Posts by Matthew Littlewood
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Well, TV 3's slogan back in the day was " come home to the feeling", after all...
Btw, Craig, I'm not too happy with that particularly happy about many things surrounding the preparation of the RWC, particularly that aspect that I/S highlighted there, among others.
(Also, there's the more parochial issue of the "proposed stadium" in my former hometown, which as Kyle and I have alluded to, is something of a mess) I would go into more detail, but y'know, I've got no idea why I'm up at nearly 1am on a Tuesday. :) And I suppose my feelings in regards to National's first week as government belong in another thread.
-
It's looking increasingly likely that the new Otago Stadium won't get the private financing required in time. In which case either it gets dropped, and a whole bunch of money has been spent for SFA, or the local bodies will be persuaded to cough up more. Neither of which is good.
It's amazing that in effect, it really hasn't progressed beyond the stage it was more than 18 months ago, when I wrote a feature on the debacle for Critic. I find that horribly depressing and in retrospect I think I was too kind on the pro-Stadium lobby. Of course the worst thing about it is that whatever happens, the Stadium won't be anything like what it was originally envisaged as- certainly nothing resembling a "multi-purpose" venue (way too small to be a Cricket ground, wrong shape for a soccer ground, probably not going to have the proper facilities for conferences, etc). I lost track of the "progress" but when I had a browse through the ODT the other day I couldn't believe how little had been achieved by any of the parties involved. (For or against that is). Mind you, the DCC and ORC have been at loggerheads for years.
It's ridiculous to have to suspend normal planning procedures just because the rugby authorities want us to. It's quite possible that a lot less people than anticipated will make it to the cup - upper class pommy stockbrokers haven't done exactly well in the last few months. We'll probably be able to fit everyone into an unmodified Eden Park.
Absolutely. There needs to be a serious reality check here- National's "damn the torpedoes" approach ("select committes? who needs those things?") in their first week has been disconcerting at best, downright insulting at worst.
-
As with Paul, I too was a big spender at Real Groovy's Dunedin shop. Myself and a lot of other people here are extremely cynical about how the Real Groovy saga has played out here. Basically we feel ignored and shafted by Real Groovy's owners, who have completely left us in the lurch.
I was wondering how the Dunedin lot would take the news. As someone who used to sink probably about $1k/year into the store down there, I still feel a tad empty that it's no longer around. And yes, a little cynical. Especially considering prior to its arrival, Echo records was performing well, had good management, stock, etc. I understand Graham's pleasure in seeing the store's return, it's just a shame that Dunedin is left without a specialist record shop. Not least considering its history.
While it's great the store is back all overthe country (although visiting the ChCh one I'm still surprised how depleted the stock still is- it's going to take sometime to get it back to anything resembling its previous status), it's all a little hollow at this stage.
This from Chris Hart's e-mail, the emphasis mine: "The Auckland store will join forces with the Wellington and Christchurch stores (purchased by local management) in order to bring the__ nation’s biggest retail chain, selling new, rare and second-hand music__, back to its former glory."
Yep, money talks etc and while we might have emotional attachment to the corner record store (like Roy Colbert's etc) or love the smell of vinyl in the morning, the end of the ledger is where it is at.
Of course. I'm just hoping the new managers learn from the mistakes that led RG to its current state. Here's hoping. It's going to be a long road back.
That said, I enjoyed the post. Nice bit from Chris Bourke, too.
-
Yeah. Fleming, the world class player who never quite showed it. Oram the world class player who breaks when playing the game. Bond, the world class player who hardly ever, and now maybe never will, play.
Richardson was good though. Only really a good test player, not ODIs, which is unusual for NZ.
Good summary. Fleming was the total enigma though- maybe he ultimately sacrificed becoming a world class player to become a world-class captain. I know it's a cliche to mention this about him, but between the scores of 30 and 60, he made batting look so easy. And then all of a sudden he'd get out, invariably upwardly driving a ball to a fielder neatly positioned on the on-side. It happened with such regularity.
-
That 1992 World Cup was great.
But.
It’s also got a lot to answer for. It resulted in 10 years of preparing home pitches that were slow, lifeless and built for Gavin Larsen and Chris Harris.
It also set in motion the complete focus of cricket administrators and coaches in this country on limited overs cricket.
Apologies for grumpiness today; I get a bit like this after a test performance like last weekend’s
That's true to a degree, but I'd more accurately date the problems to NZC's treatment of Warren Lees in 1993. And it's startling to think that we haven't beaten Australia in a test match- home or away- since. The true shambles began with Howarth tenure of 94-95 followed by Glenn Turner's brief, but tortorously mediocre term.
As much as we can criticise Bracewell for some of his odd decisions, he never did anything as stupid as pick Lee Germon as both 'keeper AND captain. I can't think of any equivalent to that madness, really.
I think NZ concentrating on ODI cricket (sometimes to a detrimental degree, it has to be admitted) is as much out of lack of reasources as anything else. If we're being totally honest, since the retirement of Crowe, NZ has only had three genuinely world class players- Bond, Vettori and Cairns.
-
I was impressed with Johnson. He was getting just enough swing for a left arm quick to be dangerous. He was pretty acurate when I was watching, and he was fast. His bowling speed was regularly in the 140s. He was about as fast as Lee. Not saying he's as good as McGrath, but most aren't.
Oh, he's certainly decent, that's for sure- NZ would love to have a bowler like him in the side- but I do think most of his wickets were a resuilt of poor technique from the NZ batsmen rather than genuinely fierce bowling. He's been shown up by the South African and Indian top orders already, and NZ has pasted him around the park in ODIs before, too. It's the NZ batting order's lack of discipline that gets to me.
-
It may also be a straightforward lack of personnel. If memory serves, Ryder domestically has a much better average in the longer form of the game. The guy can defend pretty crisply. And McCullum too has played pretty good hand at test level. But without anybody to anchor the innings from the top of the order down, the more talented guys will feel pressure to score quickly and turn it into an ODI.
Ryder's been a bit of a tyro even since he started first class cricket, there are stories of his problems with authority dating back to his early years. So it's definitely a matter of just getting the right personel behind him- I think he has it in him to be a very good test-class batsman, so it's just finding a way to best utilise his strengths without cramping his "natural game" too much. Easier said than done, mind.
I really think Flynn has the potential to be that stodgy, gritty and occasionally strokeless batsman that NZ needs right now. He's clearly not (at the moment) suited to the ODI game, but at test level, putting him at no. 3 would make some sense. The real problem, is, of course, that he'll be coming into bat when NZ are at 1/10 rather than, 3/40.
Seriously, why is it so hard for NZ to find a decent opening pair for tests? It's been endemic for as long as I can remember-probably dating back to John Wright's retirement- even when Mark Richardson was holding up one end it was more a matter of him batting for so long that we forgot we lost an early wicket.
Nice recollection of your cricketing love, Emma. Just to date me almost to a year, it was the 1992 CWC that sparked my interest in the game. A vertiable fairytale of a tournament. Not just because of the victories, but the nature of them- whether it was the sublime batting of Crowe, the pinch-hitting of Greatbatch or the bafflingly miserly bowling attack of Larsen, Harris, Watson and Patel. Everything just came into place...until a chubby Pakistani called Inziman decided to spoil things.
-
Astle's batting explosion 3-4 years ago against England in Chch when we were hopelessly behind their total is probably the greatest forlorn chase I've ever seen.
It was quite simply, breathtaking. And yes, I have the video saved on my youtube account. But what's often forgotten that it was Astle who dropped Thorpe when he was on single figures...Thorpe, typically, then went on to make a double century.
Astle was a strange batsman because he was a purist's nightmare in the way he shuffled around the crease, but he had such quick reflexes that he could muster shots that more classically correct batsmen couldn't. Brett Lee said he was difficult to bowl to for precisely that reason- he had no backlift.
But I think there's a certain level of masochism in supporting NZ in test cricket, especially at the moment, where it seems that each time the top order goes out to bat it's merely delaying the inevitable. It's especially frustrating to see them capitulate against Mitchell Johnson, who really isn't any great shakes with the ball- certainly he doesn't have any of the deadly variations in swing or pace of the greats, nor even the frustrating accuracy of a McGraugh type bowler. And yet the kiwis cowered as if he were Ambrose or Marshall.
-
Forget about that - Dunedin's in the process of ramming though a bunch of CCTVs for the Octagon - largely to avoid being responsible for policing the bars they've let expand into the street (one cop walking the beat would so much more good)
Gosh, that's interesting news. It's always struck me how even around the campus area, there's been a bizarrely contradictory approach to policing drunken activities there is in Dunedin, a lot of which seems predicated on a lack of foresight from the powers-that-be, which of course then spills over into what's now becoming the annual nuisance of the Undie 500 Riots.
Rather than take a good hard look at the causes and how to anticipate them, it's always been easier for them to fingerpoint and then bury their head in the sand. You only need to have a look at the density of the population in the immediate campus area, the sheer plethora of off-licenses and nearby bars, to know it doesn't take much to spark a proverbial in the area.
Nice piece from Mr Chapman on the implications behind this latest move- it's a development I've been following quite a bit over the last year or so, as I got to interview Katrine Evans of the Privacy Commission about it for a couple of pieces, including a rather overwritten piece about surveillance for Critic last year.
http://www.critic.co.nz/about/features/54
It's striking how prevelant the technology is in London- particularly CCTV- you do wonder whether it reaches a certain mass where it becomes difficult to determine how beneficial it actually is. I'm reminded of some of Banksy graffiti which commentates on the phenomenon. And that anecdote about the Oyster Card is fascinating.
-
Even if the panels themselves are outside the OIA their recommendations and other material that's given over to the Crown is absolutely OIA-worthy. And the Ombudsmen have shown themselves quite willing to tell pollies to hand over reports that originated outside their departments.
I think we can sometimes take for granted how bloody good NZ's Ombudsmen's Office is in holding depts to account- it really is worldclass, as shown by the fact that NZ is number 1 in the World Transperancy index.
And I'm certain that Wakem will continue the fine work of her predecessors, particularly the late great John Belgrave. She's a really impressive individual, and her career leading up to the role was pretty damn illustrious, too.
What's so surprising is how compliant depts are as well, considering the fact that the Office technically has no punitive powers. It shows the level of good faith there is in the office.
Meanwhile, I'm also a bit wary about this "panel" on climate change that ACT wants to set up. I've just read their "agreement" that RB linked. God, it's overwrought and vaguely sinister. And the wording of it is really weird- as if they expect all their promises to go through without any consultation or acknowledgement of the fact that, erm, 3 percent isn't a mandate.
Another question- considering their infamous typo-strewn billboards, and their overwritten mission statements, have they already applied their "razor-gang" to their copyediting dept? Just a thought...