Rugby: Bath sojourn appeals as crunch time looms

Pat Lam. Photo / APN

Pat Lam has managed to dispel speculation he'll be heading to Bath later this year without actually saying he won't be.

If he decides to shift to England, he'll at least be with a club whose vision and ambition on the field is matched by that of their desires off it.

Whether Lam is genuinely top-notch coaching material is debatable. This season is the one from which he can't escape judgement: this is year four - a point where stories about better structures, cultures and performances won't wash. The sole arbiter in 2012 will be results.

A dire performance last week has heightened the pressure, as did unprecedented comments by Blues chief executive Andy Dalton following that game.

Lam wouldn't disagree with Dalton's assessment - the performance was undeniably awful - but he, along with the senior players, might wonder why the chief executive felt the need to be so publicly critical.

Dirty washing is always best cleaned in private. But there is also the question of whose job it is to clean it. Dalton's colleagues are tacitly silent through the good and the bad - understanding it's best to leave the playing side to the coach and players.

Whether such divisions of labour apply at the Blues is not clear. Having a former All Black captain as a chief executive is fraught - any Blues coach would wonder whether he was being judged from above. Lam perhaps has particular reason to be uneasy, as the Blues also have former All Blacks Gary Whetton and Grant Fox on their eight-man board. No other franchise board has such a high proportion of rugby luminaries.

Lam might have more cause to wonder now Dalton has spoken out. It's one thing to feel the heat from a fervent media and support, again to wonder if there might even be enemies within the tent.

Coaching can be an isolated business and paranoia could easily set in. But Lam wouldn't be out of order to question if the current executive team are doing all they can to support and grow the organisation.

The Crusaders, certainly before the earthquake, had a clear vision. They have regularly played pre-season games in Melbourne to build support and have pushed Sanzar to host games outside the current geographic. They have a powerful, marketable brand and want to build it. They have never had any issues attracting players - Israel Dagg, Zac Guildford, Sean Maitland, Tom Donnelly; big names have been persuaded to sign.

It's been a bit different at the Blues. What is the scope of their vision? The fact it's not clear is a major indictment. There has been talk of building a high performance centre but no concrete commitment.

There has been some success in luring players - most notably Ma'a Nonu and Piri Weepu but both were distress acquisitions in that they needed/wanted to move on quickly and choice was limited.

Weepu had previously rejected the Blues, as had Aaron Cruden, Dan Carter, Beauden Barrett, Jonny Wilkinson, Juan Martin Hernandez, Tom Marshall and Sonny Bill Williams.

When so many players feel they would be better off elsewhere, questions have to be asked. Perhaps historic issues of provincial bickering are deterrents. When Nick Evans left the Highlanders and Otago in 2007, Auckland signed him even though Harbour wanted him. Evans grew up on the North Shore and played five seasons for Harbour.

It was the same with Troy Flavell - the impression was that the battle wasn't getting him to sign with the Blues in 2006 - it was persuading him to reject Harbour for Auckland, despite the fact he was never likely to play because of All Black commitments.

Trouble really brewed in 2010 when North Harbour Stadium lost hosting rights to the Tri Nations test against the Springboks. Auckland objected after the NZRU had awarded the game to their neighbours - arguing there was a legal obligation for Eden Park to host one test a season despite the ground having a capacity then of about 20,000. It was Harbour's 25th anniversary in 2010.

Perhaps the most damaging evidence of Auckland's lack of vision is yet to come. Provincial rugby is in dire financial straits. The ITM Cup is glorified club rugby and the competition is largely about developing players for Super Rugby.

The 50,000-capacity Eden Park is clearly not the right place for Auckland to play. The prospect of 5000-10,000 rattling around is not compelling, and then there is expense: it is thought to cost about $100,000 just to open the stadium.

A union with some foresight and ambition may have pre-empted this inevitability and begun looking for, or even building, a more suitable venue.

"We don't have any plans to play anywhere else other than Eden Park," says Dalton. "We are in negotiations with the Eden Park Trust around the issue of costs and hopefully we can find ways for those to be reduced."

Near-billionaire Bruce Craig bought Bath in 2010. The flamboyant executive is desperate to return the club to its former status as the biggest and best in Europe. Right now, Lam may be finding the prospect of shifting to the south-west of England more than a little appealing.