Just realised that this is a seriously top heavy aussie batting line up. Starc and Cummins can both hold a bat and Paine has the heart of a lion but if we can get Warner, Smith and Labuschange cheaply then there's not a lot of other batting and the pressure might tell.
Posts made by Cyclops
RE: Cricket: NZ vs Aus
RE: Stadium of Canterbury
It must be incredibly frustrating to put together the case for a rugby stadium in NZ.
You know, if you get an AB test, you can sell 35,000 easily. But that will be once a year. Every other game you barely need 15,000.
So, do you build for what you actually need? Or do you put together an optimistic case to pay for what you want.
NZ Rugby's admirable sentiment of spreading the ABs around really does make things more difficult.
Crusaders will probably sell out a 25k seater a couple of times a year (and probably more the first few years after opening).
15k is basically what they have now the crusaders are complaining is too small. An average crowd of 17k probably is 2 games at 13k, two games at 17k and 1 or 2 at or near capacity.
RE: Stadium of Canterbury
@nzzp The super rugby attendance figures sound about right but the provincial attendance figures sound optimistic - does any team pull 7k average home crowds?
I very much doubt it.
15k every year for a football match also seems highly unlikely without a sweetheart deal which defeats the purpose. Unless they know something I don't, the only team that has a chance of pulling that number is the phoenix and they've played maybe 2 games in chch. Planning for one per year is nuts. Maybe one every 4 years would be realistic.
If they did do a deal to get the phoenix down every year then 15k won't happen, I'd guess an average around 10k based on the Auckland experience and accounting for the lower population base.
1 rugby league per year match also seems optimistic, but at least there's a track record of Aussie teams taking home games to Christchurch.
Overall though, I think it just shows how hard it is to make the numbers for a stadium stack up. They're a terrible investment (otherwise the private sector would have long since built one) but do accrue some social benefits, and I suspect that the council have stretched plausibility to make this business case as palatable as possible.
RE: All Black Coach - Ian Foster
@Bovidae but what is 'acceptable' in terms of bedding in new systems, processes etc?
1 loss a year acceptable?
3 over 2 years?
4 over 2 years?
For me 3 in 2 is par for the course, 4 is probably still ok but not ideal...anything more...
I think it depends on circumstances. 5 losses might be acceptable if they're all away, close and we're generally playing well.
3 losses might not be if we're struggling to win, have a loss at home and the losing margins are wide.
You'd also hope that the board has a better view of the coaching as well. So if the coaching team is showing a good understanding of what they're trying to do, are adapting following losses, can articulate effectively what needs to change etc they should get more rope than if they have less losses but also less understanding of what is going wrong.
The best pathway to long term, continued success is strong processes. If someone is getting good results but can't really explain why (or where to improve) then odds on they'll regress over time. If someone is not getting as good results but they can explain why and how to improve, then over the long term they'll do better.
That has to be balanced with the reality that you are what your record says you are, but there can't be a magic number of wins for safety or losses for sacking.
RE: Cricket: NZ vs England
So Jofra is actually really really quick and outer radar was just making him look slow and disinterested.
How did our guys speeds stack up against Archer? Weren't they similar? So if Archer is actually bowling at 150 clicks when the radar says 130 how unbelievably quick woul Lochie Ferguson be with a "proper" radar...
Or was he struggling with having to grind through a test match.
Seeme quite an articulate and personable bloke but can't escape the feeling he was over hyped, over bowled and over here.
Our radar guns being slow isn't a new one. I've heard that from plenty of kiwi bowlers too.
Doesn't really stack up when you had Archer breaking the 150 mark during the test series though (does he reckon that was 160+?)