Blog Title: House Of Honcho

In Hibernation (Once again)

I have periods where updating this blog comes down the list of things to do, and unfortunately I can't see it improving anytime in the near future. So back into slumber this blog goes for the time being - no doubt I'll be back one day.

Vintage Humour

Thought I'd share in some respects a humourous thread titled "Calling All People Who Like a Bottle of Wine":

I've been informed to avoid 2007 vintage new world wines. Apparently the grapes have been particularly sour this year.

Bitter thread imo

I suggest the HABANA Merlot from south africa, olde world charm with a smooth finish!!!!!

Anything ANZAC is looking a bit dodgy - lacking strength and clarity, with very little intensity. Some may say the vintage got picked to early, but at least it travels well, all 12,000 miles.

A couple of classic aussie whines for you. Pom victorie vintage 2003 (esp) and 2007. Not enjoyed by aussies due to the bitter and lingering after taste. Available from thrashers. Also available on dvd and on w w w . putacorkinitcampo . com

Lovers of older vintages may wish to try some Pinot All Noir. Despite repeated optimistic forecasts, the 1987 vintage is yet to be equalled. David Kirk "Cuvée L'Amateur" is the one to get

Despite a climate that is not conducive for growing talent, nor is reknown for its flair & versatility, The English 1991, & 2003 cava vintages are robust & full of fight, & whilst they do not appeal to the vast majority, they tend get the job done, with the 2003 vintage showing a cheeky little kick at the death. The 2007 scrumpy vintage, after a truly awful four years of failed apple harvest, is showing signs of a late surge, with the unexpected indian summer pulling a crop which was wet, withered, & ready for pig food, into a (very) potent little number.

I tried a South African sauvignon blanc with a 36.0% alcohol content recently - tres tasty. Off market now, but I do believe another with perhaps a reduced % will be available Sunday.

Weekend Wrap

I'm trying to forget the weekend as quickly as possible. The pack of Pensioners won another game at RWC, the Kiwi Rugby League team redefined the term "sporting embarrassment" and (now that I live away from the big smoke), Auckland voters showed they have as much political intelligence as American ones by electing John Banks as Mayor.

But wait. All that pales into insignificance because ...

Marina Erakovic, the darling of NZ Tennis, won ANOTHER $25,000 challenger event, this time in Rockhampton (somewhere in Australia apparently). That sure makes up for the disappointments of the last couple of weeks, doesn't it Kiwi sports fans.

I see the rest of the world is still picking over the carcass of the All Black's quarter-final loss; this morning I have to read former Welsh winger Jonathan Davies accusing the NZ team and management of arrogance. Hmmmm - someone remind me exactly when was the last time the boyos from the valleys actually won a game against us? Even if the All Blacks had displayed signs of arrogance, which I don't think they had, winning 42 out of 47 games gave them the right - up until last Sunday - to walk around with a little bit of a strut in their step.

So excuse my mirth when the very next article I read, about the search for the next Welsh coach, contains this classic piece of ... ummm, arrogance?

(CEO of Wales RU) Lewis said he had been encouraged at the reaction to the panel's search.

"What has been hugely encouraging is that everyone we have made contact with has been prepared to speak to us and hear what we have to say. That proves the role of coaching Wales remains one of the plum jobs in the world game."

You gotta be fuckin kiddin me. The Welsh coaching job is a poisoned chalice, and the only reason coaches are even talking to you is the fat chequebook in your pocket. So to have Mr Davies accuse the All Blacks of "arrogance" while his own CEO is describing the Welsh coaching position as a "plum job in the world game" is laughable and pathetic in equal doses.

God I hope Wales get drawn in our pool in 2011. Along with Fiji.

The Semis

To tell you the truth, I haven't thought too much about this weekend's games. My attention has been diverted to three cricket series going on (and the joys of been able to finally watch it over the internet on a decent computer). So my thoughts, for what they are worth:

I think we've seen enough surprises in this World Cup. I'm expecting a France South Africa final next weekend, although you can't completely write off the other two semi-finalists. It is doubtful whether France can play as well again as they did in Cardiff, although predicting how well the French are going to play is never easy. But having got past the insurmountable obstacle last weekend, I can't see them letting themselves slip up against a team they (should) beat 4 times out of 5.

South Africa have never lost to Argentina. That will still be the case on Monday.

As far as betting goes, I don't like the prices, I don't like the handicaps, so it's a sit and watch weekend for me.

Have a good weekend.

The Curse of the Hosts

A couple of comments on here by James has got me thinking. Thanks James – perhaps this blog will get off the ground sometime – I spout some shit; someone makes a semi-relevant comment and together we get there.

But the comment that NZ’s record at RWC reads a miserable 1 from 6 for the supposedly dominant rugby union team on the planet got me into research mode. And first stop is an excellent website I’ve mentioned before – an expat-Pom who keeps records of internationals and Super 14 here.

Scroll to two-thirds down the page and you can see a graph - Riding The Wave - which shows the annual average ranking points of major rugby playing nations over the last 20 years. Apart from the last 3 years and the 3 years following the 1987 RWC, NZ exactly haven't had it all their own way, have they? And the older of us can remember the early-90 Wallabies, the mid-90 Boks and of course the 2002-3 English as teams who were at least our equal, if not better.

Now I want to add in the home ground factor. Don't ignore it - teams that play at home have a significant advantage in any sport, and rugby is no different. Hosts of the RWC have an impressive record, due to the fact that they are a major rugby nation playing at home:

NZ 1987 - winners
England 1991 - runners-up
SAF 1995 - winners
Wales 1999 - OK OK there's an exception to every rule
Australia 2003 - runners-up
France 2007 - ???

Yes we need to qualify this with the fact the Northern Hemisphere editions have more hosts than a timeshare sales evening, but the principle still stands. And here's something that surprised me - in the more-competitive sport of soccer, sorry football - the hosts have won it 5 times out of 14, finished runner-up twice (and won the 3rd/4th playoff 3 times). So 10 out of 14 soccer world cup editions have seen the hosts finish in the top 3.

What's this got to do with the All Blacks? Simple, 3 out of our 5 exits have been at the hands of the host nation - 1995, 2003 and now 2007, although yes, last week we were in Cardiff, but we are talking about the French here who would probably prefer to play us in Cardiff or London than Paris anyday.

Let's look at our record against the Wallabies and French, for they are the ones that have knocked us out twice each, and let's be charitable and forgive the 1995 team for they did actually draw the final.

In the 20 year period from 1987 to 2007, the W/L record for NZ v Australia is 28-17 (1 draw), a win percentage of 61%. But look at the games on Australian soil, and we're behind, 11-12 (1 draw). Leading up to the 2003 "shock" defeat, the Bledisloe Cup games on Australian soil between 1999 and 2003 were shared 2-2. Perhaps we were only a 50/50 chance four years ago despite what the bookies said at the time. Back in 1991, the Aussies had beaten us twice beforehand and with the benefit of hindsight, we see the Aussies were at the beginning of a period where they were top of the tree for 3 years. The point: these two losses were not "upsets".

Our record against the French is more substantial - a 70% win record both overall and away, so the losses to Les Bleus do fall into more of the surprise category. But as any long-term follower of rugby knows, the French do have this infuriating habit to be mediocre or sublime on any given day, and the All Blacks have drawn the short straw twice.

So is 1 from 6 a sub-standard record? Or do we expect too much in that our team is expected to knock over the hosts by just turning up? Never under-estimate home field advantage.

If I may be allowed to indulge for a sec, I backed Italy in the 2006 Soccer World Cup principally beacuse of their draw. Knockout tournaments have a "luck" factor in that who plays who at the business end is just as important as who is the best team. The current Springboks must be laughing. And luck also plays a part allowing supposedly superior teams to get away with a poor peformance and still get through - Italy last year against Australia; the 1991 Wallabies against Ireland and you can possibly throw in the Boks against Fiji in the weekend into that category. The ABs have yet to have that luxury from memory.

Is this just a long-winded post in a vain attempt to search for an excuse? Maybe, or perhaps here in NZ we do not completely understand the concept of knockout tournaments and home field advantage. Whichever it is, I can't wait for 2011 :-)

Weekend Wrap

Last word to Jonah Lomu. Asked in a TV interview who we should blame for the All Blacks' defeat, he replied "Blame the French. They beat us." About sums it up.

Honestly, I've avoided most of the TV and press over the last 24 hours. Open up the Herald this morning and we can read all sorts of angles - including how Monday was a non-productive work day and wife-beatings are on the increase. For fuck's sake, it's a game of rugby. I'm done with it - we lost for a variety of reasons to a team that played bloody well.

I reflect on the weekend as a rather special 4 games of rugby. That we have eight teams capable of producing such "theatre" (to borrow a term from John O'Neill) should be something rugby afficianados applaud. Yes, even that turgid England - Australia game, but that only qualifies because of the unexpected result, combined with the Australian forwards going AWOL. If they weren't so busy poking the borax at us here in NZ, I'd love to read the Australian media's analysis of their own team performance.

It will take a while to forget another amazing 10 minutes of Fijian rugby - if they played like that for 80 min gawd help the rest of us, while it was interesting to see the Argentinians are not quite as good coping with the favourites tag as they are when underdogs.

Having recently moved towns, I'm very much in "look forward not back" mode, so thoughts are already turning to the semi-finals which have the potential to produce more theatre, wouldn't you agree John. But I suppose he is too busy hating the English to read this.

Current odds for the RWC winner's market at Betfair are:

South Africa 2.38
France 2.66
Argentina 10.5
England 8.8

SAF have drifted over the last 24 hours while the other three are coming in. Perhaps people are cottoning on to the fact this is now wide open, but I remain slightly bemused that if the more likely France-South Africa final eventuates the South Africans will be favourites. Not in my book, but we'll see how they play this weekend.

If you think the mis-alignment of planets is consigned to rugby, over in the cricketing universe I'm seeing England leading an ODI series in Sri Lanka, the Indians winning an ODI against Australia while South Africa just won a test in Pakistan. Another reminder about the glorious unpredictability of sport, which is part of its attraction - but I guess NZers don't want to hear about that at the moment.

Back later in the week.

A Special Sunday Wrap

I blame Mike McRoberts. Milliseconds after Australia’s loss to England, the frontman for (NZ’s) TV3 coverage couldn’t help himself:

“Four more years George”

Oh dear I thought. Actually, that is a lie and as this has an R18 classification, here’s what I really thought:

You stupid motherfucking idiot. Hours before kick-off you go and have to put the commentator’s kiss of death on the All Blacks by an unnecessary gloat, don’t you. Didn’t it cross your tiny mind that in four years time, George Gregan will be sipping a latte a million miles away from NZ and probably won’t give a flying fuck about RWC in 2011? Now, where is my pin cushion and voodoo doll ...

You may think I’m angry and upset. Far from it – it took me three hours to stop doing cartwheels after the final whistle blew in Cardiff and only then on the advice of my doctor who was concerned at the sudden spike in physical activity. He also cautioned against walking to the dairy to get a paper as chances were I’d get that huge grin wiped off my face by some locals.

Yes, when it comes to mixed emotions through money and loyalty, money wins hands down every time. That is not to say I share the pain of the nation. I do, just suitably cushioned. But it allows me to be more objective than most here in the Shaky Isles about the earthquake we suffer every four years. Here’s a few tips to get over the grief:

Don’t bag the players. We actually didn’t play that badly. Not suggesting we played well either, but compared to the shocker the Aussies put in against England we were OK. At least our forwards weren’t beaten to the breakdown by a pack of players who should be signing up for the pension instead of playing a semi-final at the RWC.

Don’t bag the ref. There’s no doubt the yellow card was the turning point of the game and we can debate ad infinitum whether it was deserved, but it happened and no amount of moaning is going to change it. And I’m reminded of a game in Wellington 2003 where the AB’s were beaten by a team who at one stage had only 13 on the park. The ref is not a total excuse.

Don’t bag the touch judge either. Sure, with a few minutes to go when we were marching inevitably towards the winning score and some dirty cheating Frog played the ball on the ground with his over-sized mitt in full view of the touchie with the ref on the other side and touchie said nowt … well, he does come from the same country as Suzy the Waitress – what do you expect?

Don’t bag the coach. He didn’t play the game.

Hopefully you’re getting the gist. If you want a scapegoat, send McRoberts back to Iraq or wherever there’s a war going on.

And just remember. The All Blacks are still the best rugby team in the world (any overseas readers want to argue – bring it on). Four-yearly losses to teams they should beat doesn’t change that.

So while the rest of the world mock, laugh and delight in our moment of misery, we should not fall into the 1999 trap of bagging those who after all will be feeling the pain a helluva lot more than us armchair viewers. Unfortunately, it has already started:

Commentator Murray Deaker described the result as nothing short of a national disaster.

"Sadly we are a dumb rugby nation, we don't play the big matches well," he said.

"We play them in a boofhead way. We were a bunch of boofheads playing out there tonight against a French side that isn't that good. On the big occasions we choke."

There’s another commentator I wouldn’t mind sending to Iraq. I repeat, personally I don’t think we played poorly – but we still got beaten. Rugby Union is a game where it is easier to defend and spoil rather than attack and create. Points are more often than not scored through errors and turnovers. We played a team who can defend (see RWC preview peoples) and didn’t make many mistakes. We should congratulate them, be gracious in defeat and share the disappointment of our team. Hopefully we have learnt over the years not to take out our frustration by criticising the players and coaches, but I’m probably hoping for a bit much there.

So well done France. Hopefully you’ll play just as well next week otherwise life could get really unbearable.

QF thoughts

With the caveat that I missed last weekend's matches and thus fumbling a little in the dark, some musings on the weekend ahead at the RWC:

AUSTRALIA v ENGLAND
(NZ TAB $1.18/$4.50 - BETFAIR $1.24/$5.5/draw $44)

I'd like to see who replaces Farrell at second five for the Poms - if it's Barkley and they keep Tait at 13 it opens up all sorts of possibilities. While I have a knock on Oz as tournament winners they are one of the smarter teams around, so as long as they can keep the penalties in their own half to a minimum (someone have a quiet word to Rocky Elsom before the game please) I can't see anything but a comfortable win. The Wallabies' pack should get close to parity while their loosies will have time for a cuppa before having to do battle with their counterparts after first phase.

One of two bets for me this weekend -Australia with the points start ($1.85 for -11.5 at the TAB and $1.87 for -12.5 at Betfair). Why? Towards the end the Poms will get desperate and the Ockers will feed off their calamitous mistakes to blow the score out. OK, it may not happen but I think it's worth the risk.

NEW ZEALAND v FRANCE
(NZ TAB $1.10/$6.00 - BETFAIR $1.18/$7.0/draw $65)

France do have the capacity to upset but there have been far too many 40-point thrashings in yesteryear for me to believe it's anything other than a remote possibility. I actually like the picking of the young number 10 (can't spell his name) and while I understand the logic (well, French logic that is) of Traille at 15 it will be interesting to watch his positional play.

Games involving France are difficult to bet - if they play well the ABs will know they've been in a game while a mediocre performance like that against Argentina will see them well beat. In fact, that opening game of the RWC is what I suspect most games will be like this weekend - full of "safe" rugby and in this case factor in the referee as well. The one negative I have on the ABs this year is they too can put in performances where tactical kicking is unsound and handling errors abound. Throwing all of that into the melting pot it's a game to watch, not bet, not even at the handicap. A 6 or 36 point win to the ABs, or something in-between.

SOUTH AFRICA v FIJI
(NZ TAB $1.02/$12.00 - BETFAIR $1.04/$23/draw $110)

A shame Nicky Little is out with injury - I think Fiji are half the team with him missing. Not worth getting up at 2 a.m. for; Fiji have won "their" World Cup, South Africa are just starting theirs. I also think the games they've had against Samoa and Tonga will stand them in good stead for this clash.

ARGENTINA v SCOTLAND
(NZ TAB $1.15/$4.85 - BETFAIR $1.19/$6.4/draw $60)

Typical betting markets - for so long Argentina have been ignored and unfavoured and now we're in the middle of an over-reaction. The price is far too tight for this match although I do think they'll win. Unfortunately having missed both their important pool matches last weekend this is one match I'm a little uncomfortable spouting off about but with Scotland possessing the world's most deadliest boot, this is not as cut and dried as many people think.

Some further thought is required, but I'm leaning towards either playing around with Argentina 12 and under ($2.75 at the TAB, $3.25 Betfair), or backing Scotland with the points start ($2.02 for +13.5 at Betfair). Interesting to note Argentina have won 5 out of the 6 matches between these two, but never by more than 9 points.

Have a good weekend.

Damn Damn Damn

Ahhh well, it looks like the Douggie bet as the top tryscorer is sunk. Still, at 12/1 I got a good run for my money. Truth is, even if he did play, I think the chances are Habana will end up top of the tree given the slightly easier run SAF have (potentially of course) to the final.

Far be it for me to criticise Lord Ted and the rest of the selection panel, but starting Sivivatu really is a head scratcher. Some lazy defence against Italy and his fumbles v Scotland do not exactly fill me with confidence, and if the French had brains and a decent kicker (a big IF on both counts), kicks behind the line turning the wingers around would IMHO keep the upcoming QF a lot closer than most NZers will feel comfortable with. Especially when you add in the referee (Wayne Barnes) who I seem to recall looked out of his depth when SAF and Oz clashed in the opening Tri-Nations game this year.

More thoughts on the QF's closer to the time, in the meantime if any can explain the selection of Sivivatu over Howlett I'm all ears.

Weekend UNWRAP

They say moving house is one of the more stressful times of life. Having now done it 4 times in 5 years it should get a bit easier, but it doesn't. The actual move was a piece of cake (hiring a truck and 3 Arnold Schwarzeneggers is definitely worth the money), but the afterlife is where the fun begins...

Frustration finally boiled over at 3 p.m. yesterday when the electrician still hadn't turned up (I needed extra powerpoints in the house); so a phone call to the competition in town saw them (the competition) turn up in 15 minutes. Go figure. Now with power to needed areas of the abode the fun of getting a new computer to work begins. At this stage the On/Off button has been located.

Add to that despite the house having a nice digital TV dish sitting on its roof, the cable coming into the house had been cut. Get that sorted, only to find the dish needs to be upgraded as TV pics consist of the "Rain Fade" message (even in brilliant sunshine). And of course some parts of Paeroa (including the part I live in) is one of the few areas in NZ that requires a satellite dish to get TV3 - yes the channel with the RWC matches.

So with no TV and limited computer access for 4 days you lot can tell me what happened over the weekend. Cause I don't have a farkin clue.

Moving Day

No, not the third round of a golf tournament - the next 2 days sees all my worldly possessions being transplanted from current abode to another 100 km's away. So sports and betting has taken a back seat over the last few days, including updating this blog.

But I did manage to catch most of the rugby and cricket over the weekend - India's win in the 20/20 was a surprise to me, as if you ran clips of their 20/20 performances and their recent ODI series against England side by side you'd have to wonder if aliens have suddenly inhabited their body.

The rugby is consuming most of my subconcious though - crossing fingers that Henry selects Howlett for the Romania match (somehow I don't think so) and wondering how much liability to carry through on the All Blacks into the real stages of RWC.

Once moved and settled in, three cricket series will take over the brain cells, starting on Saturday with perhaps the most interesting - Australia v India in an ODI series on the sub-continent. See you in a few days.

PS to Prekladatel - have replied to your comment.

When to strike?

The All Blacks continue to drift to win the Rugby World Cup, with the NZ TAB pushing their price out to $1.65 while at Betfair it has touched $1.70. The reasons behind the drift have nothing to do with the ABs themselves; rather a combination of South Africa looking a real challenger for the trophy on the other side of the draw, and a gradual realisation that the wild-card in the pack (France) have a greater chance of meeting NZ in the quarter-finals.

In many minds, such a drift is justified for these reasons, but stop and think for a moment. Who has the greatest control over the destiny of the All Blacks at RWC? Why, the ABs themselves of course. Yes, while a referee or brilliant opposition play may ultimately decide the winner, the ABs will to a significant extent determine the outcome. That’s the “benefit” of being the best in the world and a tournament favourite. Play to your ability and you win. It’s a simple equation. And as an aside, rather ironic the (good and bad) performances of other teams is what's driving the AB price at the moment.

So while there are a couple of injuries and a horribly soft run-in of pool games to a possible tricky quarter-final that may provide a few butterflies to a NZ supporter, in reality nothing much has changed since the tournament kicked off with respect to NZ’s chances of winning the tournament. And in betting that’s the important thing – making an assessment of the probability of an outcome.

So I’m going against the flow – a possible harder quarter-final against France means diddly-squat in my book. South Africa? Don’t have to worry about them until the final, and let’s not forget they – like the All Blacks – are not cast-iron certainties to get there. In my humble opinion, NZ’s price is getting close to worth backing – the question now is when to strike in case something (e.g. another France loss tomorrow) causes it to go back into freefall.

My back of an envelope price assessment of RWC Winner’s Market:

New Zealand $1.80
South Africa $4.00
Australia $12
France $30
Argentina $40
Scotland $200
Rest – who cares.

Possible Quarter-final matches:

New Zealand v France
Australia v England
Argentina v Scotland
Wales v South Africa

An AB Loss

Yes, you read it here first, the All Blacks have lost a game at the Rugby World Cup.

And would you believe it was to Portugal? No? Well, go here and all will be revealed (Sep 18 post).

Weekend Wrap

After the first weekend of RWC, I wasn't prepared to write off the northern sides, but with the further evidence presented over the last 48 hours if the four semifinalists are not from the southern hemisphere I'll run naked down the street. Given Ireland's complete meltdown Argentina should qualify top of Group D giving them a QF against Scotland. Which means we'll probably get the Frogs - and that ain't necessarily a good thing. Ahhh well, a couple of interesting QF's to watch then.

But before I get back to packing boxes, I'd like to share with you an outstanding piece of NZ sporting journalism. Yes, I'm back on the sporting minnows crusade, and you have to laugh that the article was penned at about the same time Georgia nearly caused the upset of the century against Ireland. This plonker argues the RWC should be reduced to 16 teams using the mis-match of the ABs and Portugal as a reason. Which conveniently ignores the fact that in 1995 when the ABS murdered Japan the RWC was only 16 teams.

Mis-matches will occur whether you have 20, 16 or perhaps even only 12 teams. In fact, given the SAF-England scoreline there may be a case for suggesting a 4-nation RWC if you want to avoid one-sided affairs. With a 16-team RWC we may not have had the Fiji-Canada or Samoa-Tonga games which were both entertaining and deserved their place at the tournament.

Mind you, this journo shows his intelligence in another article with this astonishing fact:

"... and Kirwan is the only New Zealand coach, this time managing Japan."

Pardon? So Peter Thorburn must be the waterboy for the American Eagles then. And while Michael Jones is obviously proud of his Samoan heritage I seem to recall he played in a black shirt after being born in Auckland.

The amount of articles the NZ Herald are churning out over the RWC is mind-boggling. If their writers believe there are too many minnows at the RWC, perhaps they should practice what they preach and concentrate themselves on quality rather than quantity.

Overload

So, let us see what's in store for the weekend then:

Midnight tonight - the Aussies and Poms clash in 20/20 cricket, followed by India v Pakistan, interrupted by the small matter of a rugby match between the Boks and the Poms. Soon after that finishes, take stepdaughter to netball (normally I'd get wife to, but she's in bed sick).

Try and get some sleep during the daylight hours tomorrow, as I have to go to my brother's 50th birthday tomorrow evening, which I'll be leaving after a few hours to get back for some more cricket (NZ v Sri Lanka) and rugby (Wales v Australia).

Preparing for a weekend like this is a friggin nightmare, especially as I'm distracted by a pending house and town shift in 2 weeks time. Yes, you may question the wisdom of the timing, but you should see the schedule of cricket from October onwards.

So sorry, no words of wisdom today. I can't even summon the intellect to try and write something mildly interesting or humourous. My brain is fried and I need to go and get some shut-eye before the next 48 hours of madness.

I can't resist

Over 500,000 pounds at odds of $1.02 was wagered on Betfair for Australia to beat Zimbabwe at the 20/20 Cricket World Cup.

MWAHHHH HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Minnow Bashing

No, not the Rugby World Cup. The so-called minnows there are doing rather well thank you with Romaina the latest to show they will not necessarily take the expected arse-rogering of John Holmes proportions lying down (although towards the end of pool play they may be buggered - yes, pun intended - by four games in three weeks).

I'm talking Hockey; specifically Papua New Guinean Hockey. Didn't know that Papua New Guinea play hockey? Well, judging by their efforts in the Oceania Qualifying Series, despite fielding a team it is stretching the truth to say they "play" hockey. They may have 11 people standing on a bit of artificial turf but playing hockey? Errr, no.

When it comes to the developmental aims of international elite sport I usually side with the Eddie the Eagles and Eric the Eels of this world - possibly because of first-hand experience as a wannabe international athlete who in reality was not even good enough to tie up the shoelaces of the top competitors I was up against. I made my mark in the bar afterwards, but I digress.

Seeing Papua New Guines thrashed 39-0 by New Zealand and 35-0 by Australia this week crosses the line into farce. Isn't Hockey only 70 mintues long? 4 goals every 7 minutes - did the poor bastards ever get the ball? Out of interest, I tried googling to see what the world record score in another sport that involves a 1-point goal scoring system was - soccer, sorry, football.

In the World Cup it's 31-0 - handed out by Australia to American Samoa in 2001. But remember soccer is 90 minutes, not 70, so you can almost accept that as a contest. I said almost. And then I came across this delightful piece where a club side in Madagascar scored own goals in protest and lost 149-0 - go and have a read, it's rather amusing.

But getting back to the hockey - developing global competition is IMO a noble aim for any sport but all sports should safeguard against farcical situations - and 39-zip in 70 min of hockey qualifies.

And a postscript to Stephen Fleming - yep, he's been sacked. Immediately retires from One Day cricket. Does not confirm availability past the two tests against South Africa in November. If we lose him prematurely, what a waste and a sad end to a distinguished career.

Premature Ejection

You gotta be friggin kiddin me.

Richard Boock's article in the Sunday Star-Times with a follow-up piece in the Dominion Post suggests Stephen Fleming's time as captain of the NZ cricket team is about to come to a sudden end.

You gotta be friggin kiddin me.

Now while sports journos are not exactly in the Nostradamus category when it comes to predictions, given that Boock wrote Fleming's book we can safely assume the two do speak to each other and in this case there is a bit of wood burning causing the smoke on the horizon.

And if NZ Cricket are about to dump Fleming as captain, I'd rank it in the Rugby League Sports Management and American Military Intelligence category of oxymorons. Dumb Dumb Dumb. Sure, Fleming is in the twilight of his career but surely as our most successful captain ever and one of the world's best over the last 10 years he has earned some right to stage manage his exit? The fact he gave up the ODI captaincy after the World Cup shows he is not really wanting to hang onto the reins longer than he perhaps should. He is still in fine nick (a 243 for Nottinghamshire last week) and at age 34 you wouldn't think senility has crept in yet, would you?

The only ones showing signs of senility are NZ Cricket's coach and selectors. States Boock:

It's thought the New Zealand selectors are anxious to continue with Fleming's services as a batsman, but are unwilling to retain him as captain

Well here's a thought. If you demote Fleming as captain, my money is on him giving NZ cricket the big two-fingered salute and buggering off to the rebel Indian Cricket League. Honestly, NZ cricket is living in cloud cuckoo land if they think they can demote him from the captaincy yet retain his services as a batsmen.

The fact is Fleming is still the best qualified for the job, and can still hold his place in the side. And with test series away to South Africa, England and Australia over the next 12 months, it ain't the time to be blooding the heir apparent. IF NZ Cricket had any brains, they would look at the long-term calendar, see we have a softish domestic season in 2008/9 with visits by West Indies and India and promote Vettori then.

This is all so completely stupid you have to wonder what Fleming has done to piss off either (or both) the selectors or coach Bracewell. Yet again you're left with the feeling personalities and politics get in the way of rational decision-making in a NZ sports organisation.

Weekend Wrap

Having watched every Super 14 match earlier in the year, there ain't no way I am even going to attempt to watch all matches from the Rugby World Cup, especially with the 20/20 cricket about to start and the small matter of moving towns on the horizon.

The only game that really mattered was the first - as Argentina upset the hosts and threw a spanner into my prediction of a NZ v France final. It may still happen, as the finishing positions in that pool will probably not be decided until the final match on Sept 30 (Ireland v Argentina). While most people are musing on the sub-standard performance by the French, the main point I took out of the game was the refereeing. Spreadbury was horrible - his control over the breakdown was non-existent and while I do not begrudge the Pumas their victory (they deserved it purely on their tactical nous and errors the French made), play that game with a different referee who knows something about killing the ball illegally and you would probably have a different result. No, not sour grapes (I didn't bet) - but the lesson to be learned is get a referee who will be lenient on slowing the ball down and you will have a horrible, defence-dominated game which is exactly what the All Blacks do not want. Those are the sorts of games where they will be brought back to the chasing pack.

So while we can all crow about the teams south of the Equator getting off to a flying start while the northern hemisphere (supposed) giants struggle to put away the likes of USA and Namibia, it won't mean much if the likes of a Spreadbury controls a game that matters where defence is allowed to dominate and it becomes a contest of territory and who has their kicking boots on. That is my major fear for the ABs winning the tournament.

Now I all hope you put some moolah on Douggie being top tryscorer like I told you. Don't panic this week when Henry names the Fijians for the Portugal game - actually it is possible Howlett will get the start to get the tryscoring record out of the way, which would be nice. Habana grabbing 4 for the South Efrikaans wasn't exactly in the script; if he scores a couple more in pool play someone pass me the number of a French hitman please.

Back tomorrow or Wed for a serve at NZ Cricket.

Back In Black

Yeah that "Northland Blue" sucked - the RWC is about to start so I'm going back to the blackout.

I've run out of steam on the betting preview - I might get back to it Friday but with a ODI tonight I need to spend a bit of time thinking about earning money.

RWC Betting Preview (Chapter Two)

OK OK despite my warnings you’re itching to have a bet. Here’s one:

TOP TRYSCORER

Usually I avoid these markets like the plague as with 20 teams of 30 players you’re on a hiding to nothing. Yes, you can whittle the field down to half a dozen serious contenders but there is always a chance some dirt-tracker will score a bucket-load during one of the cricket-score games and throw the market out of whack.

That nearly happened in 1995 when Marc Ellis refused to pass the ball to his wingers in NZ’s romp over Japan – he ended up joint top for the tournament with Lomu. But it doesn’t always – Latham got five in the Wallabies training run against Namibia 4 years ago, but didn’t end up at the top of the tree.

In every World Cup, a winger has ended up as top (or joint top) tryscorer. And in 4 of the 5 editions, that winger has worn a black jersey. So no surprises where we start looking hardest:

(NZTAB Prices)

J Rococoko $5.50
S Sivivatu $5.50
D Howlett $8.00

And this is where I think the bookies have got it wrong. Howlett is the outsider of the three I presume because up until recently he has not been flavour of the month with the AB selectors. The key words there are “until recently” – Howlett’s 2007 form is definitely an improvement on his past couple of seasons and his selection for the final Tri-Nations game leads me to suspect he is now the first choice No. 14. It helps the other two wingers in the Squad are principally No. 11’s. Basically, unless Howlett gets an attack of the dropsies I expect he’ll be wearing 14 more often than not.

With 4 pool games, there are 8 selection spots for the wingers and my expectation are they’ll be shared 3-3-2. From the quarters on, the third-choice winger won’t even be in the match-day 22. So assuming a finals appearance it is possible two of the AB wingers will play 6 games and the other only 2.

I have been known to be wrong in the past, but it is my opinion Howlett is the number one right winger, I think Sivivatu will be warming the bench more than the others, so I think $8 is a reasonable price in this market. For the record, I got $13.50 at Betfair and I’ll be looking for more at anything over $10. You may want to wait until the team (expected to be the top XV) is named for the opening game against Italy, but that runs the risk of the bookies cutting the price when they wake up.

Yes, there are wingers in other teams apart from New Zealand – but traditionally the ABs score the most tries in the tournament and I don’t expect that to change this time around. Of the other teams, the French are next in line to consider but only the world’s best psychic will have any clues about Laporte’s selection policy. But their outside backs are all are at tasty prices.

While there are inherent risks in this market (e.g. an unusually defence-dominated tournament may see some dirt-tracker at the top of the list), $8 is a reasonable price in my opinion - $13.50 definitely so.

EDIT 11.50 a.m.

Yes, I forgot to mention the NZTAB has a top tryscorer market for New Zealand players, with Joe and Sivi at $3.75, and Doug at $5. If you're worried about some French garlic-munching winger scoring a truckload against Namibia and Georgia, there's worse bets around than backing Howlett at 5's in this market.

Weekend Wrap

Pssst Trev. There’s another Kiwi athlete out there that requires your psychological services. Women’s Marathon runner Nina Rillstone was “happy” with her 13th placing at the World Track and Field Championships:

"I'm happy enough - but if I'd managed a place in the top 10 and I would have been really, really happy," said Rillstone.

Now come on Trev. On a weekend where New Zealand can celebrate another four world champions we can’t have our also-rans expressing joy at a thirteenth place now, can we? Or being “really, really happy” if she managed to get into the top 10. Go and sort her out please.

Yes, three rowers (well, six actually – did you see the coxless four power past the 27-race unbeaten Brits? Phenomenal) and women’s motocross rider Katherine Prumm all won world titles in the weekend, which confirms what some of us have known since the days of Mark Todd and Charisma – when it comes to sports involving sitting on your arse, we Kiwis have a head start. Which kinda makes a mockery of SPARC’s Push Play campaign encouraging us to get outside and enjoy the fresh air.

Let’s face it –we are damn good at sitting on our arse. So instead of giving NZ Golf $1.4 million to try and turn us all into recreational walkers swinging a stick at a ball around a piece of grass, how about a new Lazy Boy for every family with 2 kids or more so we can ingrain from an early age the proper arse-sitting techniques that are so essential for sports such as equestrian and rowing.

Sounds like a bloody good idea to me. The fact that I need a new lounge suite – worn out from too much arse-sitting – of course has nothing to do with it.

Yeah, I’m in a good mood. When the pokie-loving wife comes home with the jackpot from the local pub in her handbag, followed by an inspired bet on India at $1.96 when England were 95-1 in their run chase last night (10 min later they were 104-4), I’m in love with life again. The only worrying thing about having a golden run in betting at the moment is currently I have a loss on an All Blacks win at RWC. Gulp.

RWC Betting Preview (Chapter One)

A major sporting tournament comes along, such as the Rugby World Cup, and bookies start salivating at the mouth. They know it’s a prime time to knick some money off Mum and Dad punter who only bet on special occasions, or where the more regular recreational gambler puts a little bit more money into his betting account. It’s Melbourne Cup day for 6 weeks.

If you go to (for example) the NZTAB’s website, you can see a myriad of options pertaining to the tournament – from who will win it, who’ll win the Pools, when some of the big teams will be eliminated, who will be the tournament’s top tryscorer etc etc. It all gets a bit overwhelming even for a supposed professional such as moi, so I can only assume it must look like a dog’s breakfast to others.

The key trick to major sporting tournaments is to ignore a lot of the markets. Sure, you might miss out on an opportunity, but more often than not you’ll be sucked into having a bad value bet. Let me give you an example. Even though rugby is my No. 2 betting sport, I don’t pretend to know everything that happens in the world of rugby. I wouldn’t have a clue how good Portugal is, who their top 15 players are and thus I can really only make an educated guess as to whether the All Blacks will cover the 110.5 point handicap that is already up at Betfair for their match against the Portuguese. And guessing and betting are not great bedfellows.

One of the golden rules in betting is stick to your knitting. So for a lot of the first month of the tournament, I’ll be sitting on the sidelines. OK, maybe I will back Portugal with the 110.5 point start (I’ll see how the Iberians play in their first match), but only because I know to win a game by that margin is feckin hard. The ABs have only ever done it once.

And so my advice to Joe Public is don’t get sucked into having a bet just for the sake of it. Another fundamental in betting-land is there is always another opportunity around the corner. But I know some of you will be itching to contribute to the profit of the NZ Racing Board, so without further ado here’s some pointers and advice from someone who supposedly knows what he is doing.

TOURNAMENT WINNER

Of course the major interest surrounding a tournament such as RWC is who is going to win the bloody thing. It tends to be the first market everyone looks at and where the most dollars end up going. Already at Betfair over 4 million quid has been wagered, most of it on the All Blacks at prices ranging from $1.38 to $2.60 (yes, the early birds got some value when this market opened up 12 months ago – alas I was not one of them).

This tournament has a dominant favourite and currently you can back NZ at $1.60 at both Betfair and the NZTAB. Interestingly, that $1.60 at our local bookie is one of the highest around – many overseas bookies still have the ABs shorter. Even though NZ has drifted over the last couple of months, the current price is not good value. By comparison, Australia was around $2.75 to win Cricket’s version of the Holy Grail earlier this year.

It is a frequent conundrum in sports betting that the most likely outcome has a price that is too short. The only thing you can do is keep your money in the wallet (or look for value on outsiders – more about that in a mo’). However, if you really want to back NZ to win the World Cup, I’d suggest an alternative method – back them in each knockout game. My prediction of (Betfair) prices from the quarters on goes something like this: v Ireland $1.10; v Australia $1.22; v SAF/France $1.33.

Multiply those three figures and you get $1.78 – yes I could be wrong (not only with the prices, but opponents) but it’s probable you’ll get more bang for your buck that way than sticking it on now in the winner’s market.

So if the All Blacks are too short, there must be value elsewhere, right? Unfortunately due to the bookies profit margin, not necessarily. Current prices for the four main contenders (if you want to back anyone else, be my guest) at NZTAB/Betfair are as follows:

New Zealand $1.60/$1.60
France $6.00/$9.20
South Africa $5.50/$8.40
Australia $8.00/$13.00

At the NZTAB it’s hard to get excited about any of those, while imho France are the most over-priced on the Betfair market (mainly due I think to their so-called Pool of Death). So in essence, if you think NZ are going to end 20 years of heartbreak, it may be worth taking the risk and all-up betting them from the quarter-final onwards. Based on current prices I think the best option is keeping your powder dry.

RWC Preview

Right, the warm-ups are completed, the teams are winging their way over (or in South Africa’s case, going home for 5 days – WTF is all that about?), so it’s time to put the stake in the sand, … well, at the TAB at least.

I’m not going to get the Einstein prize for rocket science, but fear not fellow Kiwis, the All Blacks ARE going to win the Rugby World Cup. Probably. From what I’ve seen over the last few months, there are only 2 – OK to be kind to my friends across the ditch - 2.5 realistic contenders to knock the AB’s off Mission Win That Fucking Trophy We Haven’t Had For 20 Years.

Do not argue – the facts are NZ are Numero Uno in rugby union, have been for some time and they’ve lost F.A. matches in the past 4 years. But (and this is a big but, a Serena Williams butt if you like – gawd did you see her fall over yesterday on centre court? No? Lucky you), rugby is a complex sport and combined with a knockout tournament structure New Zealand is not a put your mortgage on them betting proposition. In fact, the RWC is a shit avenue for betting but more about that another time. Let’s get back to the teams.

After NZ, you can really only count South Africa, France and maybe Australia as genuine possible winners. The main argument against other teams such as Wales, England and Ireland winning is while they have the ability (actually, ability is the wrong word, potential is more like it) to knock over one of the big guns, the probability they can do that three times in a row is entering the territory of fat pink things flying past your window.

Let’s get rid of the Breast Brigade first. Diggers, you’ve won your game against us this year. Lightning doesn’t strike twice. If you get to the semis, prepare for an arse-whipping of 1970’s proportions.

Which leaves two teams to be worried about – the Frogs and the Boks. Thankfully we’ll probably not meet either of them until the final, and currently I’m more worried about the hosts than the Saffers. Their warm-up games have been a bit like the ABs through June and July – not setting the earth on fire but winning games comfortably enough without looking like they’re digging deep. The one thing I have been impressed with them is their defence – remember when France C came out here earlier this year they weren’t missing many tackles?; well, their A and B teams don’t miss many either. In three warm-up games they gave up one try – admittedly two of those games were against a clueless (on attack) England, but nevertheless impressive. The Frogs also have good depth in their squad with perhaps their only (slight) weakness being having quality back-up grunt in the engine room.

The only nagging doubt I have about the French is lining up northern hemisphere form against that from south of the Equator. The SAF-Scotland game is the only form guide available since a full-strength NZ team went to Europe 12 months ago. And that game is a glass half-empty half-full kinda thing – the Saffers won comfortably enough but if you take out the three-try burst in the first half, South Africa only won 6-3 in 74 minutes of rugby.

One of my fears some time ago was NZ would have a series of too-easy pool games before meeting a fired up Irish in the quarters. Funny how things change – the Scots and the Italians will both give us a reasonable game and the scoreline will be closer than most people will expect, while the Irish look rudderless without their talismanic captain. That fear has now been erased and I really do feel the planets are aligning well for the Kiwis.

The RWC is not known for producing upset results. If the quarters aren’t NZ-Ireland, France-Scotland, South Africa-Wales and Australia-England, I’ll be surprised. Ditto for the semis where we can expect NZ-Oz and Frog-Boks. And that, my 4 regular readers, is when it will be time to turn the TV on. For all the dross that the tournament will serve up in the first month, there will be two monumental games to round it off – the Fra-SAF semi and the winners of that against the ABs in the final. And while I’d say on the balance of probabilties NZ will beat France (or SAF) in the final, it’s a knockout tournament and at the end of the day it will come down to who can hang onto the ball better and who gets pinged the most by the ref (yes, refereeing is a significant variable to factor into calculations). And also not to lose sight of who is sitting in the stands watching the game injured.

That’s enough entertainment for you lot for one day. I’ll knock up a betting guide in a few days.

Weekend Wrap

Awww shucks - if there were more than 3 of you begging I might keep going. But here's one last wrap for the weekend, because there is something I want to get off my chest ...

I love Valerie Vili. No, not in a sexual way - get your minds out of the gutter. To me, she encompasses all that an elite sportsperson should be - a touch of arrogance spiced with at the right times humility (yes I know that's a contradiction), emotion worn on the sleeve that is not scripted for the public a la Sharapova (and yes, let your minds wander into the gutter for a brief sec at this point ...), and I guess it helps she's spent part of her life on the wrong side of the railway tracks.

But do you know what I really love about her? EVERY time - bar one - she's stepped up to the plate in a major competition she has done a personal best. The exception was the 2004 Olympics, where a hospital stay prior was a reasonable excuse. She is one tough cookie and given her age she has the potential to dominate her chosen sport like no other, so long as drug testing regimes stay one step ahead of the cheats.

So as our other famous female field athlete rides off into the sunset (Queen Bea couldn't qualify for the Discus final today), salute our World Champion and make a note to vote for her in the People's Choice awards - she deserves it (no matter what the All Blacks do).

And before I leave the World Athletics Champs, let's dissect the comments of Kimberley Smith, our 10,000m runner who came a more than creditable fifth. The newspaper started their article with the following:

Kimberley Smith came away from the track after finishing fifth in the 10,000m at the world track and field championships yesterday disappointed at not winning a medal but happy with her placing.

Now my interest is piqued. A medal after all, is just another term for a top 3 placing, so how can you be happy with your placing but disappointed at missing a medal? Further on, we get to her quotes:

"Fifth place is very good, I mean I know that. Not many New Zealanders have gone quite fifth on the track. I don't know when the last was, so I mean I'm happy with that, but it's very disappointing."

Now I know it's hot in Osaka and she could be suffering from heatstroke, but there is one big mixed message in there. And then the penny dropped.

You see, thanks to a certain CEO of a certain government department who told us in no uncertain terms 18 months ago that a fourth = failure, our athletes have to be careful not to appear overly satisfied with these tin placings for fear of a Heineken bottle shoved where the sun don't shine and having their mental toughness questioned.

So to paraphrase - Kimberley is bloody stoked to finish fifth - and so she should be, because it is a meritorious performance in a sport where chicken-leg Africans dominate. But she can't say so, because Nick or Trevor will tell her off for being soft.

Comments on the rugby will follow in a couple of days, right now I've got to get my head around another all-nighter in front of the TV trying to work out which of the two most inconsistent sides in ODI cricket is going to come out on top. Pass me a coin someone.