All Whites, Ferns, and other international teams
13th man not helping here
Supporter For Ever - Keep The Faith - Foundation Member - Never Lets FAX Get In The Way Of A Good Yarn
"Nelson United, beat Mount Wellington on their ground in the 1977 Chatham cup Final."
....and we still talk about it down here every year!!! Son and I packing our supporters kit and flying up tomorrow. I cant believe I've finally gotten over myself after last week, and am actually excited. Really looking forward to watching Billy T in particular - havn't seen him play since Napier a few years back.
Live football with 40 thousand fans - it s been a while....
I'm not personally a Bon Jovi fan, but my girlfriend suggests this track is pertinent:
This video filmed at Westpac Stadium during their 2010 concert funnily enough:
We've got to hold on ready or not
You live for the fight when it's all that you've got"
Big Pete 65, Christchurch
"Nelson United, beat Mount Wellington on their ground in the 1977 Chatham cup Final."
....and we still talk about it down here every year!!! Son and I packing our supporters kit and flying up tomorrow. I cant believe I've finally gotten over myself after last week, and am actually excited. Really looking forward to watching Billy T in particular - havn't seen him play since Napier a few years back.
Live football with 40 thousand fans - it s been a while....
If you are old and wise you were probably young and stupid
Just walked through town. Quite a few Mexican fans in town. Some in Cuba Mall and some outside Te Papa. Football fever is building nicely in town. They were cool guys with good English. They seemed fairly confident about tomorrow night. Should be a lively day tomorrow with more arriving and kiwi fans star hitting the town.
They were surprised how warm it is here....I think they expected icebergs in the harbour...LOL
#grrrrbonjovigrrrrrrr
"Phoenix till they lose"
Posting 97% bollox, 8% lies and 3.658% genuine opinion.
Genuine opinion: FTFFA
This report from a Mexican paper suggests the President, who has shares in media giant Televisa and so stands to lose a lot of pesos if Mexico don't qualify, and Televisa, may have been involved in paying NZ off:
http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2013/11/17/opinion/008a1pol
"A photograph of false euphoria of Enrique Peña Nieto, his wife and close to the triumph of the national team against New Zealand has a whiff of the typical corrupt arrangements that usually characterize football. If something is held in the tested image, rather than the victory of a mediocre selection, but the relief that both invested in Televisa broadcasting rights of the World Cup....
If Pena Nieto bought the election that brought him to the Presidency, if the Treasury Department bought its expenditure budget for 2014 with prices ranging between 10 and 24 million pesos per member, and the big oil lobbyists buy at the price is feathers and consciences in order to approve your energy reform , why not Televisa would buy a football match that for the selection of New Zealand meant absolutely nothing?"
Actually, getting outplayed quite a bit these days
I wonder if anyone in NZ Football Federation is interested in a plan B in case of defeat.
It involves to submit a protest to FIFA first thing after the game for allowing an inelegible player, Christian Gimenez, to play for Mexico in the last four games of Concacaf clasification tournament (Panama being one of the rivals).
Gimenez played in 2001 a Conmebol official U20 competition that awarded berths to the World Cup of such category in that year. FIFA statutes say that any player that played an official match, becomes inelegible for another association, unless it has others nationalities before such match, a requirement that Gimenez DID NOT comply with.
FIFA most likely would try to dismiss it. But, alas, in the same statutes it recognize the CAS as a last instance to settle disputes, when all other options in FIFA are closed. The point is to force FIFA to issue a decision, or have at least enough proof of delayed justice to be able to file an appeal to Court of Arbitration for Sport
The matter of the dispute is if FIFA gave an improper clearence to Gimenez. Something important, because fielding an ineligible player is punished with a forfeit 0-3. Such result would change the playoff rival, Panama in this case.
if there is an opportunity, ¿why not to take it? At the very least, some monetary compensation could be obtained if CAS rule that FIFA did not enforce its own statutes.
I wonder if anyone in NZ Football Federation is interested in a plan B in case of defeat.
It involves to submit a protest to FIFA first thing after the game for allowing an inelegible player, Christian Gimenez, to play for Mexico in the last four games of Concacaf clasification tournament (Panama being one of the rivals).
Gimenez played in 2001 a Conmebol official U20 competition that awarded berths to the World Cup of such category in that year. FIFA statutes say that any player that played an official match, becomes inelegible for another association, unless it has others nationalities before such match, a requirement that Gimenez DID NOT comply with.
FIFA most likely would try to dismiss it. But, alas, in the same statutes it recognize the CAS as a last instance to settle disputes, when all other options in FIFA are closed. The point is to force FIFA to issue a decision, or have at least enough proof of delayed justice to be able to file an appeal to Court of Arbitration for Sport
The matter of the dispute is if FIFA gave an improper clearence to Gimenez. Something important, because fielding an ineligible player is punished with a forfeit 0-3. Such result would change the playoff rival, Panama in this case.
if there is an opportunity, ¿why not to take it? At the very least, some monetary compensation could be obtained if CAS rule that FIFA did not enforce its own statutes.
Big Pete 65, Christchurch
Nice coverage on 3 News... hyped!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
this, but its still
A: nice to dream
B: good to see the cake tin full of dreamers!
"Nelson United, beat Mount Wellington on their ground in the 1977 C. You were probablyhatham cup Final."
....and we still talk about it down here every year!!! Son and I packing our supporters kit and flying up tomorrow. I cant believe I've finally gotten over myself after last week, and am actually excited. Really looking forward to watching Billy T in particular - havn't seen him play since Napier a few years back.
Live football with 40 thousand fans - it s been a while....
ricki's def gone after this match
http://www.yellowfever.co.nz/categories/all-whites-and-other-nz-international-teams/topics/ricki-has-been-sacked
My vague and nasty Spanish would give: "Yeah, thanks, I don't need a blowjob, I came to fuck you all."
I wonder if anyone in NZ Football Federation is interested in a plan B in case of defeat.
It involves to submit a protest to FIFA first thing after the game for allowing an inelegible player, Christian Gimenez, to play for Mexico in the last four games of Concacaf clasification tournament (Panama being one of the rivals).
Gimenez played in 2001 a Conmebol official U20 competition that awarded berths to the World Cup of such category in that year. FIFA statutes say that any player that played an official match, becomes inelegible for another association, unless it has others nationalities before such match, a requirement that Gimenez DID NOT comply with.
FIFA most likely would try to dismiss it. But, alas, in the same statutes it recognize the CAS as a last instance to settle disputes, when all other options in FIFA are closed. The point is to force FIFA to issue a decision, or have at least enough proof of delayed justice to be able to file an appeal to Court of Arbitration for Sport
The matter of the dispute is if FIFA gave an improper clearence to Gimenez. Something important, because fielding an ineligible player is punished with a forfeit 0-3. Such result would change the playoff rival, Panama in this case.
if there is an opportunity, ¿why not to take it? At the very least, some monetary compensation could be obtained if CAS rule that FIFA did not enforce its own statutes.
Unfortunately Panama have already protested (although they left it too late I think - outside the 24 hours window after a match for protesting)
The problem is that he played for an Argentina team appearing as "a guest" in the u-20 qualifiers since they were hosting the Finals.
But it seems a very messy area - were the Argentina team's matches "official" or not? How can matches in a qualifying tournament not be official when the results are official even if one team is only a "guest" and doesn't need to qualify?
Ricki announced he's stepping down in an exclusive interview with Gourdie of TV 3 News this afternoon:
Maybe not a bad idea so people can give him send-off at the game tomorrow:
BROADCAST VERSION:
COMPLETE 18 MINUTE INTERVIEW:
"But this afternoon, even before he'd told his players, Herbert said that when the All Whites' World Cup campaign ends - so will his tenure as coach.
"I've been dedicated and loyal to the group, but really feel now that should we get beaten on Wednesday there's a clean pathway for a new manager to come in," he said.
.....Since 2010, the team hasn't progressed the way many had expected, punctuated by a disappointing display in Mexico.
Herbert accepts he's accountable for that, but he hopes New Zealand Football heeds the lessons learned, for the benefit of his successor.
"The team needs to be prioritised," he says. "I'd be suggesting planning and vision and there needs to be a big of backing and belief a side can go back to the World Cup."
Herbert says he's been lucky to coach the All Whites for eight years, and whatever happens tomorrow night, he intends to enjoy it.
He's ready for the next step.
"All I'd say is I've done nothing but give everything I possibly can. Hopefully the fond memories of 2010 can be a reflection of what I'm about."
Big Pete 65, Christchurch
I'm a glutton for punishment, I've just watched the first leg for the third time. I am even more annoyed than I was the first time.
The team to play tomorrow is miles better but we will miss Wood and really Durante is lucky to be playing. He was shocking.
If you are old and wise you were probably young and stupid
Vicelich was worse!
If you are old and wise you were probably young and stupid
My vague and nasty Spanish would give: "Yeah, thanks, I don't need a blowjob, I came to fuck you all."
Too literal, it's pure Mexican slang: "Don't give me that bullshit, I came here to fuck you all."
Actually, getting outplayed quite a bit these days
Panama made an enquiry, not a protest, after the fact surfaced in social media. The answer by FIFA was just to acknowledge they received the enquiry about the elegibility of Gimenez and that they refuse to comment (neither "no" or "yes") using as excuse art. 14, par.3. (time limit of 1 hour to protest).
But NZ is an affected third party,as such not bounded by the time limit (this is applied only to the teams involved in the match in question) and as such it can still demand FIFA to launch disciplinary measures against Mexico regarding Gimenez participation in the game against Panama, as the outcome of a forfeit, as FIFA regulations mandate in case of inelegible player, is a different playoff rival.
I know FIFA would try to avoid it, But NZ can appeal to CAS, in order to clarify the matter of the nature of Argentina participation in South America U-20 tournament in Ecuador 2001. In regulations of similar tournaments declares in art.1 that CONMEBOL organizes the tournament in behalf of FIFA, and art. 2 say participants are the 10 federations of CONMEBOL. For me that means every match in the tournament is official.
Regarding the participation of Mexico in Copa America and Brazil in Gold Cup, they are guests of a DIFFERENT confederation of the one organizing the. tournament. This is NOT the case of Argentina.
This matter has to come an impartial court to decide. Let CAS sort it out.
And if the ruling comes too late, at least make FIFA pay compensation to both NZ and Panama for the damage incurred by its "oversight"
So, is up to the NZ football community if they want to lose this opportunity and allow FIFA to keep a double standard.
I'm a glutton for punishment, I've just watched the first leg for the third time. I am even more annoyed than I was the first time.
The team to play tomorrow is miles better but we will miss Wood and really Durante is lucky to be playing. He was shocking.
I'm not personally a Bon Jovi fan, but my girlfriend suggests this track is pertinent:
This video filmed at Westpac Stadium during their 2010 concert funnily enough:
We've got to hold on ready or not
You live for the fight when it's all that you've got"
All Whites XI (Heard on Radio)
Moss
Roux - Durante - Smith(c) - Tuiloma
Rojas - McGlinchey - James - Barbarouses
Brockie - Smeltz
If that's true, ,then that's 100% what I would have picked!
I wonder if anyone in NZ Football Federation is interested in a plan B in case of defeat.
It involves to submit a protest to FIFA first thing after the game for allowing an inelegible player, Christian Gimenez, to play for Mexico in the last four games of Concacaf clasification tournament (Panama being one of the rivals).
Gimenez played in 2001 a Conmebol official U20 competition that awarded berths to the World Cup of such category in that year. FIFA statutes say that any player that played an official match, becomes inelegible for another association, unless it has others nationalities before such match, a requirement that Gimenez DID NOT comply with.
FIFA most likely would try to dismiss it. But, alas, in the same statutes it recognize the CAS as a last instance to settle disputes, when all other options in FIFA are closed. The point is to force FIFA to issue a decision, or have at least enough proof of delayed justice to be able to file an appeal to Court of Arbitration for Sport
The matter of the dispute is if FIFA gave an improper clearence to Gimenez. Something important, because fielding an ineligible player is punished with a forfeit 0-3. Such result would change the playoff rival, Panama in this case.
if there is an opportunity, ¿why not to take it? At the very least, some monetary compensation could be obtained if CAS rule that FIFA did not enforce its own statutes.
Unfortunately Panama have already protested (although they left it too late I think - outside the 24 hours window after a match for protesting)
The problem is that he played for an Argentina team appearing as "a guest" in the u-20 qualifiers since they were hosting the Finals.
But it seems a very messy area - were the Argentina team's matches "official" or not? How can matches in a qualifying tournament not be official when the results are official even if one team is only a "guest" and doesn't need to qualify?
Mexico plays at the Copa America and the matches count as friendlies for us (when it comes to the Fifa rankings), so it has been that way long ago.
Panama made an enquiry, not a protest, after the fact surfaced in social media. The answer by FIFA was just to acknowledge they received the enquiry about the elegibility of Gimenez and that they refuse to comment (neither "no" or "yes") using as excuse art. 14, par.3. (time limit of 1 hour to protest).
But NZ is an affected third party,as such not bounded by the time limit (this is applied only to the teams involved in the match in question) and as such it can still demand FIFA to launch disciplinary measures against Mexico regarding Gimenez participation in the game against Panama, as the outcome of a forfeit, as FIFA regulations mandate in case of inelegible player, is a different playoff rival.
I know FIFA would try to avoid it, But NZ can appeal to CAS, in order to clarify the matter of the nature of Argentina participation in South America U-20 tournament in Ecuador 2001. In regulations of similar tournaments declares in art.1 that CONMEBOL organizes the tournament in behalf of FIFA, and art. 2 say participants are the 10 federations of CONMEBOL. For me that means every match in the tournament is official.
Regarding the participation of Mexico in Copa America and Brazil in Gold Cup, they are guests of a DIFFERENT confederation of the one organizing the. tournament. This is NOT the case of Argentina.
This matter has to come an impartial court to decide. Let CAS sort it out.
And if the ruling comes too late, at least make FIFA pay compensation to both NZ and Panama for the damage incurred by its "oversight"
So, is up to the NZ football community if they want to lose this opportunity and allow FIFA to keep a double standard.
Sorry to repeat, I did not quote properly in the first oneI thought Dura was ok, he made some pretty crucial tackles. Tommy and Ivan seemed to be fluffing around the whole time. Tony managed to skill 2 mexicans and was solid for 10mins but then did a seal dive header, proceeding to hand ball in the box. It's all pretty shambolic, but then again would the terrible reid-smith chemistry be remarkably better (probably wouldve still conceded 3).
yung thug
I wonder if anyone in NZ Football Federation is interested in a plan B in case of defeat.
It involves to submit a protest to FIFA first thing after the game for allowing an inelegible player, Christian Gimenez, to play for Mexico in the last four games of Concacaf clasification tournament (Panama being one of the rivals).
Gimenez played in 2001 a Conmebol official U20 competition that awarded berths to the World Cup of such category in that year. FIFA statutes say that any player that played an official match, becomes inelegible for another association, unless it has others nationalities before such match, a requirement that Gimenez DID NOT comply with.
FIFA most likely would try to dismiss it. But, alas, in the same statutes it recognize the CAS as a last instance to settle disputes, when all other options in FIFA are closed. The point is to force FIFA to issue a decision, or have at least enough proof of delayed justice to be able to file an appeal to Court of Arbitration for Sport
The matter of the dispute is if FIFA gave an improper clearence to Gimenez. Something important, because fielding an ineligible player is punished with a forfeit 0-3. Such result would change the playoff rival, Panama in this case.
if there is an opportunity, ¿why not to take it? At the very least, some monetary compensation could be obtained if CAS rule that FIFA did not enforce its own statutes.
Unfortunately Panama have already protested (although they left it too late I think - outside the 24 hours window after a match for protesting)
The problem is that he played for an Argentina team appearing as "a guest" in the u-20 qualifiers since they were hosting the Finals.
But it seems a very messy area - were the Argentina team's matches "official" or not? How can matches in a qualifying tournament not be official when the results are official even if one team is only a "guest" and doesn't need to qualify?
Mexico plays at the Copa America and the matches count as friendlies for us (when it comes to the Fifa rankings), so it has been that way long ago.
Panama made an enquiry, not a protest, after the fact surfaced in social media. The answer by FIFA was just to acknowledge they received the enquiry about the elegibility of Gimenez and that they refuse to comment (neither "no" or "yes") using as excuse art. 14, par.3. (time limit of 1 hour to protest).
But NZ is an affected third party,as such not bounded by the time limit (this is applied only to the teams involved in the match in question) and as such it can still demand FIFA to launch disciplinary measures against Mexico regarding Gimenez participation in the game against Panama, as the outcome of a forfeit, as FIFA regulations mandate in case of inelegible player, is a different playoff rival.
I know FIFA would try to avoid it, But NZ can appeal to CAS, in order to clarify the matter of the nature of Argentina participation in South America U-20 tournament in Ecuador 2001. In regulations of similar tournaments declares in art.1 that CONMEBOL organizes the tournament in behalf of FIFA, and art. 2 say participants are the 10 federations of CONMEBOL. For me that means every match in the tournament is official.
Regarding the participation of Mexico in Copa America and Brazil in Gold Cup, they are guests of a DIFFERENT confederation of the one organizing the. tournament. This is NOT the case of Argentina.
This matter has to come an impartial court to decide. Let CAS sort it out.
And if the ruling comes too late, at least make FIFA pay compensation to both NZ and Panama for the damage incurred by its "oversight"
So, is up to the NZ football community if they want to lose this opportunity and allow FIFA to keep a double standard.
Sorry to repeat, I did not quote properly in the first oneGrumpy old bastard alert
Such an awesome day of footie all day on the tele (and the stadium for those lucky enough) - must be about the best day of internationals on the TV in NZ history from 6.30 am till midnight Great build-up to the main event at Westpac:
Setting my twin DVD recorders now -:
6.30 am (ESPN) - Argentina v Bosnia friendly
8.30 am (Sommet) - Croatia v Iceland WCQ
8.30 am (ESPN) - Portugal v Sweden WCQ
11 am (Sommet) - England v Germany friendly
1.55 pm (ESPN) - Brazil v Chile friendly
7 pm (Sky Sports 1) - ALL WHITES V MEXICO
8 pm (Sommet) - France v Ukraine WCQ
10 pm (Sommet) - Croatia v Iceland replay
Big Pete 65, Christchurch
a minor plus from last week's misery is that I expect to be able to sleep tonight
however, the crying that precedes it will be a drag
Panama made an enquiry, not a protest, after the fact surfaced in social media. The answer by FIFA was just to acknowledge they received the enquiry about the elegibility of Gimenez and that they refuse to comment (neither "no" or "yes") using as excuse art. 14, par.3. (time limit of 1 hour to protest).
But NZ is an affected third party,as such not bounded by the time limit (this is applied only to the teams involved in the match in question) and as such it can still demand FIFA to launch disciplinary measures against Mexico regarding Gimenez participation in the game against Panama, as the outcome of a forfeit, as FIFA regulations mandate in case of inelegible player, is a different playoff rival.
I know FIFA would try to avoid it, But NZ can appeal to CAS, in order to clarify the matter of the nature of Argentina participation in South America U-20 tournament in Ecuador 2001. In regulations of similar tournaments declares in art.1 that CONMEBOL organizes the tournament in behalf of FIFA, and art. 2 say participants are the 10 federations of CONMEBOL. For me that means every match in the tournament is official.
Regarding the participation of Mexico in Copa America and Brazil in Gold Cup, they are guests of a DIFFERENT confederation of the one organizing the. tournament. This is NOT the case of Argentina.
This matter has to come an impartial court to decide. Let CAS sort it out.
And if the ruling comes too late, at least make FIFA pay compensation to both NZ and Panama for the damage incurred by its "oversight"
So, is up to the NZ football community if they want to lose this opportunity and allow FIFA to keep a double standard.
Sorry to repeat, I did not quote properly in the first oneGoodnight, enjoy the game those who are going, just celebrate it.
COYN