Much has already been said about the idea of several of New Zealand's top sporting bodies signing a statement of intent to make major changes to the way they will deliver the sporting experience to participants in their respective codes.
Specifically, the codes will be attempting to address the falling numbers in their sports, particularly the plummeting numbers of young people staying in a particular sport.
Generally, there are good numbers of youngsters playing sport for pleasure or competition until the teenage years arrive.
There tends to be a big drop in numbers at the age of about 13 years, before levelling out for a year or two, followed by another big dive at age 15-16.
Neither of these dives in participants are ever recovered.
SportNZ boss Peter McSkimming says change must start by addressing how parents perceive sport, as their attitudes tend to colour the experiences they wish for their children, which usually mirror their own experiences while growing up.
"We're not saying winning is not important, just that there is an over-emphasis [on winning] through adult expectations."
As well, there is an increasing emphasis on early specialisation, as demonstrated by the proliferation of representative tournaments and talent scouts head-hunting potential recruits at primary and secondary school sports tournaments.
Mike Hosking disagrees. He claims the projected move away from an emphasis on winning and specialisation will lead to mediocrity.
"Turning up beats coming first. Participation beats a medal. Collaborative goodwill beats a place on the podium."
Then he shoots his own argument down by saying his own kids, who have all competed successfully at a national level, have now dropped their sports.
Sports commentator Hamish Bidwell is similarly dismissive on Radio NZ's website, saying these proposed initiatives are little more than a stunt.
"No national body can dictate whether children enjoy playing or not."
Bidwell claims his rugby club is lucky to field full teams most weeks.
Well, the solution for Bidwell's club may lie in the very approach that NZ Rugby are planning to introduce next season with their "Game On" initiatives.
Game On is an idea developed in England and Wales in recent seasons and provides some solutions to problems that occasionally plague a game of school or club rugby.
Under current rules in New Zealand, rugby matches cannot proceed if one or both teams do not have at least three trained front row players.
This rule was introduced about 15 years ago as a safety precaution to prevent players from being exposed to scrum pressures when they did not have the physical strength and/or technical knowledge to scrum safely.
Never mind that we had been doing so for over a century and that most neck and spinal injuries in the past occurred during a tackle rather than a scrum.
So what does "Game On" propose?
What revolutionary ideas are going to be introduced next season that may lead to more people playing rugby and for longer in the future?
There are six options available to teams which could mean that games can proceed, whereas it would have been impossible in the past.
Teams will need to confer with each other and the match official (referee) and agree on what shape the game will take before the match begins.
Firstly, teams can play with a minimum of ten players, with equal numbers "being encouraged."
So, there could be equal numbers of between ten and 15 players on the field during the game, rather than the mandatory fifteen.
All players in both teams must play at least half a game, as is mandatory in schoolboy rugby in New Zealand today.
Rolling subs would be permitted, with players being able to leave or return to the field at any time during the game.
The match length can be altered, as long as there is at least 40 minutes of play in total, presumably for competition points to be awarded, if that is the case.
Teams may agree not to contest or lift in the lineouts. You could have contesting without lifting, as happened in lineouts before lifting became legal a few years ago.
Probably the most contentious rule would be teams may agree that scrums be uncontested, as currently happens in junior rugby until age twelve.
These initiatives will be introduced at all levels of rugby next season, including adult rugby.
An example on what it could mean for Wanganui rugby can be found in the first part of the season in the Buller provincial union, where all four senior teams played 12-a-side because there simply was not enough players to play full XV's rugby.
I don't think the shape of premier rugby in Whanganui will change next season, but there could be some impact on the senior competition.
Had these rules been in place this season, there is a good chance three more teams may have been playing in the because those squads withdrew either after the draw was done pre-season or during the season due to insufficient numbers.
From a refereeing perspective, I do have some concerns, such as how reserves will be handled, especially around players with minor injuries coming back on to the field as rolling subs.
If one team has the bare minimum of ten players and the other has a squad of 20, getting agreement on how the game will be played and by how many players could be a Brexit-in-waiting.
Whatever you think about these initiatives, NZ Rugby is being proactive in trying to address the issue of the falling numbers of players by trying to make the game more attractive to a wider group of potential participants.
The semifinal against Border is set for July 5 at 3pm.