Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

Hurricanes investigate offensive politically-driven haka by Poua

Hurricanes Poua players challenge before the round one Super Rugby Aupiki match between Hurricanes Poua and Chiefs Manawa at Levin Domain, on February 25, 2023, in Levin, New Zealand. (Photo by Kerry Marshall/Getty Images)

The Hurricanes are looking into the altered haka that the Poua used before the Super Rugby Aupiki opener against Chiefs Manawa which took aim at the coalition government.

ADVERTISEMENT

The haka’s leader, prop Leilani Perese, spoke the Maori phrase “karetao o te Kawana kakiwhero” before the start of the haka which translates in English as “puppets of this redneck government”.

The amended version of the haka was completed by composer Hinewai Pomare after players reached out, and then sent to Hurricanes’ management “at the last minute” before the game to receive backing.

Video Spacer

Video Spacer

The composer said that the players were “frustrated” by the political environment and looking for “words to reflect that” and “add a bit of spice” to the haka.

“I sent it to management at the last minute. They were like ‘go for it. We back you 100 per cent,'” Perese said.

Perese said the message was politically driven to take a stand against coalition government policy towards Maori and that they will “never fold”.

“I don’t care. I believe in what we’re saying, I stand by it,” she said.

“I believe that in rugby, we have a platform where people watch and listen. And why not use our platform to show our people we will never fold?

ADVERTISEMENT

“To tell the government that we are stronger than ever, and we will never go down without a war.

“We wanted it to represent not just Maori, but people of all races and cultures. When we say ‘taku iwi tuohu kore e!’ that means ‘what will always last is our people, we will never fold.’

“Whether we’re Maori, Samoan, Tongan, Indian, what have you. I thought it was important for us to say because we’ve got a lot of other ethnicities in our team.

“I wanted to make sure it wasn’t just about one culture, it’s about all of us,” she said.

RNZ reports that Hurricanes chief executive Avan Lee will comment publicly at some stage after the franchise completes its review.

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

13 Comments
R
Roy 286 days ago

Go girls. I am proud of you. Kia kaha nga wahine toa!

J
JH 286 days ago

Proud of what? Hiding behind a haka to whine and spout racist terms they probably have zero clue about and it’s historical meaning and how it doesn't apply to their ‘grievances‘ at all.


All they did was confirm a mix of ignorance and racism, which conveniently only goes one way in some peoples minds, usually the same people who sweep their own historical dirty laundry under the carpet. And boy, is there plenty under that carpet.

Y
YeowNotEven 286 days ago

Of course the hurricanes are in damage control, there is a lot of money involved.

Of course sports people will use their platforms to address their grievances, that’s not new.

Either embrace the haka and the values of haka or not.

Don’t get all proud when times and good and it’s a brand marketing tool, then get upset when it’s used to draw attention to serious political issues.

J
JJGhost 287 days ago

Sport is 100% about politics. Why else do countries bid so much to host Olympic Games?

J
JJGhost 287 days ago

This seems to have stirred quite a reaction from the rednecks.

S
Sebastian 288 days ago

Including politics in the haka is nonsense.


They are professionals, performing for the organization that hires them.

No politics should be allowed.

Why should fans have to bear whatever political views players have?

What if people working in the Hurricanes organization think otherwise?

They do not get the chance to express that just because they work in a less exposed part of the Hurricanes’ organization?

W
Wayneo 288 days ago

Is #RedneckHaka trending yet?

k
karin 288 days ago

I don’t recall any one asking you, to make a comment . Especially not from a racist corrupt . Failed nation. Now go away old man . Obviously bored .

S
Super Sid 288 days ago

So when a government brings out policy which contradicts and minimalises the position of it's treaty partner, ignoring the terms of their agreement - legally recognised in the courts throughout the land, then one should just be compliant and not stir up ‘trouble’ lest it be taken as racist and ungrateful?

If not for protest supported with action then Māori would be a footnote in the history of their own country.

So glad to see that there are still plenty of rugby supporting, National voting ‘rednecks’

L
Locke 288 days ago

The irony of a bunch of racists calling others rednecks. Especially when you consider that the term redneck is itself a racially derogatory term aimed at white people. Imagine if a team with right-wing sympathies had pulled the same stunt and used a derogatory term that had racial connotations, they’d be slammed for hate speech for sure.

M
MJ 288 days ago

This is a never ending campaign of grip esegui which causes even more racism. These protesters should realise that most of them have blood from another ethnicity that they conveniently forget when needed.


Remember all your roots and stop stirring up trouble which results in an environment where your whanau from all sides suffers.

w
woss 288 days ago

And who pays their way……..the redneck Govt I presume. This is racism at its worst by an ungrateful mob of numpties

Y
YeowNotEven 288 days ago

Don’t leave out the details. What exactly is their grievance?

C
Cameron 288 days ago

They don’t have a specific grievance, they just don’t like the other mob generally.

S
Spew_81 288 days ago

No judgment on the political views of the players, they are allowed to have such opinions.


But someone should tell them: National, New Zealand First, and ACT voters watch rugby too. Perhaps a fledgling competition that is trying to grow should avoid alienating half (or more than half) of their potential audience?

C
Cameron 288 days ago

We wanted it to represent not just M?ori, but people of all races and cultures

Except for “rednecks”, I guess. And I suspect that’s a generous translation. If they’re so concerned about Maori culture, why is a women’s team even doing a Haka?

M
MJ 288 days ago

Yep, not convinced they're representing any other cultures.

As for women doing the haka, if the shoe was on the other foot beer your bottom dollar someone would be crying appropriation

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

f
fl 28 minutes ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

"fl's idea, if I can speak for him to speed things up, was for it to be semifinalists first, Champions Cup (any that somehow didn't make a league semi), then Challenge's semi finalists (which would most certainly have been outside their league semi's you'd think), then perhaps the quarter finalists of each in the same manner. I don't think he was suggesting whoever next performed best in Europe but didn't make those knockouts (like those round of 16 losers), I doubt that would ever happen."


That's not quite my idea.

For a 20 team champions cup I'd have 4 teams qualify from the previous years champions cup, and 4 from the previous years challenge cup. For a 16 team champions cup I'd have 3 teams qualify from the previous years champions cup, and 1 from the previous years challenge cup.


"The problem I mainly saw with his idea (much the same as you see, that league finish is a better indicator) is that you could have one of the best candidates lose in the quarters to the eventual champions, and so miss out for someone who got an easier ride, and also finished lower in the league, perhaps in their own league, and who you beat everytime."

If teams get a tough draw in the challenge cup quarters, they should have won more pool games and so got better seeding. My system is less about finding the best teams, and more about finding the teams who perform at the highest level in european competition.

57 Go to comments
f
fl 1 hour ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

"Would I'd be think"

Would I'd be think.


"Well that's one starting point for an error in your reasoning. Do you think that in regards to who should have a say in how it's setup in the future as well? Ie you would care what they think or what might be more fair for their teams (not saying your model doesn't allow them a chance)?"

Did you even read what you're replying to? I wasn't arguing for excluding south africa, I was pointing out that the idea of quantifying someone's fractional share of european rugby is entirely nonsensical. You're the one who was trying to do that.


"Yes, I was thinking about an automatic qualifier for a tier 2 side"

What proportion of european rugby are they though? Got to make sure those fractions match up! 😂


"Ultimately what I think would be better for t2 leagues would be a third comp underneath the top two tournemnts where they play a fair chunk of games, like double those two. So half a dozen euro teams along with the 2 SA and bottom bunch of premiership and top14, some Championship and div 2 sides thrown in."

I don't know if Championship sides want to be commuting to Georgia every other week.


"my thought was just to create a middle ground now which can sustain it until that time has come, were I thought yours is more likely to result in the constant change/manipulation it has been victim to"

a middle ground between the current system and a much worse system?

57 Go to comments
f
fl 1 hour ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

"Huh? You mean last in their (4 team) pools/regions? My idea was 6/5/4, 6 the max, for guarenteed spots, with a 20 team comp max, so upto 5 WCs (which you'd make/or would be theoretically impossible to go to one league (they'd likely be solely for its participants, say 'Wales', rather than URC specifically. Preferrably). I gave 3 WC ideas for a 18 team comp, so the max URC could have (with a member union or club/team, winning all of the 6N, and Champions and Challenge Cup) would be 9."


That's a lot of words to say that I was right. If (e.g.) Glasgow won the URC and Edinburgh finished 16th, but Scotland won the six nations, Edinburgh would qualify for the Champions Cup under your system.


"And the reason say another URC (for example) member would get the spot over the other team that won the Challenge Cup, would be because they were arguable better if they finished higher in the League."

They would be arguably worse if they didn't win the Challenge Cup.


"It won't diminish desire to win the Challenge Cup, because that team may still be competing for that seed, and if theyre automatic qual anyway, it still might make them treat it more seriously"

This doesn't make sense. Giving more incentives to do well in the Challenge Cup will make people take it more seriously. My system does that and yours doesn't. Under my system, teams will "compete for the seed" by winning the Challenge Cup, under yours they won't. If a team is automatically qualified anyway why on earth would that make them treat it more seriously?


"I'm promoting the idea of a scheme that never needs to be changed again"

So am I. I'm suggesting that places could be allocated according to a UEFA style points sytem, or according to a system where each league gets 1/4 of the spots, and the remaining 1/4 go to the best performing teams from the previous season in european competition.


"Yours will promote outcry as soon as England (or any other participant) fluctates. Were as it's hard to argue about a the basis of an equal share."

Currently there is an equal share, and you are arguing against it. My system would give each side the opportunity to achieve an equal share, but with more places given to sides and leagues that perform well. This wouldn't promote outcry, it would promote teams to take european competition more seriously. Teams that lose out because they did poorly the previous year wouldn't have any grounds to complain, they would be incentivised to try harder this time around.


"This new system should not be based on the assumption of last years results/performances continuing."

That's not the assumption I'm making. I don't think the teams that perform better should be given places in the competition because they will be the best performing teams next year, but because sport should be based on merit, and teams should be rewarded for performing well.


"I'm specifically promoting my idea because I think it will do exactly what you want, increase european rugyb's importance."

how?


"I won't say I've done anything compressive"

Compressive.

57 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING Stuart Lancaster 'wants out' of Racing 92 and eyeing Euro giants job Stuart Lancaster 'wants out' of Racing 92 and eyeing Euro giants job
Search