England are in the final of the Rugby World Cup where they will meet South Africa. a final which will be played this weekend. To make it to the final they beat the team everyone had said was ‘invincible,’ the defending Champions “The All Blacks.” It was a dominant display, in which England did not allow the All Blacks to play. Yet all of the focus since that victory seems to have been focussed on the way England faced up to the New Zealand Haka.
This is not the first time that teams have found themselves in trouble when it comes to the Haka. France, Wales, Australia and England have all in the past faced criticism for the way they have faced up to the Haka, as they tried to break what some perceive is an unfair psychological advantage given to the All Blacks.
It is important to note that the All Blacks are not the only rugby nation allowed to perform a traditional dance prior to the match commencing. Samoa has their Siva Tau, Tonga the Sipi Tau and Fiji’s their Cibi. To fans these are part of the whole match experience. To television they are also a crucial part of the ‘entertainment package’ that sport has become.
One of the complaints popping up now is why, when playing these nations, but in particular the All Blacks, is it that after the National anthems teams do not line up and get on with the match, but a pause is allowed for the traditional dance to take place? The dance representing the New Zealanders and Pacific Islanders laying down a challenge to their opponents.
It is important to remember that these are ceremonial dances. They are not war dances, as described by some trying to hype up the game.
The origins of the Haka before rugby matches dates back to the infamous New Zealand Native football team. This was a group of mostly Māori players who toured Britain, Ireland, Australia and New Zealand in 1888 and 1889. It is believed that they were the first to perform the Haka before matches, and that the New Zealand national team adopted the practice a decade later in 1905.
There is footage in the early part of the last century of Australia coming up with a dance that they performed prior to a game to try and counter the Haka. The players look more than uncomfortable performing the dance and understandably it was abandoned.
It is fair to say that as the world has changed and become more inclusive, the Haka has in fact been performed with more zeal, and possibly pride than in earlier generations. The team has clearly, like the country, learned more about Maori Culture and Traditions and the players have learned the words and execute the movements appropriately.
The most well known haka to rugby fans is the “Ka Mate” haka. In 2005 the All Blacks performed a new haka called “Kapa O Pango.” This was more about the All Blacks. However it was far more menacing and caused controversy as it ended with the performer drawing a thumb down their throat.
Unsurprisingly many interpreted this final gesture as one of a throat being slit. The composer of the Kapa O Pango haka, Derek Llardelli, has frequently explained that this was not the meaning, and that the gesture represents “drawing vital energy into the heart and lungs.”
While the countries mentioned earlier have all faced fines from the sport’s governing body one has to ask on what grounds they can honestly impose these fines. In fact one wonders how World Rugby can have created a law specifically based around this. The IRB law in question requires teams opposing a haka to stand 10 metres in their half and remain still.
A possible fine hangs over England’s heads, not for as some media outlets have reported lining up in a V formation rather than standing in a straight line, but because six players encroached over the halfway line.
In the 2011 Rugby World Cup Final France were fined £2,500 for breaching a “cultural ritual protocol” after they linked arms and marched towards the Haka. A similar fine, which in realistic terms is a slap on the wrist is expected for England.
Yet many fans in the sporting world feel that there should be no fine. Many are saying that if New Zealand and the Pacific Island Nations are allowed their moment to throw down a challenge in a traditional cultural way, why is that opportunity not afforded to all nations? World Rugby rules say that it is.
However, not all of the other Rugby playing nations have such a cultural heritage. Certainly seeing a group of Morris dancers perform representing English tradition is unlikely to have the same impact as the Haka, Siva Tau, the Sipi Tau and Cibi!
There has also been a call from some quarters to give opposing teams the option as to whether they wish to face the challenge being laid down, or simply continue their own preparation for the match. This may be seen as being disrespectful. In reality one suspects that most nations would still face the challenge, as rugby players in the main are gentlemen and have a mutual respect for each other and the culture of their opponents.
Back in 2010, there was a call for this privilege to end. These cries are being heard again now. At that time the Australian Rugby Union – as they were known then – were fined following their women’s team the Wallaroos advancing on the New Zealand Black Ferns’ haka before their World Cup match.
At that time the then IRB chief executive Mike Miller told the media that it was disrespectful to respond to the haka – from the All Blacks or any of the Pacific Island teams – by stepping forward or openly reacting.
Mr Miller went on to tell the Sydney Morning Herald “It’s a traditional part of the game,’if people want to develop something – not a response, not a war dance, but a traditional sporting or cultural way of engendering that team spirit for a match – great. They should be able to and we should create the space to do it.” He was quoted as saying. “It would be a shame if people said: ‘Let’s do away with it’ or felt the need to do some response that took away from the dignity and power of it.”
Almost ten years on there are calls once again for the tradition to end. So why has it become such an issue? When did it become such an issue?
As the Professional area approached teams started looking for what are termed the ‘one percenters,’ areas where they may be able to do something which would throw off their opponent and increase their chance of victory.
Sports Psychologists became the norm, and suddenly the haka was seen as giving the All Blacks a psychological edge. Note that few complaints were made about the other Pacific Island challenge rituals, could that be because they were never going to rock World Rugby’s super powers? Now the mere fact that England players stepped over the line literally during the Haka, is being heralded as setting the tone for the match. This action has been seen as seizing the psychological advantage which led to their victory
The Haka has been accepted as part of the pre-match for over a century. Only since the start of the professional era has it caused so much debate. Never before was it described by coaches as being disruptive. Does it really give the All Blacks an edge in todays Professional era, when the top teams meet so regularly?
It seems as if this really is a storm in a tea-cup. It is interesting to note that no complaints have been published from the All Blacks claiming they were offended.
As Liam Napier wrote in the Guardian on this very issue referring to the actions of England, “Their response enhanced pre-match tension and heightened expectation for those at the venue, and those watching around the world.” That is what TV Broadcasters want, and what the fans in the stadium want. World Rugby’s administrators however worry that if you let one team take an inch how much will another side look to take, and what could be the worst outcome?
Mr Napier then seizes upon the crux of the issue when he writes, “why should the opposition be confined in the way they connect in the face of this challenge?”
“England’s response said “challenge laid down, challenge accepted”. Such a message should be embraced. As long as the opposition do not turn their backs or respond in a way which seeks only to cause offence, teams should be able to react as they see fit, rather than being forced to stand in military fashion behind the line.”
He has a very valid point. Surely though it is ultimately up to each team whether they wish to accept the challenge? Which brings into question the timing of the Haka. Should this really take place after the National anthems?
Maybe if it is to continue it should be at the end of the warm up? That would then give opponents the opportunity to face it if they wished, or to opt not to and head back to the changing rooms. The crowd would still see it performed, but obviously the drama would be impacted and the broadcasters would not like that.
So should the haka and similar traditional challenges remain? If it is such a key component why is it not seen across the board in other sports?
At the end of the day does it cause any harm? No. If the All Blacks and fellow Pacific Islanders wish to do this prior to their matches then they should be given the opportunity. If they are given that opportunity, then the opposition must be given the option as to whether they wish to accept the challenge or not.
Opting not to face the challenge may well result in the crowd turning against them, but if they feel it is a risk they are happy to take, then so be it.
To get rid of a tradition that has been in place for over 100 years and caused little or no problems for at least 70 of those years would seem to once again be pandering to the minority. Another sign that today’s society lacks respect for the past.
The game would probably lose more than it gained by stopping the Haka and similar challenges, as they are part of the spectacle and what the fans want to see. However if teams are allowed to carry out such a ritual then that opportunity must be afforded to all, and all must be given the opportunity chose whether they wish to face the challenge or not, and also how they choose to face it.
