KEY POINTS:
One table has Auckland in first place while the other has them 11th. One table has North Harbour fourth, the other has them 12th.
Southland made the semifinals yet, when the New Zealand Rugby Union assessed the 14 top provincial unions earlier this year, they determined Southland were
only the 12th strongest.
Questions have to be asked, then, whether the NZRU were guilty of applying flawed methodology in trying to determine the strength of the 14 provincial unions. Their rankings don't tally at all with the final placings in the Air New Zealand Cup round-robin.
The discrepancies between the two tables are vast. Did the NZRU get it horribly wrong or does their table more accurately reflect the long-term prospects of each union?
Auckland's form this year could be considered an aberration, the result of losing too many good players last year and this year's side playing badly.
Their No 1 ranking under the NZRU table does not need debating as history has shown blips occur. Auckland were awful in 2004 and won the title in 2005. They won again in 2007 and it will be a major surprise if they don't bounce back strongly next year.
But Harbour in fourth place is hard to understand as is the ninth place awarded to Counties.
Neither of these unions has an outstanding recent playing record. In fact, both could be accused of consistent under-achievement given their playing resources.
Counties finished 14th in 2007 and won only once in 2006 when the competition was played under a split pool format. Harbour made the quarter-finals in 2006 where they were hammered by Otago and were ninth last season.
Southland have made the knock-out stage for the last three years and have provided a healthy contingent to the Highlanders. The NZRU assessment is entirely at odds with the Stags' performances.
"At the end of the day it [NZRU assessment] is not right," says Southland chief executive Roger Clark. "But that is not the NZRU's fault. They were stuck with criteria that were not applicable.
"To say we are the 12th strongest region when we have consistently finished in the top eight makes a bit of a mockery of the criteria."
Clark is not alone in his view. The biggest gripe throughout the provincial review was that the NZRU were using dated and largely irrelevant assessment criteria.
A major weighting was placed on population and playing numbers which appear to have little impact on a union's success. Southland have the smallest population in the division and rank well down on playing numbers but have shown it's what you do with what you've got that matters.
"If you have good people, good coaches and good development programmes," says Clark, "then we have shown it doesn't matter what size your population is. I think we have shown that maybe there needs to be greater emphasis on performance."
Hawke's Bay have also defied their NZRU ranking and agree with the need for more emphasis on performance. They were ranked sixth by the NZRU but have made the semifinals in consecutive years.
It could be argued two good seasons is not enough evidence Hawke's Bay are a provincial heavyweight. But again, if assessments were made under more relevant criteria, they would most likely be higher than sixth.
Their progression has been consistent across a number of areas since 2006 and they are perhaps the model union.
In 2005 they had no Super 14 players. When they came into the top division in 2006 they had none, and likewise in 2007.
But in 2008 they provided four players. Next year that number is likely to increase with prop Fakaanau Taumalolo a Chiefs possibility and Thomas Waldrom, who has just signed, in the Crusaders squad.
Hawke's Bay have about 80 per cent of the squad now that they had in 2006, showing their success is down to good coaching and player development rather than the power of their chequebook.
Chief executive Mike Bishop says the union are paying slightly less on player wages in 2008 than they did last year and that they are nowhere near the salary cap.
Revenue has slowly increased as have crowds and now Bishop says they are in the novel position of having players chase them.
"That would not have happened a few years ago," said Bishop, which is why he believes the competition is working the way it is.
"I don't want to see any dumbing down of provincial rugby. We don't want to see any major change. We are comfortable with the salary cap being where it is although we are on record as saying we need to look at the notional values and All Blacks counting towards the cap."
THE NZRU RANKINGS
1: Auckland
2: Canterbury
3: Wellington
4: North Harbour
5: Waikato
6: Hawke's Bay
7: Otago
8: Taranaki
9: Counties
10: Bay of Plenty
11: Manawatu
12: Southland
13: Northland
14: Tasman
AIR NZ CUP TABLE
Final round-robin standings:
1: Wellington
2: Canterbury
3: Hawke's Bay
4: Bay of Plenty
5: Southland
6: Waikato
7: Tasman
8: Taranaki
9: Northland
10: Otago
11: Auckland
12: North Harbour
13: Counties
14: Manawatu
