I think the NZRU and New Zealand owe Japan even less if that's the stance we're taking.
The point I'm making is that if you want to come out and say you can't fit a match with Fiji in because of a busy schedule, only to then announce a match with Japan, it looks a bit silly doesn't it? Philippe Saint-Andre almost hinted as much in some interview bites on the news today.
Why not just say, no, we're not sending these guys to Fiji because there's no money in it? Because, reading between the lines here, that's the reason. It's not that they want to develop the game in Japan, because if they wanted to develop the game they'd be playing against the islands and other cash strapped teams. A busy schedule wasn't an issue when they played Australia in Hong Kong a couple of years ago, either.
Of course it isn't to do with busy schedule that they don't play Fiji. If you believed that in the first place you were stupid. The NZRU and Steve Tew are notoriously very profit concerned and as long as he is there he will not be acting as charity. Like it or not, that's the reality.
Secondly, playing Japan will actually do far more for developing the game in Japan than playing in Fiji would. The reality of Fiji is that they will likely never be able to reach beyond a point whilst being amongst the lowest nations GDP and population wise.
If New Zealand were to play Fiji, it wouldn't suddenly change any of the problems with player release, low GDP, and low infrastructure. It wouldn't even make them that much money (in fact I think they moved a match to New Zealand once in hope of getting a bit more for themselves once? And I know Samoa did this for a match against Scotland once). So basically, if New Zealand were to play, it would still be the same the next year. And would lose New Zealand money.
Compare that to playing against Japan. Who have far less Tier 1 matches and exposure to higher level rugby than Fiji or the Fijian players have, it will be a big boost with dwindling interest there ahead of the 2019 World Cup (I expect the All Blacks will be getting a pat on the back from the IRB for this), and will get a lot more money into both Japan and New Zealand rugby. So it does far more the Japan national team, the 2019 World Cup, and both Japan and New Zealand's piggy banks than playing in Fiji which would change nothing about Fiji but hurt New Zealand's accounts.
Look at how much value the Fijian dollar has to compared to other currencies. They would be playing in about a 15,000 ground there with the fans paying money that would be far cheaper in value compared to an expected minimum 27,000 (possible 50,00 it is deemed big enough for a bigger stadium in Tokyo) of fans paying prices that of a far higher value in the Japanese currency. Add to that Japan will attract much higher market of sponsors to contribute to expenses, and will be able to pay the appearance fee for the All Blacks.
All Blacks playing in Fiji does nothing for the development of Fiji. It may seem a harsh truth but the reality is with Fiji - the sport can't get any more attention or be anymore popular there. What would develop rugby in Fiji is firstly the IRB taking a stronger stance allowing/enforcing Fiji's best players playing for Fiji. I wouldn't be suprised if the 'Classical All Blacks' as over the hill as some of them are - don't still manage to win convincingly over the Fiji team that Fiji can present. Playing Fiji in Fiji brings significantly less money to Fiji than if they play here.
Agree with all of this. Haven't one of Fiji or Samoa or both moved matches to New Zealand to get more money before?
Tonga also had the chance to host Scotland last year, but it was cancelled due them failing to be able to pay for some very basic expenses or something so Scotland played Australia instead, and that was with large IRB help yet they still couldn't host Scotland. That just sums up the financial incapability of the Pacific Islanders we are talking about here.
4. Maybe it does seem dishonest - but I think New Zealand places far too much sentimentality towards rugby in the Pacific Islands. We still do more for Tonga and Samoa than anyone, Samoa especially. We don't owe countries anything because we have a large Polynesian population - whatever the All Blacks get from developing players who have Pacific origins, those countries get back by esentially poaching off us. There are plenty of teams the All Blacks don't help out - we've never played a test match against an African nation other than South Africa! Yet for some reason because of geographical proximity we seem to owe Fiji a crapload, which with the political stance Fiji has taken in the last decade - its interesting that we seem to feel we owe them anything at all!
I've seen the Samoan rugby fan pages and they are full of crap about how big evil New Zealand are nicking all their players. It strange that they seem to think that every single player of Samoan descent is poached. For example they were moaning about the All Blacks capping Samoan born, New Zealand educated Laulala twice, whilst they themselves have about about 10 times as many New Zealand born and New Zealand educated players of Samoan descent in their team. For every Laulala they lose (even though it's not as if they've lost someone who spent their whole life in Samoa), they gain about 10 players like Paul Williams (who is captaining them this June) or Kahn Fotuali'i.
I saw Samoan rugby fan page claiming Japan had two Samoans in their team as well (Hendrik Tui and Male Sau, both New Zealand born and educated), yet Tui who moved to Japan as a teenager will have spent far more time in Japan than he has in Samoa.
I know there are exceptions such as Sivivatu who is more poach, but that certainly isn't the norm as they portray, and every nation does it and many more than New Zealand do it.
In fact France will have more Fijian poaches in their side this June, alongside two South African ones yet they don't get any criticism about that. Nobody ever says how France should be playing poor African teams that they have Dusautoir, Nyanga and Betsen who were all born there and were French educated.
uhmm...obvious question: why the hell would the AB play Japan in a test match ?
Is it purely marketing ? because from an actual sports/rugby perspective this isn't exactly an interesting event...I mean I love poundings, and the AB looked absolutely sumptuous and majestic last time they played Japan in the '11 pools but....a test match.
What, they going to send their 3rd stringers or smt ?
This really is quite a stupid and ignorant post. Do some research on New Zealand's historical record against numerous teams, what strength of teams they have play against Italy these days, and why Japan might have lost so badly in 2011.
I bet you would rather have New Zealand play Australia like 10 times a year and allow the sport to end up with the global credibility of Rugby League.
