Moana Pasifika during the cultural challenge before the match between Moana Pasifika and the Maori All Blacks at FMG Stadium. Photo / Getty Images.
Blues chief executive Andrew Hore has expressed his desire for the potential consequences of Moana Pasifika's introduction into Super Rugby Aotearoa to be fully investigated and believes the budding franchise should be based in the Pacific Islands, not Auckland.
Moana Pasifika's bid to join Super Rugby Aotearoa, alongside a teamfrom Fiji in 2022, is poised on a knife-edge as New Zealand Rugby considers the respective business cases and attempts to renegotiate its $100m per-year broadcast deal with Sky Television.
While NZR plot Super Rugby Aotearoa expansion, significant tension has emerged between the Blues and Moana Pasifika's plans to be based in south Auckland.
Speaking publicly on Moana Pasifika's bid for the first time, Hore says the five existing Kiwi franchises are largely in the dark about the potential impacts of a sixth New Zealand-based team.
"We're all in agreement that a Pasifika team could add real benefit. The impacts and consequences, though, we all need to look at," Hore tells the Herald.
"At the end of the day [the Blues], and I know the other franchises too, will still look to develop any kid of any background.
"Having that mix of people with a different mindset and ideas is really healthy. We've seen that in our team and we tried to celebrate that difference this year.
"We don't mind waiting as long as we carefully investigate the consequences of any team coming into the competition.
"We want to gain answers to those questions so we know any development to the competition is in the best interests of all stakeholders in New Zealand rugby.
"At the moment we don't have those answers so it's very hard to support it or not support it. We've got to be open to the fact it may take a little bit longer than what people think because there's a lot of balls in the air at the moment."
Hore said issues such as the clearly defined Blues territory in Auckland and the potential threat to their membership base were yet to be discussed. He also expressed concerns about the potential cannibalisation of commercial revenue streams and future playing prodigies that could arise from two Super Rugby teams competing in the same market.
"That's one of the key questions we don't know. We also believe it's not for us to commission that piece of work. If we're entering into a licence then that's the role of whoever is making that decision," Hore says.
"We're very proud of the Pacific element of this franchise, and how we've helped develop a lot of those Pacific players and coaches.
"What we do know from provisional reports we've seen is there will be an impact – so how do you mitigate that impact. Those are all things that need to be answered which, at the moment, we don't have sight of.
"Speaking to key figures in this franchise of Pasifika descent we believe it has to be done really well to be successful.
"At its core it has to have opportunities for Island-based players and coaches – not people who are domiciled already in New Zealand.
"Ultimately the idea would be that it would be based in one of the Islands because if you can see it, you can dream it. It's very hard to do it any other way."
In a challenging economic climate wrought by the Covid-19 shutdown, the Blues faced the prospect of insolvency this year before Super Rugby Aotearoa got off the ground.
Despite an improved financial outlook, Hore says commercial challenges for the five New Zealand franchises remain real.
"It's not rivers of gold out there and it hasn't been for a long time," Hore says. "What we have got is a really good competition that engages sectors of our community and this year was testament to that.
"The other side is making sure any side that comes in is really competitive because blowouts don't make it engaging. When people come to Super Rugby Aotearoa they know they're watching the best talent.
"With the emergence of Australia there's real hope we can have a really exciting tournament in our own time zone.
"It has to enhance that, not detract. People can't make decisions that others then have to suffer the consequences for. It doesn't work like that so we all need to have a proper look at this."
Moana Pasifika co-chairman Pelenato Sakalia acknowledged Hore's concerns but says when emotion is stripped from the debate, the two teams would not compete for the same talent base.
Moana Pasifika's roster would embrace a significant percentage of players who must declare allegiance to the Pacific Island nations.
"Their biggest concerns the Blues have raised with me is the confusion it's going to place on players for example," Sakalia said.
"The top-end players going through our rugby academies want to be the best and play for the best. The All Blacks still sit at the apex of the model here in Aotearoa.
"There's absolutely no doubt who they are going to choose in terms of the crème de la crème.
"There's no way the Blues can accommodate all the potential that exists within Auckland. It's not humanly possible – there's only so many people they can have on their roster.
"When you start to look at it from a detailed perspective people will make logical decisions; families will make logical decisions. They want to see their sons reach the top.
"When I looked at the numbers I was scratching my head as to why we were even having this debate."
Commercially Sakalia says it is a similar story with a perception and reality clouding concerns until details of Moana Pasifika's alignment to Samoa and Tonga are revealed.
"The commercial options for Moana Pasifika are fundamentally different to the Blues. We have mandatory requirements to be able to get a licence to not enter into commercial arrangements that would undermine Super Rugby teams. NZ Rugby has been consistent about that.
"From a revenue perspective we are no threat."
This inherent tension between the Blues and Moana Pasifika is one of myriad issues New Zealand Rugby must navigate before reaching a final decision on expansion teams by March.