The Wrap: Rugby Australia must resist being drawn into New Zealand’s spider web

Managed a club team for the past 6 years, son plays club and school, fundraise, help out at the club, and sponsored the C2K rugby academy program.

You Aussies seem to have forgotten. Australis had it's most successful international team ever when you had three franchises. As soon as you got more teams your rugby went in decline.

Andy, I’d have thought it was pretty obvious that the whole point of my previous post was to call out your totally unwarranted and unbalanced attack on SANZAAR so don’t make out as if followed your approach by attacking the JRU. Look through my posts – I’ve not criticised their morals once, I’ve only equated them to SANZAAR’s. I said “YOU speculated that maybe “the JRU only ever intended it to be a one-off 5 year gig to prepare for the RWC”” to point out how you wouldn’t have any problem with such self interested behaviour – I never even said that they did it. In your last post you’ve proved my point. You agree that Japanese clubs have been deliberately “harmful” to SH rugby but that’s ok in your eyes because there is “no relationship!” Everything SANZAAR does is wrong, nothing Japan does is wrong. Let’s get real. Everyone acts in their own best interest in negotiations and SANZAAR didn’t “roll” “little” Japan. You keep going on about the harm to the relationship, but your accusations are unfounded and if it’s in both parties’ best interest it’ll happen. Not convinced? Read the quotes over the weekend in the Japanese press from JRFU director Yuichiro Fujii. Far from taking your unbalanced approach and refusing to work with the Southern Hemisphere because of imaginary wrongs, he realises that it is in Japan’s best interest to have its clubs playing against the best of the Southern Hemisphere. He wants this to happen every June and July, after the Top League finishes. So much for all of your scurrilous behaviour ruining the relationship nonsense. Can’t you give it a rest?

Competitive bids are harmful any time they wind up in an unsustainable circumstance. Laughable to think it requires a highly profitable company to inflict them - you seriously think Harris Scarfe was incapable of shafting suppliers? In reality it is the other way around; the more desperate they are, the more likely they are to turn a blind eye to the harm inflicted. By your own words, if 'desperate small suppliers' didn't think they'd benefit, they wouldn't sign the deal. But in the rugby sense, JRU were the small supplier and SR was their opportunity to reclaim control of their game from the companies. Instead they were rolled by the bigger organisation and have now had to throw their lot in entirely with the companies. Chances are they've only made things worse. But overall, it sounds a lot like you are trending toward "They had it coming". When it is left to the Japanese companies I would quite agree that them taking players has been harmful to SH rugby, but with no relationship they have no reason or responsibility not to do harm. S18 was SANZAR's opportunity to create a relationship and an alternative that might have provided some influence over such behaviour. They did it with Argentina, going down the partnership route and including them in everything despite that they are unlikely to be big financial contributors and the associated travel would be far more onerous even than Japan. But they didn't with Japan, despite often talking of them as the longer term hope for financial stability. Instead, rather than bring them into the tent, they left them outside looking in and eventually told them to go away. They didn't need to give them a free pass, just a sustainable involvement and they didn't. There is no guarantee they'll get another chance, and they've certainly put another hurdle in the way if they do. I mean, it is not like anyone holds grudges in rugby, is it (*cough* 2003 RWC, *cough* 2011 vote, *cough* Meads and legs)? I wondered how quickly you'd pounce on the idea that JRU only ever intended a one-off gig. But as I noted it was merely possible seeing as we lack insight into the detail, and was actually unlikely given how things played out. A better fit to how to why Japan signed up and how things played out was that there was some expectation of a transfer of intellectual property ahead of the RWC. It is a benefit often touted of lesser countries playing against Tier 1 countries and was perhaps another way SANZAR could have made it worth the JRU's time and money being involved, especially if there was any thought of involving them in a modified RC. But if that were the case they were obviously disappointed, with Jamie Joseph having to go another way completely in preparing the Cherry Blossoms. Again, I guess we'll never know now. :silly:

In most negotiations between organisations, both operate primarily to ensure that they benefit from the arrangement, of course one would also hope that one isn’t trying to totally rip the other off. If one organisation thinks that they won’t benefit the deal doesn’t go ahead. In negotiations with the JRU SANZAAR did this. In negotiations with SANZAAR the JRU did this. In taking players developed by Southern Hemisphere nations without compensation, Japanese clubs do this. Yet for some reason you hurl all these insults at SANZAAR for doing it but not the Japanese organisations. You speculated that maybe “the JRU only ever intended it to be a one-off 5 year gig to prepare for the RWC” which would totally leave SANZAAR in a hole, but the JRU would have achieved its objectives. Nothing negative from you about that. I mention that Japanese clubs take players developed by Southern Hemisphere nations without compensation, causing major financial difficulties to SANZAAR nations and reducing the quality of the rugby at test and Super level. Nothing negative from you about that. Yet for you it seems that it’s SANZAAR’s job to selflessly look after Japanese rugby, and if they don’t they are the devil incarnate. Competitive bids can be harmful when you have say a big highly profitable supermarket screwing desperate small suppliers. That simply isn’t the case here. The SANZAAR unions aren’t some huge, greedy, highly profitable organisations, they are struggling financially and a massive part of the reason why is the selfish behaviour of Japanese clubs funded by some of the biggest and richest companies in the world. Yet you expect SANZAAR to give Japan a free ticket into the competition that they have invested hugely in over the years, but Japanese rugby has done so much to undermine. Your attack on them is utterly unbalanced and unwarranted.

"All SANZAAR did was what you yourself say everyone does" is not quite correct; I never said everyone. I said it was characteristic of that particular contracting strategy, which is a strategy about as far removed as it is possible to get from the touchy feely, 'listen to each other’s point of view', 'benefit of all' approach you were talking about. You want those thing, or are actually interested in a long term relationship, you go with a different strategy. But they didn't, they chose a strategy that is very much from the "greed is good" end of business, used when the party requesting the bids does not give a rat's proverbial about how it affects the bidding parties or care the least about their motivations. All those things you listed; inviting bids, bidders submitting bids, evaluations, negotiations, awarding - they are all entirely about achieving the maximum advantage for the party requesting the bids. It is specifically why it puts two bidders up against each other to compete, so if you read that as a one way exercise, it is because that is precisely what I meant. Even after that, all the changes and ultimately cutting the Sunwolves loose, it was all solely about what was best for SANZAR and not a thing else. But it was certainly the nature of the bid process they chose, and one I have been through many times on both sides of the table. As a strategy it is pretty harmless on the small scale, trying to get a few bucks off a computer or playing two car yards off against each other on a new motor. But on the large scale it often winds up in court and not infrequently sends supply companies out of business. Which is essentially how it played out for the Sunwolves, their employees, their fans, and all that passion and developing culture. It is not what SANZAR styles themselves as being about, but it is certainly how they acted in practice. All the things that proved wrong with the competition and SANZAR's financial motives were all questioned before the competition even started, but SANZAR denied any such thing and barreled on regardless. Everyone was hurt when it all hit a tree, but some more than others and it was SANZAR's hands on the wheels with their interests alone setting the direction. That they damaged themselves excuses nothing, any more than it would a reckless driver who broke a leg and killed a passenger. Which is not to say it is necessarily all a bad thing. I certainly still think it very unlikely that Japan would have anything to do with any 2nd tier SH competition in future and arrogant to just assume otherwise, especially with them having been given a sharp push to go another way entirely. But you may also have got exactly what you want too, at least on the larger scale. Japan probably do feel they now understand SANZAR's point of view, fully appreciate why the SH is interested in their rugby, and now know to keep a firm grip on their wallet in future. And to be honest, I say that having had words to pretty much that exact effect directly from the mouth of one of their horses.

Hi Andy, apologies for the slow reply. To be precise, you said “the entire exercise from start to finish was about SANZAR’s interests” which to me means everything that happened during the exercise – SANZAAR inviting bids, bidders submitting bids, then the evaluation, negotiation, awarding and so on. Clearly that is not a one way process. But you meant something different, fine. What’s clear to me – and you may wish to refer to your second paragraph – is that the pejorative terms that you have used to describe SANZAAR’s behaviour in this matter are not appropriate. “You aren’t sitting down with a party you plan to create a long term partnership with and craft a deal to both your benefits, you are asking for their best bid and then haggling. No-one ever says “No, that’s too much, we’ll pay more to make sure it works better for you”, they say things like “That’s nice, but is there any chance you could move four of your home games to Singapore too?”” All SANZAAR did was what you yourself say everyone does. Why hurl insults at them for it? Questioning their competence re growth and relationship management I can understand, but such unjustified accusations about moral character can only cause offence and damage relationships, while demonising someone causes both parties harm. Much better to explore and try to understand each other’s point of view.

"perhaps the JRU knew things or had an agenda that you know nothing about" is an interesting point. I mentioned it earlier as a possible reason the JRU were prepared to accept the terms, but flipping it around perhaps the JRU only ever intended it to be a one-off 5 year gig to prepare for the RWC. Or decided that fairly early on, given how things were going and the talk out of SR. I would have thought it would have played out differently at the end if that were the case (for starters, it would have made the big cash demand unnecessary when it was such a poor look), but perhaps ongoing sustainability was not given that much consideration. But it is hardly illogical or imbalanced to say the bid process was all about SANZAR’s interests. I don't know how much you have to do with contracting, but that is the specific intent of a competitive bid arrangement. You aren't sitting down with a party you plan to create a long term partnership with and craft a deal to both your benefits, you are asking for their best bid and then haggling. No-one ever says "No, that's too much, we'll pay more to make sure it works better for you", they say things like "That's nice, but is there any chance you could move four of your home games to Singapore too?" Same when it apparently dawned on SANZAR that a massive increase in revenues still wasn't enough and they needed changes. The reasonable collaborative action with a partner would have been to sit down and craft a new agreement that recognised the needs of both parties, just as you previously suggested. Maybe something to do with recruitment assistance, or attempted engagement with the Japanese companies as JRU's other big stakeholder, who knows. Whereas the selfish approach was to stick a big price tag on it and tell the JRU to like it or lump it. As you say, just cutting the Sunwolves might have been cleaner, but it would have been no less selfish. Either way is simply addressing only what SANZAR needed. As for collaboration, I didn't mean to suggest that the Test teams would never meet again. But such meetings generally aren't on a collaborative revenue sharing basis anyway, and there is certainly no reason they would need to be. But nor was it what we were discussing either, was it? What we were talking about was club/franchise teams playing within some extended competition structure, and whether or not Japan could just be assumed as walk-up starters for the asking. They've gone a different way since (and because of) the events of the last couple of years, one that may yet put enormous pressure on SH player stocks. It is a course they'll be hoping satisfies all their Tier 2 competition needs, and there is simply no reason to assume they would jump at the chance to potentially repeat the Sunwolves experience.

Hi Andy, I will answer you direct question with a direct answer and address some of your statements. Can I assume you feel that was an appropriate and sustainable basis for Japan’s involvement that worked for their benefit as well as SANZAR’s? Both Japan and SANZAAR clearly thought so at the time, or they wouldn’t have signed it. Yes, I know you keep on saying that you are amazed, but perhaps the JRU knew things or had an agenda that you know nothing about. Who are we, lacking this knowledge, to criticise the JRU for their decision? In the end as I have discussed it didn’t turn out well for SANZAAR, partly their fault, partly because the Sunwolves failed to get the expected players from their clubs. Whether it turned out well for the JRU is a matter for them, you may wish to refer to comments from the national coaching staff for their thoughts. “The entire exercise from start to finish was about SANZAR’s interests…” This is the sort of illogical unbalanced statement that ruins relationships and leads to a harmful victim mentality. So Japan went into this either in naïve foolishness or purely to altruistically give to Southern Hemisphere rugby? It just doesn’t make sense. “…doesn’t make their subsequent actions reasonable.” What would have been reasonable actions? To allow their domestic competition to keep on sliding and make it less attractive broadcasters and fans? Happy to hear you thoughts on this, perhaps there is something I haven’t thought of. “… they may choose to never collaborate again…” “…the arrogance of any casual assumption that given the history they would want or need anything to do with SH rugby ever again.” That would be everyone’s loss, including Japan’s. Rugby is a small sport, you will have noticed that unions worldwide are currently trying to collaborate because we all need each other to survive (including bringing Japan into regular top tier international rugby in the RC & Nations Championship.) Even as a general principle and ignoring the last point it’s untenable to suggest that different unions won’t collaborate at some level. And who knows, perhaps the current or future leaders of Japan rugby won’t have such a pejorative view of SANZAAR as yourself.

I didn't ask what you thought the Sunwolves brought to the competition, I asked what you thought were reasonable contract terms for a team participating in SR. At the start of this discussion you were unaware and asking for references supporting that S18 had come with a colossal increase in revenues, of which Japan received nothing, and was having to pay a fee on top. But as you have avoided the question, can I assume you feel that was an appropriate and sustainable basis for Japan's involvement that worked for their benefit as well as SANZAR's? Absolutely SANZAAR would have preferred that things subsequently turned around and the product suddenly started kicking goals. But that doesn't make those initial contract terms reasonable, and it doesn't make their subsequent actions reasonable. I have no problems stipulating that the entire exercise from start to finish was about SANZAR's interests and the pressures on them. But understanding that doesn't excuse it, and it clearly happened with no thought at all as to how it affected Japan; as a minimum, their motivations were entirely selfish. 'Both sides listening to each other’s point of view and making things work for the benefit of all' are fine words, probably the sort of fine words the whole exercise started with. But there was little of that actually on display in the first contract, and none at all in the second. So Japan walked away and have decided to go a different way, which was probably the best outcome all around. But you are wrong that "we need to co-operate to find solutions that work to the benefit of all"....they may well chose to never collaborate again and could easily look to the NH instead. Or do their own thing entirely to their own benefit, perhaps becoming an even bigger threat than the European clubs. That was specifically my original post, observing the arrogance of any casual assumption that given the history they would want or need anything to do with SH rugby ever again.

I’m sorry Andy but the words “worth nothing” and “deserve nothing” are very loaded moral judgement phrases in my world and I would not use them in such a transactional sense, especially when talking about a different race and culture. Perhaps you inhabit a very different world, but for me they really mean something nasty. Everyone has some good in them, everyone has some worth, everyone deserves something, many Japanese people have been subject to racism. So I hope you can understand my reaction, rather than dismiss it. The Sunwolves did bring great things to Super Rugby. I loved the passion of the crowd, the stadium announcements. I was so happy to see the joy of their first win, the genuine mutual respect between players and crowd when the team lined up and bowed. I’m sure that the players enjoyed the rich cultural experience and some of the clubs benefitted from Japanese sponsors. But that doesn’t mean that the inclusion of the Sunwolves and other expansion teams (and I don’t know many times I need to reiterate that the Sunwolves weren’t the only expansion team cut and not the only team I was referring to in those comments) were of a net benefit to Southern Hemisphere rugby. I’m not sure whether you have much experience in dispute/relationship resolution/counselling whether personal or organisational, but “your side of the story” does not mean you saying what my motives are. Your side of the story might include how my actions affected you including your finances, emotions, opinions and likely future actions, even what they make you believe about my motivations. All sorts of other things too. But what my motives actually were are certainly not for you to definitively say. I get that from your side Japan received an inferior financial deal and the proposed future deal was utterly unsustainable. You felt treated like second class and SANZAAR came across as exploitative and greedy. Trust has been lost and that will be difficult to regain. That’s not an exhaustive list, and I am sorry if it does fully take your side into account. Are you not also willing to accept my side, whatat it meant for SANZAAR? That for SANZAAR the inclusion of the Sunwolves and other expansion teams diminished Super Rugby as a competition and as preparation for tests by reducing the quality of rugby and increasing travel. That as a result attendances and tv audiences dropped and broadcasters were disgruntled. This was not a sustainable situation in a world where wage inflation was making it more difficult for SANZAAR countries to retain players. Decisive action was required and at great political cost internally SANZAAR therefore cut the Force, Cheetahs and Kings from Super Rugby and decided that only an additional fee could make the inclusion of the Sunwolves sustainable. Of course SANZAAR made mistakes. For example expansion was a failure and maybe they would have been better just cutting the Sunwolves instead of suggesting the extra fee, I don’t know. But your lack of acceptance for any aspect of the SANZAAR’s points of view and the pressures on them, plus your pejorative views on SANZAAR’s motives are, in my opinion, unfair and unhelpful. Future co-operation between Japanese and Southern Hemisphere rugby can only go ahead if both sides listen to each other’s point of view and it can be made to work for the benefit of all. Taking a pejorative view on each other’s motives is damaging to this. For example, have I in this discussion said that Japan is the enemy because their clubs cause so much damage by poaching players, or that it is immoral that they don’t even pay compensation to the unions that developed these players? That wouldn’t be helpful. Unfortunately the Sunwolves’ future inclusion in Super Rugby as it existed pre COVID would have benefitted neither party. We need to co-operate to find solutions that work to the benefit of all.

I never said it falling attendances were "all Japan's fault", I said "..now Japan is responsible for falling attendances across all the games in SR". Seems a fair summary of your statement that "..crowds in Super Rugby fell dramatically in South Africa and Australia especially in the Super 18 era and something needed to be done", when that something included sticking a ¥1b price tag on Japanese involvement. So who is it that's putting words in whose mouth??? And nice fake outrage and attempted diversion by the way, pretending that "worth nothing or deserves nothing" was some sort of global moral judgement, rather than specifically related to their involvement in SR. Seriously desperate, but a point easily cleared up - relative to receiving zero financial return and being charged a fee for participating, feel free to describe what you think the appropriate terms should have been for the Japanese involvement as one of 18 teams in Super Rugby. As for the bid, Japan bid for involvement within the box provided. SANZAR defined that box, just as they did for the Singapore bid. They even changed it on the run; the Sunwolves games in Singapore weren't their choice, they modified their bid because someone told them the travel was going to cost them the spot. If they alone had come up with the idea of taking no revenue share, there is no way that extra travel would have mattered a jot. It was obviously a base parameter, defined by SANZAR, unless you have a reference that describes how JFRU came up with the idea for themselves as an aggressive bid tactic? I remain astounded they agreed, but they did and that is certainly on them...perhaps they were desperate leading up to a home RWC and were prepared to try anything to put up a good showing. That doesn't excuse SANZAR taking advantage of it however, or then calling it normal and trying for even more later. But to answer your last question, no, I am most definitely not so disrespectful of Japan to think that they would ever have actively bid the terms of their involvement as their choice. The question itself suggests you are suffering a significant comprehension gap, and are most definitely a waste of time.

Delete

Will you stop putting words into my mouth. Where did I say that falling attendances are all Japan’s fault? (three other teams were cut.) And I would never say or think that a country is worth nothing or deserves nothing, that is obscene. If you will insist on thinking the worst of SANZAAR whatever the logic you may wish to reflect on why Japan chose to, not just accept, but propose such a supposedly ridiculously awful deal in the first place. Are you really so disrespectful of them to think that they would actively bid for that?

The challenge of funding a single PI team such as Fiji is small $$s compared to the funding that Forrest has been providing to develop rugby in the Asia/Pacific region in 2017 - 2020.

The danger would be to assume that the squad playing for the WF in 2020 is the same squad that would play for the WF in 2021. IF the WF was one of the 3 teams playing in the TT comp, you don't think that top players wouldn't want to join in on the opportunity to participate in the best rugby being played in the region?? Forrest certainly has the resources to MIH and there's unlikely to be any salary cap in a professional competition with private ownership of teams (the GRR model).

Really, I could have sworn you wrote that "Regarding the [massively increased] TV deal, most of that was for tests, not Super Rugby". And now Japan is responsible for falling attendances across all the games in SR, such that they (and only they) had to pony up millions of extra dollars? You haven't acknowledged where I'm coming from, you've just jumped around looking for reasons why Japan was worth nothing, deserved nothing and was rightfully having reparations demanded of it if they wanted to stay involved. I'll stand by that description of the size of that demand, but agree that further discussion is a waste of time - you are clearly entrenched in the position that they didn't deserve anything from anyone or even to be there. But on your last point, sufficient to say that I am sure that Japan now fully understands what the SANZAAR countries want from them, how little they will get back in return, and I don't doubt that will be reflected in Japan’s future dealings with those nations. That was exactly my original point, after all. I've also expressed my surprise that Japan signed up to it all in the first place, but hope the lesson hasn't been lost on any Pacific Island team approached for future iterations of SR too. There will no doubt be lots of fine words about helping hands and development, but they'll likely go the same way if they don't make it rain money. And maybe shouldn't expect to see much of it themselves.

It would be sink or swim time for Aust rugby. In which case they need to get on board with Twiggy, his money & contacts. To start with RA can make some governance changes, then as mentioned before, establish a stronger domestic structure. They can also look to strengthen the links established with the island teams from the NRC and GRR (i.e not making them play completely out of Aust ), then slowly move into Asia. It could be a medium to long term winner financially and growth wise. Especially if a Lions Tour and the RWC 2027 takes place here as well.

Andy, please stop putting words into my mouth. I did not say that Super Rugby didn’t matter, just that it was of less interest to tv viewers than test rugby. Match day income from Super Rugby is obviously greater than the surpluses of the SANZAAR nations and crowds in Super Rugby fell dramatically in South Africa and Australia especially in the Super 18 era and something needed to be done. Only very rich companies can survive if one of their divisions is failing. I’m sorry, but this exchange is becoming a waste of time for me. I try to enter dialogue with people who disagree with me so that we can learn about each other’s points of view and I have acknowledged where you are coming from, but I’m at the point of giving up here. You keep using perjorative terms like “naked greed” and “contempt” betraying an entrenched position beyond logic and refuse to see the other point of view or admit to any failings on the Japanese side. Greed implies benefitting greatly, but I have shown that whatever the extra income for SANZAAR, the costs and reduced income elsewhere have been greater to the point that major surgery as you put it was needed. You see the financial unsustainability for Japan, but refuse to accept that SANZAAR also needed to address the financial sustainability of the Sunwolves for them. You criticise the original terms, but talk as if they were all SANZAAR’s fault, refusing to acknowledge that Japan wrote their own bid, competing against other countries who also wanted to join. No relationships can work unless both sides make some effort to understand each other and I can only hope that this is a feature of Japan’s future relations with the rest of the rugby world.

Pretty much agree with most of this, but Australians can hardly complain about a rugby relationship based on 'stunting, withering and subservience' when this is precisely the way Australia has treated NZ in league, soccer, netball, basketball (don't even mention cricket!) And it's certainly not true that NZ constructed its five soup franchises 'from all of their established provinces' — it actually required all sorts of non-traditional combinations of provinces that still causes angst to many. Other than that, enjoyable article that avoids much of the hysteria going round on this topic (on both sides of the Tasman).