O'Neill defends World Cup ultimatum
Australian rugby boss John O’Neill believes that the threat from the New Zealand Rugby Union (NZRU) to boycott the 2015 World Cup was entirely warranted considering the current commercial agreements in place.
During the recent World Cup NZRU boss Steve Tew dropped a bombshell with the revelation that the All Blacks would not attend the next global showpiece unless certain financial arrangements are reviewed.
The central problem is that the SANZAR nations lose out on millions of dollars every World Cup year due to the IRB’s current rules surrounding advertising which prevent teams from giving their sponsors the kind of exposure they would like in addition to the loss of revenue which results from playing fewer games.
The reality is that as a result the Australian Rugby Union (ARU) are set to post a A$8 million ($7.80 million) loss for 2011 following a World Cup campaign which effectively cost them A$16 million while the NZRU have taken a NZ$13 million ($9.65 million) hit, a situation which both O’Neill and Tew believe to be untenable.
2015 may seem like a long way away, but O’Neill is adamant that the threat laid down by his counterpart in New Zealand was not premature.
“I don’t think so… what hadn’t been in the public arena was how much angst and aggravation there had been behind the scenes,” he told Reuters in an interview on Monday.
“It just hadn’t arrived in the public arena. So, a fair bit of it was born out of frustration.”
O’Neill admitted that threatening to boycott the next World Cup while the tournament was on the go in New Zealand was probably a careful piece of timing on Tew’s part to ensure that the threat got as much traction as possible.
“Probably with all the rugby world media (in attendance) it probably wasn’t a bad time to say it straight up, particularly coming from the New Zealand Rugby Union. You couldn’t foresee a World Cup happening without the All Blacks, indeed without the Wallabies or the Springboks,” he explained.
After Tew made his sensational threat the IRB released a statement saying that they were committed to negotiating with all stakeholders, but chief executive Mike Miller seemed to be trying to call the NZRU’s bluff when he said that any team was replaceable.
Although a World Cup boycott may seem extreme it is probably more a case of political posturing as both sides seek to reach a compromise that will favour them.
O’Neill believes that the initial threat was successful in a way and he remains hopeful that both sides will be able to reach a solution before any other drastic measures are taken.
He said: “We’ve certainly had an indication that our concerns are being taken seriously. Sitting here today we don’t have an answer but we expect to get one.”
“There’s an acceptance certainly by the 10 major nations that the formula is too much of a burden. I think we’ll get a sympathetic outcome and so I don’t want to be suggesting any boycotts or anything like that. I’ve got faith that we’ll get a resolution,” added O’Neill.
