Posts by Jimmy Southgate
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Bond's no Martin
I don't get why Southee keeps getting to go ahead of him, he's only had 1 good innings.
-
I guess Styris, Tuffey & Bond's calmness shows the value of experience.
I still don't disagree with getting Astle & Cairns to move on, but I don't think its time Styris was gone - he has a lot to offer, and more perhaps, than Oram.
-
@Naly D I was at the stadium for that game vs Pakistan. It remains the greatest game of cricket I have watched. There were probably only 10,000 or so in the stadium, but the noise we made in the last over as we exhorted Kyle Mills to do something he hadn't yet been able to do was epic. I don't think i've ever felt as euphoric after a sporting spectacle.
My early memories of cricket were of my favourite player at the '92 world cup, Rod Latham. I just loved how much he didn't look like a sportsman. Jesse Ryder owes a lot to the man :-)
-
As people have mentioned previously, it's not going to be that different to an existing match.
I'm not sure about that, Eden Park's current capacity is 47,500, the World Cup capacity is supposed to be 60,000 - so that's a pretty decent jump in numbers just there.
When you figure that apart from ABs games the current capacity is rarely reached its an even bigger jump. I don't know where to find the stats, but i'm pretty sure that Super rugby crowds usually average in the mid to late 20,000s (if that) - so a Rugby World Cup final is going to be twice the size.
Let alone that there will be 4 games (ok, probably only 3 unless people really want to watch the 3rd / 4th playoff) in 8 days that size.
-
Eden Park is private property, not a council facility, so whatever public money goes into it gains the city nothing.
Nothing? Im guessing the gain of nothing is the same reason Auckland & Dunedin are keen to get the 7s into town as well. Of course the city gains something when a few extra thousand people turn up for the weekend.
-
Wait, you want us to pay for our stadia, and all of yours too? That didn't seem a bit greedy when you typed it?
Its probably ungracious of me I know, but this is the kind of sentiment I have about the whole mess.
The appearance to me (which is certainly unfair of me) is that everybody else is stumping up cash and having a good shake at getting this thing done, but the Auckland lot aren't.
I'm probably far too gloriously uninformed to helpfully comment :-)
-
Yes precisely. Ten teams would be more viable (actually 12, as there's two whole teams of All Blacks who can't play NPC.
To be honest, my biggest issue with 10 is that the next division down only has 6 and it seems like a big waste of time.
If the number of NPC players was to get closer to the number of super 14 players that would also help. Currently you might get a contract for 5 months for the NPC. Then you have to go do something else for the rest of the year. Super 14 players get a full year of work and don't have to have another half of a career.
Would you then be at risk of less opportunities for players in NZ? Might more and more players come through the academy systems and players like Delaney wouldn't get a shot? Essentially the NPC at the moment is the bridge between High School & Super Rugby.
So here is what I propose, Salary caps, transfer fees, a cap on the number of all blacks in a team
I guess that would force some teams to shed some players, and potentially make the competition more even.
-
NZ just isn't big enough to support 14 professional rugby teams, particularly in a competition that basically has no all blacks.
New Zealand probably isn't supporting 14 professional rugby teams anyway, or at least not 14 teams where all members of the squad are paid a full wage. The teams like Hawke's Bay are semi-professional; Michael Johnston is a builder when he's not playing - he only took a year off from that when he got a Hurricanes contract in 2008.
There's a partial counter to that argument as well in that if we don't at least try then we'll lose ever more players overseas - take Tasman's Goodman going to Japan for an example of a "lesser" player still getting paid better elsewhere.
I would wager that one big reason (not the only) for the change in the emphasis of the Canes was the abandonment of Athletic Park in favour of Westpac Stadium.
No doubt true, and particularly so given the (apart from the last two years) good average crowd sizes achieved there. Having had the pleasure of visiting McLean Park earlier this year though, while Westpac is very convenient and is great when its a full house - I think I liked the smaller & more rectangular ground.
-
Actually, the only time the Hurricanes have played all their home matches in Wellington was 2008. But I see your point, and agree with it.
Yeah, I did exaggerate a little bit there :-) From your list though it is pretty obvious that in the 90s the Hurricanes were a regional franchise, and now they're not.
I'm going to be in the minority here but I think the provinces should only get preseason matches. During the season the teams should have a home base and bloody well stay there! It's hard to get homefield advantage if you're roaming about the country
I actually agree with you, i'm not interested in watching the Hurricanes play at McLean park at all.
There's no fair way to relegate teams, because people only care about their team when a. It wins or b. They think it's being given a raw deal.
In the end, I think this is why the Player's Association's 7-7 proposal would probably come closest to appeasing everyone - perhaps excepting those worried about the finances.
Splitting the premier division into two pools immediately shortens the season & presumably that helps to save money, so that's the two big aims of the revamp sorted isn't it?
-
I've always had the feeling that a large part of the argument about the AirNZ Cup / NPC was Super rugby and its abandonment of the provincial centres.
After all, for most of the unions if they don't have NPC they have pretty much nothing. Remember back in the 90s when Napier, Palmerston North & New Plymouth would all get a Hurricanes game - now they're lucky to get a pre-season game.
I'm sure that's purely due to the financial reality of Super rugby, but the uproar around the proposed changes this year, probably indicates there's a fair few people who couldn't give a damn about the 5 franchises and are more interested in their local teams.