Why are New Zealand allowed the advantage of the Haka?

lI must admit that though I admire the Haka I can't help thinking that it gives New Zealand a psychological advantage for at least for the first 5 minutes of the game at must be worth at least a early penalty.and should such a advantage be given in a non-friendly game especially in the World Cup?  Similarly  should the   "War Dances" of the South seas Islanders should be allowed?

Wales in 2008 showed how to respond to the Haka  in the 2008 match which you can view here (Watch it it's perhaps Ryan Jones' finest moment) where on their Home ground they refused to back down even to the ref and insisted the All Blacks should move first.

The Haka great entertainment but this is serious business and should such an advantage be given to a side ? I don't think so.

Mind you England's decision to wear n all Black aternative strip is a deliberate provocation and prehaps could be seen in the context of Glasgow Rangers playing in green hoops.

I give some credit to the organisers for the timing of the opening ceremony as the 12 hour time difference means that we will have to rise earlier to watch the matches but it the same for New Zealanders and the other southern hemisphere nations when the World cup is in Europe.
And I wonder what the reaction in Wales would be to a 9:30 Pm kick off as fans and players will be asked to do for Wales South Africa match tomorrow?

No praise for ITV's coverage though EyeONWales a blog which is well worth a visit covers most of my critcsism. But here some of my own  anyway.

The coverage of the opening ceremony was appalling far to many  Add- breaks and studio contributions . My niece switched to S4C and I suspect most Welsh speakers or even those with a smattering will do so when the coverage is available
.
Especially after the Match commentaries I've heard so. It comes to something that BBC Wales' coverage of the Leinster-Dragons match last night surpassed  that of ITV coverage of the opening New Zealand -Tonga match.and shows the difference betweem the true professional and the merely gifted amateur . Though I'm not sure about the gifted.

It looks like we will have to put up with references to England at every opportunity and although on the BBC Brian Moore has a "slight" bias towards England at least he will criticize them and point out their weaknesss and he is entertaining.

Likewise the  ITV pundits are boring and there's nothing like the insight of Gusgott,Woods and our own Jonathan Davies all of whom may have a bias towards their own Nations but it is acceptable because they at least know what they are talking about.

The BBC can be annoying in its refernces to England .Who can forget  the reference to the "England -France match some years ago as "The Main event" but ITV as they have been in every World Cup they covered have given the impression that England is the only Home nation in the competition.

The France-Japan game has just finished and after a few minutes "analysis"  they have moved on too The England Game. Even if England are knocked out at the qualifying stage  (unlikely as it is) we will probably more coverage of what went wrong rather than the success of othe Home sides.

Why have the BBC failed yet again to cover the Rugby World cup and left us with piss- poor amateur  coverage from ITV?