KEY POINTS:
It will take a strong presentation of a plan that promises success from the New Zealand Rugby League bosses if they are to head off further blood-letting at the annual general meeting in Auckland on Saturday.
There is much angst in league circles at the cost over-runs from last year's tour to England as well as other expenditure under former chairman Andrew Chalmers which is seen by many as having got out of hand, especially when the promised income never materialised.
The feeling now is that those of the 15 districts which were coerced and convinced to back Chalmers' revamp of the NZRL constitution want to reverse that, especially the change whereby the chairman is elected by the board rather than by votes from the districts. That gave Chalmers the opportunity for in-house politicking, which the districts now see as destructive.
The board aims to present all details of the tour losses and other financial fallout, with the intention of heading off any witch hunt.
To that end, three weeks ago it asked the districts to send notice of any questions in writing. The response has turned up more than 100 specific queries, some relating to matters that are several years old.
But throughout the broader league community there is hope the queries can be dispensed with smoothly, rather than via an extended raking of the coals, and that a "big-picture" plan offering a better future will be put forward.
There are, however, nagging suspicions that the board and management are not equipped to push such a plan through to fruition. There is already concern at the length of time it has taken to see facts and figures or any real change since Chalmers left, especially given the parlous state of the game and its finances.
One month away from a test against the world's best - what should be a decent drawcard and a good money-spinner - the Kiwis still have no signed-and-sealed sponsorship deals. As it is World Cup year, surely a marketable commodity, deals should have been tied up long ago. Instead, the NZRL is already spending the projected profits, having taken an advance from the Australians to help them over 2007's $1.3 million loss.
There is no national competition and, after years of pouring money into the Bartercard Cup only to see their players disappear to the cities then on to the NRL, Super League and France, the provinces are wary of what's next.
Those who resigned from the board when Chalmers did have been replaced but it still looks like an oval table of old footy heads. Those who remain from the board under Chalmers will face questions as to what they knew and when, and why nothing was done to rein in the spending and limit other damage.
Some of the NZRL's problems could undoubtedly have been avoided had Chalmers been confronted by his board and senior NZRL management. The financial controller, Brian Mills, by all accounts tried to do this but was then sidelined to the point where his job of six years became untenable and he resigned. The general manager, Peter Cordtz, and others also must have been aware of the precarious financial position.
What's needed in management, then, is business, legal and marketing expertise rather than a history as a player.
The NZRL also needs a better eye for the future, some innovation and lateral thinking rather than the footy thinking, personal disputes and the back-to-the-future approach that has dragged it down.
The big-picture plan has to be financially stable and that means success from the NZRL's only source of earning power - the Kiwis.
Now that the coaching residency rule is scrapped we hope to see the best man appointed and allowed to stay even if he does secure a club coaching post in Australia or England. The players can be expected to respond better than they did under Gary Kemble, when captain Roy Asotasi started the process that led to the coach's removal. There is now a chance to rebuild the unity and onfield success achieved by Bluey McClennan.
The board is in the process of appointing three independent directors from a shortlist recommended by the Institute of Directors. The previous three have departed after short terms once they realised the mess they were in. Hopefully the newcomers have more backbone.
For new chairman Ray Haffenden it has been a turbulent introduction to the post and stormy seas still loom. He is regarded as a breath of fresh air, bringing honesty and integrity to the job, but there is impatience to see rapid change and some doubt he can unite factions and achieve that.
Part of the game's problem is that small districts with few players, little turnover and no experience of managing major events nor sums of money have one vote, as does the might of Auckland, the game's stronghold.
The fact is, the Auckland Rugby League dwarfs the NZRL in player numbers, coaching development work, turnover and every other facet of the game. The trouble is the districts hate Auckland. Plus in recent times the ARL and the NZRL which are both housed in the latter's freehold HQ in Penrose have been openly antagonistic towards one another.
An Auckland takeover may not be the best thing and certainly it's a move that would be monumentally unpopular in some parts of the country. But the alternative might be footing the bill for the failings and misdemeanours of the crew they voted for.
In posing their 100 questions, the districts will no doubt get some answers that point the finger for part of the NZRL's sickly condition right back at themselves.
