Controversial choice: New sponsor's logo
All Blacks fans have reacted angrily to the New Zealand Rugby Union's controversial decision to sell commercial space on the front of the world champions' jersey.
The All Blacks' official Facebook page has been flooded with comments from passionate New Zealanders who object to having the name of US insurance giant AIG splashed across the front of the side's shirt.
Unlike most international sports teams, the All Blacks' famous black attire has largely been commercial free, apart from the logo of kit supplier adidas and a short-lived deal with a local brewer in the 1990s.
But, NZRU chief executive Steve Tew said the tradition was unsustainable and the AIG deal, which will run until mid 2018, would provide a much need increase in cashflow.
However, his argument did not hold with purists who called the decision a "disgrace" and "disrespectful".
"One of the things that made the All Blacks so special, put them ahead of every other nation and world number one is the pride in the jersey," Nathan Hulme posted on Facebook.
"Now the NZRU have ruined that and what it stands for, sold out our pride and passion. Right at the heart of the all black jersey."
Peter Armitage added: "Steve Tew hang your head, you are a disgrace to the greatest team the world has ever seen."
Nico de Jong acknowledged the NZRU need to attract funds but not at the expense of the black jersey.
"It is part of our kiwi heritage, and by placing a company name on the front I think is completely disrespectful, especially considering it is a foreign company," he wrote.
Other critics targeted the choice of sponsor given that AIG required a $182 billion bailout from the US government at the height of the global financial crisis.
"It is so disappointing to see the NZRU choose such an unworthy company to partner with and even worse, give ownership of the black jersey by splashing their tainted brand over where the heart once beat," wrote Kano Wins.
John Copestake said: "You have ruined all the history and class of the black jersey by staining it with AIG on the chest. NZRU you make me sick."
Even players objected to the original proposal, forcing a reduction in the size of the logo and the removal of a white box around it.
"When we saw the size of it and the box we thought it was too big for the jersey," hooker Keven Mealamu revealed.
"So it's nice that they were respectful and able to take the box off and keep it to the size it is now."
But Tew made it clear there was no room for any further compromise.
"We respect people who decide that it's not a good idea, but we're the ones in charge of the legacy at the moment and we'll make the decisions we need to make," he said.
He added it cost about NZ$100 million ($82 million) to run rugby in New Zealand and significantly more cash was needed for the sport to survive and grow.
"It's a challenge for us, and we need some money."
The All Blacks will wear the new jersey for the first time when they play Australia in Brisbane on October 20.
Comments
Kinsman says...
Seriously, most fans are aware of the economic realities involved here. That of course doesn't stop a minority bleating into their Facebook accounts and it doesn't stop a media organization picking up a couple of bleats and building a story around it. After all, that's what the media do....
Do I like it, no! Do I accept it is necessary, absolutely!
Hopefully it will also ensure a significant number of players do not go abroad to ply their trade keeping the AB's with their stars for longer.
As commented by Patron below, there is a real story in here, just not the one being reported.
Posted 17:11 13th October 2012
Chubbylugs says...
Find it funny that nzanders think their jersey is more sacred than anyone else's. each to their own, but the self imposed arrogance is a bit OTT
Posted 17:09 13th October 2012
KiwiJoe says...
Sign of the times I,m afraid, most overseas games are pretty well sold out and even if all the NZ ones were, it still wouldn,t be sufficient to keep our best players, maintain grass roots rugby etc.
The reality facing a small independent country is that you have to get funds from wherever to maximise the pulling power of the current team, which is huge, to be fair.
The choice of sponsor seems to be the main sticking point, I don,t believe the hype about corrupting the jersey, I still have my pristine, cherished Canterbury Steinlager shirt with a much more prominent logo, but I suppose a Kiwi beer company is definitely more acceptable than a company like AIG, though I bet they don,t have the funds AIG offer.
Keep doing the Haka and winning as often as possible, the Legend and Heritage will take care of itself.
Posted 17:02 13th October 2012
Ferdie says...
is facebook the #1 source of facts these days?
I had a look at the AB site - the sponsorship deal has 1152 'likes' and 363 comments, some for, some against.
The NZ Herald site has a comments section, a whole 76 people are anti the AIG deal. Seventy-six - it is hardly a nationwide mutiny!
Why people from other countries feel the need to be upset - why does it bother you? Protest to your own union about their own sponsorship first.
NZ H quotes a sports marketing consultant - he suggested people be realistic, and get on with life.
I will.
Posted 16:50 13th October 2012
Dangerous says...
born and bred kiwi. Passionate all blacks supporter. I recognise the need for revenue opportunities. It's not like it's changing the whole colour of the jersey to pink. We will get used to it. Little 4 million new Zealand can't keep paying players with cows and crates of beer. No worries bro. It will be sweet as!
Posted 16:36 13th October 2012
Benny says...
The AB legacy would be ruined a lot faster if the NZRFU went broke and couldn't pay its players or develop the sport at the grass roots. Where do these fans think the money is coming from? Half empty stadiums during super rugby? We're lucky we get a decent cut from SANZAR considering how small our population is. Suck it up and enjoy that with the extra cash we might be able to hold on to ABs that are considering a move offshore.
Posted 16:12 13th October 2012
NHSaints says...
To the Nz rugby fans - get out there and fill the stadiums so NZRFU doesn't have to resort to this method of funding. To NZRFU - get that disgraceful logo off of the jersey. Put it on warmup kits ect if you have to...but do not ruin the jersey with it.
Posted 15:40 13th October 2012
Patron says...
What a beat up!! The real story is: This is the second biggest sponsorship of any code. Guess who is no. 1?? The same jersey! So one jersey has beaten the world of all codes; twice. No third rate referee from the Bleatingish Isles can stuff that up!
Posted 15:31 13th October 2012
melkdave says...
WOW i know the shirt is an icon,and deservedly so,but isnt this just a tad over the top from the fans.After all its earning very good revenue for the NZRFU ,who need it ,after the troubles earlier with funding Otago ect Surly any income would be viewed as good.But then im not a kiwi so even though i respect the shirt,its not an icon to me .
Posted 15:29 13th October 2012
leebok says...
Well if you went to games they might not need the money.
Posted 15:23 13th October 2012
ste490 says...
Sorry but its a sensible financial option in this day and age.
Posted 15:19 13th October 2012
Manni83 says...
As an English man, I'm aware my opinion means little in this issue. However I for one find it sad that the NZRU have made this decision.
"we're the ones in charge of the legacy at the moment and we'll make the decisions we need to make,"
To me this quote seems a bit arrogant. Especially when there is clear opposition to the idea. This is a national team not some club team the board of directors can play with at will. They represent the country of New Zealand. As a kid growing up in Great Britain, the first thing I ever even knew about New Zealand was that the All Blacks were the most feared opponent any rugby team could ever face. No matter where you are from, I would challenge anyone to argue that point. It seems to me selling the space on the shirt is just a quick and easy way to get in revenue. I am well aware of the financial needs of rugby clubs, and no doubt an national institution has an even more problematic time making sure the books balance. But surely as kiwis, the people who made this decision owe that jersey and what it represents, the effort of finding other forms of funding or at the very least consulting with the people of the country it is worn for.
The Haka brought to us by AIG would be decidedly less awe inspiring than the Haka from the peoples of New Zealand.
Posted 15:12 13th October 2012
Philly says...
Money talks...
Posted 15:02 13th October 2012