I am in complete agreement with you Saffa, I'm just saying that Bill probably could have made the decision to take Smith over him unthinkable if he had had the exact same Nix season he did minus the 4 or so howlers that directly resulted in opposition goals. I think those mistakes left the door ajar for Baze to get Smith in there.
Ranix wrote:
Sure enough Smith of Braintree inclusion in NZ WC squad headlines BBC sport article on there main page. laughing stock for a day. Oh they do mention Chris Wood though in the small print.
The article's so laughable, they can't even get Smith in a Braintree shirt.
Permalink
Permalink
Banzai!...AIEEE!!! wrote:
Cool video. Most of them I got…but a couple left me slightly perplexed 🤔
Goalkeepers: Max Crocombe ✅, Alex Paulsen ✅(good with feet?), Michael Woud ❌
Defenders: Callan Elliot❌, Tim Payne✅, Tyler Bindon✅, Michael Boxall✅, Nando Pijnaker❌, Tommy Smith❌, Finn Surman✅; Liberato Cacace✅, Francis de Vries✅
Midfielders: Lachlan Bayliss❌, Joe Bell✅, Matt Garbett❌, Eli Just✅(just juice?), Ben Old✅(good golfer), Alex Rufer✅(yellow seats=phoenix club man), Sarpreet Singh✅, Marko Stamenić❌, Ryan Thomas❌(???)
Forwards: Kosta Barbarouses✅ (aged like fine wine), Callum McCowatt❌(scouting report??), Jesse Randall✅(jandal), Ben Waine ✅(Waine train), Chris Wood✅
Permalink
Permalink
If your Xs are ones you didnt get, Garbett and Stamenic are Day 1s and are in a nostalgic scrapbook with each other because they played football together from a very young age. Bayliss is popcorn because Box Office Jets. I don't get the others either
Permalink
Permalink
Endorsed by
I completely agree with Nelfoos & ballane- just an absolutely nightmare/disgrace this NZF organization for years now and getting worse.
Look at the current appointments:
DB- HC- never been in charge of a professional team- there by accident not ability
TR- AC- never been in charge of a men’s first team not even at local/national level
AC- new TD- never been coaching at HC at any level
JF- HC- U20- been there 10+ years ago already with PT, only social media coach according to AC/AU players
JB- new President- could not even guide Mainland Football clubs
They all have something in common: big salary’s, no vision, YES people, no innovation and/or new ideas or concepts’’, no backbone, limited man-management- same old; same old & always the same persons.
Permalink
Permalink
Ranix wrote:
Sure enough Smith of Braintree inclusion in NZ WC squad headlines BBC sport article on there main page. laughing stock for a day. Oh they do mention Chris Wood though in the small print.
FFS this is so embarassing. We are going to be the laughing stock of world football right up to kickoff. The UK press will not let this rest right up to the NZ vs England game.
I have been beating on to my mates in the UK about how much NZ football has progressed and become so much more professional then they go and select a player from the Braintree bench. My phone has gone crazy with people laughing.
Mr Bean meets Keystone cops...thanks Baz and NZF.
I have been beating on to my mates in the UK about how much NZ football has progressed and become so much more professional then they go and select a player from the Braintree bench. My phone has gone crazy with people laughing.
Mr Bean meets Keystone cops...thanks Baz and NZF.
Permalink
Permalink
Endorsed by
Banzai!...AIEEE!!! wrote:
I’d have no problem with this being the official 2026 AWs tune.
Permalink
Permalink
Smith a better pick than our 2010 amateurs who got to go?
I only ask this because we didnt pick players from the SPL, The Swedish Premier league, and the A League.
Unheard of depth in NA Footy
I only ask this because we didnt pick players from the SPL, The Swedish Premier league, and the A League.
Unheard of depth in NA Footy
Permalink
Permalink
No comparison with the Smith pick.
Bayliss has had a break out season with the premiers. If Smith had just recently had a great season with the Jets, no issues picking him over Billy T at the Nix.
If Bayliss doesn’t move to the likes of AFC, he will possibly secure a move to a European league the equal or better then Sweden.
Also nice to pinch a player who may have ended up playing for Australia.
Bayliss has had a break out season with the premiers. If Smith had just recently had a great season with the Jets, no issues picking him over Billy T at the Nix.
If Bayliss doesn’t move to the likes of AFC, he will possibly secure a move to a European league the equal or better then Sweden.
Also nice to pinch a player who may have ended up playing for Australia.
Auckland will rise once more
Permalink
Permalink
Endorsed by
Everyone talking about Tuiloma vs Smith in the squad.
But how about Tuiloma vs Callan Elliot?
Elliot is still prone to mistakes, and is not a regular starter at Auckland FC.
Tuiloma should have been picked ahead of him.
But how about Tuiloma vs Callan Elliot?
Elliot is still prone to mistakes, and is not a regular starter at Auckland FC.
Tuiloma should have been picked ahead of him.
Permalink
Permalink
Tuioloma vs Smith vs Elliot - none of them should be in the squad, but arguing about it is just using bandwidth pointlessly. Smith wont get any game time and it's unlilkely that we'll see Elliot onthe park for more than a few minutes at the end of a game. Can we now focus on the positives? We have a solid team, Bazely will probably be forced to play the top lineup every game so we'll get to s how we compete against the big guns in footy.
Lets sit back and enjoy it!
Lets sit back and enjoy it!
Queenslander 3x a year.
Permalink
Permalink
Endorsed by
Bevan wrote:
Everyone talking about Tuiloma vs Smith in the squad.
But how about Tuiloma vs Callan Elliot?
Elliot is still prone to mistakes, and is not a regular starter at Auckland FC.
Tuiloma should have been picked ahead of him.
I’m not a fan of Elliot would rather have Storm, but in saying that as one of the smarter members posted Paynes hamstring is a concern, so Elliot and Tuiloma would be a smarter pick, with Tuiloma able to do a job on the right and still having cover on the bench
Permalink
Permalink
theprof wrote:
Tuioloma vs Smith vs Elliot - none of them should be in the squad, but arguing about it is just using bandwidth pointlessly. Smith wont get any game time and it's unlilkely that we'll see Elliot onthe park for more than a few minutes at the end of a game. Can we now focus on the positives? We have a solid team, Bazely will probably be forced to play the top lineup every game so we'll get to s how we compete against the big guns in footy.
Lets sit back and enjoy it!
So with the team selected what’s your starting 11? Do you go Bell, Thomas and Stamenic? Who gets your nod in goal? Who are the starting CB?
Permalink
Permalink
For me my starting 11 from those selected.
Max
Payne. Surman. Boxall. Old.
Bell.
Thomas. Stamenic.
Just. McCowatt.
Wood.
I realise I’ll get some hate having Old at LB seeing he’s been chosen as an attacker but he’s had a brilliant season since being moved into it.
I’d admit that the 3 cdm could be abit defensive but they are also all good at passing, and the difference Bell made in the Chile game was immense with his work rate and screening.
Max gets my nod, Paulsen hasn’t had a great season, hopefully he bounces back.
Bindon rides the pine but only because I feel like Boxy organises better and Surman is the tackler.
I realise McCowatt has been playing more of a 10 role but I think he is better then Randal who would be better coming on when the opposition has tired legs.
Max
Payne. Surman. Boxall. Old.
Bell.
Thomas. Stamenic.
Just. McCowatt.
Wood.
I realise I’ll get some hate having Old at LB seeing he’s been chosen as an attacker but he’s had a brilliant season since being moved into it.
I’d admit that the 3 cdm could be abit defensive but they are also all good at passing, and the difference Bell made in the Chile game was immense with his work rate and screening.
Max gets my nod, Paulsen hasn’t had a great season, hopefully he bounces back.
Bindon rides the pine but only because I feel like Boxy organises better and Surman is the tackler.
I realise McCowatt has been playing more of a 10 role but I think he is better then Randal who would be better coming on when the opposition has tired legs.
Permalink
Permalink
YellowAndBlack wrote:
For me my starting 11 from those selected.
Max
Payne. Surman. Boxall. Old.
Bell.
Thomas. Stamenic.
Just. McCowatt.
Wood.
I realise I’ll get some hate having Old at LB seeing he’s been chosen as an attacker but he’s had a brilliant season since being moved into it.
I’d admit that the 3 cdm could be abit defensive but they are also all good at passing, and the difference Bell made in the Chile game was immense with his work rate and screening.
Max gets my nod, Paulsen hasn’t had a great season, hopefully he bounces back.
Bindon rides the pine but only because I feel like Boxy organises better and Surman is the tackler.
I realise McCowatt has been playing more of a 10 role but I think he is better then Randal who would be better coming on when the opposition has tired legs.
Randell for McCowatt - Randell and Old played really well together, in what was their first outing. McCowatt is also a defensive 10 - works hard on D to turn the ball over and launch counters. I think with him and the three CDM's we become to defensive in our set up. Also Randell seems to be our best option, or at least our most willing option to take a player on, outside Old.
Permalink
Permalink
Endorsed by
Crocombe/Paulsen
Payne. Surman. Boxall. Old/Cacacae.
Bell.
Thomas. Stamenic.
Just. McCowatt/Randall.
Wood.
This is the most obvious best XI, I'd go with McCowatt over Randall simply because he's the more experienced, Old vs Libby I'm still 50/50 on, Old has the better playing minutes this season, but Libby is by far the better LB/WB option when fit.
I was a masive Rifer ahead of Bell campaigner for a while, but Bell's rmost recent performances have shown me he has moved past his little blip in form, Rufer will certainly be called on later in games.
In goal, Crocombe is clearly the senior more experienced of the two, both are good stoppers, Paulsen a better disributor but is conceeding a decent number of goals at the moment so that has to be considered.
Payne. Surman. Boxall. Old/Cacacae.
Bell.
Thomas. Stamenic.
Just. McCowatt/Randall.
Wood.
This is the most obvious best XI, I'd go with McCowatt over Randall simply because he's the more experienced, Old vs Libby I'm still 50/50 on, Old has the better playing minutes this season, but Libby is by far the better LB/WB option when fit.
I was a masive Rifer ahead of Bell campaigner for a while, but Bell's rmost recent performances have shown me he has moved past his little blip in form, Rufer will certainly be called on later in games.
In goal, Crocombe is clearly the senior more experienced of the two, both are good stoppers, Paulsen a better disributor but is conceeding a decent number of goals at the moment so that has to be considered.
Queenslander 3x a year.
Permalink
Permalink
MetalLegNZ wrote:YellowAndBlack wrote:Randell for McCowatt - Randell and Old played really well together, in what was their first outing. McCowatt is also a defensive 10 - works hard on D to turn the ball over and launch counters. I think with him and the three CDM's we become to defensive in our set up. Also Randell seems to be our best option, or at least our most willing option to take a player on, outside Old.
For me my starting 11 from those selected.
Max
Payne. Surman. Boxall. Old.
Bell.
Thomas. Stamenic.
Just. McCowatt.
Wood.
I realise I’ll get some hate having Old at LB seeing he’s been chosen as an attacker but he’s had a brilliant season since being moved into it.
I’d admit that the 3 cdm could be abit defensive but they are also all good at passing, and the difference Bell made in the Chile game was immense with his work rate and screening.
Max gets my nod, Paulsen hasn’t had a great season, hopefully he bounces back.
Bindon rides the pine but only because I feel like Boxy organises better and Surman is the tackler.
I realise McCowatt has been playing more of a 10 role but I think he is better then Randal who would be better coming on when the opposition has tired legs.
Good analysis. If we have that above midfield trio there is risk yes we are a bit too defensive. But I also think McCowatt goes good alongside Wood, as pressing with a high work rate is not really the Woodsman’s game. He needs others to do it.
I’d still go Paulsen in goal. He made such as a difference against Chile. Libby needs good mins in the 2 warmup matches
My smokey impact role is FDV coming on as pseudo winger crossing to Wood. Saw a little cameo of that June last year against Ukraine
I’d still go Paulsen in goal. He made such as a difference against Chile. Libby needs good mins in the 2 warmup matches
My smokey impact role is FDV coming on as pseudo winger crossing to Wood. Saw a little cameo of that June last year against Ukraine
Permalink
Permalink
Endorsed by
I really don't understand the logic in needing someone to look after the players who won't play. They are all professionals. If player can't motivate themselves despite knowing they won't play, or have a sulk, then they shouldn't be there. If the coaches can't keep them focus and motivated, then they shouldn't be there.
And even if that is the case, there is probably at least one club captain that will be part of that group. They really can't manage the job?
If they didn't want the decision criticised, then Bazeley should have given a better answer than the high-level waffle he provided in his 2 minutes response. Give some concrete examples rather than the hilarous quote of "[Smith] could impact, the performance from not playing".
And even if that is the case, there is probably at least one club captain that will be part of that group. They really can't manage the job?
If they didn't want the decision criticised, then Bazeley should have given a better answer than the high-level waffle he provided in his 2 minutes response. Give some concrete examples rather than the hilarous quote of "[Smith] could impact, the performance from not playing".
Permalink
Permalink
Endorsed by
+8
+8
"You can never get a bloody tradesman at Easter, it's a wonder Jesus got crucified" - Karl Pilkington
Permalink
Permalink
Endorsed by
2ndBest wrote:
I really don't understand the logic in needing someone to look after the players who won't play. They are all professionals. If player can't motivate themselves despite knowing they won't play, or have a sulk, then they shouldn't be there. If the coaches can't keep them focus and motivated, then they shouldn't be there.
And even if that is the case, there is probably at least one club captain that will be part of that group. They really can't manage the job?
If they didn't want the decision criticised, then Bazeley should have given a better answer than the high-level waffle he provided in his 2 minutes response. Give some concrete examples rather than the hilarous quote of "[Smith] could impact, the performance from not playing".
Siggy went all stinky in 2010.
Permalink
Permalink
Endorsed by
2ndBest wrote:
I really don't understand the logic in needing someone to look after the players who won't play. They are all professionals. If player can't motivate themselves despite knowing they won't play, or have a sulk, then they shouldn't be there. If the coaches can't keep them focus and motivated, then they shouldn't be there.
And even if that is the case, there is probably at least one club captain that will be part of that group. They really can't manage the job?
If they didn't want the decision criticised, then Bazeley should have given a better answer than the high-level waffle he provided in his 2 minutes response. Give some concrete examples rather than the hilarous quote of "[Smith] could impact, the performance from not playing".
That’s because what it is is nothing that gives you logical football reasons, but mates hooking up a golden handshake for a mate!
Permalink
Permalink
Endorsed by
On a positive note, how awesome is is to see Ryan Thomas included in a NZ squad for the FIFA World Cup?? Really didn't think I'd see the day, stoked for him.
I think there's a couple of places in the 11 still up for grabs that will be based on the performance in the friendlies, namely the goalkeepers (I reckon give both keepers a half each in each game), and whether Singh can start - we always look better with him on the pitch but he's barely played recently. LB should also be more of a competition between Cacace and Old, but I think Cacace will definitely start.
I think there's a couple of places in the 11 still up for grabs that will be based on the performance in the friendlies, namely the goalkeepers (I reckon give both keepers a half each in each game), and whether Singh can start - we always look better with him on the pitch but he's barely played recently. LB should also be more of a competition between Cacace and Old, but I think Cacace will definitely start.
The founding and only member of the Franz Josef YF chapter
Permalink
Permalink
Endorsed by
Wingers and 10 are the positions where you would say aren't super locked in and can try a multiple of different options.
I think right now in the rankings you have for those positions
Just
McCowatt, Old, Randall
Singh, Garbett, Thomas
Kosta, Waine, Bayliss
I think right now in the rankings you have for those positions
Just
McCowatt, Old, Randall
Singh, Garbett, Thomas
Kosta, Waine, Bayliss
Permalink
Permalink
Banzai!...AIEEE!!! wrote:2ndBest wrote:Siggy went all stinky in 2010.
I really don't understand the logic in needing someone to look after the players who won't play. They are all professionals. If player can't motivate themselves despite knowing they won't play, or have a sulk, then they shouldn't be there. If the coaches can't keep them focus and motivated, then they shouldn't be there.
And even if that is the case, there is probably at least one club captain that will be part of that group. They really can't manage the job?
If they didn't want the decision criticised, then Bazeley should have given a better answer than the high-level waffle he provided in his 2 minutes response. Give some concrete examples rather than the hilarous quote of "[Smith] could impact, the performance from not playing".
This is a valid point. We have no idea how Sigmund behaved in Sth Africa once it was clear new boys Reid & Smith were starting ahead of him. But Siggy was candid in his book about the "mental anguish," he suffered from not getting a minute on the field in 2010. The feeling of missing his moment on the world stage affected him deeply apparently. I mean even Andy Barron got on. Tim Brown & Glen Moss two others that don't look back on Sth Africa so fondly.
The AWs ain't France (2002 & 2010), Netherlands (1996 Euros) or even Roy Keane's Ireland (2002) but there are plenty of examples of teams at the big dance imploding due to selection issues and other stuff.
One of Crocs or AP is likely going to be very very disapppointed. 36yr old Barba will be gagging to get on, but that may not happen as I expect Wood barring injury to play 90 mins each game. Come the Belgium match we maybe still in the hunt to make the R32 right to the very end. Heart on his sleeve Garbett is one guy I think could get a bit grumpy if he's only a bit part player.
Injuries, lost of form, LBS & others being the new stars in 4 years, FIFA changing the qualification pathway etc etc, even the younger players don't know for certain they will get to another WC.
I also think Smith probably is a go to, sounding board for all of Bindon, Surman & Pijnaker. Tommy has played in all 3 comps being the Championship, MLS & ALM. He's likely got some very useful career tips for all 3 younger CBs. Plus perhaps most importantly he's played in a World Cup, on the big stage, as a young virtually unknown kid. Marking some of the bigger names in world football. Some advice on how to deal with the nerves of all that, and trying to remain as relaxed as possible.
It's clear there are also some factors at play that make being part of the coaching staff different, to being a senior member of the playing squad. Factors that are really only understood if you are actually part of the WC group. That's not unreasonable to believe. I clearly remember watching father figure Rory Falloon holding court, on a table of otherwise young AWs at Buenos Aires Airport in 2017 enroute to Peru.
However despite all this I'd rather have Tuiloma there than Smith. The squad basically has 3-4 LBs (even Elliot has been playing on the left at AFC), but only 2 RBs. And there have got to be questions about how many mins Payne can last in games in that gut busting up & down role.
The AWs ain't France (2002 & 2010), Netherlands (1996 Euros) or even Roy Keane's Ireland (2002) but there are plenty of examples of teams at the big dance imploding due to selection issues and other stuff.
One of Crocs or AP is likely going to be very very disapppointed. 36yr old Barba will be gagging to get on, but that may not happen as I expect Wood barring injury to play 90 mins each game. Come the Belgium match we maybe still in the hunt to make the R32 right to the very end. Heart on his sleeve Garbett is one guy I think could get a bit grumpy if he's only a bit part player.
Injuries, lost of form, LBS & others being the new stars in 4 years, FIFA changing the qualification pathway etc etc, even the younger players don't know for certain they will get to another WC.
I also think Smith probably is a go to, sounding board for all of Bindon, Surman & Pijnaker. Tommy has played in all 3 comps being the Championship, MLS & ALM. He's likely got some very useful career tips for all 3 younger CBs. Plus perhaps most importantly he's played in a World Cup, on the big stage, as a young virtually unknown kid. Marking some of the bigger names in world football. Some advice on how to deal with the nerves of all that, and trying to remain as relaxed as possible.
It's clear there are also some factors at play that make being part of the coaching staff different, to being a senior member of the playing squad. Factors that are really only understood if you are actually part of the WC group. That's not unreasonable to believe. I clearly remember watching father figure Rory Falloon holding court, on a table of otherwise young AWs at Buenos Aires Airport in 2017 enroute to Peru.
However despite all this I'd rather have Tuiloma there than Smith. The squad basically has 3-4 LBs (even Elliot has been playing on the left at AFC), but only 2 RBs. And there have got to be questions about how many mins Payne can last in games in that gut busting up & down role.
Permalink
Permalink
Endorsed by
https://twitter.com/thenichecache/status/2055030503942869367
While New Zealanders argue back and forth about Tommy Smith's All Whites World Cup inclusion, the Argentinians are out there asking the real questions #ElProfesor pic.twitter.com/pYabDT1yXC
— The Niche Cache (@thenichecache) May 14, 2026
Permalink
Permalink
Endorsed by
observerfromuh wrote:MetalLegNZ wrote:See that's the point of Tommy being in the squad Tuiloma and Pjanker will get the same minutes as Smith, let's be happy that Baze got 90-95% of the squad right and as coach he's allowed one of his picks (like most teams that will attend the WC)
1 nil up in the 85th minute and you look to bring in a third CB....
You bring on Bindon or Boxall... but if you had to choose between Smith, Pjanker or Tuiloma, who would you choose then?
I do think that Smith and Kosta both shouldn't go, but at the end of the day there is better things to look forward to e.g. the cup itself and if we can pull a shock against the 3 Lions.
Say Payne or Elliott get injured, for Payne not to be unexpected given injuries over the past couple of seasons, then having Tuiloma, who recently played pretty well against Luis Diaz and Colombia at RB for the AWs, as someone in the squad that has played RB - could then very well see minutes (for legitimate reasons).
For Smith to see minutes he probably needs Boxall, Surman, Bindon, Pijnaker, and Stamenic to be out (maybe even Payne and/or De Vries as well). Its not a like-for-like situation. Smith is so far down the pecking order, Bazely is as close to playing as Smith.
For Smith to see minutes he probably needs Boxall, Surman, Bindon, Pijnaker, and Stamenic to be out (maybe even Payne and/or De Vries as well). Its not a like-for-like situation. Smith is so far down the pecking order, Bazely is as close to playing as Smith.
Permalink
Permalink
Endorsed by
Very late posting about this, haven't been on here in like four or five days.
No surprise Bazeley ended up including Smith in the playing squad instead of a coaching role. Tuiloma and others must be pissed and I feel for them. However, it is done and we have a very good squad otherwise. I am the same as anybody else who dislikes Woud and how his presence in the squad could be a problem for current and former Nix players e.g. Rufer, Payne, Surman, Singh.
Have no problem with Kosta being in the squad. In the Chile game, he showed he can still be a good back-up option in the absence of Woodsy and earned his spot.
No surprise Bazeley ended up including Smith in the playing squad instead of a coaching role. Tuiloma and others must be pissed and I feel for them. However, it is done and we have a very good squad otherwise. I am the same as anybody else who dislikes Woud and how his presence in the squad could be a problem for current and former Nix players e.g. Rufer, Payne, Surman, Singh.
Have no problem with Kosta being in the squad. In the Chile game, he showed he can still be a good back-up option in the absence of Woodsy and earned his spot.
Permalink
Permalink
Endorsed by
I can’t see how Surman and Singh would have any possible beef with him?
Auckland will rise once more
Permalink
Permalink
Think we’d even be okay with Auckland Phoenix if he did his job in the squad. That’s what will matter. Effort and intensity at training and focus on the goal.
All goalies are mad usually. Crocs and Paulsen outliers.
Did a starting 11 that was a 12. Wondered why it was so easy and the math was using so many players.
Back to the drawing board there then…
Hopefully we won’t be siloed like the English teams allegedly were in the Lampard/Gerard/Scholes days.
AFC will get over themselves in a bit couple of years, though they’ll always be kinda Jafas.
Focus on the Cup.
Seeing the point, though not accepting, on Smith: knowledge of the English game, particularly the Championship. In an around the EFL pyramid: Cacace, Stamenic, Dibley-Dias, Waine, Wood, Bindon, potentially Surman, Garbett and Crocombe. And Gray. Leulaui on loan from Burnley, Howieson was at Burnley and Payne was at Blackburn.That’s another senior player to talk to them about their club, career plans etc. Someone who may know the personnel involved. He also had a season (or two?) in the MLS, which is Surman and Boxy.
It does have a whiff of the old UK privilege in NZ football…but maybe that’s what we get with Baze. 🤷♂️ Pros and cons.
All goalies are mad usually. Crocs and Paulsen outliers.
Did a starting 11 that was a 12. Wondered why it was so easy and the math was using so many players.
Back to the drawing board there then…
Hopefully we won’t be siloed like the English teams allegedly were in the Lampard/Gerard/Scholes days.
AFC will get over themselves in a bit couple of years, though they’ll always be kinda Jafas.
Focus on the Cup.
Seeing the point, though not accepting, on Smith: knowledge of the English game, particularly the Championship. In an around the EFL pyramid: Cacace, Stamenic, Dibley-Dias, Waine, Wood, Bindon, potentially Surman, Garbett and Crocombe. And Gray. Leulaui on loan from Burnley, Howieson was at Burnley and Payne was at Blackburn.That’s another senior player to talk to them about their club, career plans etc. Someone who may know the personnel involved. He also had a season (or two?) in the MLS, which is Surman and Boxy.
It does have a whiff of the old UK privilege in NZ football…but maybe that’s what we get with Baze. 🤷♂️ Pros and cons.
Permalink
Permalink
theprof wrote:
all have played for Wellington and some in the more recent derbies where he was more of a dick than usual.
Surman and Singh haven’t played them and using the Wellington rationale, you may as well say Waine has an issue as well and even Boxall?
Nothing to see there.
Nothing to see there.
Auckland will rise once more
Permalink
Permalink
Endorsed by
AucklandPhoenix wrote:theprof wrote:Surman and Singh haven’t played them and using the Wellington rationale, you may as well say Waine has an issue as well and even Boxall?
all have played for Wellington and some in the more recent derbies where he was more of a dick than usual.
Nothing to see there.
Im also not convinced its completely genuine rather than being played up for the cameras.
I think everyone in the situation would be adult enough to put differences, if any, aside with a larger goal in mind.
And if not, Tommy Smith will sort it out.
I think everyone in the situation would be adult enough to put differences, if any, aside with a larger goal in mind.
And if not, Tommy Smith will sort it out.
Valley FC til I die?
Permalink
Permalink
Endorsed by
Apparently the Slovenian side in 2002 (Korea/Japan) had a big internal fight, as their star striker from one part of Slovenia thought the coach from another region, was favouring selecting players from the coach's home patch. Ended with the coach in tears at a press conference, and star player walking out of the squad.
If only there had yes been a Slovenian Tommy on hand to sort it all out.
If only there had yes been a Slovenian Tommy on hand to sort it all out.
Permalink
Permalink
Endorsed by
Watching the Netflix documentary about the French team at the 2010 World Cup.
Maybe it’s Smiths job to sniff out the mole.
Maybe it’s Smiths job to sniff out the mole.
Auckland will rise once more
Permalink
Permalink
Changing tack slightly. It is interesting to compare the make-up of our squads 1982 to 2010 to 2026.
1982 had 5 players based in Australia, the rest were NZ based - including places like Gisborne and Invercargill! (To be fair Gisborne City were very strong back then and Invercargill was Bobby Almond's retirement gig). But no players based in Europe, or beyond Australia for that matter.
2010 had 9 international based players (beyond NZ/Oz) and one unattached, the rest NZ-Based.
2026 has 17 international based players (counting Singh as international-based).
So a real snapshot of how the game has progressed here, in tandem with the growth of international opportunities.
Admittedly our international-based players are not all regulars at top clubs, with the obvious exception of Braintree Town, but the trend is stark.
1982 had 5 players based in Australia, the rest were NZ based - including places like Gisborne and Invercargill! (To be fair Gisborne City were very strong back then and Invercargill was Bobby Almond's retirement gig). But no players based in Europe, or beyond Australia for that matter.
2010 had 9 international based players (beyond NZ/Oz) and one unattached, the rest NZ-Based.
2026 has 17 international based players (counting Singh as international-based).
So a real snapshot of how the game has progressed here, in tandem with the growth of international opportunities.
Admittedly our international-based players are not all regulars at top clubs, with the obvious exception of Braintree Town, but the trend is stark.
I know, I know, its serious!
Permalink
Permalink
Endorsed by
