Frenchman Bernard Lapasset has been relected as the International Rugby Board's new chairman. Photo / Greg Bowker
In the constantly changing world of Southern Hemisphere rugby, there has at least been one consistent theme in the Sanzar alliance - betrayal.
It has never been one for all and all for one between New Zealand, South Africa and Australia - something made apparent again last week when the latter two went against the former when it came to voting for the IRB chairman.
The fact that Australia and South Africa both backed Bernard Lapasset to stay as IRB chairman while New Zealand voted for Bill Beaumont is not itself reason to believe all is not well within Sanzar.
All three nations share common goals on what they want to see the IRB achieve in the next few years but New Zealand felt they were more likely to get there with Beaumont at the helm. The other two felt Lapasset was a better bet.
There is cause for concern, however, in the fact New Zealand ran a transparent process to reach their decision which was without other agenda. They heard presentations from both Beaumont and Lapasset and concluded the former was more likely to accelerate research being done into a new World Cup financial distribution model.
But the South Africans and Australians saw the vote as an opportunity to make political mileage. It is debatable whether both South Africa and Australia genuinely believed Lapasset was more capable of modernising the ailing governing body and all its antiquated strategies.
The doubt exists because South Africa Rugby Union's Oregan Hoskins has been elected vice-chairman of the IRB. It required Lapasset to use his casting vote as chairman to get Hoskins over the line.
Australia, too, look set to gain after backing the Frenchman. Australian Rugby Union chief executive John O'Neill is likely to end up on the IRB World Cup executive, which will provide him with the opportunity to have direct input into the 2015 tournament and most likely beyond.
The World Cup was the core issue splitting the IRB. The major unions are determined to instigate change to the way finances are distributed and also to relax the draconian sponsorship rules. Beaumont was seen by the major unions, including New Zealand, England and the Celtic nations, as the more visionary leader; a more likely moderniser.
If nothing else, he would have been voted in on a mandate of instigating change - which would have opened dialogue and put pressure on him to deliver. Having seen their man fall short, the question now is whether the NZRU believe Lapasset can deliver the changes they desire. As Tew has made clear, the NZRU loses around $15 million every fourth year due to hosting fewer tests in World Cup year. That loss is unsustainable and it's imperative some sort of solution is provided either by shifting the 2015 tournament to a later window to allow for a full Rugby Championship programme; for there to be a bigger compensation payment directly from World Cup revenue; or for there to be a new model of revenue-sharing for all tests that would see the All Blacks benefit from selling out the much larger grounds in Europe.
Tew says he's confident that the closeness of the vote will have done much to highlight the appetite for change.
"We don't have a personal beef with Bernard. We just think there needs to be a speeding up of the work being done by the IRB which has been glacial. We thought Bill would have accelerated that.
"We expect Bernard to have a clear message from a 14-12 vote that there is a feeling among the members of the international rugby community that there needs to be change. He needs to lead it and he needs to speed it up."
For now, Tew is not disheartened by his Sanzar partners. While the three partners held a different view on the personnel to achieve their goals, they still, Tew believes, have a shared vision on what the key goals actually are.
"My sense of it is that we [Sanzar] are quite aligned around the commercial stuff and revenue flows. They just believed they had a better chance of doing that with Bernard."
All New Zealand can hope for now is that South Africa and Australia put the pressure on Lapasset to reform the World Cup. But confidence is not high.
The chairmanship vote once again showed that secret deals and horse trading are still how the IRB prefers to conduct its business.