Why is Richie McCaw’s chest a billboard now?
By Dane25, 17 Oct 2012 Dane25 is a Roar Guru
- Tagged:
- All Blacks, Richie McCaw, Rugby Union, sponsorship in sport
Crusaders captain Richie McCaw, and coach Robbie Deans hold the Super 14 rugby trophy. AP Photo/NZPA, Ross Setford
Related coverage
As a boofhead of Australian descent, I am always reluctant to comment on matters of importance relating to our kin from across the Tasman.
However, in this situation, I think it’s pretty safe to go on the record with this bombshell: New Zealand rugby fans appear to be somewhat henpecked about the new sponsorship deal for the coveted All Black jersey.
For so long one of the last remaining hidey-holes from commercial intrusion, the All Black jersey will now relinquish it’s membership in the unstained apparel brotherhood after the NZRU succumbed to the buck and whored out the prized cloth space to elephantine multinational AIG.
Across the ditch, the decision has been met with a fair deal of rotten fruit.
The All Black jersey is recognised in all corners of earth as a uniquely powerful brand for rugby arse-kicking. It has relentlessly rucked the back of world rugby’s subordinates for 107 long years, and for 95 percent of this time has done so with the trunk commercial free.
NZRU Chief Executive Steve Tew has defended the decision to flay the kit with the corporate brush, stating that playing rugby is a bloody expensive business with its costly mattress-sized goal post pads and steeply-priced ongoing rights to the feel-good anthem “The World in Union,” and that the controlling body needs all of the capital support it can get.
Now pardon my lack of smarts, but hasn’t partaking in regular big-ticket ruggers been a drain on the purse for eons? So why now is the NZRU holding out the hand for some spare change?
One would immediately assume that the joint is totally impoverished and in need of an immediate injection of capital at all levels, but taking a gander at the NZRU’s financial position provides further mystification with the organisation posting a $9.6 million profit last year.
To some, that’s ‘time to layby a portion of the Cayman Islands,’ but to Tew it means battening down the hatches for some belt-tightening selling of the soul.
Another possibility is that their football department needs some new toys and a coat of paint, but with the world champion national men’s team on a 14 month winning streak and 8 points clear on top of the IRB rankings, the Sevens side running second on the current circuit and the women’s outfit also reigning world champs, it appears doings are in a fairly golden state of cherry ripeness at ground level with the Gilbert.
In their current climate of near-perfection, a blank cheque for the sports science white-coat brigade or a multi-million dollar state-of-the-art training facility could manifest itself as an increase to the regular winning margin over the Wallabies to 20 points from the usual 17. Is that a reasonable return for the strip’s integrity?
Couldn’t Tew just sell a few spare Bledisloes to settle his pecuniary paranoia and keep Richie McCaw’s torso free of this mercantile malfeasance?
To make things even more bitter, the selection of sponsor has the Kiwi teeth gnashing like they’re in an never ending Dunedin winter, with the choice of a faceless corporation who carries a historical rank spot of financial failure going down like Felix Baumgartner with the faithful.
Surely if the space was going to be flogged off, the keys to the cherished real estate could’ve gone to an iconic Kiwi brand. As an Australian, we love to emblazon our national teams with booze companies to remind the world we are frequently soused, so why not the equivalent such as a Tui or Steinlager to make a heavenly marriage with the coveted apparel?
Nope, instead the NZRU has opted for a relatively-unknown global money-spinner whose name contains the word ‘America.’ Weird.
I cringe at the possibility of awkward cross-promotional press conference moments involving some clueless Yankee suits attempting to wax about “The game they play in Hereford” and the commitment to the ongoing success of the “All Blocks.”
The fans over the Tasman, some of the most devoted and maniacal on the planet, deserve better. As does the game in the country as a whole.
New Zealand rugby had a wonderful legacy that separated them from the rest of the chasing pack and had them as perennial front runners in rugby values.
Unfortunately, it seems everything has it’s price these days.
Looking to join The Roar team? We're searching for an experienced Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. Yes, this does mean you get to work with the site all day long! If you're a digital media sales star, we want to hear from you. Apply now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby Union articles
- Where is Deans in the pecking order of rugby coaches? (319)
- Wallabies squad announced: Folau in, no Quade Cooper – yet (267)
- Deans: Should he stay or should he go? (245)
- SPIRO’s Lions Diary: Deans goes for experience, plus Folau (242)
- Wallabies 25-man Lions squad: analysis (214)
- Quade Cooper misses Wallaby squad selection (209)
- Quade shouldn’t be fly half against the Lions (184)
- Could Matt Lucas be a Wallaby bolter? (53)
- Australia, time to get behind the Wallabies (93)
- Who can still win the Super Rugby title? (17)
- Deans must forgive Quade: Slack (91)
- SPIRO: Super Rugby TMOs are making too many mistakes (67)
- Rebels’ O’Connor stays on sidelines (5)
- ‘Lucky 29′ journey into despair (part one) (4)
- Australia, time to get behind the Wallabies (93)
- Who can still win the Super Rugby title? (17)
- ‘Lucky 29′ journey into despair (part one) (4)
- Super Rugby teams will skin the Lions (116)
- Super B to the rescue for rugby? (52)
- Picking your ‘First V’ for the Wallabies (66)
- Looking forward to the 2015 Wallabies (20)
Recommend this story.
- Explore:
- All Blacks, Richie McCaw, Rugby Union, sponsorship in sport

October 17th 2012 @ 2:40am
jame said | October 17th 2012 @ 2:40am | Report comment
Its professionalism in sport. Why are we surprised by it? I don’t think NZ rugby fans are worried or #issed about WHO they sponsored by.In fact it will benefit grass roots, womens and sevens program more.
It is the design of the ‘all black’ kit that really ticks them off. AB jersey is famous because of its ‘all’ black strip. Now its dominated by a massive AIG logo in a box in the middle of the jersey which in my opinion looks cheap and tacky. I would of liked them to get rid of the box or move the AIG logo to the sleeves and under/on top of the addidas logo.
Maybe having an American sponsor will entice other global American companies to start investing in rugby in the US.
October 17th 2012 @ 6:29am
mania said | October 17th 2012 @ 6:29am | Report comment
def cheap and tacky and should’ve been on the sleeve as apparently the initial design was. looks out of place in the front and really distracts from the silver fern. at least with the addidas it was equal to the fern because of symmetry. now with the AIG logo its in the middle and dominant.
the irony is that AIG arent even in NZ.
IAG own most of the insurance companies and they’re australian
October 17th 2012 @ 6:52am
nzmate said | October 17th 2012 @ 6:52am | Report comment
Jame, the all blacks (15s) is different from the other sponsored NZ teams in that the AIG logo has been reduced in size and the box around ‘AIG’ has been removed.
October 17th 2012 @ 4:40am
Kuruki said | October 17th 2012 @ 4:40am | Report comment
Bottom line the NZRU have sold out. The sleeve should have been the only place offered up. I can see jersey sales dry up and old jerseys without the logo being worn. They might have hit pay dirt but they have sold something they will never get back, allot of New Zealanders are no longer proud of the jersey, i think it’s disgraceful. I cringe every time i look at it.
October 17th 2012 @ 9:11am
Snobby Deans said | October 17th 2012 @ 9:11am | Report comment
Kuruki – what a load of bollocks. People will still buy the jersey, just as they did when the Adidas logo went on it. It’s a logo that is 1/3rd the size that is allowable. The way some people go on, you’d think the All Blacks now wear a hippy tie-dyed shirt that is a million miles removed from what we’ve had until now. A bit of perspective and common sense is needed.
If the price to pay for having money to keep developing the game, retaining talent, etc, to keep the All Blacks at the top of the rankings and RWC contenders is a logo on the jersey, then I’m all for it. Better that than a logo-free jersey for an All Black team that has fallen down the rankings and is no longer the dominant force it once was.
October 17th 2012 @ 10:03am
Ryan said | October 17th 2012 @ 10:03am | Report comment
People all too quickly forget that this is not the first time a Sponsors logo has appeared on the ABs Jersey and Shorts.
One only needs to go back to the days of Buck and Fitzy to see that.
I actually don’t think much of the logo at all it’s not as hideous as people like yourself are trying to make out Kuruki far from it in fact.
If you seen Reunion last night only 11% of pollers were deadset against it the overwhelming majority whilst not exactly pleased with the logo can understand why it is there, and that is to benfit NZ rugby at all levels from Grassroots through Provincial, Super and then AB level.
October 17th 2012 @ 11:38am
Kuruki said | October 17th 2012 @ 11:38am | Report comment
Like i said the sleeve should have been the only place offered up. While you may be happy to sell out to a disgraced American company i’m not. It was the jersey that kept players in New Zealand, with this added money all it will do is increase the amount needed to keep them here.
October 17th 2012 @ 7:34pm
nick said | October 17th 2012 @ 7:34pm | Report comment
It wasn’t the jersey that kept players in NZ Kuruki. Its to play for the All Blacks, thats not the same thing.
October 17th 2012 @ 5:05am
tc said | October 17th 2012 @ 5:05am | Report comment
AIG sponsors the ABs and also now sponsors some of the US rugby teams ,hmmm, and I think there is still some kind of partnership between both our 7s program’s . I wonder if this partnership is going to get deeper, it doesn’t matter anyway I love a good conspiracy.
October 17th 2012 @ 5:40am
richard said | October 17th 2012 @ 5:40am | Report comment
As a nzer, I accept that this is the way of the world, The game in nz is bleeding money to fund the game at all levels. This is the price nz has to pay to fund a centralised system – one I might add that I fully support as it has enabled nz to maintain its pre- eminence in the game.
Whether nz can continue to do this into the forseeable future remains to be seen, although it is highly unlikely, in the face of external pressure from overseas unions who seem to have an insatiable appetite for our playing and coaching stocks.Unfortunately, I can see the next logical step in the process – the selling off of our super franchises to private interests.All the NZRU is trying to do is to delay the inevitable, for when it does finally come, will throw away our advantage over all of our opponents!
October 17th 2012 @ 6:39am
Indio said | October 17th 2012 @ 6:39am | Report comment
The NZRFU have already sent out feelers on potential ownership of the Super franchises, but unless they change their business model, it won’t fly. Owen Glen has looked at it and walked away saying that the NZRFU wanted the owner’s money but retains all the controls LOL!!
The only way I see it working is partial sales of the franchises in a JV with a specially set-up business arm of the NZRFU to run it. They can’t have their cake and eat it too….
October 17th 2012 @ 6:43am
mania said | October 17th 2012 @ 6:43am | Report comment
that would be the beginning of the end for the AB’s.
October 17th 2012 @ 9:05am
James said | October 17th 2012 @ 9:05am | Report comment
No it wouldn’t be.
October 17th 2012 @ 11:44am
garth said | October 17th 2012 @ 11:44am | Report comment
Yes, it would.
October 17th 2012 @ 1:04pm
James said | October 17th 2012 @ 1:04pm | Report comment
Err, no. I assume you are one of those ‘chicken little’ ABs fans who equates private ownership with players being witheld from national selection by selfish club owners. That will never happen and can be easily avoided by putting the appropriate structures in place. If you haven’t noticed, NZ rugby isn’t exactly flush with cash, and the NZRU’s insistance on centrally owning and operating Super Rugby teams doesn’t help matters. The aversion to private funding in NZ is holding the sport back, just wait and see what happens when the NRL, A-league or maybe one day AFL expand into NZ. The current setup is not working and will only hurt the sport long-term.
October 17th 2012 @ 10:07am
Ryan said | October 17th 2012 @ 10:07am | Report comment
Indio that is also one of the sticking points of Taranaki being denied a Super franchise although they tick all the boxes.
Stephen Jennings one of NZ’s wealthiest men and Taranaki local from the seaside town of Oakura, wants control of the team but the NZRU is unwilling to relenquish control this is the only reason why Taranaki have not been given the backing of the NZRU to date. They have the finances (Private) and the facilities but they don’t have the urge to let the NZRU control the team whilst funding it from Stephens pockets.
October 17th 2012 @ 11:44am
Emric said | October 17th 2012 @ 11:44am | Report comment
Yeah I’ve been waiting for the day when the Naki gets fed up of being treated badly by the NZRU,
October 20th 2012 @ 10:21pm
amband said | October 20th 2012 @ 10:21pm | Report comment
why do you accept it as the way?
October 17th 2012 @ 5:51am
mania said | October 17th 2012 @ 5:51am | Report comment
money talks
October 17th 2012 @ 6:35am
Indio said | October 17th 2012 @ 6:35am | Report comment
It’s quite ironic that in the “land of opportunity” where sponsorship deals are de rigueur, I look at that most American of all sports (gridiron) and lo and behold!, their playing strips/jerseys are ALL CLEAN!! I quite like this American sports sponsorship business model whereby the TV network pays through the nose and in return receives nice clean playing strips and even cleaner stadia..
If only the ARU-NZRFU had the balls to sit down and demand a similar deal. Methinks the only person from the ARU side capable of driving this has just stepped down, and the only one from the NZRFU capable of it has not yet stepped up.
October 17th 2012 @ 6:43am
richard said | October 17th 2012 @ 6:43am | Report comment
Indio, your argument is moot, the yanks can do it because they have a vast population – this guarantees packed houses at games, to fund it.
Comparing nz and oz to the US doesn’t stack up.
October 17th 2012 @ 9:06am
Indio said | October 17th 2012 @ 9:06am | Report comment
I am well aware of the economics of the American Football business model. The ANZAC population base will not sustain a similar model for Rugby Union, but on a world-wide basis, the IRB is the ideal entity to drive it. But not under the current IRB structure.
Realistically, I believe the Tier-1 nations can collectively drive a similar sponsorship model but I doubt there will be consensus on crucial issues like what games to cover below the tests, revenue distribution, etc.
Personally, I like the clean jerseys look.
October 20th 2012 @ 10:23pm
amband said | October 20th 2012 @ 10:23pm | Report comment
ANZAC?
October 20th 2012 @ 10:30pm
amband said | October 20th 2012 @ 10:30pm | Report comment
there is no need to have names on jersey’s. They are not for profit unions. All they need is the game and they own that and are in the box seat
Most of last century was played without sponsor nameson jerseys
October 17th 2012 @ 6:44am
nickoldschool said | October 17th 2012 @ 6:44am | Report comment
It had to happen unfortunately, it was just of question of ‘when’?. It may be the price to pay to keep their best players in rugby, allow them some breaks or quick overseas stints etc. I think the jersey is one thing but ultimately its the players and fans who give the jersey its aura. Just hope the money will be used smartly.
Kudos to the ABs and NZRU to have waited that long to accept sharing/selling a piece of what is the most successful brand in world rugby.
Plus, am not sure anyone coming from the country of the ‘Qantas’ wallabies can have a go at you guys on that.
October 17th 2012 @ 6:46am
The Grafter said | October 17th 2012 @ 6:46am | Report comment
Adidas and Steinlager have previously, and currently been on the jersey. The All Blacks ‘brand’ is known world wide (did the UK journalist in 1905 know what he was going to create when he misspelt backs with blacks?), and as a major player in sport, was always going to be sought out by some of the bigger companies around the globe.
October 17th 2012 @ 7:00am
ilikedahoodoogurusingha said | October 17th 2012 @ 7:00am | Report comment
Now I’ve seen everything. You call yourself a boofhead and then go on and use the word malfeasance?
October 17th 2012 @ 7:09am
defunkt said | October 17th 2012 @ 7:09am | Report comment
It’s a lot of money which will continue to support centralised contracting and continuing world domination. The logo as it appears is fairly discreet, this NZ’er ain’t too bothered.