Regional Football - powered by Park Life

Nike Cup 2014

277 replies · 60,875 views
about 12 years ago
Optimist wrote:
Smithy wrote:

I don't agree that you can call it cheating. If you have a question on the rules, and you raise that question with the rule-keeper, and get a green light, you can't be said to be cheating.


Cheating implies an element of dishonesty or trickery, which can't be said to exist if you've put your hand up and asked for a ruling.


Anger at New Zealand Facepalm Football I can understand. But the club/player/coach in question don't deserve any grief in my opinion. At least not on the facts disclosed so far in this thread.


Up to one of the clubs to appeal.


Let's put the player to one side, because given his age he is at the affect of what is going on around him.  But the club and coach are party to an arrangement they know is being put in place as an exception/precedent so they have agreed to be party to this "arrangement of convenience" - so they deserve any and all the grief any reader of this thread feels moved to throw in their direction.


I do not agree. But history suggests you're not really open to changing your mind on things, so I'll demur.

Incredible stamina. No shame. Yellow Fever.

Permalink Permalink
about 12 years ago

Getting back to the football, it was great to see a couple of younger teams in the Auckland qualifier. Papakura looked like a very young team but were two mins away from taking all three points against Ellerslie in their first pool game. In the other pool, Western Springs improved with each game. It also looks like there were more teams in the other regional qualifers this year as well.

And this is where I see the benefits of the competition - a high profile and well run tournament that kids want to be part of and see it as part of their pathway in football. Players are prepared to practice through the heat of summer and you see their improvement from preparation and playing in the tournament. More kids spending more time in the game has to be good.

Hopefully the focus is on football in the NZ finals this weekend rather than the off-field action :-)

 

Permalink Permalink
about 12 years ago


Waitak, Cashmere, Wests (Wngtn) and Onehunga in Saturdays quarters (2pm - 6 pm). Final Sunday at 3.30.

"At the end of the drive the lawmen arrive...

I'll take my chance because luck is on my side or something...

Her name is Rio, she don't need to understand...

Oh Rio, Rio, hear them shout across the land..."

Permalink Permalink
about 12 years ago

Having witnessed the type of challenge the winners will face in Australia first hand and observed the results of the antipodes representatives in the finals it has to be acknowledged that you need a good team to progress.

Obviously the further you progress the greater the experience and to their credit Onehunga have given their lads a couple of great experiences in recent years.

I have no issue with clubs targeting the event and players to play in it. It is at the sharp end the best club football we can offer players of this age. With the demise of National Representative Tournaments it is our only chance to play against top players from across the country.

I like this years format, no one off games and tournament based from start to finish.

The rules are clear about prior involvement with a club and I think that is fair. I do not though believe in restricting the players after the event. If someone was to be picked up by a pro club overseas then he would have to wait until the end of the next season to transfer.

If an Academy or school in NZ spotted him and offered a scholarship he would have to wait, it just does not seem right to me.

The exclusion of the Canterbury boys because they were taking up opportunities at an Academy in Wellington and the loss of opportunity to play for the rest of their team mates simply stinks.

I do not know about the loaning of players, not something we would do in Canterbury and does sound a bit fishy.


Good luck for the weekend, hope it goes well. 
I think players should be club-tied for the same season, mainly because of how certain adults would choose to assemble sides. Clearly an issue can be made for players moving to a new location. 

E's Flat Ah's Flat Too

Permalink Permalink
about 12 years ago

Jeepers Smithy, if we all had the same opinion it would be a pretty bland forum.


Yes I try to take a position on things, however I always try to put across a reasoned point of view.  I wouldn't however like to earn a reputation for being inflexible.


In regards to this particular topic - all the best of luck to the teams playing this weekend!

Permalink Permalink
about 12 years ago

The onehunga (wynr's) player has been kicked out of the tournament.

So how do wynrs stay in it... Seems another gutless call from nzf

we only sing when were winning
Permalink Permalink
about 12 years ago · edited about 12 years ago · History

This is quickly starting to look like the America's Cup not the Nike Cup!

You've got to hope the muck raking stops now and the focus shifts to youth playing football on the park over the next 2 days at Bruce Pullman Park. At the end of the day these kids must be a sample of the cream of this age group talent, with some no doubt in line to go on and feature in our future NZ age group teams (2000 born and younger = 2017 / U17's) and (2000's & 99's = 2019 / U20's)

Hopefully in time some transparency to the apparent back flip on this matter will be issued by NZF. For those of us watching from a far the MUPC rules seem pretty clear cut.

http://www.aucklandfootball.org.nz/fileadmin/user_upload/Files/Downloads/Regulations/2014/2014_MUPC_NZ_Finals_Tournament_Handbook.pdf

This give's all power for the competition / tournament to NZF and in respect of player eligibility (clause 4) there is no reference to appeals or other NZF regulations, which have been mentioned earlier in this thread as being exercised? One can only hope that if there are any other instances of players being permitted because of application of the discretion provisions NZF have got it right.

Permalink Permalink
about 12 years ago

Big T, "kicked out". More detail please. Who initiated this? If he's already played in the competition, how can Onehunga (as opposed to individual player) not be penalised?

Kotahitanga. We are one.

Permalink Permalink
about 12 years ago · edited about 12 years ago · History

Looking forward to see how Western Suburbs fare against top opposition from around the country. The team has pretty much been together from 9th/10th Grade & have been the dominant team (with Karori) each year as theyve moved up through the age groups. Have watched a lot of their players as son played either against (club) or with (Ole/Kaizen/RHFA) & they play a quick passing game.  Understand they beat Miramar Rangers U17 7-0 last weekend - didnt watch it so unsure of the standard of the Miramar team.

Yes, the Nike Cup rules may be considerd "strict", but they are what they are, pretty simple to understand & should be abided to. I know several players (incl 1 x Wests I believe) who chose not to compete this year as they want to change clubs for 2014 season, so expect these to be upheld throughout the country in fairness to all players.

Was the Onehunga "loan" a deliberate way to circumvent the rules as the player was still "registered", therfore considered eligable - guess only they know, but if so certainly against the spirit of the game/rules, though the agreement should never have been sanctioned between Onehunga/ECB/NZF?  in the first place..... Their should be no 'loans" in Junior Football...You register for a club....trial....dont get in the team you want eg 1st Team....play in the 2nds or 3rd etc or move on & register for a different club - Simple.

Heres hoping for a Wests win...some good football on show....and Anyone But Onehunga to progress. :-)
Permalink Permalink
about 12 years ago

I can not understand why Onehunga would not be flat out removed from the competition. They had a player ruled ineligible, so therefore should lose their points for any and all games in which that player was on the team sheet, which means they dip out from the playoff tournament. As for all the "Look, they would probably have qualified even without the player, and that makes it a bit tough on the rest who deserve a shot" comments, I agree completely, but rules are rules. If they are not adhered to, at ANY level, what's to stop someone playing a 19yo and pulling him out once the next stage is reached? Rufer should know better, and should hire better people who don't make such epic balls ups as this, and the way to make this happen is to learn the hard way.

 I guarantee any team apart from the mighty Wynrs would not get let off that easily.

You can ascertain what your opponent is afraid of by observing the means by which he attempts to frighten you



Permalink Permalink
about 12 years ago
2Boys wrote:

This is quickly starting to look like the America's Cup not the Nike Cup!

You've got to hope the muck raking stops now and the focus shifts to youth playing football on the park over the next 2 days at Bruce Pullman Park. At the end of the day these kids must be a sample of the cream of this age group talent, with some no doubt in line to go on and feature in our future NZ age group teams (2000 born and younger = 2017 / U17's) and (2000's & 99's = 2019 / U20's)

Hopefully in time some transparency to the apparent back flip on this matter will be issued by NZF. For those of us watching from a far the MUPC rules seem pretty clear cut.

http://www.aucklandfootball.org.nz/fileadmin/user_upload/Files/Downloads/Regulations/2014/2014_MUPC_NZ_Finals_Tournament_Handbook.pdf

This give's all power for the competition / tournament to NZF and in respect of player eligibility (clause 4) there is no reference to appeals or other NZF regulations, which have been mentioned earlier in this thread as being exercised? One can only hope that if there are any other instances of players being permitted because of application of the discretion provisions NZF have got it right.

impossible for them to play for nz surely! Too many at private academies. Players in Canterbury told no nz pathway if you are at private academies!
Permalink Permalink
about 12 years ago

Results today:

Waitakere City 7   Cashmere Technical 0

Western Suburbs 0 Onehunga Sports 3

Cashmere Technical 4  Western Suburbs 3

Onehunga Sports 1 v Waitakere City 1

Waitakere City 3  Western Suburbs 0

Cashmere Technical 0 Onehunga Sports 5

Good thing for Wests and Cashmere is that they get another opportunity in tomorrow's semi. 

Draw not up on AFF website yet but I assume it will be:

Waitakere v Western Suburbs

Onehunga v Cashmere



Permalink Permalink
about 12 years ago

Hey tech speaking - ha ha & I don't know if Chch players have been told no route to nz rep if you not at FTC/NTC but I do know there are over a doz. 14-16 year old Chch lads currently at Ole academy and Phoenix academy in Welly so they've voted haven't they?

Kotahitanga. We are one.

Permalink Permalink
about 12 years ago
Global Game wrote:

Hey tech speaking - ha ha & I don't know if Chch players have been told no route to nz rep if you not at FTC/NTC but I do know there are over a doz. 14-16 year old Chch lads currently at Ole academy and Phoenix academy in Welly so they've voted haven't they?

No-one gives a flying f..k about FTC/NTC. Most are wising up on where the good coaching is at. 
College/lower level pro club is a far more appealing proposition than not improving much at FTC and then falling of the end of the line at 16. NZF needs to get its head out of its r's and realise they are severely limiting opportunities, and NZ will never make headway on the world stage as long as it stays hellbent on their pathway being the only one that leads to better football. It doesn't.
Permalink Permalink
about 12 years ago
10cc wrote:
Global Game wrote:

Hey tech speaking - ha ha & I don't know if Chch players have been told no route to nz rep if you not at FTC/NTC but I do know there are over a doz. 14-16 year old Chch lads currently at Ole academy and Phoenix academy in Welly so they've voted haven't they?

No-one gives a flying f..k about FTC/NTC. Most are wising up on where the good coaching is at. 

College/lower level pro club is a far more appealing proposition than not improving much at FTC and then falling of the end of the line at 16. NZF needs to get its head out of its r's and realise they are severely limiting opportunities, and NZ will never make headway on the world stage as long as it stays hellbent on their pathway being the only one that leads to better football. It doesn't.

totally agree! Burnley down here has been fantastic for the kids here. Most are turning down FTC and NTC opportunities to go with better coaching. Some quite young and before they have been brainwashed by this crap. Good on them I say. I am sure many will do well no matter the pathway!!
Permalink Permalink
about 12 years ago

I'm really surprised Wests are not more competitive!

Incredible stamina. No shame. Yellow Fever.

Permalink Permalink
about 12 years ago

Everyone was foxing today I reckon. The real competition. Is tomorrow.

Kotahitanga. We are one.

Permalink Permalink
about 12 years ago · edited about 12 years ago · History

Guys excellent photos from todays action at https://www.facebook.com/jlsphotographs

Smithy the Western Suburbs boys try to play some good nice football but they are probably not in the same physical condition as the Waitakere and Onehunga squads and play a pace a couple of clicks slower. They appear to have a few youngsters 2000 born and someone said at least one 2001 born? (the photos tell a story here) Apparently they only named a squad of  13 or 14?? (16 allowed) so that won't have helped either. Conditions today where tough: hot and the wind unfortunately got up again making play difficult later into the afternoon, although you would expect Wests should now how to play in windy conditions! Bruce Pullman Park is an excellent facility but you would struggle to find a more exposed, windy location in Auckland. I was watching the Waitakere / Onehunga game but are very surprised Wests lost to Cashmere from what I saw in the other fixtures.

Tomorrow is another day and you never know what that may bring. It sounds like it was a very early start for the Wests and Cashmere kids so after a good night sleep they may be up to spring a surprise or two!

PS: Got a download today from an Onehunga official on the background to the players eligibility being over turned today and will look to share this maybe tomorrow, when I have time to sit down and type it up as it has been conveyed to me (I also want to recount a couple of points tomorrow). But by all accounts the player in question only played in and featured on the team card for 2 of Onehunga's 9 fixtures up to this weekend and the loss of points from the 2 fixtures (per the MUPC rule book) had no effect on the results up to this point. Apparently Onehunga were aware of threats to challenge his eligibility so didn't use him until the fixtures were a dead rubber to try and flush out certainty. Apparently everyone including Onehunga wanted clarity and certainty on the issue going back to the 1st weekend of the Auckland qualifiers but the NZF football appeals committee?? kick-ed for touch with a non ruling on a point of procedure not being appropriately followed, so it dragged on until the player was used again.


Permalink Permalink
about 12 years ago
2Boys wrote:

Guys excellent photos from todays action at https://www.facebook.com/jlsphotographs

Smithy the Western Suburbs boys try to play some good nice football but they are probably not in the same physical condition as the Waitakere and Onehunga squads and play a pace a couple of clicks slower. They appear to have a few youngsters 2000 born and someone said at least one 2001 born? (the photos tell a story here) Apparently they only named a squad of  13 or 14?? (16 allowed) so that won't have helped either. Conditions today where tough: hot and the wind unfortunately got up again making play difficult later into the afternoon, although you would expect Wests should now how to play in windy conditions! Bruce Pullman Park is an excellent facility but you would struggle to find a more exposed, windy location in Auckland. I was watching the Waitakere / Onehunga game but are very surprised Wests lost to Cashmere from what I saw in the other fixtures.

Tomorrow is another day and you never know what that may bring. It sounds like it was a very early start for the Wests and Cashmere kids so after a good night sleep they may be up to spring a surprise or two!

PS: Got a download today from an Onehunga official on the background to the players eligibility being over turned today and will look to share this maybe tomorrow, when I have time to sit down and type it up as it has been conveyed to me (I also want to recount a couple of points tomorrow). But by all accounts the player in question only played in and featured on the team card for 2 of Onehunga's 9 fixtures up to this weekend and the loss of points from the 2 fixtures (per the MUPC rule book) had no effect on the results up to this point. Apparently Onehunga were aware of threats to challenge his eligibility so didn't use him until the fixtures were a dead rubber to try and flush out certainty. Apparently everyone including Onehunga wanted clarity and certainty on the issue going back to the 1st weekend of the Auckland qualifiers but the NZF football appeals committee?? kick-ed for touch with a non ruling on a point of procedure not being appropriately followed, so it dragged on until the player was used again.


 

Interesting. Thanks.

That point re NZF sounds frustratingly believable.

Incredible stamina. No shame. Yellow Fever.

Permalink Permalink
about 12 years ago

How the f### are wynrs still in this comp.... Such a joke anybody else would have been out.....


we only sing when were winning
Permalink Permalink
about 12 years ago

if Wests only have a squad of 13-14 then it is a shame as i would of thought you would need all 16 to give the team the options needed to win against unknown opposition …..

and by the looks of the posted photos they played a outfielder as keeper for some games so injury is also a big issue that a small squad will not help.

is there a rule that could cause this problem to occur and cause wests to have a small squad…? 

good sportsmanship and fair playing field is all we ask for

but all we get is talk and goal posts moving

Permalink Permalink
about 12 years ago

if Wests only have a squad of 13-14 then it is a shame as i would of thought you would need all 16 to give the team the options needed to win against unknown opposition …..

and by the looks of the posted photos they played a outfielder as keeper for some games so injury is also a big issue that a small squad will not help.

is there a rule that could cause this problem to occur and cause wests to have a small squad…? 

 
 
It might be to do with the fact that you have to have played for your club in the previous season. 

Wests wouldn't have wanted to carry 16 players through the winter. So they have probably just brought their regular Saturday squad to Auckland, which would usually be 14 players here in Welly. 

I guess the teams from other centres have played it differently in that respect.

Nonetheless, Wests have dominated (and I mean DOMINATED) their winter league here in Wellington, and creamed everyone in the qualifying tournament (including Karori who have been their traditional rivals during the winter). So it's interesting (and a shame) to see them struggling.

Incredible stamina. No shame. Yellow Fever.

Permalink Permalink
about 12 years ago

Something about fish and ponds?


Auckland has a much bigger player base, both number of players and clubs. In my experience better players play up grades week to week during winter then play "down" for annual age restricted tournament football, eg Nike Cup and Napier U19's. So they have experience playing against better quality and bigger/quicker players (physically) and then the club has no problem taking the full number of squad players to tournament.

Permalink Permalink
about 12 years ago

So basically, Wynrs try to deliberately circumvent the competition regulations but are cunning enough to make sure that if they are sanctioned that they remain in the competition.

NZF looks largely toothless and Wynton gets to play the 'everybody is against me' card once again.

Guess bringing the game into disrepute isn't what it used to be.


Permalink Permalink
about 12 years ago

Looks Waitakere beat Onehunga in the final 1-0.

Kotahitanga. We are one.

Permalink Permalink
about 12 years ago
Global Game wrote:

Looks Waitakere beat Onehunga in the final 1-0.

Please say it's true.
Permalink Permalink
about 12 years ago

http://www.foxsportspulse.com/comp_info.cgi?a=FIXTURE&compID=298728&c=0-4202-0-265218-0

Kotahitanga. We are one.

Permalink Permalink
about 12 years ago
Optimist wrote:

Something about fish and ponds?


Auckland has a much bigger player base, both number of players and clubs. In my experience better players play up grades week to week during winter then play "down" for annual age restricted tournament football, eg Nike Cup and Napier U19's. So they have experience playing against better quality and bigger/quicker players (physically) and then the club has no problem taking the full number of squad players to tournament.

 

Yeah you could say that about ponds and fish. You've only got conjecture to back it up though. If you look at head to head contests between Auckland and Wellington teams it doesn't work out. Check out the last ten years of the Chatham Cup for example.

Nike Cup tends to buck the trend, with Auckland teams being significantly ahead of the rest of the country. Perhaps that reflects the fact that Auckland teams have always taken it much more seriously. Planned for it etc. Perhaps it shows that Auckland is much stronger at kids' footy and that strength whittles away as players get older. Who knows.

Taking all of that into account though. The Wests team was so far ahead of the rest of the competition in Wellington that I thought they would be in the mix against the Auckland teams.

Incredible stamina. No shame. Yellow Fever.

Permalink Permalink
about 12 years ago

So basically, Wynrs try to deliberately circumvent the competition regulations but are cunning enough to make sure that if they are sanctioned that they remain in the competition.

NZF looks largely toothless and Wynton gets to play the 'everybody is against me' card once again.

Guess bringing the game into disrepute isn't what it used to be.



Someone has a Wynton-shaped bee in their bonnet.

Incredible stamina. No shame. Yellow Fever.

Permalink Permalink
about 12 years ago
Smithy wrote:
Optimist wrote:

Something about fish and ponds?


Auckland has a much bigger player base, both number of players and clubs. In my experience better players play up grades week to week during winter then play "down" for annual age restricted tournament football, eg Nike Cup and Napier U19's. So they have experience playing against better quality and bigger/quicker players (physically) and then the club has no problem taking the full number of squad players to tournament.

 


Yeah you could say that about ponds and fish. You've only got conjecture to back it up though. If you look at head to head contests between Auckland and Wellington teams it doesn't work out. Check out the last ten years of the Chatham Cup for example.


Nike Cup tends to buck the trend, with Auckland teams being significantly ahead of the rest of the country. Perhaps that reflects the fact that Auckland teams have always taken it much more seriously. Planned for it etc. Perhaps it shows that Auckland is much stronger at kids' footy and that strength whittles away as players get older. Who knows.


Taking all of that into account though. The Wests team was so far ahead of the rest of the competition in Wellington that I thought they would be in the mix against the Auckland teams.


Yes, but what you also have at senior level is player payments that creates mobility and foreign players. I'd argue a hypothesis that maybe youth football is more reflective of relative regional strength based on player pools size.
Permalink Permalink
about 12 years ago
Smithy wrote:
Optimist wrote:

Something about fish and ponds?


Auckland has a much bigger player base, both number of players and clubs. In my experience better players play up grades week to week during winter then play "down" for annual age restricted tournament football, eg Nike Cup and Napier U19's. So they have experience playing against better quality and bigger/quicker players (physically) and then the club has no problem taking the full number of squad players to tournament.

 


Yeah you could say that about ponds and fish. You've only got conjecture to back it up though. If you look at head to head contests between Auckland and Wellington teams it doesn't work out. Check out the last ten years of the Chatham Cup for example.


Nike Cup tends to buck the trend, with Auckland teams being significantly ahead of the rest of the country. Perhaps that reflects the fact that Auckland teams have always taken it much more seriously. Planned for it etc. Perhaps it shows that Auckland is much stronger at kids' footy and that strength whittles away as players get older. Who knows.


Taking all of that into account though. The Wests team was so far ahead of the rest of the competition in Wellington that I thought they would be in the mix against the Auckland teams.


Yes, but what you also have at senior level is player payments that creates mobility and foreign players. I'd argue a hypothesis that maybe youth football is more reflective of relative regional strength based on player pools size.


yeah but when age grade national teams start - most of the better kids are "forced" to move to auckland as that is where the team is normally based.   
Permalink Permalink
about 12 years ago · edited about 12 years ago · History
Smithy wrote:

So basically, Wynrs try to deliberately circumvent the competition regulations but are cunning enough to make sure that if they are sanctioned that they remain in the competition.

NZF looks largely toothless and Wynton gets to play the 'everybody is against me' card once again.

Guess bringing the game into disrepute isn't what it used to be.



Someone has a Wynton-shaped bee in their bonnet.

Agreed, hate to think what Wynton has done to the small group of haters that seem to have found each other on this thread.

Permalink Permalink
about 12 years ago
Smithy wrote:
Optimist wrote:

Something about fish and ponds?


Auckland has a much bigger player base, both number of players and clubs. In my experience better players play up grades week to week during winter then play "down" for annual age restricted tournament football, eg Nike Cup and Napier U19's. So they have experience playing against better quality and bigger/quicker players (physically) and then the club has no problem taking the full number of squad players to tournament.

 


Yeah you could say that about ponds and fish. You've only got conjecture to back it up though. If you look at head to head contests between Auckland and Wellington teams it doesn't work out. Check out the last ten years of the Chatham Cup for example.


Nike Cup tends to buck the trend, with Auckland teams being significantly ahead of the rest of the country. Perhaps that reflects the fact that Auckland teams have always taken it much more seriously. Planned for it etc. Perhaps it shows that Auckland is much stronger at kids' footy and that strength whittles away as players get older. Who knows.


Taking all of that into account though. The Wests team was so far ahead of the rest of the competition in Wellington that I thought they would be in the mix against the Auckland teams.


Hi Smithy, given this is the Nike Cup thread I was talking about teenage play. I do have facts to back my statement up about Auckland being in the fortunate situation, when playing National tournaments, that we have players that either consistently play up or are consistently playing keenly contested matches week in week out, again due to large player and club numbers.  That's reflected in the results of Nike cup, National Schools and  U19 tournaments that are consistently won by Auckland teams, and often with the majority of top 8 teams being Auckland based - although Napier last year was a bit of exception, albeit that the final was won by Three Kings from Auckland.


While Auckland has strength - particularly up to the Nike cup age grade - Auckland clubs are not so good at retaining players into their late teens/early 20's.  I believe I witnessed one of the reasons for this drop off today, it was:


- Iwata (although he was on gardening duty today)

- Bilen

- Berlanga

- Irving

- Moreira

- Tade

- Lowdon

-  Cardozo

It's no wonder some of our younger players get disheartened and give it away, when pathways are filled by overseas sourced players. It's my personal belief that we have to get better at giving options to. NZ players rather than filling our top. National League teams with foreign players who are only really here for the money and the opportunity to secure a contract elsewhere via the world stage of the CWC.

Permalink Permalink
about 12 years ago
chopah wrote:
Smithy wrote:
Optimist wrote:

Something about fish and ponds?


Auckland has a much bigger player base, both number of players and clubs. In my experience better players play up grades week to week during winter then play "down" for annual age restricted tournament football, eg Nike Cup and Napier U19's. So they have experience playing against better quality and bigger/quicker players (physically) and then the club has no problem taking the full number of squad players to tournament.

 


Yeah you could say that about ponds and fish. You've only got conjecture to back it up though. If you look at head to head contests between Auckland and Wellington teams it doesn't work out. Check out the last ten years of the Chatham Cup for example.


Nike Cup tends to buck the trend, with Auckland teams being significantly ahead of the rest of the country. Perhaps that reflects the fact that Auckland teams have always taken it much more seriously. Planned for it etc. Perhaps it shows that Auckland is much stronger at kids' footy and that strength whittles away as players get older. Who knows.


Taking all of that into account though. The Wests team was so far ahead of the rest of the competition in Wellington that I thought they would be in the mix against the Auckland teams.


Yes, but what you also have at senior level is player payments that creates mobility and foreign players. I'd argue a hypothesis that maybe youth football is more reflective of relative regional strength based on player pools size.


yeah but when age grade national teams start - most of the better kids are "forced" to move to auckland as that is where the team is normally based.   

 

That's not my experience. Not many Welly kids relocate anyway.

Incredible stamina. No shame. Yellow Fever.

Permalink Permalink
about 12 years ago

Rumour Wynrs to be given a 1 year ban... 

we only sing when were winning
Permalink Permalink