that you earn.
Style of play, form of team, number of wins, rules in play, attitude of refs, etc, are all things outside their control.
Spending more money than is coming in is not.
March 2nd 2012 @ 11:23am
Rugbug said | March 2nd 2012 @ 11:23am | Report comment
Thats exactly it, Otago got themselves into this situtation and it is their fault alone.
You can not go blaming anyone else for your own failings.
Sure other teams are struggling but this could just be the wake up call and catalyst for change that the NZ domestic game needs
March 2nd 2012 @ 2:10pm
Brady-Aj said | March 2nd 2012 @ 2:10pm | Report comment
Actual the NZRU got them and a lot of other in this position by chopping and changing the Competition. If they had just made a decision and stood by it Otago, Southland, Counties, Tasman to name just some would not be in this position. Maybe its time for a Super league style war or a Clive Palmer to start up a new comp to get the NZRU moving again.
March 2nd 2012 @ 3:15pm
Rugbug said | March 2nd 2012 @ 3:15pm | Report comment
No they Didn’t Brady- Aj and if you had been following the drama unfold you would have noticed where Otago took full responsibility for their poor handling of their financial situation. Otago are a seperate legal entitiy and it is they who who have overspent not the NZRU
March 2nd 2012 @ 11:56am
ohtani's jacket said | March 2nd 2012 @ 11:56am | Report comment
I bet that guy in the Kiwi Scept?cs ad isn’t King of the Gorgonites. Come to think of it, they should do a KotG version.
But I digress… The Otago Rugby Football Union brought this upon themselves. Instead of looking to blame the laws or the NZRU or whatever your hobby horse is, start with the Otago Union. The present ITM Cup model doesn’t work and needs to be made semi-pro to be rid of player expenditure, which is what is really hurting the unions, but the ORFU has been a mess for a decade now. New Zealanders have a habit of claiming this BS love affair with provincial rugby that doesn’t exist. If New Zealanders cared half as much about their provincial unions as they claim they’d make it out to the games. Everyone’s afraid that if the ITM Cup disappears then the talent pathways will disappear too, but we simply cannot sustain three levels of professional rugby in our country. There are very few rugby fans in NZ who can pay to see ITM Cup, Super Rugby and test matches in a single season. For many New Zealanders, having Sky TV to watch ITM Cup, Super Rugby and test matches is a luxury. I’m sure the Otago Union will live on in some fashion, but the NZRU did the right thing here.
March 2nd 2012 @ 12:20pm
Matt said | March 2nd 2012 @ 12:20pm | Report comment
I don’t 100% blame the ORFU at all. I believe that’s the short sighted easy option for people to make.
If we have ALL of these other unions also having lost massive amounts of money (and they all have over the last few years, except for Hawkes Bay) you have to ask the question of why.
Otago are not an outlier, the only difference they faced was that they had their own stadium on the books which dragged them slightly further than everyone else. People should recall that the only other Union that was in the same difficult situation was Tasman. And they had to sell of their stadium too in order to escape the financial death trap. It was a close run thing for them and they weren’t even burdened with covering Super Rugby wages like Otago was or having to pay for upgrade to keep their stadium at Test match standard.
The major factor for the ORFU was a $5.9M loss in 2009, thanks to Carisbrook depreciating on their books and being sold to the council for not enough money. That was the kick that sent them over the edge.
But the entire situation has been bad for every union. And the reason is because the environment in which they were operating was made too difficult by poor organisation of structure by the NZRU.
March 2nd 2012 @ 7:24pm
ohtani's jacket said | March 2nd 2012 @ 7:24pm | Report comment
We all know that the provincial rugby structure is bleeding cash, but did the NZRU force the ORFU to take out loans against Carisbrook? Is it there fault that the ORFU sold Carisbrook too late? Were they responsible for the payroll and salaries?
March 2nd 2012 @ 12:23pm
Jiggles said | March 2nd 2012 @ 12:23pm | Report comment
got to agree OJ. When watching the NPC on tv, which I really enjoy, I doubt the crowds are anywhere near the size of the Super Rugby.
March 2nd 2012 @ 12:29pm
King of the Gorgonites said | March 2nd 2012 @ 12:29pm | Report comment
Ha. I think the premise of the ad is for people who actaully havent been to the country but has negative perceptions of it for whatever reason. I, on the otherhand, was the opposite. i hadnt positive perseptions going into it. that all changed after my several trips to NZ during the RWC. i came out of it with negative perspetions, and that was even before Aus was kncoked out of the WC. Look i may go back again, but definately not for anything rugby related. in the interim, if i want to see NZ i will watch Lord of the Rings!
March 2nd 2012 @ 2:30pm
Brady-Aj said | March 2nd 2012 @ 2:30pm | Report comment
Next time you go, head south from Auckland until you hit Hawks Bay . An area with a Rich Rugby history and Community that Does not have the small bother syndrome that Auckland’s have towards Australia, Quite the opposite actual and you will see why we deserve a Pro team before areas like Counties and other places with a bigger Population, One which is money, due to the fact of the employment opportunities that exist in HB and Two is we would have the support of the Manawatu and East coast unions.
March 2nd 2012 @ 3:13pm
King of the Gorgonites said | March 2nd 2012 @ 3:13pm | Report comment
Cheers for the tip Brady. Will do. I got to see a lot of the south island and must admit the calibre of people there were far superior to what i found in Auckland. i am sure AUckland is the worse when it comes to common respect etc.
March 2nd 2012 @ 3:22pm
Rugbug said | March 2nd 2012 @ 3:22pm | Report comment
The Hawkes bay is not in the south island KOG its on the east coast of the NI
March 2nd 2012 @ 4:11pm
King of the Gorgonites said | March 2nd 2012 @ 4:11pm | Report comment
Did i ever say it was Rugbug. i was simply stating what i saw of NZ – and that was mainly the South island. that was to help show that i hadnt been to the area he referred to, as i basically only saw Auckland in the North.
But thanks for your (misguided) tip. I always appreciate the feedback of helpful kiwis.
March 2nd 2012 @ 6:26pm
Rugbug said | March 2nd 2012 @ 6:26pm | Report comment
Well you didn’t say it wasn’t pal and quite easy to misread your post as it is hardly point specific.
Settle petal
March 2nd 2012 @ 7:39pm
Jiggles said | March 2nd 2012 @ 7:39pm | Report comment
Auckland is a dump KOG. I have done a bit of the north island, and the south and its only in Auckland that you get the kiwi’s with a chip on their shoulder. the only place I had a bad experience during the RWC was Auckland. Wellington by comparison was very nice and friendly, the locals were great.
March 2nd 2012 @ 3:21pm
Rugbug said | March 2nd 2012 @ 3:21pm | Report comment
Hawkes bay have just as much a little brother complex as any other union in the country.
I do agree the HB should get a pro team before the like of counties and or harbour for example.
Although one has to remember what a dismal failure the central vikings were Brady, alot would have to change for the manawatu and HB to be able to work together successfully.
In saying that Taranaki is in the most powerful position to get a pro team and I think in the best interests of NZ rugby Taranaki, HB and the Turbos should combine together they would be one hell of a formiddable force
March 2nd 2012 @ 12:27pm
kingplaymaker said | March 2nd 2012 @ 12:27pm | Report comment
Part of the problem too it would seem is the refusal of New Zealanders to countenance the idea that anything could be wrong with the way things are done, or with the NZRU. There is a blind and uncritical, deeply conservative attitude towards rugby which means that the governing body are never under pressure to improve things if they are going wrong. To follow up on what Matt says above, if the NZRU were a private company its shareholders would have pulled the plug many years ago.
March 2nd 2012 @ 1:24pm
allblackfan said | March 2nd 2012 @ 1:24pm | Report comment
OJ, the ITM Cup IS semi-pro which is a BIG problem. I think you meant it should become amateur.
A big part of why the NZ unions are struggling is due to player payments and living beyond their means. The NZRU has harped on this since at least 2000 (it’s contained in their annual reports which can be downloaded as a PDF from their website)
March 2nd 2012 @ 6:22pm
ohtani's jacket said | March 2nd 2012 @ 6:22pm | Report comment
The ITM Cup isn’t semi-pro. It has a $1.3m salary cap and guys running around making 60-70k.
March 3rd 2012 @ 3:13am
allblackfan said | March 3rd 2012 @ 3:13am | Report comment
OJ, the fact the ITM Cup has a salary cap is one good sign it is semi-pro. People running around earning 60-70k (even if that was true) is another sign.
Make no mistake, I am angry at the ORFU for allowing this to happen but I think the NPC has to become fully amateur. This means that players of genuine ability and genuine determination will rise to the fore (ie ITM, Super , AB etc) while the rest will provide the so-vitally important foundation on which the game is built (I believe some call it `grassroots’) just like bush Rl is so important to NRL