Posts by Paul Williams
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Carter's line breaks were scintillating. They should have come to more -- unfortunately, his teammates' support play was as bad as their ball handling.
Agreed, and it was surprising which tacklers he elluded.
LB, yeah, Cowan did seem to be going well.
-
Outplayed Conrad Smith.
Well that's a little hard to argue. Smith played well against RSA but certainly Kahui played well on the w/e. The point is that not one substitute played well.
-
The Roar's Spiro Zavos's family's thing - it's often a good read, particularly with Zavos senior is writing.
I don't disagree with any of this commentary but Braid wasn't turning over much ball so I suspect that Henry thought to give Lauaki some time to see what he could do. It didn't work and sadly for both Braid and Lauaki, neither seem likely to have more chances (I think legbreak's right, Lauaki's not produced often for the ABs). I'm still left wondering who is the best 7 when McCaw's not playing?
Interesting comment about Mealamu; once the best hooker, now clearly second best.
-
They are big and one dimensional, and everyone is their size at international level - only the other guys are mentally tougher and have a greater skill set.
Bollocks. Nuf said. There's simply too many players who prove this wrong to respond further.
Lauaki had a bad game, he's had good games before, but he's never been a regular and frankly the Aussies were exerting a lot of pressure on us and had the better back three on the day. He may well be dropped however (so too was Kaino a while back). Braid played ok, but didn't dominate (then again, the pack wasn't as dominant either) so who'll play 7 if McCaw's still unfit?
Nonu didn't have a great game but I'm pleased that someone's posted the stats and noted that the AB gameplan was to spin it wide plus both defences were regularly set offside.
-
But hey, if you think chanting "fire at will" and "secret agenda" is in-depth industrial relations policy analysis
Craig, that's an unreasonably simple characterisation.
Their posts are overtly political, but they're far from insubstantial. They clearly lay out the basis for their views and link to primary data sources, the analysis is original, not a cut-and-paste of others, and is rigorous. Of course there's other perspectives and of course it's didactic, but it's not simplistic nor is it formulaic.
The fact that they believe National might not be telling the public the whole story is hardly unreasonable either. The leaks from Australian insurance commentators, the slips of tongue by junior spokespeople and the absence of policy detail gives rise to this speculation; I hardly think the Standard are at fault for asking what's going on.
Of course, it may be as simple as National deciding that policy isn't the best way to fight this election, perhaps they're right, but I think that's to the detriment of our democracy and the downside is that they are open to the charge that they're holding back important information - it's not the first time (for National or for Labour).
-
A S, fair enough - I enjoy the Standard and think they do some excellent analysis but they're entirely upfront about being partisan. Perhaps someone else might wish to comment on National's latest acquiesence to the status quo (not that I mind it however, I think they've got it right).
-
Che, wonderful post, thanks.
I went to some mission lands a few years back to look at an Aboriginal housing/training scheme. It was in Armidale, not so far from civilisation, but the contrast between the mission estate and the other suburbs spoke volumes (though I'm sure it was nothing like the stark existence you speak of). The good thing was, and I say this with a degree of professional pride, TAFE NSW was working very effectively with the local people and Land Authorities and had successfully built a dozen or more houses while totally refurbishing another dozen. All the while, the young men and women were being trained in building trades.
There's things we can do and I entirely agree with 81st; talking about it is never a waste.
-
I also read Kaplan's piece - he's an excellent analyst and writer.
It's worth reading an earlier and related piece he did in relation to Obama's different approach, compared with the other candidates - Dem and Republican, on the issue of negotiations with "rogue states". It's here. Also, did you see the piece on autism?
-
__You made him?__
Everyone needs a hobby.
My wife has instructed me to ask for the type of wool and the number of the pattern......
Best laugh I've had this week, thanks to you both.
-
Craig, let me just say this; they're subjecting it to exactly the same sort of analysis I might once have been capable of...
The serious point is that isn't it just jolly that we're no longer arguing about the fundamental rules governing the economic lives of the majority of our fellow citizens, neighbours, parishioners and employers/ees.
BTW, you must surely have been into Poleconomy or was it too low-brow :)?