Northern Edition
Select Edition
Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

Haka - Essential or Unnecessary

THE ALL BLACKS PERFORM THE HAKA. PHOTO: GETTY

If there are two words in rugby, bound to inflame immediate argument, it’s those two. Whenever the All Blacks tour the UK it’s only a matter of time before the inevitable objection to our traditional pre-game challenge is raised. Those in favour of this unique tradition versus those equally keen to restrict its performance, the naysayers convinced it gives our team a very tangible and unfair (motivational) advantage.

ADVERTISEMENT

It may surprise our Northern Hemisphere friends to know that this same issue is also frequently & hotly debated here in New Zealand. From personal experience (working talkback radio for 20 years) it’s a topic that completely polarises people with opposing opinions unlikely to ever find any agreeable middle ground. It seems there’s as many Kiwis eager to remove Ka Mate as the AB haka as there is those keen to retain it.

Which perhaps partly explains why the original KM (a haka borrowed from one particular tribe) was joined a decade ago by Kapa o Pango – a new initiative designed (so we were told) to more completely represent the whole of NZ and thus every person ever wearing the jersey.

Now most of all that is true. Of equal importance though were the unresolved and rather tricky issues around the copyright and commercial ownership of Ka Mate. Meaning NZR didn’t own that haka (and could’ve potentially faced paying a century’s worth of royalties) whereas Kapa o Pango, commissioned especially for the All Blacks, is theirs to trademark alongside the team name, silver fern and that iconic black jersey.

This past fortnight has seen even more haka on display here with newly-created versions, specific to the Lions tour, performed by Super Rugby sides the Blues & Crusaders. (Highlanders opting for a ceremonial sword swap with Chiefs & Hurricanes yet to reveal).

Without wanting to offend anyone involved, the Crusaders haka last weekend left me cold. Not the physical actions or words themselves but more its placement, necessity and appropriateness (or not) for the fixture itself.

Let’s not forget we’re dealing with a rugby match between a touring team and commercially created professional franchise. Meaning the tradition and history, so vital a link between KM and the ABs, was glaringly and obviously lacking.

ADVERTISEMENT

For me it was too style-ised, too music video looking and (dare I say) too contrived. I immediately envisaged some stereotypical ad-guy, way too over-enthusiastic in his gesticulations, spouting inane claptrap about “individually tailored entertainment packages” while espousing “unique haka” as the buzzword part of some over-thought “marketing strategy”. Yuk.

In fact the antithesis of everything I’ve ever been taught and believed that (any) haka is about. But what would I know? This after all being nothing other than my irrelevant opinion.

Don’t get me wrong. I have no wish to offend anyone who did like that haka nor the creators of it who have every right to do with their intellectual property whatever they wish.

Personally I felt it was like watching rugby’s version of the plastic tiki – as unappealing as was equally unnecessary.

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Play Video
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 Long Reads

Comments on RugbyPass

S
SK 1 hour ago
The times are changing, and some Six Nations teams may be left behind

If you are building the same amount of rucks but kicking more is that a bad thing? Kicks are more constestable than ever, fans want to see a contest, is that a bad thing? kicks create broken field situations where counter attacks from be launched from or from which turnover ball can be exploited, attacks are more direct and swift rather than multiphase in nature, is that a bad thing? What is clear now is that a hybrid approach is needed to win matches. You can still build phases but you need to play in the right areas so you have to kick well. You also have to be prepared to play from turnover ball and transition quickly from the kick contest to attack or set your defence quickly if the aerial contest is lost. Rugby seems healthy to me. The rules at ruck time means the team in possession is favoured and its more possible than ever to play a multiphase game. At the same time kicking, set piece, kick chase and receipt seems to be more important than ever. Teams can win in so many ways with so many strategies. If anything rugby resembles footballs 4-4-2 era. Now football is all about 1 striker formations with gegenpress and transition play vs possession heavy teams, fewer shots, less direct play and crossing. Its boring and it plods along with moves starting from deep, passing goalkeepers and centre backs and less wing play. If we keep tinkering with the laws rugby will become a game with more defined styles and less variety, less ways to win effectively and less varied body types and skill sets.

284 Go to comments
Close
ADVERTISEMENT