Rugby: NZ sides closer to own contracts

New Zealand's franchises are on track to be granted their wish of being able to contract players directly.

Rather than have every player recruited through the New Zealand Rugby Union, then aligned to a franchise depending on which province they join, Super 14 bosses want to be able to sign who they want and be more in control of their own playing roster.

If the franchises are able to sign players directly, they will be able to determine player payments and the length of contracts offered.

It's also likely the franchises would have to be given control of their own budgets and that geography may cease to be so important in determining where players end up.

Hurricanes chief executive Greg Peters says that feasibility work continues to be done on the switch to direct contracting but the indications are so far positive that it can be introduced.

"All the franchises have a favourable view of direct contracting," said Peters. "It is seen as desirable. It should produce settled squads and we might be able to do away with the draft system.

"There is a workstream ongoing into this and the issues are around the mechanisms of how you do it."

Some franchises believe they have lost players in the past because the NZRU has held a conflicting view as to what they might be worth.

There have also been several examples of players not being able to make it into the franchise for which they are 'eligible' due to each team being able to protect only 24 of their 28-man squad.

Nick Evans, Craig Newby, Hosea Gear and Brent Ward have been some of the higher profile names forced to move to find a contract.

But while there are obvious benefits to switching to a direct system, it will throw up new problems that will need to be carefully managed.

"There is recognition and agreement that the centralised contracting system in New Zealand is the envy of the world," says Peters.

"You don't have to look too far north to see the effect heavy recruitment of overseas players can have on the performance of a national team.

"It would not be desirable to have five first-fives in our franchises who are not eligible to play for the All Blacks. We would need to have controls and restraints. This is all on the table for discussion right now. The ultimate goal is to design the best competition in the world that attracts and retains the best players."

Those restraints that Peters mentions would be in place to ensure that the ability of the All Blacks to win tests was not compromised by any new system. The franchises would be free to recruit their own squads but Peters says that would still be done through constant and open communication with the national body.

Other questions also have to be asked in regard to accountability and responsibility of budgets.

One proposal is for the NZRU to determine its typical total annual spend on Super 14 and then divide that by five and hand the money to each franchise. They would then be responsible for managing and spending that budget as they saw fit. But the NZRU are believed to be reluctant to hand franchises that level of financial control.

The existing system of picking 24 players from within a franchise's 'catchment zone' would also have to be reviewed. It's likely that franchises would still pick the bulk of their squads from players based within their locality. However, there would be more opportunity to approach players from outside the region.

At the moment, players can only transfer their provincial contracts and that in turn leads them to being 'eligible' for a different Super 14 franchise. Under direct contracting, the Blues for example, could make a top dollar offer to Stephen Brett to lure him from the Crusaders.

Peters says there is still much work ahead to come up with a workable system that can be signed off and put into operation.