Please World Rugby, ban the Haka

[nickdnz]

Yeah, I'm going to have to respectfully disagree there. I have no problem with a team silently advancing on the ABs, but noise that drowns out the haka? No, it shouldn't be allowed. I do think that's disrespectful because it's like an audience that heckles over a public speaker. Heckling = disrespect, and so singing, chanting, yelling, or anything else during the haka would amount to heckling, which is a disrespectful action.

das

100% my view. There are plenty of responses I love, advancing on the haka like France or not moving like Wales. All great - but singing over the top of it, especially when it is 23 people performing to 80,000 is simply disrespectful. But again I'll just be called precious.

 

[dasNdanger]

100% my view. There are plenty of responses I love, advancing on the haka like France or not moving like Wales. All great - but singing over the top of it, especially when it is 23 people performing to 80,000 is simply disrespectful. But again I'll just be called precious.

(And before you delete this as OT, remember...you can't be a mod, from NZ no less, dangling around the word 'precious' and not expect us to take the bait. )


Also - HAKA!





das

 

[The_Wol]

Critical ... no ... just a little disappointed ... I asked for a wake up call back in March on another unique thread

http://www.therugbyforum.com/threads/32882-Rugby-Union-A-History-of-Cheating?p=630683#post630683

Called it

 

[Kapa O Pango]

Buck Shelford frowns upon this thread.

 

[Rich Taff]

Ok I'll set the backdrop for this story:

It's a couple hundred years ago there is a lot of tribal unrest in NZ. Te Rauparaha cheif of Ngati Toa tribe goes on his way to travel and try an find allies in other tribes, Another tribe Ngati te Aho, had beef with Te Rauparaha (for another altercation) sent a war party to find him and make him pay (NZ was in beast mode in these days and the currency was blood) he got wind of the party chasing him and was helped by a leader of another tribe who got him to hide in a kumara( sweet potato) pit. When Ngati Te Aho arrived it is said he muttered (while hiding In the pit)
Ka mate Ka mate/ I die I die
Ka Ora ka ora/ I live I live
He said this not knowing if they will find him or not.
In the end they didn't an the rest if the haka is the rest of the tale.
There are thousand of haka in NZ, ka mate is the most famous one by far it's pretty much a celebration of survival, nothing to do with the team.
Kapa o pango (team in black) is the all black haka.

Thanks, knew I'd heard something like that.

 

[bertiec]

offend the traditional mores? Richie? Dan Carter? European descent most of them. bugger off back to your own touch line for a game chat let them get on with it. or maybe get bruce on to start the dancing.

 

[smartcooky]

Ban "Swing Low, Sweet Chariot". Its a racist chant and the hand actions are offensive

Ban "God Defend New Zealand". Its offensive to Atheists and Agnostics. While we're at it, ban "God Save the Queen", because in addition to the aforementioned, it is also offensive to Republicans

Ban "La Marseillaise", because its a blood-thirty a call to violence with disturbing imagery.

Ban "Land of Our Fathers" because the Welsh crowds are such great singers they gee up their home crowd and that it gives them an unfair advantage.

All pre-match cultural displays should be replaced with and exhibition of Morris Dancing. On second thoughts, ban Morris Dancing! Who wants to see a bunch of middle-aged poofters with bells tied to their ankles, poncing around and waving hankies.

All of these make as the same amount of sense as banning the Haka.... none!!!


ETA: snd before any idiots pop-up in faux outrage, I'd just to make it clear, that this post is a p¡ss take!

 

[TRF_Olyy]

"God Save the Queen", because in addition to the aforementioned, it is also offensive to Republicans

Surely this just means we should crank it louder?

 

[goodNumber10]

Ban "Swing Low, Sweet Chariot". Its a racist chant and the hand actions are offensive

Er, think you've got that one a bit backwards.

While we're at it, ban "God Save the Queen", because in addition to the aforementioned, it is also offensive to Republicans

it's awful, would much rather Jerusalem.

All of these make as the same amount of sense as banning the Haka.... none!!!

I agree, it should be moved to before the anthems though, it's deeply insulting that the home nations Anthem is usurped by 23 preening cockatoos

 

[Shaggy]

100% my view. There are plenty of responses I love, advancing on the haka like France or not moving like Wales. All great - but singing over the top of it, especially when it is 23 people performing to 80,000 is simply disrespectful. But again I'll just be called precious.

I agree - the "challenge" is to the opposing team, not the opposing teams fans. To my eyes (or perhaps ears), it's no different from the home fans singing over top of the visiting fans national anthem

 

[Noodle]

I agree - the "challenge" is to the opposing team, not the opposing teams fans. To my eyes (or perhaps ears), it's no different from the home fans singing over top of the visiting fans national anthem

But you have your national anthem as well. That gets respected. Then you challenged the other team. But the challenge is supposed to happen in the game, not before. Lots of fans see themselves as part of the team when at home games, they are there to help the team to victory - "the 16th man." The challenge should be met by the whole stadium if it is to be made not in the match.

The haka is good. New Zealand can not expect everyone to stand around quietly while they do what they want in the other team's home however.

 

[Shaggy]

But you have your national anthem as well. That gets respected. Then you challenged the other team. But the challenge is supposed to happen in the game, not before. Lots of fans see themselves as part of the team when at home games, they are there to help the team to victory - "the 16th man." The challenge should be met by the whole stadium if it is to be made not in the match.

The haka is good. New Zealand can not expect everyone to stand around quietly while they do what they want in the other team's home however.

Yes, all nations have a national anthem, yes, it gets respected - is it not possible to acknowledge and respect something that is important to another nation, that is derived from Polynesian roots, as well as something that comes from European roots (the anthem).

Where did I say that I speak for the whole of New Zealand ... I was merely expressing my opinion that singing by the crowd over top of it, is disrespectful, as they aren't the ones being challenged. If the opposing team wants to respond to it by singing, fantastic.

Your "16th man" argument is fine (IMO), after the Anthems and Haka ... sing away as loudly as you like, past All Blacks have said that it's pretty intimidating to hear during the match.

 

[goodNumber10]

I just don't get why it should be the last thing that happens before a game kicks off..... that should be the place for the home teams anthem.

 

[Rich Taff]

I just don't get why it should be the last thing that happens before a game kicks off..... that should be the place for the home teams anthem.

I can see your point there. The origins of the Anthems being sung after the Haka (as I mentioned previously) would certainly back it up.

I just think it's a great part of the game, and see no reason why anyone would want to get rid of it. The polynesia v polynesia haka in one of the world cups (think it was Tonga V Fiji) was incredible, as they both did it at the same time and it 'flowed' offering an incredible spectacle.

 

[smartcooky]

The haka is good. New Zealand can not expect everyone to stand around quietly while they do what they want in the other team's home however.

A myth and a strawman of World Rugby's making!

No-one in New Zealand (or at least, no-one who knows anything at all about Maori) is arguing that this should happen. Ask any Maori elder and they will tell you that how you respond to haka is YOUR CHOICE. If you want to stand still and face it, you can do that. If you want to advance on it, you can do that, if you want to sing all the way through it, you can do that.

No Maori will question your choice of how to respond.

I love the way the Irish responded in 1989 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=weUHwCjeD7s

I loved the Mexican stand-off that the Welsh employed in 2008 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fYIUdVNFgU&feature=related

I loved the "in-ya-face" by Cokers and Norm Hewitt at Twickenham in 1997 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hOZRHpleH8

Challenge and Response. That is what Haka is all about!!!

It is the WR (formerly the iRB who have dictated how opponents must respond, so stop blaming Kiwis for this state of affairs... it was not our doing and we generally do not agree with it.

 

[goodNumber10]

A myth and a strawman of World Rugby's making!

No-one in New Zealand (or at least, no-one who knows anything at all about Maori) is arguing that this should happen. Ask any Maori elder and they will tell you that how you respond to haka is YOUR CHOICE. If you want to stand still and face it, you can do that. If you want to advance on it, you can do that, if you want to sing all the way through it, you can do that.

No Maori will question your choice of how to respond.

I love the way the Irish responded in 1989 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=weUHwCjeD7s

I loved the Mexican stand-off that the Welsh employed in 2008 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fYIUdVNFgU&feature=related

I loved the "in-ya-face" by Cokers and Norm Hewitt at Twickenham in 1997 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hOZRHpleH8

Challenge and Response. That is what Haka is all about!!!

It is the WR (formerly the iRB who have dictated how opponents must respond, so stop blaming Kiwis for this state of affairs... it was not our doing and we generally do not agree with it.

this is just not true... The Haka protocol is a direct result of New Zealand throwing their toys out of the Pram in 2006, Wales then asked the IRB to advise on a protocol moving forward because up until that point New Zealand absolutely DID dictate what happened. NZRFU were fully consulted in the process and have fed directly into the current protocol.

The slinking off to do it in the shed is an example of the Kiwi's NOT allowing anything to interfere with the Haka and was only decided on the day despite the Welsh advising them weeks in advance that they wanted the Anthems last, McCaw even slags the Welsh off in his biography for not respecting the Maori Culture yada yada.

It's all very well New Zelanders saying "we dont' want this, no New Zealander is bothered etc.... but the fact is the NZRFU DO want this as it maintains it's pre-match center piece and continues to bring in the revenue. it's completely disingenuous to put the blame on everyone else.

 

[smartcooky]

this is just not true... The Haka protocol is a direct result of New Zealand throwing their toys out of the Pram in 2006, Wales then asked the IRB to advise on a protocol moving forward because up until that point New Zealand absolutely DID dictate what happened. NZRFU were fully consulted in the process and have fed directly into the current protocol.

You will, of course be able to provide actual evidence for this?

No?

Thought not!

By the way, be careful before calling me a liar.

Also by the way, what happened in Wales in 2006 HAS NOTHING WHATSOEVER TO DO WITH THE WR REQUIREMENT THAT OPPONENTS REMAIN STATIONARY AT THE 10M LINE

 

[goodNumber10]

Where do i call you a liar then? I said your claims are not true very very different.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/6187320.stm

Mr Lewis told the BBC the WRU had informed their New Zealand counterparts of their plans to respond to the haka several weeks ago.

He said: "The match protocol outlining the order of events had been set by the Welsh Rugby Union to the New Zealand Rugby Union on 16 October. However, the WRU were only officially informed by New Zealand on the morning of the match that the haka was not going to be performed.

This kind of brinkmanship is not good for rugby, it's not fair on the fans."

Mr Lewis added that the WRU would write to world rugby's governing body, the IRB, to "suggest that a worldwide protocol for the haka is agreed to by all".

'Valid response'

Professor Piri Sciascia, pro vice-chancellor Maori at Victoria University in Wellington, New Zealand, was consulted by the WRU over appropriate responses to the haka.

He said: "I don't recall a discussion that discussed the protocol of putting the haka between the national anthems.

"I was as surprised as anyone else on Sunday morning our time to see the haka not being performed.

"What I envisaged at the time is the kind of traditional Welsh singing of the national anthem or some national song in response after the haka, but something quite separate from the two formal national anthems where people stand to attention."

He added: "The advice that I was being asked about was around the validity as to whether or not the Welsh national anthem was a valid response.

"I said yes it was valid to respond and in fact whatever the way in which the Welsh people responded to the haka - that's up to them."

All Blacks captain Richie McCaw accused the WRU of trying to "mess around" with the traditions of the haka.

He said: "The tradition needs to be honoured properly if we're going to do it. If the other team wants to mess around, we'll just do the haka in the shed [changing room]."

All Blacks head coach Graham Henry said he believed it had been agreed that 2005's match, which saw the haka followed by the Welsh anthem, was a one-off.

He said: "We agreed to the change last year but we had a guarantee it wouldn't happen again. But they (the WRU) asked us to do the same this year and we said no."

 

[smartcooky]

Where do i call you a liar then? I said your claims are not true very very different.

"this is just not true..."

Any way you slice it, if you say that my claims are untrue, then you care calling me a liar.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/6187320.stm

1. All of which is very interesting but none of it has anything whatsoever to do with what I am talking about, i.e. the WR requirement that opponents must remain stationary at the 10m line

2. A biased article published in a Welsh media outlet is not evidence, its opinion. Evidence would be an NZRU or WR official press release stating who requested what.

 

[goodNumber10]

"this is just not true..."

Any way you slice it, if you say that my claims are untrue, then you care calling me a liar.

Don't be ridicolous.

2. A biased article published in a Welsh media outlet is not evidence, its opinion. Evidence would be an NZRU or WR official press release stating who requested what.