The problem with NZ football
Founder
Permalink
Permalink
All Whites, Ferns, and other international teams
The problem with NZ football
71 replies
·
4,207 views
Being over at Euro, it shows you what instils passion into your sport and country, and that is watching your national team play (now I dont mean against some small pacific island)
NZ needs to be in Asia NOW and having meaningful internationals where the public can get behindour team and go nuts.
Sort it out NZF.
Founder
Permalink
Permalink
It's going to happen, but not before the whole thing is drastically rearranged. Mark my words, there will soon be separate West and and East Asian confederations, and we and the Island nations will be a part of the East along with Australia.
FIFA know that Oceania as it is is unsustainable. They are really stuck between a rock and a hard place on the issue of the World Club Cup, and FIFA don't like being in that sort of position. They want the WCC to be competitive but also know that this area needs it as a dangling carrot.
Also, the development of the Island nations is reliant on them facing a higher calibre of opposition more regularly; Fiji vs Vanuatu etc ad infinitum is really doing no-one any good. Not so high a calibre that they get thrashed but Fiji vs Malaysia or Thailand is going to give them a lot more benefit just playing Vanuatu over and over again.
Nix, Leyton Orient and Alloa Athletic supporting schmuck.
Permalink
Permalink
do you really think that if the AW's were playing Qatar or China we would get 30,000 fans together all chanting in unison?
All I do is make the stuff I would've liked
Reference things I wanna watch, reference girls I wanna bite
Now I'm firefly like a burning kite
And yousa fake fuck like a fleshlight
Permalink
Permalink
No - but we might get more fans and chants than when we play Vanuatu!
I think we need to milk the current structure as much as possible before they change it. i.e. we are able to get in all these age group and womans world cups olympics etc. I think that has already had a positive effect for football in new zealand. along with the Phoenix of course.
But I would still rather have our age group teams playing against asian sides and improving rather than praying for an upset in our 3 games at world cups. It will be better for us in the long run to get more competetive games. and will give the fans something to get behind.
If we build it, they will come...
Permalink
Permalink
NZ U17 Women are going to win the cup this year...
Permalink
Permalink
Imagine if Aussie were 5th in Asia so we had the playoff wit them for the World Cup, that would get the media intersted and general fans out.
Why don't we play the regurlarly - like annually? Eg league, union, cricket
Oh Wellington is wonderful. We got the wind, the rain and the phoenix. Oh Wellington is wonderful.
Permalink
Permalink
Why don't we play the regurlarly - like annually? Eg league, union, cricket
Because Aussie wouldn't want to.
In their eyes standard wise that would be like the All Blacks having an annual game against Tonga at Rugby. good for tonga, but not so good for the All Blacks.
If we build it, they will come...
Permalink
Permalink
Well, Feverish, I have suggested that NZF should be following the AFC's set of goals in this thread.
http://www.yellowfever.co.nz/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=5869
If we wanted to consider a possible future with AFC, it would be the most excellent start to at least achieve the same goals that each of the AFC countries are expected by 2012. I really don't think that we could really convince them that we are capable to be an AFC country until we have the same set of goals or be in reach on those goals.
At the moment, people are negative and deterring those ideas away having not really realizing the important aspects of each of those goals in the infrastructure. The cost involved is fairly big but we can build towards it and a number of those goals are not beyond reach by any stretch of the imagination.
What does get me is that many people want to be in AFC but are not willing to change to those set of goals that I have well suggested as being inline with AFC goals. If you want to be in AFC, then you have to prescribe to those goals, it's shouldn't be even debatable, but yet people "want" but not "do". Don't expect AFC to welcome us if we don't do their goals. Most people would just like to dream being in AFC but really couldn't be bother to make the necessary changes.
Just all talk as I see so far.
http://www.yellowfever.co.nz/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=5869
If we wanted to consider a possible future with AFC, it would be the most excellent start to at least achieve the same goals that each of the AFC countries are expected by 2012. I really don't think that we could really convince them that we are capable to be an AFC country until we have the same set of goals or be in reach on those goals.
At the moment, people are negative and deterring those ideas away having not really realizing the important aspects of each of those goals in the infrastructure. The cost involved is fairly big but we can build towards it and a number of those goals are not beyond reach by any stretch of the imagination.
What does get me is that many people want to be in AFC but are not willing to change to those set of goals that I have well suggested as being inline with AFC goals. If you want to be in AFC, then you have to prescribe to those goals, it's shouldn't be even debatable, but yet people "want" but not "do". Don't expect AFC to welcome us if we don't do their goals. Most people would just like to dream being in AFC but really couldn't be bother to make the necessary changes.
Just all talk as I see so far.
Permalink
Permalink
Might also help if these international games were promoted, as opposed to the Vanuatu game where there was no marketing other than word of mouth on these forums...
Permalink
Permalink
do you really think that if the AW's were playing Qatar or China we would get 30,000 fans together all chanting in unison?
if we build up a bit of a rivalry in the Asian Cup, world cup qualifiers and the Phoenix do well and create publicity for the likes of Bertos, Smeltz and Brown...
then...heck well maybe...sometime...certainly if we were playing Japan, Korea, Australia and put together some convincing displays...it seems possible...
Permalink
Permalink
I really don't think that we could really convince them that we are capable to be an AFC country until we have the same set of goals or be in reach on those goals.
Australia managed it.
Incredible stamina. No shame. Yellow Fever.
Permalink
Permalink
I really don't think that we could really convince them that we are capable to be an AFC until we can prove that we can afford life in Oceania, let alone increased competitions and distances in asia.
We're not going to get a Lowy sugar daddy or a government that would dare to buck the obligated trend of devoting life to Rugby Union, and unless that happens we simply can't afford it.
We're not going to get a Lowy sugar daddy or a government that would dare to buck the obligated trend of devoting life to Rugby Union, and unless that happens we simply can't afford it.
Permalink
Permalink
Exactly. The only chance we've got is if FIFA decide it must be so in which case Uncle Sepp might jingle his change pocket and scrape around the back of his couch cushions to come up with the millions that we'd need.
Incredible stamina. No shame. Yellow Fever.
Permalink
Permalink
Exactly. The only chance we've got is if FIFA decide it must be so in which case Uncle Sepp might jingle his change pocket and scrape around the back of his couch cushions to come up with the millions that we'd need.
Which, as I said, will happen and not too far away.
Nix, Leyton Orient and Alloa Athletic supporting schmuck.
Permalink
Permalink
Exactly.� The only chance we've got is if FIFA decide it must be so in which case Uncle Sepp might jingle his change pocket and scrape around the back of his couch cushions to come up with the millions that we'd need.
�
Which, as I said, will happen and not too far away.
Oh really!?!
And why should they bother to help us compare to the 100s of other playing countries or even to assist the OFC compare to the other confederations. From 1993 (or was it 1997?) we obtained full status confederation and had a seat on their executive committee. Why would they do any extra favours in our direction just because we seem to be the leading nation in OFC? There are another 10 OFC nations too who have just as valid reasons to have extra assistance.
As for the expectation to be in the AFC, Australia entered as the strongest OFC for a long time plus having a number of restructuring since the ASA fell and the introduction of professional football by the way A-League 2004 and FFA and Frank Lowy and Fox TV money of $750,000.
At 2006, the AFC old set of goals were not that difficult, so Australia had it easy by then. But with the new set of goals, now it is more difficult.
So. . . . what the heck do we have to offer at the moment?
Unless we make the changes now in line with the new AFC goals we really have no evidence to say otherwise.
So we need to wake our ideas up!!!!!
. . . and start making some grounds instead waiting for a some beautiful princess with a whole lot of dosh to save us. (how embarrassing would that be?) 
Permalink
Permalink
Ah, the Colin Chin argument. "Let's make ground by spending millions", of course these grandiose schemes fall apart when you remember that NZ football is broke, not a little poor, but totally and completely Ghetto Poor.
The survival of the existing NZFC is a season to season proposition, we've had to pull warm-up games for the full national sie, let alone youth sides, and you want us to organise promotion/relegation and an expansion of the NZFC ? A competition where pretty mcuh every side makes a loss ?
Without the beautiful princess we have nothing, but a game ranked 5th in media covergae and a long way further down in government funding. Delusional.
The survival of the existing NZFC is a season to season proposition, we've had to pull warm-up games for the full national sie, let alone youth sides, and you want us to organise promotion/relegation and an expansion of the NZFC ? A competition where pretty mcuh every side makes a loss ?
Without the beautiful princess we have nothing, but a game ranked 5th in media covergae and a long way further down in government funding. Delusional.
Permalink
Permalink
Progress is never made without placing some foundation stablilzers in the organisation of it. The cost to restructuring for success is very little cost that people realize. Separating legal entity of the NZFC and the NZF is hardy a loss in the financial situation, its reorganising foundation for success. If there is a good finanical year, the money is utilised better. If there is poor finanical year, the cost is minimised. It's really cost vs benefits. At the moment, the aim is very short sighted and the goals are not achieved because the resources are stuck in the wrong place. that is the money is wasted away in the wrong place.
e.g. it's like that Government scheme of $56,000 spent on badges to celebrate Maori success. What the heck does the Government understand what Maori success is for the schools? If they wanted to supply money to celebrate Maori success, then they should have place a $56,000 fund to those specialist who then in their own legal entity create a scholarship trust fund to make an ongoing contribution to help certain individuals to achieve that extra monetary sustainability for the future generations.
Ok i got off the topic a bit in that example, but you get the picture.
We need wise spending and NZF can't focus on the league without messing with other stuff.
Quite a number of the AFC goals are well within reach with little if no extra cost.
It's a matter of priorty of finanical goals.
The small stuff can be sorted financially and then it is not need to be a continue liability item on the balance sheet as well as a troublesome item as an uneccessary expense in the revenue statement. Then more money can be placed into clearing other borrowing debts that we obtained in the past. Then the focus of the NZF can be on national squads, Federations can focus on grassroots development, and the League committee can focus on the elite level competitions. Each have their own budgets, each will have a representative on the board to established finanical allocation between the three strands of football. Then three focused budgets are produced to the satisfiation of all parties. This is simple accounting/financial philisophy that is ignored. You can't tell me that this simple goal is not within reach.
At the moment there is no streamlining of the football organisations because everyone is not having a fair say/vote of football issues. And NZF are working independant of the federations and so the NZF agendas are costing or doubling up and wasting money.
First steps first. . .
Separate the legal entities of the NZF national team committee from the NZFC league committee and they should be separate also from the Federation local grassroot development programme. Each have different needs and need to refocus the cost saving efforts.
Then your NZFC committee would be able to focus on the feastiability of the NZFC future by removing uneccessary cost, concentrate on the marketibility of the product and promotiion of the game to the general public. Then they could look at the expansion of the NZFC and guiding towards promotion/ regulation in the future. Therefore the short goals, adds to the overall long term goals of the NZFC. And the competition financial statement starts to look more promising.
The NZF national teams committee can focus on the national squads programmes to met the challenges of that the global game demands on NZ now that we are the main nation in the OFC. This means working on national elite programme for players and also referees.
The federation will also not worry about have to contend for the scraped NZF money by being well informed about the NZF and NZFC activities and making appropriate goals in their grassroot development. Also the NZFC clubs within the federation will have a say in their federation committee.
All three groups are accountable and answerable to each other in the NZF general committee with equal votes. Hereby having a streamlined football programme.
. . . This will save us thousands of dollars in the short term and the long term as well as proper growth of the sport in NZ.
It's a win, win situation, really.
Oh BTW, we don't care about what the government does with football. The government is not beautiful enough to wait for them.
e.g. it's like that Government scheme of $56,000 spent on badges to celebrate Maori success. What the heck does the Government understand what Maori success is for the schools? If they wanted to supply money to celebrate Maori success, then they should have place a $56,000 fund to those specialist who then in their own legal entity create a scholarship trust fund to make an ongoing contribution to help certain individuals to achieve that extra monetary sustainability for the future generations.
Ok i got off the topic a bit in that example, but you get the picture.
We need wise spending and NZF can't focus on the league without messing with other stuff.
Quite a number of the AFC goals are well within reach with little if no extra cost.
It's a matter of priorty of finanical goals.
The small stuff can be sorted financially and then it is not need to be a continue liability item on the balance sheet as well as a troublesome item as an uneccessary expense in the revenue statement. Then more money can be placed into clearing other borrowing debts that we obtained in the past. Then the focus of the NZF can be on national squads, Federations can focus on grassroots development, and the League committee can focus on the elite level competitions. Each have their own budgets, each will have a representative on the board to established finanical allocation between the three strands of football. Then three focused budgets are produced to the satisfiation of all parties. This is simple accounting/financial philisophy that is ignored. You can't tell me that this simple goal is not within reach.
At the moment there is no streamlining of the football organisations because everyone is not having a fair say/vote of football issues. And NZF are working independant of the federations and so the NZF agendas are costing or doubling up and wasting money.
First steps first. . .
Separate the legal entities of the NZF national team committee from the NZFC league committee and they should be separate also from the Federation local grassroot development programme. Each have different needs and need to refocus the cost saving efforts.
Then your NZFC committee would be able to focus on the feastiability of the NZFC future by removing uneccessary cost, concentrate on the marketibility of the product and promotiion of the game to the general public. Then they could look at the expansion of the NZFC and guiding towards promotion/ regulation in the future. Therefore the short goals, adds to the overall long term goals of the NZFC. And the competition financial statement starts to look more promising.
The NZF national teams committee can focus on the national squads programmes to met the challenges of that the global game demands on NZ now that we are the main nation in the OFC. This means working on national elite programme for players and also referees.
The federation will also not worry about have to contend for the scraped NZF money by being well informed about the NZF and NZFC activities and making appropriate goals in their grassroot development. Also the NZFC clubs within the federation will have a say in their federation committee.
All three groups are accountable and answerable to each other in the NZF general committee with equal votes. Hereby having a streamlined football programme.
. . . This will save us thousands of dollars in the short term and the long term as well as proper growth of the sport in NZ.
It's a win, win situation, really.
Oh BTW, we don't care about what the government does with football. The government is not beautiful enough to wait for them.
Permalink
Permalink
And why should they bother to help us compare to the 100s of other playing countries or even to assist the OFC compare to the other confederations. From 1993 (or was it 1997?) we obtained full status confederation and had a seat on their executive committee. Why would they do any extra favours in our direction just because we seem to be the leading nation in OFC? There are another 10 OFC nations too who have just as valid reasons to have extra assistance.
They won't be doing it to help us, they'll be doing it to get rid of a problem.
FIFA's whole operating and governing policy is about making the game as big as it can in all areas. Aside from North America and the South Pacific, it's about as big as it can possibly get. North america is being dealt with separately (look for USA/Canada to be awarded a joint World Cup very soon). FIFA realise that the only way to really do it is to dissolve Oceania and combine the whole thing with Asia.
Oceania is regarded by FIFA as The Black Sheep. It's too small to be able to mantain a decent standard but too big to be able to sweep under the carpet.
As for the rest of your post, I really couldn't be bothered with it. Your passion is, as always, admirable but your grammar is so poor it's hard work deciphering any meaning from your writing.
Nix, Leyton Orient and Alloa Athletic supporting schmuck.
Permalink
Permalink
You think watching Australia, Japan or Iraq belt the All Whites 4-0 is going to get more people coming to games than watching the All Whites thrash Fiji or Vanuatu? Hmm. :P
In all seriousness, agreed 100%. When NZ qualify for SA 2010, if they do well (being realistic!) that will be enough for the AFC to take notice, guidelines aside. Having a professional football league wouldn't hurt, mind.
In all seriousness, agreed 100%. When NZ qualify for SA 2010, if they do well (being realistic!) that will be enough for the AFC to take notice, guidelines aside. Having a professional football league wouldn't hurt, mind.
Permalink
Permalink
It's going to happen, but not before the whole thing is drastically rearranged. Mark my words, there will soon be separate West and and East Asian confederations, and we and the Island nations will be a part of the East along with Australia.
Why will the AFC agree to split? I don't see any of the nations in the east voting in favour. I can see the AFC perhaps accepting Oceania's members, but not their agreement to separate themselves. As far as I am aware - and I'm happy to be proved wrong if someone can produce a link to the appropriate regulations - FIFA do not have the authority to dictate to the AFC that they must split up.
A straight merger of the OFC and AFC would produce a zone of 57 countries - OFC being 11 now and Asia being 46, with East Timor now in though Bhutan have never entered a World Cup). The CAF has 53 teams, though Comoros have yet to enter a World Cup. UEFA has 53 teams now that Montenegro are in. Hence an AOFC of 57 teams would not be a major leap of zone size. (To complete the stats, CONCACAF has 35 and CONMEBOL 10.)
*Edited to correct quoted zone of East Timor (I thought they were originally schedule to join OFC and hadn't checked where they eventually went)
SiNZ2008-06-23 20:18:13
Permalink
Permalink
i had a chat to Sepp last night at the QF. Our move to Asia is in the bag
Founder
Permalink
Permalink
Ponder this ...
Can anyone think of a country in which the national football team has a lower profile in their own country than the AWs have in NZ?
I think its pretty fair to rule out anyone in Africa, Europe, South or Central America, Middle East, East or Central Asia or Australia.
I am thinking possibly India, Pakistan, Banglas and Sri Lanka. And then, possibly the US and a couple of the small Pacific Islands such as the Cooks and Tonga (but only because they were NZ-administered for so long). Actually, was Tonga NZ-administered? Cant recall. Anyway ...
Any other contenders?
(and, yes, I do think Oceania is one - significant- reason for this)
Marius Lacatus2008-06-23 20:41:52
Permalink
Permalink
Canada.
Incredible stamina. No shame. Yellow Fever.
Permalink
Permalink
And almost certainly the USA.
Incredible stamina. No shame. Yellow Fever.
Permalink
Permalink
The Canadians crossed my mind, but I gave them benefit of the doubt - I remember them at the '86 World Cup.
Marius Lacatus2008-06-23 20:47:35
I think a pretty tight call between here and the US. I imagine that away from East and West coasts a football is as hard to find as an agnostic, but they did host a world cup not too long ago and have a growing professional league etc - so open to being convinced on that one.
Permalink
Permalink
I reckon the Sri Lankans might just have us - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sri_Lanka_national_football_team
The Indians did grab a draw with France away from home in 1948
And they have been the major force in the South Asian Football Federation Cup (held every two years) - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Asian_Football_Federation_Cup - which, incidentally, sounds like a good tournie. Some great rivalries in there. Just what we have none of in football
(please note I am not advocating border skirmishes or civil war as a means of generating football rivarly, although Im sure it would contribute quite effectively)
Permalink
Permalink
Would be great to be in Asia just so we could play some teams that we give a sh*t about. Australia. Korea. China.
Incredible stamina. No shame. Yellow Fever.
Permalink
Permalink
Why will the AFC agree to split? I don't see any of the nations in the east voting in favour. I can see the AFC perhaps accepting Oceania's members, but not their agreement to separate themselves. As far as I am aware - and I'm happy to be proved wrong if someone can produce a link to the appropriate regulations - FIFA do not have the authority to dictate to the AFC that they must split up.
A straight merger of the OFC and AFC would produce a zone of 57 countries - OFC being 11 now and Asia being 46, with East Timor now in though Bhutan have never entered a World Cup). The CAF has 53 teams, though Comoros have yet to enter a World Cup. UEFA has 53 teams now that Montenegro are in. Hence an AOFC of 57 teams would not be a major leap of zone size. (To complete the stats, CONCACAF has 35 and CONMEBOL 10.)
*Edited to correct quoted zone of East Timor (I thought they were originally schedule to join OFC and hadn't checked where they eventually went)
I think due to the enormous geographical spread it would be the practical thing to do. It could also ensure the likes of Israel are put into their proper federation - (West asia) although I know it's not quite as simple as that. And, as for FIFA not having the authority to tell AFC what to do, well, if FIFA decided it was going to happen, it would happen. They have the clout,and importantly the money to get whatever they want done, done. By what ever means available...
I'll come back to the crux of my argument, Oceania is both the black sheep of FIFA and an embarrassment to them, and FIFA won't tolerate either for any length of time. If combining with Asia means that the Oceania problem goes away then I'm sure it will happen and happen soon.
Nix, Leyton Orient and Alloa Athletic supporting schmuck.
Permalink
Permalink
The Canadians crossed my mind, but I gave them benefit of the doubt - I remember them at the '86 World Cup.
I think a pretty tight call between here and the US. I imagine that away from East and West coasts a football is as hard to find as an agnostic, but they did host a world cup not too long ago and have a growing professional league etc - so open to being convinced on that one.
Association football in Canada is pretty weak - their major league (CSL) is restricted to Ontario and, recently, Quebec. Basically the equivalent of the NZFC only having teams north on the Bombays - albeit Canada has geography as a big excuse. There are two teams in USL-1 (Vancouver Whitecaps and Montreal Impact) and some in the PDL, but they're very low profile. The NZFC is by far better off than the CSL.
Toronto FC is very much a success in the MLS, however TFC has a higher import allotment due to the lack of quality players eligible to represent Canada. Doesn't help them that some of the better Canadians are already playing for other teams - such as Dwayne de Rosario in Houston (and Owen Hargreaves for England 
)
)The response to the 2000 Gold Cup was pretty good if I remember rightly, but my connections to the country only started in 2002 so I can't rightly say.
I'd say Canada has a much lower profile than NZ.
Permalink
Permalink
I have a really interesting book that details Australias move to Asia as well as their world cup journey. Its called 15 days in June, written by Jamie Fink. If anyone is interested in reading it pm me and im sure a transfer could be arranged
www.kiwifromthecouch.blogspot.com
Permalink
Permalink
If the NZ public could adjust their expectations from being a top nation in a sport that only 5 or 6 play seriously (Rugby/Cricket/Boat Racing) to being merely a competitive nation in a global sport, wouldn't close matches against Qatar/Bahrain/North Korea etc and trying to get the odd upset against the Saudis/China etc be interesting? We'd get a decent number of games to build momentum as we'd surely see off the likes of Thailand/Vietnam etc in earlier round qualifying.
Permalink
Permalink
Sam, I think we overstate the coverage of football in the US. I read an article that said it was a big deal when teh first ever MLS Game was on ESPN 2 rather than its usual place on ESPN 6, where it regularly features behind things like cheerleading and the rock scissors paper championship
Normo's coming home
Permalink
Permalink
I have a really interesting book that details Australias move to Asia as well as their world cup journey. Its called 15 days in June, written by Jamie Fink. If anyone is interested in reading it pm me and im sure a transfer could be arranged
Jessie Fink ?
If so, I'm not sure you could pay me enough to read it.
Permalink
Permalink
If so, I'm not sure you could pay me enough to read it.
I guess we know picture books are your thing, but how much to reeducate a snagg muko would be priceless.
convict2008-07-05 04:13:29
Permalink
Permalink
Hmmm, good england
Normo's coming home
Permalink
Permalink
reeducate Definition
re�edu�cate (r? ej?? k?t?)
transitive verb -�cat?�ed, -�cat?�ing
to educate again or anew, esp. so as to rehabilitate or adapt to new situations.
Permalink
Permalink
The Canadians crossed my mind, but I gave them benefit of the doubt - I remember them at the '86 World Cup.�
�
I think a pretty tight call between here and the US. I imagine that away from East and West coasts a football is as hard to find as an agnostic, but they did host a world cup not too long ago and have�a growing professional league etc - so open to being convinced on that one.
�
Association football in Canada is pretty weak - their major league (CSL) is restricted to Ontario and, recently, Quebec. Basically the equivalent of the NZFC only having teams north on the Bombays - albeit Canada has geography as a big excuse. There are two teams in USL-1 (Vancouver Whitecaps and Montreal Impact) and some in the PDL, but they're very low profile. The NZFC is by far better off than the CSL.
�
Toronto FC is very much a success in the MLS, however TFC has a higher import allotment due to the lack of quality players eligible to represent Canada.� Doesn't help them that some of the better Canadians are already playing for other teams - such as Dwayne de Rosario in Houston (and Owen Hargreaves for England )
)�
The response to the 2000 Gold Cup was pretty good if I remember rightly, but my connections to the country only started in 2002 so I can't rightly say.
�
I'd say Canada has a much lower profile than NZ.
Funny that you say that Toronto FC is a success in the MLS when they finished last in there division last year?
But hey thats why u support the Phoenix i guess
Permalink
Permalink
Funny that you say that Toronto FC is a success in the MLS when they finished last in there division last year?
But hey thats why u support the Phoenix i guess
Expansion teams are EXPECTED to come last. Anything else is the exception rather than the rule.
So considering that despite this, they managed to smash season ticket records, gain a broadcast contract with the biggest network in Canada, sell out every game and gain a massive following - yeah I'd call that a success.
Oh, and I support the Phoenix because I'm a fan of football, a fan of Wellington, and a fan of Wellington's sports teams.
On field results is not the only thing qualifying success. But hey, that's why you support Waitakere I guess.
Permalink
Permalink
What a surprise a Phoenix fan not concerned with success
on the field!!!
what is the point of playin if you dont want to win
also no surprise how u say u are a fan of Wellington but not of NZ Football
but thats why you support an aussie team
and if i was a Waitakere fan at least i would be able to watch them represent NZ something the Phoenix wont be able to do
on the field!!!
what is the point of playin if you dont want to win
also no surprise how u say u are a fan of Wellington but not of NZ Football
but thats why you support an aussie team
and if i was a Waitakere fan at least i would be able to watch them represent NZ something the Phoenix wont be able to do
Permalink
Permalink