Hard News: Denial
136 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Newer→ Last
-
or can we just split the difference, and agree that there's a lot of hysterical fucktards on all sides who aren't adding any value to the debate?
Are you talking about the EFB, or the rugby coach thing?
-
And folks - you can point at Lindsay Perigo, and I can post a link to Chris Trotter's various freak outs on the subject the Sunday Star Times . I'd call it a draw myself, and what a squalid game it is.
-
with the herald reporting Maori leaders: Why we still back Rickards it's not hard to think that there's something just a bit wrong with many of the louder voices claiming to represent Maori.
I can't help but compare what Sharples is saying about Rickards with what he had to say about the Ruatoki raids, on Rikards -
Dr Sharples said that when a case was before the court nothing was proven or disproven, and supporting Maori was what Maori did.
"We're not here to defend them for things they've done wrong. But it's not our job to prosecute them in the papers or make verbal attacks.
"In terms of Maori, he's reached the top and he's made mistakes.
"Justice takes its course and that's fine, but it doesn't mean we have to turn our back on our own."
it's quite sickening.
-
Are you talking about the EFB, or the rugby coach thing?
Applicable to both, I'd say. Somehow, it is hard to feel that torn up on behalf of Robbie Deans - who, I'm sure, is going to have a long and fabulously successful career wherever he ends up. If the Abs loss ends up being the Wallabies' gain, so be it.
-
with the herald reporting Maori leaders: Why we still back Rickards it's not hard to think that there's something just a bit wrong with many of the louder voices claiming to represent Maori.
I spent a couple of hours trying to draft a letter to The Herald expressing my irritation at a more than usually toxic example of the MSM's 'Te Borg' approach to reporting Maori, and other minorities. But you know something - the more I looked at that story, I couldn't even get angry at the sight of Maori dealing out the same old racist card, and white media folks falling for the bluff, one more time. At the risk of sounding like a total drama queen, I just can't hear Rickards' name anymore without feeling numb melancholy and more than a little dirty.
-
Hang the coach!
And whoever takes over from him, hang him as well!
-
I'd call it a draw myself, and what a squalid game it is.
Would you? You always seem to quote hysteria where its existence is somewhat dubious. The BRT and EBs and Maxim etc. *did* spend copious amounts off money on electioneering in ways that were never very transparent.
In the mean time the hysteria comes from a newspaper that allows its writers to compare NZ and our elected PM to North Korea, Robert Mugabe, Victor Chavez, Stalin and worse.
Craig, your attempts at perspective are pathetic.
-
...a more than usually toxic example of the MSM's 'Te Borg' approach to reporting Maori,
yes, I was quite prepared to take exception to the Herald article's heading but after reading the artilce i couldn't get all that worked up by the implied generalisation.
I was thinking that a slight change in Sharples' wording might make things clearer -
Dr Sharples said that when a case was before the court nothing was proven or disproven, and supporting Maori men was what Maori men did.
But then, where's Anette Sykes on this?
-
I'm still not 100% comfortable with elements of the EFB myself. But John Boscawen's astroturf activities -- phone-spamming 80,000 people in Labour electorates included -- had the perverse effect of making me swing more behind it. He just comes across as yet another man with lots of money and a raging sense of entitlement, and that gives me the creeps.
So Russell, if you strongly support a position on policy or legislation and a supporter of the positin you hold spams by emai or phone, whould that autopmatically mean you change sides? Thats pretty unprincipled.
-
And Jackson didn't ask the question that might have made this angry man squirm: the daughter he mentioned more than once is about the age now that Louise Nicholas was when these men, in their position of responsibility, began to use her: would he be so blithe and forgiving if she had been so used?
Clint Rickards should have leave his family out of it. But so should you, RB. Clint's children have no choice about who their father is so back off of them please.
Worik
-
But so should you, RB.
i think you miss understand RB's point - which was a comment on how Rickards would react as a father, it's not a comment or reflection on his children.
-
And the Sunday Star Times ran a Chris Trotter column arguing that any breech of electoral law on the part of the Labour Party was an acceptable means to the end of keeping the filthy Tories out of power. (Though to be fair, they also printed an equally demented column from Matthew Hooten the next week saying, in effect, some weird Parliamentary procedural near-coup d'etat was an acceptable means to the end of just fucking up the government.) Can't say either Trotter or Hooten have improved much since that bipartisan brain fart.
What about the post-Orwea front page in the same paper comparing Don Brash to Pauline Hansen while Clayton Cosgrove issued dire warnings of race war in the streets? Just a little over the top, don't you think?
Sorry, Don, but why don't the hysterics on both sides just grow up? Reading stuff you don't like in the newspapers - even when you feel it's rhetorically way OTT or flat out wrong - isn't creeping fascism. And anyone who asserts any such thing - either from the loony left or rabid right - is truly pathetic in my book.
Of course, in any debate, it's much easier to accuse your enemies of having a secret agenda or acting in bad faith. But does that really contribute anything to a civil society or a healthy body politic?
-
Clint Rickards should have leave his family out of it. But so should you, RB. Clint's children have no choice about who their father is so back off of them please.
Rickards has repeatedly mentioned his children (and been photographed with his daughter) at the same time as he's denigrated women who were as young as 16 at the time of the events. It seemed to me the one question that might actually make him sit up and acknowledge how horrible the behaviour of him and his mates was.
-
True the coach of the 2003 RWC winning side had failed in 99, but the other 5 winning coaches had not previously failed; that is a totally spurious argument.
I think it would have been very difficult for Sir Brian Lochore to previously fail, given that he won the first World Cup.
I don't care about the argument, but I think your logic is flawed. You're comparing one coach who had two goes and won it on the second try, with five (four actually) who only had one go, and won it.
The argument is 'giving a guy a second go after losing isn't a bad idea', to disprove that you need to point to people who have been given a second go and it hasn't worked.
Surely the valid comparison for Clive Woodward is with the coaches of top tier (NZ, SA, Australia, England) nations who have had two goes and failed. No All Black coaches have had that chance, I don't know about SA, Australia).
-
"Phil Kitchens (sic) wouldn't have a bias, because he's not Louise's friend, is he?" Jackson asked ironically as he introduced the interview.
"Louise is a rock star and Clint Rickards is the scum of the earth according to mainstream media," he continued, later declaring "Operation Austin, they seemed to be able to find women everywhere."
Willie seems to have created his own little niche in broadcasting - the "a-prominent-Maori-has-done something-wrong-and-is-a-victim-of-MSM-racism" school of broadcasting. I seem to rememeber him and JT going down to see Donna Awatere-Huata when she was released on home detention. A lovely example of hard-hitting investigative journalism it wasn't.
On the other hand, you have a real journalist like Phil, who has an extensive track-record of exclusive investigations. Not many journalists can say they were responsible for revealing fraud from a sitting MP, resulting in jail-time.
-
...but the other 5 winning coaches had not previously failed; that is a totally spurious argument.
Not an argument - just an observation. It *is* possible to lose one world cup with one coach, and yet still win it with the same.
As is the argument that changing coaches every 4 years hasn’t worked before, so why not do something different??
I admit, I was stooping to the level of 'sports talkback caller' with that one, such is my brain-space after an afternoon of Deaks and co. My main argument is that Henry *does* now have some RWC experience to call upon, and won't make the same mistakes twice. That, apparently, doesn't count for a lot.
Anyway, my favourite conversation of Sunday afternoon...
Caller: "Deaks, I've got two predictions to make. The first is that a Deans-led Aussie team will beat a Henry-led All Blacks team in the 2011 World Cup Final. The second, that final will be played in Sydney after we stuff up the Stadium at Eden Park."
Deaker [no irony]: "Well, Henry won't be in charge of the All Blacks by 2011, and Eden Park will be ready, but, other than that, I think you're dead right."
-
And folks - you can point at Lindsay Perigo, and I can post a link to Chris Trotter's various freak outs on the subject the Sunday Star Times . I'd call it a draw myself, and what a squalid game it is.
Who knows Craig, but it sounds like a good celebrity death match to me. I'll get the play dough.
-
It seemed to me the one question that might actually make him sit up and acknowledge how horrible the behaviour of him and his mates was.
Ten out of ten for optimism and seasonal good will, Russell, but I've seen little evidence that anything is ever going to shake Rickards and his enablers out of denial mode. What really creeps me out is that he's still publicly defending two convicted rapists. From the moment he showed up at his trial in full dress uniform (and received a warning that doing so while on suspension and not on official police business was in clear breech of regulations), I thought this guy had serious judgment issues. We had a lucky escape in not putting this person in the Commissioner's office.
-
KM,
Laporte was coach in 03 and 07; and got madder as time went on..
Dwyer was successful in 91; his side had deteriorated by the time he took them to a ¼ final exit in 95.
And of course Hart and Wylie were involved in 87, before presiding over the disaster in 91; Hart having a further crap-out in 99
Dick Best (Eng) 91 (I think) and 95.
South Africa change their coaches most years, yet they’ve got the best record of any RWC side..
Noizy, I challenge you to find examples from Henry’s past (Blues, Wales, Lions) where he has learnt from past mistakes..
-
WH,
Deans was/would have been/will be a good All Blacks coach, but its past time the quadrennial bloodletting was made to stop. As you might expect, listening to sports talkback this weekend was really disappointing. Special mention to Doug Golightly and his embittered offsider: you have no idea how nasty, smallminded and rude you come across as being.
Craig, that isn't exactly what Trotter's piece said.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/4315598a1861.htmlThough the overwhelming majority of the 5000-6000 participants in last Saturday's demonstration would indignantly reject the idea, they were not marching in defence of any recognisably democratic principle at all, but to defend the aristocratic principle: the right of a small, self-perpetuating minority to use the power conferred upon it by the possession of great wealth to negate the rights and aspirations of the majority.
The conservative ideology, which inspired the "Kill the Bill" movement, is profoundly anti- democratic. Historically, it has resisted every attempt to expand the realm of freedom. It opposed the abolition of slavery and rejected the extension of the franchise – up to and including women's suffrage. It never accepted the right of workers to combine in trade unions, and fought the creation of the welfare state. Conservatives have argued strongly against both racial and sexual equality. Their ideal society is characterised by privilege, hierarchy, discrimination and deference: rule by the few – not by the many.
[...]
The Electoral Finance Bill, by threatening to starve the conservative elites of the funds they need to ensure that popular deference to wealth and privilege remains ingrained in the electorate, constitutes a direct threat – not to democracy, but to its polar opposite, Economic Royalism – the aristocratic ambitions of those whom President Theodore Roosevelt described as "malefactors of great wealth".
It's not a great bill, I grant you this, but the principle at the heart of electoral law reform is an important one. We are not the only country to be concerned about the distortions that wealth can have on the democratic process.
-
Craig, that isn't exactly what Trotter's piece said.
WH, I think I've characterized Trotter's Sunday Star Times column of August 27 2006 perfectly accurately. I don't have a link, as it seems to have vanished behind Stuff's paid subscription firewall, but if any one can point me to the text and where I've misrepresented his view of the pedge card rort as "the most courageous and forgivable kind of corruption"... Well, I will naturally withdraw and issue a grovelling apology.
As to his most recent effort, perhaps folks "indignantly reject the idea" because it's presented with Trotter's usual rhetorical force, but equally usual tendency never to let anything get in the way of a good knee-capping or pending apocalypse. You know, like the ranty-right stuff about the left being dominated by femi-Commie dykeocrats, tree-huggers, Te Quaeda apologists and union officials?
Wouldn't have Trotter any other way, but like most skilled polemicists you've got to take it all with lots of salt. And quite frankly, I don't think his SST columns would get (or deserve) much space in any retrospective collection.
-
Noizy, I challenge you to find examples from Henry’s past (Blues, Wales, Lions) where he has learnt from past mistakes..
Well, I defy anyone to learn anything from Wales. But as for the other stuff...
When Henry (& Fitzy) were in charge of the Blues they were better than the ABs, although you would never get me to admit it at the time.
Lions lessons, well, his AB teams thrashed the Lions here as comprehensively as they have ever been beaten. And to be fair, his Lions tour of Australia was a very close one. Set a standard that Sir Woody conspicuously failed to hit.
-
It's cricket season dammit!
So I'll keep my opinions about coaches in NZ general.
I don't mind sticking with losing coaches. All coaches lose sometimes.
BUT
Really good coaches can identify their own errors and really good coaches have the people skills and management skills necessary to admit when a mistake has been made.
Both JB and JH failed in their efforts to win a world cup. And both made quite dramatic calls leading up to the world cups. Both teams failed to perform as well as they could/should. And both coaches were demonstrably wrong.
And both coaches have not admitted that they stuffed up.
For that reason I believe both coaches need to be replaced.
Why is it in NZ that we tolerate this behaviour where someone in authority stuffs up and it's OK to let them carry on without ever admitting their mistake. It isn't restricted to sports coaches. And it is a serious problem when it is something less trivial than a sports coach eg a DHB chairperson, or a police commissioner.
And frankly at this time of year I couldn't give a rats arse about rugby but dammit why can't we get rid of the incompetent that is in charge of our cricket team???????
Back to talkback now...
cheers
Bart -
And to be fair, his Lions tour of Australia was a very close one.
Heh. As was a certain RWC quarterfinal.
Close ain't good enough!
-
Bart, well said on Braces. Although the missed opportunity to give him the flick earlier in the year compounds this disaster. Even worse in the cricket case, there was a clearly superior alternative.
Don, you’re right to point out that Blues team was a Fitz (and ZZ) led team. Once they left, and with Henry around, they went into decline.
But it’s the last minute changing of the criteria for reappointment that’s the real sin here. And I think that was Golightly and the Art Dealer’s main point on Saturday.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.