Posts by Kyle Matthews
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I dunno ..... you are probably right, but I'm not 100% convinced. The high level of grass-roots passion in UK football (soccer) for example has not translated to international success for England.
I think there's a world of difference between the UK soccer structure, and the NZ rugby structure. Their club football has a whole heap of overseas players in it, so I'm not sure if there's as much push for the domestic players. The Air NZ Cup, while it's probably in decline a little from half a dozen years ago, is still filled with NZers, and I would imagine is still the best domestic rugby competition in the world in terms of talent across the field.
-
<i>If a bloody Twickers crowd can chant “Allez Bleu” non-stop throughout the 2nd half in 1999, the Welsh shouldn’t find it too much of challenge following suit.
When will people realise the All Blacks can come across as arrogant to northern hemisphere audiences?</i>But any fool could have seen months ago that this is one game where the All Blacks would definitely be playing -- I suspect there will be a lot of expat Kiwis with tickets.
Well I think there's a big difference between a Welsh crowd and an English one. I think there's a lot more respect between NZ and Wales (both in, and outside of rugby), than NZ and England.
And French supporters all fronted up and bought for a different game. They're now reliant on Irish supporters (who bought many of the tickets for Cardiff) handing their tickets back, and finding accommodation at short notice at a fully booked city. Like Russell says, every Kiwi doing the tour, and a whole heap of expats, forked over a few hundred bucks for tickets to this weekend's match ages ago.
Anyway, we'll see come Sunday morning.
-
Christ, and the prize for most depressing blog entry of the year goes to this one, for statisticking the crap out of positivity for the weekend.
Selections were interesting. Keith Robinson I can understand. He needs some game time if he's going to be worth playing for the rest of the tournament. Jack on the bench, so if it's a problem, the substitution can just be made early.
Howlett must be wondering what he has to do to be the #1 winger. The other two haven't been playing bad (Sivivatu's dropsies aside) but Howlett is in the form of his life. I don't see how he could do more, he was clearly #1 I thought.
I don't understand the fascination with McAlister over Mauger, who I think is exactly the person you'd want in the backline come crunch time in the big games - reliable, experienced, less likely to make fatal errors.
I'm with RB. ABs will take this by 25+ points, and knock the memory of 1999 on the head well and truly. Cardiff will practically be a home game for them, the Welsh won't cheer for the frogs.
I liked TV3's attempt at wriggling around the law to play the adverts on Sunday morning, particularly #3 rule:
3: Be targeted primarily at audiences outside New Zealand.
"Our signal outside of New Zealand will reach a combined population of more than nine million people, which is more than double New Zealand's population, making the Pacific audience the primary audience for the signal.
"One country alone in the Pacific group, Papua New Guinea, has a substantially larger population than New Zealand, with 6.2 million people.
I wonder how much they had to offer some PNG TV channel to play the game at about 11pm at night. I know PNG play rugby league, do they play much rugby?
I can't imagine one million PNG people getting up at 2am to watch the All Blacks.
Yes sure TV3. You primarily bought the rights to the Rugby World Cup so you could broadcast it around the Pacific Islands. The fact that you could also show it in New Zealand (where all the adverts will originate from) was just a fringe benefit. Whatever.
-
I never made it too the 94 BDO (only actually been to one in my life, the recent one with Janes Addiction) - but I did catch The Breeders / Cinematic / Smashing Pumpkins at the town hall in Wellington, and even got a chance to hang out with Kim and Kelly before the show (press pass and I was on crutches - great combination when you throw a bottle of bourbon in to the mix). Never was big on the Pumpkins and found their live show to be like listen to Siamese Dream through a big PA, but the Breeders were fantastic that night (Cinematic were good too but I'm personally biased).
I found out about that gig too late to get tickets (only being in Wellington for part of the summer holidays), and trooped down there in the early evening to try and beat someone up at the door to get in. No luck unfortunately.
I hung around outside for a while hoping that the noise of the gig would carry outside, but then I realised that would unlikely to work, and truly sad. So I moped off home. Spewing.
-
In short: supporting the All Blacks is not at all like anything political. It's just something that traditionally New Zealanders have been good at.
I'm not so sure about that. We're very good about supporting them when they win. We're not so good about it when we lose. You don't often hear, after All Blacks losing, "the better team won, and that's OK". The best you might hear is "the better team won, there's going to have to be heads rolling". Most likely you'll hear "The All Black sucked! F'ing XXX and stupid YYY can't pass/throw/kick/tackle" etc etc.
I was... I can't remember if it was reading or watching tv now... some ex- All Black who's now in the UK somewhere. He was commenting about how great the club rugby fans there are. They sing like legends, they make noise like buggery, and they cheer incredibly loud if you win.
And if you lose they go oh well, give a decent clap, head to the pub, and come back and support you next week. Contrast that to the fickle support a lot of Air NZ cup teams have been having...
I'd never want to pay to see a test in New Zealand, it's better on the TV, but I'd shell out a heap of cash to be at a Welsh test just to be in an environment where 80 thousand rugby fans sing to support their team., bring the house down, and expect to lose but hope to win. That's supporting your team.
-
Doesn't giving it away signify that you couldn't actually sell many copies? It may be a smart move but only for someone that no longer has the market power they once had.
I was walking through campus last week, and two attractive young women offered me a can of coke. And then gave cans to another hundred or so people who were wandering past. Sadly, they weren't there just for me.
Didn't stop me buying some more coke this week. And coke isn't exactly demonstrating any inability in the marketplace.
I suspect Radiohead would however be spewing that Prince got in first. He got three times as much publicity out of it than they will.
-
Nah. I thought it clearly bounced on the line and was therefore in goal.
I feel the need to see video of this, clearly it's the major controversy of the weekend! Someone youtube it.
Bouncing on the line wouldn't matter at all as far as I know. The question would be where his feet were when he gained possession of the ball. Even if the ball was on the goal line and was picked up by the player, if his feet were in the field of play, once he's picked it up then the ball is in the field of play. If he then goes into the goal area, and he's carrying the ball, the ball is in goal, and hence taken back.
Witness that Ireland forward who caught the ball from a kickoff this morning in the field of play, but deliberately put his right foot on the sideline as he caught it. That ball's out, even though it probably would have bounced in.
-
But surreptitiously taping politicians while looking for that 'Macaca Moment' - and putting one together with some "unfair editing" as you put it if your prey isn't obliging - doesn't seem like much of an advance, just the same game with a lot of disingenuous bullshit about "citizen journalism" and "digital democracy".
Sorry Craig, that's a pile of nonsense.
Key was clearly out on public business (or, national party promotional business), and just because he brought his own camera along, doesn't mean that he no doubt wouldn't have welcomed TV news cameras, who might have been there if he was doing anything more important than snorting spuds.
If that's OK, then why isn't some chap with a handycam and a sense of humour OK?
There's nothing wrong with the editing done on the film. It's biased, one-sided, and clearly done to poke fun at Key. It's a private video though, not TV3 news. There's no obligation to be fair and unbiased. If the editor made 'funny', then he's done his job as far as I'm concerned.
-
The funny thing is, by my own standards I should like hockey. I don't, and I don't know why, It just never appealed really.
I think it's a silly game. You get penalised if you block the ball with your foot or leg. Surely the point of the game is to stop the ball going into your own goal?
Try ice hockey or inline hockey. Pucks whizzing at players at 150 km, three times as fast, and travels (internationally) much better.
-
might pay to send a friendly email to your IT dept and ask them to block the URL, just in case anyone else stumbles onto it.
I can see that email.
"Er yeah. So I've heard that there's pornography online. Not that I look at it! And certainly not at work! Only look at the internet for work purposes, obviously. But yes. So, just in case anyone at work accidentally clicks on a link to this website, can you block it?"
The person at the other end will be thinking "Christ. Damn porn addicts, asking us to block their favourites list so they're not tempted!"