NZ Rugby House building. Photo: Elias Rodriguez
Analysis - The season might not have started, but the future of NZ Rugby's governance was on the agenda today in Wellington.
It always feels a bit early to be talking about rugby when the Black Caps have just won a test match and people are still feeling sand between their toes from the long weekend. But the season has technically started, not just with warm up games being played but the slightly more serious debate about the game's governance beginning in earnest as well.
Friday saw a meeting of New Zealand's 26 provincial unions and the NZ Māori Rugby Advisory Board discuss the way forward in the wake of last year's independent review of NZ Rugby's constitution and governance structure.
The 134-page review concluded that two changes should be made: The creation of an independent process to ensure the appointment of an appropriately skilled, high performing board to govern the organisation and the creation of a Stakeholder Council to ensure the voices of stakeholders are heard and their interests represented in a collaborative forum.
New Zealand Rugby CEO Mark Robinson and chair Dame Patsy Reddy Photo: PHOTOSPORT
Review panel chair David Pilkington somewhat ominously said that "it's the panel's fervent hope that this is the last review of this type and that walk, finally replaces talk."
The outcome of the meeting today saw a statement released:
"As voting members, the PUs and NZMRB are mindful of the responsibilities to their communities and the wider rugby family and have worked in good faith to consider the recommendations of the review. We will continue to progress the work undertaken to enable the constitutional adoption of the changes and - alongside New Zealand Rugby - expect to provide the finalised details of the governance model in due course."
'In due course' - so the question now is whether the provinces and NZMRB will actually vote to enact the changes found in the review.
Being indecisive is a critique that's been targeted at those running the game for essentially its entire existence over matters all the way down to kids' junior rugby. In a black and white sense it appears that, unsurprisingly, a system of governance that was first created in 1892 needs some sort of modern update.
Of course, it's easy to conflate this entire notion with the view that NZ Rugby itself isn't fit for purpose. Yes, there are issues that need to be addressed, from participation to attendance and a few things in between.
The All Blacks perform the haka before the Rugby World Cup final against South Africa at Stade de France. Photo: Andrew Cornaga/www.photosport.nz
But one thing you can't accuse NZR of is standing still in terms of a cultural shift, with reviews and subsequent strategies on women's rugby, inclusion and Pasifika participation released over the last 18 months.
The Silver Lake deal, whatever you may think of it, was due to a need to change the financial model of the business. Whether it works or not, we'll find out in due course and if nothing else, that's what the current chief executive and board's performance should ultimately be based on.
This current situation has, of course, forced a response from the Rugby Players Association. Their resistance to the initial Silver Lake deal forced a renegotiation, made their relationship with NZR appear publicly very adversarial, and has put them in a position to demand this week that the adoption of the governance review's finding in full was the only possible outcome.
The RPA has accused NZR, the provincial unions and the NZMRB of doing this deal behind closed doors and questioned just how independent any sort of appointment committee will be. Given their leverage over the Silver Lake deal it seems entirely unlikely anything is going to happen without them agreeing to it first, so really the rhetoric around a lack of transparency has a slightly inflammatory tinge to it.
So really, while this potential governance change is a serious issue and change is necessary, the review wasn't a call to simply burn everything to the ground and start again.
What happens now? Probably a case of more announcements about structure and committees that probably won't mean much to kids dreaming of being All Blacks and Black Ferns one day. The really meaty stuff, like what will happen with the NPC, FPC and even Super Rugby, is for down the line.
Let's just hope the main parties have learned from the Silver Lake saga in terms of optics. Rugby doesn't need a long, drawn out, messy fight again.
