Rugby: Something to Tew on

There has been more good than bad during Steve Tew's reign. Photo / Greg Bowker

Since taking over the top job in October 2007, Steve Tew has not had an easy ride. The leading players were under siege from European predators in 2008; the provincial was bleeding cash; and, following the World Cup debacle and the decision to remove leading All Blacks from Super 14, fans, broadcasters and other leading stakeholders were disenchanted with rugby.

On top of all that, the world plunged into the greatest financial recession since the Great Depression of 1929.

Complicating matters further has been the appearance on the NZRU balance sheet of some of the predicted losses expected from hosting the World Cup. To evaluate the Tew reign purely on financial performance would give the misleading impression that the game here is in turmoil. It would also be unfair to look at the previous World Cup cycle 2004-2007 and compare Tew's reign with that of his predecessor, Chris Moller.

That period benefited greatly from a currency hedging deal that saw the NZRU protect its foreign currency income from the high New Zealand dollar. The British & Irish Lions tour of 2005 also brought in an extra $25m, while the original broadcast deal struck in 1995 was tapered to pay out more revenue in its final two years.

The hostile environment has to be taken into account when evaluating the last three years. Many of the stress points were inherited while the impact of the global recession can't be ignored. Tew and his team were trying to bring new sponsors to the table when the corporate world was shredding staff and slashing expenditure.

The NZRU were desperate to bring fans back to the game, see stadium attendances rise at a time when petrol was soaring above $2 a litre, unemployment was climbing and discretionary expenditure in most households was disappearing.

However financial chaos didn't seem to affect the spending power of the major overseas club; able to offer ludicrous salaries to big name All Blacks putting greater pressure on wage structures here.

The external dramas intensified the challenge of steering rugby to a better place, but questions still have to be asked about the Tew reign.

Has the NZRU done all it could to promote and market the game? Has the focus been on professional rugby at the expense of the community game and were investments in the grass roots properly thought through and administered?

What about the notion of using the All Blacks as cash cows? Their programme has bloated, yet overall revenue has fallen in every year of Tew's reign.

Even in troubled financial times, the reach of the All Black brand has increased and while the family of key sponsors has grown, overall revenue has shrunk.

The provincial championship has been through several incarnations now without ever really capturing the public's hearts. Super Rugby also continues to suffer from falling attendances although viewership holds up.

Several provincial unions have been in serious financial trouble over the last three years, largely because the NZRU has not been able to curb the ridiculous expenditure of gung-ho provincial administrators who don't seem able to say no to players.

Maybe it's harsh to suggest they should be across what is happening at a micro- level in the provinces but would Tasman, Southland and Bay of Plenty have been in so much trouble if the NZRU had been able to implement a realistic and meaningful salary cap?

A holistic evaluation of the Tew era comes out favourably, though. There has been more good than bad.

Expenditure has risen but look at the key reason why - the bulk of the best players have opted to stay here.

Retaining Dan Carter and Richie McCaw came at a price but surely it's better to have them here and be dipping into reserves - there precisely to be dipped into in times of need. The All Blacks continue to be a hugely successful rugby team and even their worst recent year, 2009, saw them record a win ratio of almost 75 per cent.

Total playing numbers have risen every year since 2007, as have the numbers of coaches, referees and volunteers.

While the overall picture could possibly look better, it absolutely could be worse and the game here is stable, solvent, successful and potentially ready to capitalise from hosting the World Cup.

Player retention 9.5 / 10
This has been the hallmark of the Tew era as New Zealand has never before been able to keep so many key players for so long. There are 37 players who have played 50 tests or more for the All Blacks and nine of them were in the squad that won the Grand Slam last year.

The two men who top the appearance list, Richie McCaw and Mils Muliaina, are likely to be the first to win 100 test caps and later this year there could be five players in the World Cup squad with more than 80 test caps.

At times last season the All Blacks were able to put in excess of 740 caps on the field at any given time - a world record - and if Ali Williams and Sitiveni Sivivatu successfully return to the starting line-up, that collective number could push well past 800.

As a final testament to how much senior talent has stayed here, the question to ask is: How many former All Blacks currently playing overseas could still make the national team? The answer is two, and one would only make the bench: Nick Evans and Carl Hayman.

Financial management 6 / 10
The headline figures make for painful reading. In the three years Tew has been at the helm the NZRU made $400,000 profit in 2008, a $16m loss in 2009 and is expected to post about a $10m loss this year.

Player costs have risen - agreement was reached to increase the player payment pool to 36 per cent from 32 per cent in 2009. The strength of the Kiwi dollar and the costs of hosting the World Cup have been the other key factors behind the losses.

The more relevant measure is revenue - which has dropped from $103m in 2007 to $101m in 2008 to $97m in 2009. Some of that is linked to the broadcast and adidas sponsorship deals - which are both paid in foreign currency worth less due to the higher Kiwi dollar.

The confusing part is that in the last three years the NZRU has secured an international sponsor in Iveco, extended the adidas contract and struck domestic deals with the like of Rexona, Barkers, BNZ and Investec.

The All Blacks have also played more and more tests. They played 15 tests and a game against Munster in 2008 which generated $7.8m of new revenue; 14 tests in 2009 (one in Tokyo and one in Cardiff for significant sums) and 14 in 2010 (one in Hong Kong and one in London for direct payment). Yet total revenue has fallen in every year.

Community game 7 / 10
The NZRU can't be accused of not supporting the community game. They have a programme in place to spend up to $20m. The restructuring of Super Rugby and provincial rugby had to allow a clear window for club rugby.

Anecdotally there are reports that club finals have been well supported in the last few years and proof that development programmes are working has come in the continued success of the national age-grade sides.

Player numbers 7.5 / 10
Overall playing numbers have moderately increased each year of the Tew reign. There were 136,059 in 2007; 140,279 in 2008; 145,472 in 2009.

With many other sports such as football and triathlon enjoying unprecedented levels of funding and popularity, rugby has had to battle to win hearts and minds. The biggest realisation made by Tew is that no one can be complacent and believe the default sport of young New Zealanders is rugby.

Money has been made available to hire development officers in schools to recruit players and the key statistic to credit is the growth in numbers in the junior grades. Initiatives such as the Small Blacks have been popular and effective.

Where the NZRU has not achieved its goals is in retention. The dropout rate of teenage players remains high - close to 50 per cent of 13-year-olds won't be playing by the time they are 18.

Competitions 6 / 10
The provincial championship has been unnecessarily tortured in recent years. In 2008 and 2009 it lived with an axe over its head only for a reprieve to be granted on both occasions. The uncertainty and the late changes in thinking made it hard for unions to retain players and sponsors. Super Rugby has begun a new phase that could generate greater interest and the decision to cut the Tri Nations to two rounds and introduce Argentina has enthused several key players.

Spectator numbers 6 / 10
The NZRU can't be held entirely responsible for waning spectator interest across all levels of the game. Provincial unions and Super Rugby franchises are accountable too and some of the blame for the decline is down to their lack of innovation.

While big clashes can still generate big crowds, average spectator numbers across the Super Rugby grounds have declined.

In 2008 there was an overall 17 per cent drop in spectators across Super Rugby. The mood is set from the top and when the All Blacks can't sell every ticket for every home test it alludes to the lack of enterprise and disconnect that exists. 2009 was the nadir when thousands of tickets were unsold for the All Blacks' clash against Italy. Even Tri Nations tests have struggled to sell out in the last few years.

Several common theories exist to explain the decline: there is too much rugby; too many other options open to people. At the start of 2010 Tew admitted mistakes had been made:

"Some of the things that we did, rightly or wrongly about trying to win the World Cup, meant that a long period of growth and popularity started to wane. It has not been consistent and across everything but enough to worry everybody."

The NZRU took the public for granted. They thought the love for the All Blacks was unconditional. They also focused too hard on the broadcast experience. Rugby in New Zealand is set up perfectly for the armchair viewer but the stadium experience is often dire. Overpriced tickets for uncovered seats; long queues for greasy overpriced junk food; late kick-offs and phenomenally dull pre-match entertainment.