For too long the consideration of 'stakeholders' in sports, not only in New Zealand but around the world, has centred on what's best for those holding the dollars.
Grassroots sport has become the responsibility of government-backed funding because major sports have been preoccupied with paying growing player salaries, feeding an even faster-growing sporting bureaucracy and looking to shore up their futures funding for the sorts of crises the world is going through with the coronavirus pandemic.
The fractures involved in coping with economic shutdowns have been exacerbated by a complete societal shutdown to ward off the worst effects of Covid-19.
A timely report, A Sporting Chance, issued by a British-based thinktank has lessons for New Zealand.
The report said the government needed to encourage fans to take financial stakes in rugby and football clubs as a means of creating sustainability while also adding a protection buffer in times of crisis.
The comments were based on the number of British sporting institutions under financial difficulty with the prospect of club collapses cutting a swathe through what is acknowledged as the cultural heritage of towns up and down the land.
The director of Onward, the thinktank that prepared the report, Will Tanner, told The Guardian, "There are social as well as economic reasons for the government to take steps to safeguard those institutions for thousands of fans and communities that rely on clubs."
While many of the issues are British-specific, there are parallels applicable to New Zealand.
As Tanner said: "What our research showed was that it was difficult for fans to get detailed information on how their clubs are run.
"The accounts of many are opaque and most rugby clubs rely on benefactors rather than sustainable business models. Fans invest a lot emotionally every week and pay increasing prices on the gate. There should be greater responsibility to them."
It was noted that Germany's Bundesliga clubs generally have to be 50 percent owned by members. That has resulted in ticket prices significantly lower than in England's Premier League.
In England, increases in television and sponsorship income have tended to go in one door of clubs and out the other to players and agents.
While New Zealand's government has already put in place funding support for clubs and organisations involved in sport, the fact remains that there is plenty of space to have a greater contribution from the grassroots 'stakeholders' in the game who have been significantly overlooked.
A public share of New Zealand Rugby, Netball and Cricket, for starters, could have ongoing ramifications for those codes.
But any change in that regard requires a loosening of control and that is a stumbling block in the minds of many of those holding purse strings.
However, a study of the requirements put in place in the Bundesliga, or a type of Telecom-share that ensured ownership of the sporting company remained in New Zealand hands, could go a long way towards achieving more financial stability in the longer term.
How much more powerful might the stadium of five million people be if it had a share in the sport from which they derive so much of their pleasure and interest?
How much better served might sport in New Zealand be if a committed proportion of income was made to ensure the ongoing viability of clubs further down the line?
In the case of rugby, how much deeper might the war chest be to ward off temptations for younger players, especially, to choose to play their rugby offshore?