KEY POINTS:
The on-field clashes may be over, but a war between the nation's rugby unions is only just beginning.
With an expanded national championship beset by spiraling player costs, dwindling incomes and widely disparate ambitions, city-based financial heavyweights such as Auckland, Wellington and Canterbury are on a collision course with struggling small-town unions.
Official New Zealand Rugby Union documents obtained by the Herald show costs associated with the 14-team Air New Zealand Cup have continued to rise while the earning power of many unions has declined.
Television audiences have nose-dived and attendances at many marquee play-off games were so poor they were run at a loss.
The Weekend Herald this week spoke to the chief executives of nine Cup unions. Most agreed the competition was unsustainable in its current format.
The views on what should be done to save a competition that appears to be in its death throes are split along financial and geographical lines.
The four most recent additions to the competition - Hawkes Bay, Manawatu, Tasman and Counties - believed their inclusion had been positive but costs needed to be slashed.
The big three unions - Auckland, Wellington and Canterbury - argued that a reduction in the number of teams needed to happen sooner rather than later.
There is little common ground.
"I am utterly convinced [the format] is not sustainable going forward," said Wellington chief executive Greg Peters. "There is one professional soccer team in this country and one professional league team. Why do we think we [can sustain] 14 professional rugby teams?
"What is the sustainable level of provincial rugby in a market the size of New Zealand? That is the crux of this issue.
"The professional level isn't 14 teams. It might be six or it might be eight and we need to celebrate that."
NZRU deputy chief executive Steve Tew, however, wasn't convinced a pared down competition was the way to go.
"There were suggestions from some of the unions that we might go to a six-team competition and play home and away. But I wonder how many people would have watched Wellington play Canterbury for a third time this year?"
An elite competition comprising of just the major unions would be like rerunning Super 14, he said.
"My personal view is: would the fans be even more tired of the product if we were repeating the same big teams playing each other?
"One thing the 14-team competition has done is given a wider base of New Zealand's population an opportunity to participate.
"That has been reflected by good crowds in Hawkes Bay, encouraging crowds in Tasman and okay crowds in Manawatu. Counties is still a challenge but that part of Auckland is not an easy place for us to crack. But it has got to be attempted because there is a very important part of our rugby playing population live there."
One of the features of this year's competition was its success in the expansion unions.
Hawkes Bay were the darlings of this year's tournament but there was also cause for celebration in Blenhiem and Nelson, Tasman's formative unions.
The stadiums in both towns were being substantially upgraded and the communities had rallied behind the team, said chief executive Lee Germon.
"We've seen a real boost in terms of parochialism with people wearing the Makos jerseys and we've seen our young players really aspire now to be Makos.
"Previously, Nelson Bays and Marlborough didn't quite have that same ring to it. Now when you ask our young players what they want to be, they want to be a Mako. That's really healthy for the region."
But North Harbour chief executive Brett Hollister believed the inclusion of the new teams had hurt the competition.
"We are creating more opportunities for players but I am not sure the standard is high," said Hollister.
"The New Zealand rugby market is very mature and discerning. They grow up on the game so they understand when they are being served quality and when they are not.
"When you take the best players out and add four more teams, I don't necessarily believe you are creating a better competition."
Another major issue is the inflationary impact the expansion has had on the player market.
Many players were commanding five times the salary of two years ago, said Manawatu chief executive Hadyn Smith.
With not enough quality players to meet demand, unions were being forced into choosing between financial prudence and a desire to be competitive.
"The Catch 22 is, do you let players go and risk being at the bottom end of the competition or do you secure those players but put yourself at financial risk? It is a situation we all have to make a decision on."
Having overspent and still finishing second-bottom, Bay of Plenty have made their decision.
"We just won't be spending as much," said outgoing chief executive Paul Abbot. "That will have an impact on the number and quality of players we can contract. And it won't just be us. You'll probably see it happening across the range. A number of unions are going to go down that path simply for survival. It is just going to be a fact of life."
While that might seem a recipe for even greater mismatches, that might not be the case, said Auckland chief executive Andy Dalton.
"Most of the unions, if not all, are under pressure. I think we are all having a look at how we can cut costs."
There is more to the issue than just the best interests of the provincial unions.
The competition needs to fit into a complex programme that includes club, Super 14 and international rugby, said Tew.
The NZRU is committed to a third season of the Cup in its current format but beyond that it will be subject to a review.
That review, possibly to be held as early as January next year, will likely determine the shape of New Zealand's national competition for years to come.
