Why NZR will eventually win fight with provinces

Six months after the independent governance review into New Zealand Rugby was released, the rubber really needs to start hitting the road in terms of actual change. David Pilkington’s report was thorough and detailed, but it was also a forthright and uncomplicated roadmap – it shouldn’t take New Zealand Rugby and its members more than six months to get from A to B.

Indeed, Stuff understands that

NZ Rugby, which has supported the review’s findings since last September, is becoming increasingly aware that time and transparency are two factors it can’t ignore for much longer.

NZ Rugby and the provincial unions are said to be at an impasse, with the provincial unions unwilling to accept the findings of the review, and NZ Rugby unable to support the counterproposal put forward by the provincial unions.

The entire process is in danger of becoming bogged down unless someone can show some leadership, break the impasse, and – God forbid – actually let the public in on what is being discussed.

Next week will likely see some developments on that front.

But the provincial unions’ lack of openness hints at a weakness in their position.

While it is entirely reasonable for them to fight for the NPC – “The NPC is a vital competition and will remain so,” one provincial chief executive told Stuff yesterday in relation to some parallel NZ Rugby work being undertaken on the competition – they have been unwilling so far to lay out their governance position in the public domain.

They are either not entirely united on that position or they aren’t confident enough of standing behind it – or their recent record of fostering the game at the grassroots level.

As the governance review report pointed out, only 21% of the NPC provincial unions’ expenditure goes to community rugby.

In fact, if you peel back the layers on this entire debate, it becomes clear that the provincial unions have a strong position constitutionally, but a far weaker case to sustain this arrangement in the modern age.

It feels like change, even piecemeal, is inevitable, and while rugby politics can send the average rugby punter to sleep quicker than a World Rugby TMO check, it’s important to remember what is at stake here: this governance review is simply about getting the most capable people in New Zealand to run the game.

The next steps in this process will be telling.

To that end, the appearance by the players’ association chief executive, Rob Nichol, on the Breakdown last Sunday was significant.

Nichol, playing the peacemaker role, is a smart man who doesn’t speak publicly without a degree of strategic thinking.

The “transition model” he floated appeared to be a clear signal about a potential next step – eventually getting to the review’s recommendations but taking the provincial unions’ concerns on board.

It felt like a sensible, compromise offer, and the provincial unions will come across as stubborn and obstructionist if they again say no.

It may also be the final offer before the gloves come off.

Nichol and the players’ association had no issue throwing some public haymakers against NZ Rugby during the Silver Lake tussle, and it’s likely they’ll go down the same route if they believe the game is squandering a gilt-edged chance to become “fit for purpose”.