In my last Roar article I alluded, in an off-handed way, to the intriguing notion of the All Blacks representing New Zealand in international Australian Rules.
When I say All Blacks, I don’t mean the star players, but the All Blacks brand, used under licence granted by the New Zealand Rugby Union, with all the prowess and prestige that comes with it (I’ll refer to the team hereafter as “The AFL All Blacks”).
The AFL All Blacks would be run by the New Zealand Rugby Union, in a joint venture type arrangement with the AFL, adding to the stable of teams it operates, such as the Black Ferns, the Maori All Blacks and All Blacks Sevens.
Could the expertise, brand loyalty and outstanding history of success of the All Blacks be transplanted into another code? Before I answer this question, I must first answer, why?
On the face of it, the idea of the All Blacks brand and ethos being used in another code sounds like something out of Frankenstein, especially to the many passionate supporters of New Zealand’s national team.
But the more I thought about it, I wondered if instead it could be the opposite, namely the epitome of professional sports administration and entrepreneurship.
From a purely commercial perspective, the venture has the potential to be a financial bonanza both for the AFL and the New Zealand Rugby Union.
The All Blacks are among Australasia’a most widely recognised sports properties, both within the region and globally.
If Manchester United, for example, entered a rugby league team into the European Super League, there is no doubt that would have a huge economic impact both for Manchester United as a football club, but also for the sport of rugby league in England – and globally given the clout of Manchester United.
While the All Blacks are not Man U, the brand has a significant global following, and the commercial impact would be enormous in the Australasian context.
The brand would win over many tens of thousands new fans and put the New Zealand Rugby Union at the forefront of sports innovation.
The AFL All Blacks would place the brand before a new and lucrative audience in Victoria, and the southern states.
Most Australians know the All Blacks, but this has not translated into revenue or any form of commercial benefit for the New Zealand Rugby Union, mainly because rugby union cannot, and probably never will, break into the AFL dominated states.
From a purely self-centred, capitalist perspective the AFL All Blacks represent an unequivocal message to the ARU that the New Zealand Rugby Union is tired of waiting for it to crack this lucrative market and may as well take matters into its own hands.
The AFL All Blacks would be a vehicle for the New Zealand Rugby Union to generate revenue from a local market in which it has no hope of making money from through rugby union.
On a crude calculation, based on say a three match annual series and other events, the AFL All Blacks could potentially double the revenue earned from the All Blacks in the Australian market, perhaps increasing annual turnover for the union by as much as ten to fifteen percent.
You could conceivably have the original All Blacks playing a Bledisloe Cup in Sydney in front of 80,000 people on a Saturday, while the AFL All Blacks playing the Sunday at the MCG in front of 100,000. The commercial benefits, in terms of shared gate-takings, sponsorship, television revenue and other income streams are obvious.
Of course there is risk involved, but it is good risk that I am sure the AFL and New Zealand Rugby Union could jointly manage. In my view, the 2019 Rugby World Cup in Japan poses far more commercial risk to the sport of rugby union than any AFL-New Zealand Rugby Union joint venture ever could.
The AFL All Blacks would not damage or otherwise adversely affect the All Blacks image globally because their focus would be Australasia.
The All Blacks have a huge following in France and the UK in particular, but this would be entirely unaffected by a radical and revolutionary re-drawing of the Barassi Line.
Could the mystique and success of the All Blacks organisation translate to another code? Yes it could.
The principles by which the All Blacks achieve their success – respect for the jersey, teamwork, physicality, physical conditioning, strong training ethic, pride, heritage, and technical superiority, could easily translate into success in another code.
I don’t envisage Dan Carter turning out for the team, but whoever does will, like their rugby union counterparts, be willing to die for the jersey and be acutely aware of the responsibility they have as ‘All Blacks’ to succeed.
To many readers the above would be nothing more than a bit of light-hearted, fanciful sports-fiction writing.
But thirty years ago, the idea of a rugby league player swapping codes, or of rugby becoming an Olympic sport, or that rugby would one day pay its players large salaries would have been similarly dismissed. Professional sport is an extension of the business world, and in this world the face of commerce changes rapidly from year to year.
New alliances and entities borne of commercial necessity are being made and re-made constantly as companies strive for economic viability, sustainability and growth. To believe sports organisations are immune to these forces is wrong.
Who knows what the next 30 years in Australian sport will bring, but one thing is for certain, it will be radically different from what we know it is today, so much so, that the notion of the AFL All Blacks might well be quite mundane.
allblackfan
Guest
You raise some good points (definitely worth considering). However, I refer to this comment: ``Most Australians know the All Blacks, but this has not translated into revenue or any form of commercial benefit for the New Zealand Rugby Union, mainly because rugby union cannot, and probably never will, break into the AFL dominated states.'' Perhaps (and I never thought I could say this about any NZ team in relation to Aust) but given that the NZRU is now dealing with global sponsors (ie Rang Rover, Tag Haeur, etc), do you really think they'd care about a backwater market like Australia? The NZRU bit the bullet and put a second sponsor on their jersey. The money they got from that deal is flowing ALL the way down to the grassroots level. From the AFL/NRL point of view, their job just got harder. How much harder would that job get if more money were to flow into the NZ rugby system. A fully professional domestic rugby competition in NZ would destroy RL never mind the AFL?
Boomshanka
Guest
Licca Didn't see your post as I was replying to Moonshine. AIG / IAG whatever - insurance is still a dirty word in Christchurch and the announcement at the time of the sponsorship also lamented the brand confusion that exists. Incredibly embarrassing - not. I'm man enough to admit to my mistakes but will still maintain that an insurance company emblazoned across the national team jersey is a disgrace. As someone who was in the Christchurch CBD at the time of the earthquake, I'm still amazed that it is over two years and many insurance outfits are still dragging the chain. The NZRFU have however in that time kicked rugby league out of its home park, had the Government build a temporary stadium (18,000 capacity) and now expect the good people of Christchurch to stump up for a 35,000 seat covered stadium without contributing a cent. The same organisation that encouraged the city to expand Lancaster Park for the Rugby World Cup to then not schedule any All Black games or Semi finals at the venue. Brand confusion between two insurance companies AIG and IAG pails into insignificance compared to what good people in my home town have lived through and continue to do so.
Boomshanka
Guest
I'd say that you'd be able to know how many clubs there are in Melbourne as well as I can. (there are also a few traditional football clubs struggling to field teams across Victoria - so careful) I'll agree to disagree on why Channel Nine chose to start showing rugby league, suffice to say it happened the same week that the AFL started being shown (technically illegal) direct to FOX. To still deny rugby league fans access to their sport beyond that date would have been untenable. FYI: Super League was always going to start in Melbourne from the onset. Its original plan was to reduce the number of Sydney clubs and spread to Perth, Adelaide and Melbourne. I suppose Melbourne was going to host a relocated team perhaps and as you say Melbourne would be an ideal retreating ground should it not take off elsewhere. Probably a better argument than the Storm was/is "a News Ltd concoction designed to get southern Pay-TV subscriptions".
Licca
Roar Rookie
Boomshanka has not returned since his monumental stuff up regarding sponsors, whcih must be incredibly embarrassing. The QLD rural Darling Downs AFL league that Oikee insists does not exist is probably bigger than the Melbourne and probably whole Victorian RL put together. Research people research !!.
Moonshine
Guest
You didnt answer my qn on the number of NRL clubs in melbourne - there appear to be less than 5 years ago... Nothing to do with anti-siphonong but we'll agree to disagree BTW why didnt Super league go to Melbourne straight away in 1995? Because they wanted to build up a pool opf players in case Perth etc didnt work and as strategic bargaining chip for the NRL when the war was settled...
Boomshanka
Guest
They started showing the NRL games on their digital channels because to not have done would have blown the whole anti siphoning (make up legislation on the run) fiasco out of the water. It was not done to provide any leverage at all. It was done to protect their interest in keeping some integrity in being afforded preferential rights. The same week that Nine showed live rugby league into Melbourne coincided with the AFL being shown directly to Pay TV - technically against the law, but then don't let the facts get in the way of positive spin.
Moonshine
Guest
They started showing on Gem just before they signed the new NRL contract to give them some leverage in discussions - perhaps after negotaiting with Fox to reorganise you knoe the contract which was written before digital channels became pervasive - melbourne doesnt change to digital till December from my reading but lots of people can get digital now in the dual broadcasting regime...
clipper
Guest
The fact is really that Nine is in it to sell advertising - why should they show something that would rate far less and therefore attract less advertising unless they have to in the contract like 7 does with AFL in Sydney and Brisbane - the NRL has to take some of the blame for this.
Boomshanka
Guest
Fact is Nine could have chosen to show rugby league on their multi channel into Melbourne a lot earlier than they did. Nine could have shown the entire 2011 season on GEM as they do now, but they finally got there act together by round 5 - 2012. Nine in my few should never be allowed to broadcast sport. They continue to abuse their privileged position provided to them by politicians (who supposedly represent citizens).
Moonshine
Guest
I can only say that on Pay TV prior to this year the Sunday 4PM (now on Gem) was shown on Pay at 6PM. Of course when there are 2 FTA games on friday night they are not going to cannibalise the FTA audience by showing a Pay TV replay early on friday night...Nine are paying the bulk of the money after all. Your ans to Qn 1 proves my point, Nine and Fox couldnt come to an agreement to show Storm games live in the finals (because thats what the contract said) but Fox relented in some cases for some contra...There was no conspiracy by Nine - Fox wanted to drive subs and it may have failed which is why they are now getting out...
Allan
Guest
They are welcome to the Giants. No please - have them, have them all.
Boomshanka
Guest
Ans1 The storm have reached the finals every year in the last decade (except for 2010 - salary cap issues). In every single year, the final series would be locked up, exclusive on Nine. After watching what little live games through the season, imagine the disappointment come finals time, with the number one team lost. Ans2 On a typical Friday night prior to round 5 last year sitting in Melbourne with a FOXTEL subscription, the first RL game would come on at 11.30pm some 4 hrs after kick off and not near live. The second game followed with a 6 hr delay (again not "near live"). I imagine you subscribe to the Conroy theory of live TV where he has defined live coverage of the Rio Olympics as less than 24hrs. Ans3 News limited secured Melbourne for the same reason they hold onto the Brisbane Broncos - exclusivity. Melbourne is the second largest market in Australia and it made good business sense to lock in after the super league fiasco (as you say previously) - there were some good players wandering around and a mercenary club outside Sydney makes commercial sense - Melbourne being the obvious answer. Ans4 The current scenario where only up to 5 games per round are played live has again sold the game short. Nine has ensured they continue to hold the game to ransom. Nine are a dinosaur relying on favourable government legislation. The rest of the world get access to live HD coverage of there top sports whereas the Australian sporting public get what they deserve. Guaranteed FTA access does not deliver better coverage.
Moonshine
Guest
Boom Sorry in your confusion with IAG and AIG perhaps in your rant above, you meant where appropriate Channel Seven, Melbourne rebels, Rugby Union and the Wallabies...
Ian Whitchurch
Guest
The shedload of open space is actually one of the things that restricts the growth of Australian Rules.
Moonshine
Guest
Ding: Ans 1 There are significant expats in Victoria to drive subs where they are consistently underperforming so consequently to see the Storm you had to have Pay-TV or other league you had to have Pay-TV. Storm rarely on FTA TV. Get it - NOT ON FTA TV BUT ON PAY Ans 2 Have you heard of video recorders or Pay TV. The League FTA FTA games were repeated on Pay TV straight after their screening on FTA in the north so to see it near live in the south and not at 2 AM you have to get Pay TV. Ding... Ans 3 It wasnt successful but it was a last ditch attempt for News to get some pay TV subs because 4 AFL games On FTA meant people had less desire to get Pay in the southern states whereas to see any RL in Victioria etc on saturday or anywhere in fact you need Pay.. Ans 4 Drove some subs I guess but not a lot - the rebels will drive some but again not a lot. Lachlan Murdochs view that RL would be a world game and drive subscriptoions has come up a wee bit short as he did with Super league and One-Tel so he was wrong again....... I may be mistaken but there appear to be a lesser number of melbourne RL clubs than 5 years ago according the Vic RL site but more in the Victorian country. Perhaps you could help here.. The Nine AFL show managed to find the only NRL supporter in Wellington after the Swans game to interview - amazing coincidence from your perceived bias by Nine against NRL
Boomshanka
Guest
I've asked this question before of you under a different handle, but answer me this; How does News Limited design a promotion to get Southern Pay TV subscriptions to then have that successful team effectively buried by the incumbent FTA Network for the next 15 years. How would AFL go in New Zealand if the best games each round and all finals matches (except the GF) get shown on 4 hr delay after midnight full of soft porn ads as southern RL fans have had to put up with over the last decade? The advent of the storm did not drive Pay TV subs in Melbourne as you purport. All it did was antagonise. FYI. I follow the sport of Rugby league well before News came on board and I look forward to the day they eventually leave. The storm is only one club that I'll support in the great game.
Moonshine
Guest
Boom, You spurt all this but follow a News Ltd concoction designed to get southern Pay-TV subscriptions and made up by the remnants of 3 failed Super league sides and the other News Lts club gives up its best prop to start them off and manage to win a comp in their second year half run by News Ltd.. Are you serious when you fire such broadsidea at others....?? Though instead it could be renamed the Wanderers model...
Moonshine
Guest
Kasey Thanks for your contribution. I thought all the Irish worked in eastern Suburbs bars..The Irish idea was part of an options paper that was quickly considered and dismissed and was never a genuine consideration so you anmd your brother naysayers can relax....
Nathan of Perth
Guest
We're alllllmost at 25,000 members, should get it soon.
Nathan of Perth
Guest
I very much doubt Key's comments put anything on a drawing table at AFL House!