Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

Former Australian boss hits back at Steve Hansen's 'absurd' claims

(Photo by GREG WOOD/AFP via Getty Images)

An Aussie strongman has finally hit back at Sir Steve Hansen, and he hasn’t missed.

The former All Black coach claimed last week that New Zealand owed Australia nothing as the two countries set about creating new competitions post-Super Rugby.

ADVERTISEMENT

But Hansen’s lingering resentment over the 2003 World Cup co-hosting rights debacle has been torn to shreds by former Australian rugby boss John O’Neill who said the great All Black coach should “stick to his day job”.

O’Neill let rip with both barrels, inferring that “one of Hansen’s best friends” had to wear some of the blame for New Zealand losing the 2003 tournament. And he described the re-opening of this particular wound, so far down the track, as “absurd”.

Video Spacer

Reds scrumhalf Tate McDermott interview

Reds scrumhalf Tate McDermott speaks ahead of Super Rugby AU Week Three, when Queensland faces the Western Force on Friday

Video Spacer

Reds scrumhalf Tate McDermott interview

Reds scrumhalf Tate McDermott speaks ahead of Super Rugby AU Week Three, when Queensland faces the Western Force on Friday

The influential O’Neill has also advised Australia to go it alone in a bid to host the 2027 World Cup, rather than farm out some pool matches to New Zealand.

Current Aussie chairman Hamish McLennan has been diplomatic over Hansen’s belligerent words, but that was never O’Neill’s style.

O’Neill said the NZRU had stuffed it up in 2003, and a report by former New Zealand Chief Justice Sir Thomas Eichelbaum proved it.

“I’ll paraphrase the conclusions; the NZRU shot themselves in the foot,” O’Neill told the Sydney Morning Herald.

ADVERTISEMENT

“Rugby World Cup and the International Rugby Board had particular conditions about clean stadia and you either had to comply or lose the hosting rights.

“Yes, the terms and conditions for hosting may well have been onerous…but in our language, like it or lump it. New Zealand Rugby – through arrogance and hubris – thought they could force the IRB and World Rugby to change the rules. They didn’t.

“Judge Eichelbaum’s words about me were that I did no more than act in the best interests of Australian rugby.

“New Zealand Rugby at the time got rid of the board who stuffed it up. They got rid of the CEO [David Rutherford], [chief operating officer] Steve Tew stayed on and later in 2007 became CEO. Steve was No. 2 to David Rutherford and he remains one of Steve Hansen’s best friends.

ADVERTISEMENT

“Steve Hansen can make as many comments about rugby as he wants…in this case he was not in the vicinity and it’s a part of the game he wouldn’t know anything about.”

O’Neill said Hansen’s claim that 2003 showed how Australia let New Zealand down “didn’t stack up”.

New Zealand was officially the 2003 sub-host and the agreement became null and void because the NZRU crossed out clauses it didn’t like.

https://www.instagram.com/p/CCfBnVbA9gZ/

O’Neill was amazed that New Zealanders were still apparently upset by the 2003 controversy.

“It’s absolutely absurd. Move on,” he said.

“Brinkmanship only gets you so far.

“It would be foolish to say Steve Tew and I had a close relationship. It was a particularly sensitive matter for Steve, not for me, and it is what it is. You can’t re-write history to serve your own purpose.”

O’Neill said the success of the 2003 World Cup relied heavily on all the games being played in Australia, and they should repeat that formula for 2027.

“It’s ours to lose,” he said.

“I wish Hamish every success in the world. I’m available for a conversation at any time.”

Meanwhile, McLennan told the Australian: “This is a moment in time and we will rebuild Australian rugby and at some stage in the future we will repay the favour to New Zealand.”

The implication is that if New Zealand was more accommodating of Australian teams in a post-Super Rugby competition, it would allow the All Blacks to host its pool round in the 2027 World Cup.

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
JW 3 hours ago
Does South Africa have a future in European competition?

I rated Lowe well enough to be an AB. Remember we were picking the likes of George Bridge above such players so theres no disputing a lot of bad decisions have been made by those last two coaches. Does a team like the ABs need a finicky winger who you have to adapt and change a lot of your style with to get benefit from? No, not really. But he still would have been a basic improvement on players like even Savea at the tail of his career, Bridge, and could even have converted into the answer of replacing Beauden at the back. Instead we persisted with NMS, Naholo, Havili, Reece, all players we would have cared even less about losing and all because Rieko had Lowe's number 11 jersey nailed down.


He was of course only 23 when he decided to leave, it was back in the beggining of the period they had started retaining players (from 2018 onwards I think, they came out saying theyre going to be more aggressive at some point). So he might, all of them, only just missed out.


The main point that Ed made is that situations like Lowe's, Aki's, JGP's, aren't going to happen in future. That's a bit of a "NZ" only problem, because those players need to reach such a high standard to be chosen by the All Blacks, were as a country like Ireland wants them a lot earlier like that. This is basically the 'ready in 3 years' concept Ireland relied on, versus the '5 years and they've left' concept' were that player is now ready to be chosen by the All Blacks (given a contract to play Super, ala SBW, and hopefully Manu).


The 'mercenary' thing that will take longer to expire, and which I was referring to, is the grandparents rule. The new kids coming through now aren't going to have as many gp born overseas, so the amount of players that can leave with a prospect of International rugby offer are going to drop dramatically at some point. All these kiwi fellas playing for a PI, is going to stop sadly.


The new era problem that will replace those old concerns is now French and Japanese clubs (doing the same as NRL teams have done for decades by) picking kids out of school. The problem here is not so much a national identity one, than it is a farm system where 9 in 10 players are left with nothing. A stunted education and no support in a foreign country (well they'll get kicked out of those countries were they don't in Australia).


It's the same sort of situation were NZ would be the big guy, but there weren't many downsides with it. The only one I can think was brought up but a poster on this site, I can't recall who it was, but he seemed to know a lot of kids coming from the Islands weren't really given the capability to fly back home during school xms holidays etc. That is probably something that should be fixed by the union. Otherwise getting someone like Fakatava over here for his last year of school definitely results in NZ being able to pick the cherries off the top but it also allows that player to develop and be able to represent Tonga and under age and possibly even later in his career. Where as a kid being taken from NZ is arguably going to be worse off in every respect other than perhaps money. Not going to develop as a person, not going to develop as a player as much, so I have a lotof sympathy for NZs case that I don't include them in that group but I certainly see where you're coming from and it encourages other countries to think they can do the same while not realising they're making a much worse experience/situation.

144 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ Does South Africa have a future in European competition? Does South Africa have a future in European competition?
Search