Steve Tew getting the excuses in

[Isurus]

You mean they buy in a load of talented players?

If I was thinking along those lines then I would have to be talking about England and then I might have compared them to Chelsea + Real Madrid + Juventus , but no, that's not what I meant.

Edit: you don't really want to start a "New Zealand steals pacific islands players" thread do you? That's an argument you can't win.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

If I was thinking along those lines then I would have to be talking about England and then I might have compared them to Chelsea + Real Madrid + Juventus , but no, that's not what I meant.

Edit: you don't really want to start a "New Zealand steals pacific islands players" thread do you? That's an argument you can't win.

Haha, no it was only a joke
I'm well aware of how many players go into NZ from the pacific Islands, and believe me: I'm really on NZs side when trolls start trying to say you're all poachers

 

[nickdnz]

Seriously where does this last comment come from, if anything Canadians on here have beeen defending NZ rugby. You guys ***** about everyone disliking you and than you pull this crap out? Go BOKS!!!!

 

[LittleGuy]

Island Venues small?


Apia Park, Apia, Samoa. Capacity 15,000

TFL National Stadium, Suva, Fiji. Capacity 30,000

Teufaiva Sport Stadium, Nuku'alofa, Tonga. Capacity 11,000 (What other country in the world will you find a stadium with enough capacity to take over 10% of the population of the entire country??!!!)

Compared to Eden Park, Twickenham, Millenium Stadium, Stade De France these venues are small, yes proportinately they are big to the size of countries population. But my point was that they can't generate the same ticket revenue that the Tier One teams would have in hosting matches. This is reflected by the fact that when an Island team plays NZ or Australia the game is virtually always played in the Tier One venue.

@ Iverson, you are the one who turned this into a personal issue, while I reacted poorly with my GO BOKS!!! Comment. There was absolutley no need to take Canadian posters to task because of the flag under our handles your comment was clearly a thinly veiled "You guys have no idea what you are talking about because you are Canadian".

I noticed you being incredibly rude to another Canadian poster Rusty Lock in another thread I think it was the Japan-NZ thread where you immediately resorted to a personal attack on him when he questioned John Kirwan's selections for that game, rather than posting a logical retort, I nearly said something in that instance but Rusty acquitted himself well in his response.

As for my comments on the game yes the game has nothing to do with the thread's subject, but the timing of your comment coincided with what had been a poor result for Canada and very much seemed like rubbing salt in the wounds. Perhaps it was just bad coincedence or maybe you were feeling a little inflated from what was a good AB's performance.

 

[Bucephalus]

Rightfully?!?!?.. and why does Japan hold more right than NZ to host this competition?.

Steve Tew is right on the money[no pun intended] with this. Anyone who doesn't see what he is trying to say is just ignorant.

I hate that, I hate it with a vengence. So, if you dont agree with him you're ignorant eh.

My view is that everyone is entitled to a view and its total "ignorance" to demand someone else shares your opinion.

 

[Tricia McMillan]

As for my comments on the game yes the game has nothing to do with the thread's subject, but the timing of your comment coincided with what had been a poor result for Canada and very much seemed like rubbing salt in the wounds. Perhaps it was just bad coincedence or maybe you were feeling a little inflated from what was a good AB's performance.

I've never understood when a big team plays an emerging team, the big team's fans act with animosity towards the other team. Cut them a break in my opinion, if both teams put up good performances then the big team will win every time, but to wish anything bad upon the smaller team is just out of line.

 

[smartcooky]

I hate that, I hate it with a vengence. So, if you dont agree with him you're ignorant eh.

My view is that everyone is entitled to a view and its total "ignorance" to demand someone else shares your opinion.

Err. go back and READ his post.

[TEXTAREA]

Originally Posted by Dizzy
Steve Tew is right on the money[no pun intended] with this. Anyone who doesn't see what he is trying to say is just ignorant.[/TEXTAREA]

There is a world of difference between "agreeing" and "understanding"

 

[TRF C A Iversen]

I've never understood when a big team plays an emerging team, the big team's fans act with animosity towards the other team. Cut them a break in my opinion, if both teams put up good performances then the big team will win every time, but to wish anything bad upon the smaller team is just out of line.

Oh for goodness sake Tricia. For real? If so, where did I wish anything bad upon Canada or it's fans? Why do people seem to be able to make up in their own mind what others actually said? Is there anything at all out of line about doing that?

@ Iverson, you are the one who turned this into a personal issue, while I reacted poorly with my GO BOKS!!! Comment. There was absolutley no need to take Canadian posters to task because of the flag under our handles your comment was clearly a thinly veiled "You guys have no idea what you are talking about because you are Canadian".

Again your making up what I actually meant. I decide that, because I know what I said and meant. I just noticed four Canadians in a row discussing the NZRFU's situation and getting some things right, yes, but some things demonstrably wrong. It was a smart-ass one off comment, not meant to say anything other than "I for the most part disagree with you guys and your reasonings - and oh look your all canadians". When I saw who I was disagreeing with it was no different than me seeing three Canadians in a neutral part of the world discussing the rights and wrongs of New Zealand rugby and saying "hey, I wouldn't pretend to know what you guys do right and wrong with Canadian Hockey financial administration, so why are you guys all experts from afar". It wouldn't have mattered if it was 2 people from Romania and one from Uruguay, I'd still have disagreed. The fact that you guys were from Canada was just kind of interesting to me as I'd never seen that many posts from Canadians consecutively and I made a smartass comment. Big deal. I'm not apologising for it. People lump New Zealanders and their opinions all together on this forum continuously.

I noticed you being incredibly rude to another Canadian poster Rusty Lock in another thread I think it was the Japan-NZ thread where you immediately resorted to a personal attack on him when he questioned John Kirwan's selections for that game, rather than posting a logical retort, I nearly said something in that instance but Rusty acquitted himself well in his response.

To say something like that and not use a link or quote is inflammatory. It seriously implies directly that I have something against Canadians. If I have disagreed with him, it's nothing but a co-incidence and I'd like to see references to what I've said that's incredibly rude.

As for my comments on the game yes the game has nothing to do with the thread's subject, but the timing of your comment coincided with what had been a poor result for Canada and very much seemed like rubbing salt in the wounds. Perhaps it was just bad coincedence or maybe you were feeling a little inflated from what was a good AB's performance.

I certainly was not attempting to rub "salt into the wounds". I personally have nothing but the highest regard for many Canadians and none higher than their rugby representatives. Many of those guys are awesome players. As a country I have immense respect for Canada, particularly for their attitudes to conservationism, good gun-control, social policies and peace-keeping work world-wide.

As for your attempt to PC bully me into a category of an anti-Canadian aggressor, I guess Canada can't win em all when it comes to producing wonderful people.


Finally, might I respond to Canuks. As you can see I've spent a long time addressing the attack on myself from Little Guy. I haven't been able to respond to your well-worded and articulate response to my views. May I just say that I disagree with your understanding of my motivation, but I do agree with most of your broader points.



As anyone can see I've WELL AND TRULY held to account for a one-sentence smart-ass comment in a ridiculously PC world. So let that be the close of the matter. Any other discussions on this can be held with me via Personal Message or can be deleted to keep the thread back on topic.

 

[Intent]

Has this thread turned into Canadians know New Zealand and what's best for it or something?

Hi, sorry I'm so late in replying.

I don't mean my comments to be an attack on kiwis at all, nor do I claim to have any knowledge about the inner workings of the NZRU. But.. I question any major Union (it was mentioned earlier in this thread that this funding gap left by the RWC is felt in other countries) that is having problems coming up with solutions in order to make up for the lost money. I would question this for any sport in any country but especially if it is the most popular sport and with a team that is generally regarded to be a cash cow.

I didn't take your remark to be condescending at all, but I'm from western Canada and we tend to be a little bit more mellow.


edit. I would also like to make it clear that I agree with Tew and most posters in that the IRB's current sponsorship model is absolute ***s. It needs to be changed in order to keep up with the increasing popularity and financial wellbeing of Rugby. My first comment (a few pages back) started with IF the IRB don't change their policies and NZ withdraw from the next world cup that it would do a great disservice to the progress of the game.

 

[james5000]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/5770586/Southern-heavyweights-shake-IRB-money-tree

 

[Aout]

I maybe missed the point of the article, but did they discuss about these changes WITHOUT the other unions ?

 

[Dizzy]

I hate that, I hate it with a vengence. So, if you dont agree with him you're ignorant eh.

My view is that everyone is entitled to a view and its total "ignorance" to demand someone else shares your opinion.

Dude, I never said if you don't AGREE with Tew you're ignorant. What I meant was, if you can't have an open mind and even TRY to understand what he is saying then you are ignorant.
Because some posters were saying Tew wasn't happy that we lost so much money in THIS tournament when that isn't what he was saying at all.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/5770586/Southern-heavyweights-shake-IRB-money-tree

I've been waiting for someone to post this up, was too lazy to do it myself lol..

I guess this settles it then. The SANZAR nations all spoke up and threatened to pull out, not only the All Blacks. Obviously there is something going wrong with the IRB otherwise no other nation would've helped the cause and the IRB wouldn't have settled.

 

[Shaggy]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/5770586/Southern-heavyweights-shake-IRB-money-tree

That's a great result for all of the tier one teams, and also for the other nations who struggle to attend due to lack of funds ... the relaxation of the sponsorship rules should help the Fiji's, Samoa's, and Tonga's a lot.

Its a shame that the number 1,2, and 3 ranked sides in the world have to threaten to leave before any progress is made on any of these issues.

 

[smartcooky]

The key feature of these agreements are

► A review of the financial model - one of Steve Tew's points

► RWC year losses ro major unions to be compensted - another of Tew's points

► Relaxing its restrictive sponsorship arragements - yet another of Tew's points

► Teir 1 teams to share the short turnarounds - Teir 2 & 3 teams will be happy

But the one thing that really surpised me was the the IRB have given their CEO Mike Miller a bollocking for the arrogant an dismissive way he responded to Tew's complaints, when he suggested that if New Zealand were to not go to 2015, they could be replaced. AT the meeting, both Australia and South Africa said they would stand behind New Zealand, which would mean replacing all three. How credible would a RWC be without the top three ranked sides? It would be like having a cricket world up without India, Australia, England... i.e. just a sad joke.

 

[nickdnz]

I think that what makes people jump on their high horses in some countries is the attitude that "you need us because we're the best, and without us your nothing, so gived us what we want", but the reality is that was not the intention of Steve Tew at all. It wasn't meant as a threat as much as pointing out the reality, that the NZRU cannot afford to take the financial slaughtering every four years, and that will probably apply to a majority of the unions in the RWC.

Overall I think the meeting went as well as can be expected. I hope that there is some middle ground, as it is clearly very important for the game of rugby that the NZRU makes money to fund the game internationally, it just can't be to the detriment of existing unions who rely on sponsorship to be competitive.

 

[Dizzy]

Wow, didn't know Miller got a bollocking. That's surprising and deserved as well. To even suggest he could replace a team with such calibre is ridiculous. The ONLY response he SHOULD have had was that he would sit down with Tew and come to a compromise. Then ARU and SARU wouldn't have had to threaten pulling out as well.
When this thread begun there were alot of people against Tew on this. Where have they all gone?

 

[shire shark]

Isn't Steve few the same guy that signed Rodney so'oialo to a 4 year extension when he was already on the outer. Now he's being payed elite money to sit on his ass. He also signed a 30 year old flanker who a history of concussion problems and a player that is obviously on the downside of his career in richie McCaw to a 4 year deal. Tews the same guy that stuffed up the 2003 world cup hosting rights. He's got a great track record. He's got no one to blame except his poor mismanagement of funds. All they care about is themselves, that extra money they are getting is being taken out of the minnows pockets. And I mean non world cup minnow teams that struggle even with the irb input. More money for tew to squander.

 

[TRF C A Iversen]

Isn't Steve few the same guy that signed Rodney so'oialo to a 4 year extension when he was already on the outer. Now he's being payed elite money to sit on his ass. He also signed a 30 year old flanker who a history of concussion problems and a player that is obviously on the downside of his career in richie McCaw to a 4 year deal. Tews the same guy that stuffed up the 2003 world cup hosting rights. He's got a great track record. He's got no one to blame except his poor mismanagement of funds. All they care about is themselves, that extra money they are getting is being taken out of the minnows pockets. And I mean non world cup minnow teams that struggle even with the irb input. More money for tew to squander.

What a load of generalisation and finger-pointing, mixed in with some plain old WRONG and a little unsubstantiated accusation for good measure.

On top of all that, it's typical issue shifting now that the major issue of the thread is shown for what it is.

SH hater like many others, Shire Shark? Or am I not allowed to generalise, finger point, be plain old wrong or throw about a little unsubstantiated accusation as you just have?

 

[TRF_stormer2010]

The key feature of these agreements are

► A review of the financial model - one of Steve Tew's points

► RWC year losses ro major unions to be compensted - another of Tew's points

► Relaxing its restrictive sponsorship arragements - yet another of Tew's points

► Teir 1 teams to share the short turnarounds - Teir 2 & 3 teams will be happy

But the one thing that really surpised me was the the IRB have given their CEO Mike Miller a bollocking for the arrogant an dismissive way he responded to Tew's complaints, when he suggested that if New Zealand were to not go to 2015, they could be replaced. AT the meeting, both Australia and South Africa said they would stand behind New Zealand, which would mean replacing all three. How credible would a RWC be without the top three ranked sides? It would be like having a cricket world up without India, Australia, England... i.e. just a sad joke.

SA would still manage to not win that tournament.

But seriously, I agree that the outcomes are for the best even though I think Tew should have/ could have raised his concerns better;

NZRU can't afford to carry losses every 4 years sounds a lot better than NZRU are seriously considering pulling out of 2015.

Yes, it comes down to exactly the same but the former just sounds better with going straight to the point without relying on theatrics and sounding like a threat/throwing of toys.

 

[TRF C A Iversen]

SA would still manage to not win that tournament.

But seriously, I agree that the outcomes are for the best even though I think Tew should have/ could have raised his concerns better;

NZRU can't afford to carry losses every 4 years sounds a lot better than NZRU are seriously considering pulling out of 2015.

Yes, it comes down to exactly the same but the former just sounds better with going straight to the point without relying on theatrics and sounding like a threat/throwing of toys.

Exactly! It was just a poor choice of words and as you said sounding like a threat. It wasn't one, but just an important issue worded badly. In the end, it'll be for the best for all teams.

I would've liked the teams outside the top 8 being given some preferential sponsor options, like being allowed theirs 5-10% bigger on their tops and other things than others and other incentives to help them secure more (ie, more advertising etc).