NZ plea for a World Cup bailout

By WYNNE GRAY

While New Zealand continues to protest it is on track for the 2003 World Cup, it has not disclosed a meeting asking for financial relief from Australia.

About a fortnight ago, the Herald understands, NZRFU officials asked for help and were told the ARU could bail them out with a multi-million-dollar deal.

But as compensation, Australia demanded that New Zealand relinquish a World Cup pool or a semifinal. The ARU could then use those matches to regenerate the money it had given to the NZRFU.

A statement early yesterday from NZRFU chief executive David Rutherford said New Zealand was set to host 12 World Cup games including a semifinal.

But when the Herald pointed out, late in that day, that 12 games meant New Zealand would host a solitary pool involving five teams, a quarterfinal and semifinal, Rutherford amended his mathematics.

He changed New Zealand's host arrangements to 24 games - two pools, two quarters, a semifinal and playoff - for the 2003 tournament.

Rutherford's initial assessment, though, did have the look of a Freudian slip, especially after the Herald discovered the NZRFU's transtasman trip to seek financial assistance.

New Zealand has denied consistently there are World Cup dramas amid reports of a "leaked" draw, trouble between the host countries and even suggestions that the tournament might be moved to the northern hemisphere.

About three months ago, the NZRFU first questioned whether Australia, on its behalf, might ask the IRB for some monetary help.

After working through its World Cup budgets, the NZRFU felt it was heading for a multi-million-dollar deficit at the 2003 event. It planned to stage games throughout New Zealand in the belief that it should showcase the sport to as many areas as possible - but that would increase costs.

Like the hosts, New Zealand had agreed to keep the revenue less costs it made from the tournament.

The problem was that the NZRFU was looking at a loss, the Australians at a significant profit.

About a fortnight ago, NZRFU chairman Murray McCaw, new board member Craig Norgate and Rutherford met the Australians.

It is believed Australia indicated it would write a cheque for about $US10 million ($23.7 million) to allow the sub-hosts a substantial World Cup profit.

In exchange it wanted the NZRFU to give up either one pool or a semifinal and that deal was refused.

The tournament schedule, venues and dates are likely to be confirmed next month.

The recent continued impasse with Australia probably accounted for Rutherford's repeat comment.

"There is a semifinal in New Zealand. There has been no suggestion to make any changes," he said.

After what appears to be a stalemate between Australia and New Zealand, the IRB may be tempted to become more assertive in its demands on the southern hemisphere hosts.

Meanwhile the NZRFU is likely to re-sign Jonah Lomu today to a new contract to take him past the World Cup.

And after yesterday's deadline passed for potential All Blacks to declare if they were unavailable for the end of year trip to Ireland, Scotland and Argentina, the NZRFU said it would reveal any non-starters today.

While some players have expressed concern, it seems the list will be player-free.