Can NZ win?

Yes they can (says Bob The Builder). Will they? "will", "certainty", "nailed on" etc are not words in (this) punter's vocab. What I like to do is think through various scenarios and assign admittedly rough probabilities and get a rough idea of what I think the true prices should be, compare them to what the market is saying (and my book) and work out a plan.

Without looking up the exact figure, average first innings scores are around the 350 mark these days, right on the cusp of the follow-on figure. The only good thing from a draw layer's view yesterday was NZ were batting when the bad light came and refused it. Getting extra runs now just saves them from the possibility of having to get them on Day 4 or 5. If the light is bad in the morning, they'll keep on batting and if anything, it makes a draw less likely (they are getting runs off "free" overs that normally would expect to be lost).

So say 560 all out - another 10-15 overs lost tomorrow. I'd assign the chances of SAF avoiding the follow-on at 45-50%. If there is one trap in test cricket it is thinking just because one side gets 500+, it must be a road and the other side will too. Sometimes that happens (esp. at Napier, Antigua and a few other grounds around the world), and while the pitch is OK you need to take into account SAF bowled badly (and dropped a catch or two). There is turn on the pitch, some sunshine would be nice tomorrow, and I don't think Vettori will bowl as many pies as Boje did. And Patel has impressed me in ODI's - gets nice loop and what a nice situation to make your test debut - bowling when your batsmen have put 550 on the board - absolutely no pressure at all. Having a left-arm and right-arm orthodox spinner in tandem is a nice combo.

So 45%-50% may be generous, but I'll stick to it. To me, the test boils down to can NZ get SAF out for around 300 around lunch on Day 4 - if they can they have plenty of time to get the result (I think they would enforce the follow-on as if they are chasing a smallish target on Day 5 they can bat in the fading light whereas SAF would be off the park). Chances of NZ bowling SAF out for 300 or less? (I'd say 30-35%). Remaining 15-25% SAF bowled out betwen 300 and 350 which makes the game close to call.

So the draw should be odds on, but around 1.75 to 1.8 in my book. NZ should be 2.2-2.3 and SAF 100's. Currently the prices are 1.35 draw, 4.1 NZ and 50 SAF.

With the spinners being the main danger, I won't be too concerned if SAF are 80-1 - any wickets the seamers pick up will be a bonus. If SAF get off to a good start, the draw will fall quickly and I will quite happily go in at laying it again at 1.15 - 1.20. So there's the plan. NZ test wins overseas are rare, and maybe I am looking through rose-tinted glasses, but I think they are more than a 25% chance that the market suggests.

Super 14 Week 12

Without Sky last week I only saw brief glimpses of the games last week and I feel a bit out of touch. Although looking at the P/L sheet for rugby a case could be made that I've been out of touch all season. Here goes with fingers crossed:

HIGHLANDERS ($4.90) v WARATAHS ($1.27)

Hopefully the Tahs will get there before game time. Assuming that is the case, I expect them to win as I can't make a case for a result the other way. No bet; pity the weather is clearing as the Highlanders with 10.5 points would look attractive if there's any rain around.

CATS ($1.73) v FORCE ($2.38)

Two mediocre teams playing each other should have the prices much closer together. The Cat's captain is still on the injured list (along with about 25 Force players) - this game is a lottery; the Force have never been to SAF so who knows how they'll travel - on pure value alone, a lay of the Cats.

HURRICANES ($1.33) v CHIEFS ($4.50)

I've got the Canes wrong all season. So I give up. I want to back the Chiefs at that price but the moment I plonk my hard-earned on them a Canes victory is guaranteed. Of course, if I don't bet, the Chiefs will upset them. I'll sleep on what to do with this one.

BRUMBIES ($1.18) v REDS ($6.20)

Next.

CHEETAHS ($2.04) v BLUES ($2.02)

An interesting match-up. I tend to favour the Blues but evens is a bit skinny. I won't be betting but I will be trying to get some money on the total points market as I'll be surprised if these two teams can't produce more than 43 points.

BULLS ($1.65) v SHARKS ($2.58)

I do think the Bulls will win but I don't think they deserve to be $1.65. If they shorten to below $1.60 I'll lay them - will be a cracker of a game if you like two tonne dump trucks smashing into each other.

STORMERS ($5) v CRUSADERS ($1.25)

We all know the Crusaders took the Force too lightly last week, so what do they do? Rest McCaw, Jack, Somerville and bench Carter. They know the forwards are in for a torrid time next week (against the Bulls) but ffs - benching Carter??? Hope they lose (spoken like a true Aucklander).

So I'm really only interested in:

Laying the Cats
Backing Highlanders with the points start if the weather is shit in Dunedin
Backing over 43.5 total match points in the Cheetahs v Blues game

and maybe laying the Canes.

Rolling in the money

"It is questionable whether profit generating professional sports should receive government or public monies" - Ministerial Taskforce on Sport, Fitness & Leisure (2001), p.59

"Significant income increases have occured in major professional sports without critical evaluation as to whether the continued allocation of grants by central agencies to these sports is an appropriate use of public funds" - Ibid, p.60

"The Taskforce does not support provision of public funds for recreation and sport to professional codes" - Ibid, p.78

So upon hearing the news that the New Zealand Rugby Union (Inc.) generated a record profit of $23.7 million dollars, it was time to dust off SPARC's latest annual report, and well, whaddya know, government funding of rugby through SPARC increased from $22,500 in 2003/4 to $682,500 in 2004/5.

From one Head Honcho to another - congratulations Jock, I'm really happy rugby had such a successful year in 2005, I really am. But here's a thought: that $682,500 you bludged off the taxpayer, how about paying it back because YOU DON'T FUCKING NEED IT.

Back online

A week without a phone line is like a month, no a year, without you-know-what. Perhaps I exaggerate.

Anyway, all I need to complete this orgasmic week is for the Sky technician to visit tomorrow as promised in time to get TV pics for the second Saffer / NZ test that kicks off tomorrow night. Not that I really want to watch, as the cards are lining up for the Kiwis to get a good old-fashioned thrashing. Sometime ago I made the comment that one of the problems (actually the major problem) for the NZ cricket team is the top 6 inches. Once a team estabishes ascendancy over them, they seem powerless to do anything about it - especially away from the comforts of home. So, with 5 days fine weather forecast, a pitch that may misbehave - South Africa at 1.82 is almost worth backing. But I think the really wrong price is the draw - at the moment on Betfair it's 3.75 and it should be closer to 5.0 IMO.

While on the subject of cricket, during Easter I got a copy of SPARC's annual report from last year and I get really p!ssed off seeing cricket continues to be funded for high performance. Why cricket is a "carded" sport in New Zealand defies logic. To quote the NZ Academy of Sport (the high performance arm of SPARC):

The New Zealand Academy of Sport invests in the sports that are most likely to bring international success for New Zealand.

Can someone please tell me, apart from a fluky win in the ICC Champions Trophy in 2000, what "international success" cricket has ever brought to NZ???

Super 14 preview up tomorrow - not that it will be worth much - the only good thing about no phone over the weekend was placing no bets - I would have got most of the games wrong. Although I wouldn't be so stupid as to back the Crusaders at 1.03 - I'm looking forward to seeing the Sunday papers where they have the biggest winners and losers at the TAB; I'm picking someone is still feeling sick at a guaranteed 3% interest at the TAB costing them 50% of their principal instead.

Tele-joke

Moved house yesterday - phone man came and said there's a problem down the road and he'll leave me a message on my cellphone if the phone is unable to be connected.

Today lunchtime no connection and still waiting for a message - a few (cell)phone calls later find there's a cable fault unable to be repaired until next Thursday. So no phone/internet until then. God I love this country sometimes.

Yes this does mean I'll not be blogging for a week ...

Winning at all costs

It's good to see even in Orienteering the "winning at all costs" mentality that has become the catch-cry for sports is beginning to show its face.

At the Nopesport forum you can read about foot tripping, abusing a 10 year old boy and antics at the control during the recent JK relays in the UK. It's great to read such tales as after all, winning is the only thing that matters in sport and you should do everything in your power to ensure you (and/or your team) reach that lofty goal. Compare these stories to the NZ relays last weekend where the only tripping that occurs is due to a lack of co-ordination from getting absolutely plastered at the prizegiving the night before.

No wonder New Zealand is declining as a sporting nation - values of sportsmanship, fair play and enjoyment are relics of an ancient sporting age and we MUST adopt the aggressive (some would say Australian) approach that demands the only focus shall be on winning.

PS: For anyone who thinks I'm serious, look up the definition of "sarcasm" in the dictionary.

Women, cricket and politics

Some of them are worth their weight in gold.

While I've been enjoying a weekend of sun and wine, the better half has been home alone and I arrive home to find 25 boxes packed (I'm moving house on Thursday). Looks like the wedding ring has just got a tad more expensive.

Betting-wise a very consistent weekend. A 100% strike rate (as in struck out). Not too much damage and spent last night getting out of a hole in the SAF NZ cricket test. Every time I get cute with cricket betting by backing the draw with a view to getting out down the track I end up in a hole. Memo to myself: just lay the fkn thing pregame and make life easy.

Didn't see the first 2 days as the hotel didn't have digital but pried open the eyes with matchsticks to sit through last night and pleasantly surprised to see the Kiwis continuing to be competitive. Dodgy wickets tends to even up teams so they are in with a shout. However, given my predictions are wrong more often than not, for nationalistic reasons I will publicly state the Saffers are going to win this one.

A new phrase from a commentator - "he gives his armpits some fresh air" - as Oram presumably lifted his arms upon reaching his century.

Finally, trawling through the written questions from the House of Parliament found a series from a National MP relating to funding of Commonwealth Games sports; for example:

What was the annual investment by the Government into high performance Cycling, in the financial year immediately preceding the 2006 Commonwealth Games and the 2002 Kuala Lumpur Commonwealth Games?

Looking forward to seeing the answer, especially as the 2002 Commonwealth Games were held in Manchester.

Off to Nelson

The NZ Orienteering Championships are in the sunshine city this long weekend, so I'll be away until Monday - yesterday was the most number of hits I've ever had on this blog, so please come back next week.

A quick update on the cricket. I think I heard on the radio while half asleep this morning the hours of play for the upcoming SAF NZ series are 9.30 to 4.30 so bad light may be less of an issue. The draw back at 3.1 may not be such a wise move after all, but I'll get out of it at some stage. And GO THE DESHI's! More in hope now than belief, but they can still win this. Pity I'll be on a plane when it's all happening.

With travel and Orienteering, the time to devote to thinking about Super 14 bets has been limited, and the matches this week look even more unappealing than last week. On the face of it, you would expect the Blues, Crusaders and Chiefs to be comfortable winners over the Force, Cheetahs and Stormers respectively.

The Reds / Bulls holds a little more interest with the Reds travelling home from SAF. While the Reds did play well at home earlier this season I am tempted to back the Bulls if they stayed around the 1.90 mark. Cats v Sharks I don't care, 2 South African sides playing each other is not my forte, but I feel the Sharks are too short and if anything, I'd have a speculator on the Cats.

Earlier this season the Highlanders-Canes match was one to look forward to, but I feel the Otago boys are on the slide and now they have James Ryan out for the season. Am leaving it alone, which brings us to the final match of the round and the most interesting.

Waratahs v Brumbies. The head says the Waratahs but I can't entertain them as a 1.60 favourite. A 1.80 v 2.20 game in my book. The only thing I got right preseason this year are the Brumbies are not a spent force - with both teams at full-strength this will be worth watching.

Now that I've explained the difference between backing and laying, the bets for JWOC will be (assuming I can get them matched)

Lay the Reds @ 2.14 to win 30 (lose 34.20)
Lay the Sharks @ 1.60 to win 50 (lose 30)
Lay the Waratahs @ 1.58 to win 65 (lose 37.70)

Finally, something I read in the paper brought a few of those rambling thoughts together.

Graham Henry admitted he became so obssessed with results during stints with the Lions and Wales, he lost sight of managing and coaching the players. (John) Mitchell has taken a similar philosophy to the Force. "I am less outcome-focused as a coach. I am always looking for improvement rather than focusing on results" - Wynne Gray, NZ Herald 13 April

It made me smile because on Tuesday night, I rang an orienteer that I "coach" (I use the term loosely as our relationship consists of a phone call every two months or so) to basically convey the same message. It's all too easy when approaching a major sporting event to think about your goals and what you are setting out to achieve, rather than what you need to do to get your best sporting performance. "Focus on the process, not the outcome"

It leads to the paradox of elite sport - the more you concentrate on the process and think less about the desired outcome, the greater the chance you actually have of achieving the desired result. And therein lies a lesson for the boffins at SPARC:

SPARC, national sporting organisations et al are only interested in results. They have to justify money spent, and the only way (in their eyes) they can justify that is things like the number of medals. But athletes aren't (or shouldn't be) thinking about what colour medal they are going to get. Their job is to get everything right in the build-up and performance on the day, and (hopefully) the result will take care of itself. Hopefully, because one thing you cannot control in many sports is the performance of your opponent(s).

The role of NSO's and others who put money in is (or should be) to create the ideal environment for athletes to perform. To cut a long story short, publicly placing results expectations on individual sports and athletes IMO does not contribute to that ideal environment - for the simple reason that it runs the risk of dragging the athletes' focus away from the importance of process. They do read newspapers you know.

This has nothing to do with accepting mediocrity, or not placing expectations on athletes to perform, it has everything to do with sporting administrators and funders showing some understanding about what athletes need to do to perform and reach what are (or should be) common goals.

Have a good Easter everybody.

15 sec of fame

Sorry for the self-promotion, but I was furious when reading about the taxpayer-funded trips by SPARC Board members to the Athens Olympics.

The press release can be found here

You can go to Radio Sport and listen to the dulcet sounds of my voice in the Listen Back section; pick Wednesday - it straddles two time slots; starts 13:15 into the 16.30 - 16.45 slot and continues into the 16.45 - 17.00 slot. Note that these links will only last a week before being wiped.

The Government Administration Select Committee Financial Review of SPARC 2004/5 can be found here

Some related comment can be found in the columns at Sportsfreak

Preview - SAF v NZ

I'm away over Easter, so had better get this up, even though the first test is 4 days away. Even this far out, you can make some reasonable assumptions, such as:

1. Bad Light. The colour of the leaves in my backyard tells me it is autumn in the southern hemisphere. And whilst South Africa is 10 degrees closer to the equator than NZ, it is still autumn over there. I haven't checked thouroughly, but these surely have to be the latest tests ever played in SAF, certainly since readmission. So they will not be 450 over tests, and I'd estimate approx. 10 overs lost each day to fading light.

So these will be 400 over tests before a ball is bowled. My rule of thumb is when about 90 overs of play have been lost, the draw should be around evens thanks to the weather (depends of course on teams playing, match situation, etc). So I'm assuming 50 have been lost already; more than a session or two lost to bad weather in any test and the draw laying masses will start fidgeting.

I had fully expected this to be factored into prices so I am surprised the opening prices on Betfair are 2.02 SAF, 5.4 NZ, 3.05 draw. (the draw was 3.1 but I did a spot of vacuum cleaning). Granted, the long-range weather forecast for Pretoria is good, but long-range weather forecasts are not hugely accurate.

2. Player fitness. I choked on my cornflakes this morning when reading on cricinfo the following quote from the NZ team manager: "Crocker added that the entire squad was still jet-lagged and that they had all been given Wednesday off to recover". FFS, they've been in the country a week. Anyway, this heading is all about Bond. Shane Bond (cue 007 music). Yes, the favourite frustration of the NZ cricket fan will play it's part - when Bond will break down. Knee, back, virus, testicles - something will go wrong with the only true strike bowler we have; it's only a question of when. A fully-fit Bond for the entire test series would give NZ a chance of winning a test (but perhaps not the series), and that forms the basis of my prayers every night.

3. Preparation. SAF have just played Oz and NZ have just played the Windies (interspersed with many sessions of cards in the changing room). Wonder who has the advantage there?

4. Autumn Pitches. Tired, perhaps over-used pitches - I can't see batting roads in this series. Not that South Africa would want them anyway.

5. Ball v Bat. The recent SAF Oz series was dominated by the ball. I expect that to continue in this series - with the exception of Kallis, I don't think there is a batter who can bat all day. NZ's openers are shaky, although for non-NZ readers don't underestimate Fulton - he is a good bat. I also think the NZ bowling attack is perhaps a bit underestimated - obviously Bond and Vettori are decent but the others are not exactly lambs to the slaughterhouse. The battle of Ntini v NZ's middle order will be one of the keys in this series IMHO - and given NZ had trouble with Fidel Edwards recently, I can't see them completely negating an in-form Ntini.

6. Tactics. SAF are one of the more negative sides in test cricket, but they will be licking their chops at the moment. Both teams I suspect will be reasonably positive; NZ fancy their chances and no doubt SAF are expecting to win, and will be reasonably motivated to do so after a summer of being beat up by the Aussies (in tests).

Summary: So all in all, as long as the weather does not play a large part in proceedings, the goldmine of the draw layer shall continue. But there should be caution that it will take less weather interruptions than usual to bring the draw into play. Getting off the fence, SAF 2-0. Hope I'm wrong.

My rough prices for the first test would be SAF 2.5, NZ 6.0, draw 2.5. I've already backed the draw at 3.1 pretest and will continue to do so - I'll be unfortunate if that's the shortest price on the draw all game. No matter what happens on the first day, I'll be happy to lay SAF odds-on, back NZ above 10, and will start getting rid of the draw if it gets to 2.5 and below - weather-dependant as always.

P.S. GO THE DESHI's!!! Some kind soul on the Betfair forum put up a video link, so I'm getting to see a completely unexpected competitive test match that I'm looking forward to seeing its conclusion.

Why are we so surprised?

The news that New Zealand lost its Davis Cup tie to Kazakhstan is not surprising, yet it provides the sporting media another chance to highlight what a joke NZ tennis is and lead the hand-wringing of why we suck so much at it.

We don't need reminding. Using the SPARC-approved method of predicting sporting results, our boys currently ranked 634 and 835 were always going to be up against it in the snow at Almaty versus numbers 374 and 934 in the world.

So we currently suck at tennis. Big deal. Give them a bit of space and time to get their house in order without highlighting their plight too much please - one day another Chris Lewis will appear and all will be rosy again.

145-6

83 further runs required to avoid the follow-on and Australia are still favourites to win this match - current prices (approx) Bangladesh 3.7 Australia 2.5 Draw 2.9. Geez I hate temptation. It's like having a naked goddess standing right in front of you all yours for the taking knowing the wife is due home in 2 minutes time.

I am so tempted to get involved and lay the sh!t out of the draw; what's stopping me is I don't trust the weather - it seems OK, but some forecasts have some rain on Day 4.
One good thing is reading comments off cricinfo such as these:

"Hossain had Ricky Ponting going back to one that swung and kept low in the 12th"

"Damien Martyn, who looked uneasy against the indifferent bounce that he encountered in ten deliveries prior to his dismissal, made too much room to cut and was undone by one that kept very low"

Without TV pics it's hard to judge for yourself (and why I'm always a little wary of betting matches I can't see), but this seems like a pitch that is starting to misbehave. Which is why I'm tempted to lay the draw and possibly go overweight on Bangladesh. If Oz do not avoid the follow-on they will do very well not to lose this game. If they get past 228, game on.

So to succumb to the naked goddess and lay the draw with a bit extra on Bangladesh, or keep out of it? I've got a few hours to think about it.

355-5

I heard this score while half asleep this morning and assumed someone in the Aussies must have enjoyed some mediocre bowling until I fully awoke from my slumber and realised that Shahriar Nafees doesn't play for the baggy greens.

Some time ago I made a deal with myself never to bet on cricket games involving Bangladesh and Zimbabwe - well "never" is not quite correct, not until either of these sides showed some signs of improvement. That day for the Bangladeshis may not be too far off. They remind me of Sri Lanka when they first entered test cricket - cannon fodder for their first few years before undergoing a reasonably rapid transformation into a competitive force. What you want to do as a punter is to get the timing right, for there is little doubt Bangladesh will one day be a competitive force in world cricket - all the ingredients are there (a huge population, a cricket-mad country) and as long as they continue to use offshore help for coaching and facilities, they will get there sooner rather than later.

Interesting checking the Betfair prices for this test - seems the prices were around Oz 1.10 Bangladesh 100 Draw 10 pregame (and that was with weather uncertainty); now the prices are Oz 1.72 Bangladesh 12 Draw 2.76. Now that this game has some life, it is tempting to get invovled but I won't - the ground is hosting it's first test match so there is very little information to judge how the pitch will behave on Days 4 and 5, and I have no idea how to assess the weather information and how any aqua would affect the ground. Betting is all about in some respects assessing relevant information, and when you can't do that it's not betting, just guessing.

So I'm not going to guess - I'll sit on the sidelines and secretly hope for the upset of the century - well, 2006 since Aussie did lose an ODI to these guys last year, didn't they :-)

Junior Fund going up

Amazingly, I got a couple of bets right this weekend.

First, a word of explanation - thanks to betting exchanges, not only can you "back" a team to win, you can do the opposite by taking the opposite side of the bet (known as "laying" the bet). So you can offer a bet to someone who wants to back a team to win, and what you are doing is backing that team to "not win". In a head-to-head match, it's almost the same as backing the other team to win, except on the very odd occasion something called a DRAW happens.

In the interests of simplicity, I put the bets up for the junior orienteering team as "$30 on the Bulls to win @ $3.60", when in fact what I am doing is laying the Chiefs @ 1.40 (yes, the prices aren't exactly the same but I wear the difference)

So the Bulls bet did come in, as well as the Reds beating the Cats. My reputation is slowly being restored as the JWOC fund is up to $871.80 from $820 bet. Probably would have been simpler to just donate the money but where's the fun in that?

When you read something that pisses you off, like this did on Monday, you have a few choices - like kicking the cat, or taking your frustrations out on the keyboard and then firing it off to the media in the forlorn hope that someone might be interested.

Well, blow me down, someone was interested and if you're in NZ and interested, go and buy the Sunday Star Times and turn to Section B, page 11. Unfortunately it's not available online and at 1500 words I'm not going to post the original version here. The (extremely) short version is it is ridiculous to use medal targets at something like the Commonwealth Games as a measure of accountability for high performance funding for two simple reasons: one, success in sport is not necessarily judged by winning or finishing in the top three, and two, any sporting performance is not directly linked to the amount of (public) money spent in achieving that performance. Pretty simple concepts I would have thought.

Actually, if you have any interest in NZ sport, you should take an interest as to how the taxpayer's money going into sport is being used, and in some cases, abused. Over the last couple of weeks I've done a lot of thinking about the direction that SPARC are taking high performance sport in this country and in some areas they are IMO going down the wrong road. When I get the time to organise my rambling thoughts into some semblance of coherence I'll post them here.

Winning at all costs?

One of the better columns on sport IMO is written by ex-Wallaby Peter Fitzsimons and appears each Saturday in the Sydney Morning Herald; today's had this little warm and fuzzy laced with the usual amount of Fitzsimon's sarcasm:

Aren't those Norwegians a weird bunch? Take the situation in the Winter Olympics. During the women's team cross-country event, a champion Canadian skier by the name of Sara Renner broke her pole. One of the blokes who was with the Norwegian side and who happened to be on the spot and had a new pole, handed it to her so she could keep going. Canada went on to win the silver medal, and Norway came fourth. I know, I know. Staggering. Disturbing. Any self-respecting member of the Australian team would surely have sledged the Canadian skier, before teasing her by holding the new pole just out of reach, and then protested to the judges that she was breaching the rules by trying to get new equipment mid-race, and that would show everyone what sport was all about. At least, though, the Norwegian good sport, Bjoernar Haakonsmoen, has been appropriately awarded. At a ceremony in Oslo this week, he was presented with 7400 cans of maple syrup, gathered by grateful Canadians.

Recent columns have also taken potshots at the Australian women's 4x400 relay team that won the gold at the CG through a protest, even though the English wiped the floor with them and won by about 100 metres. (The English were DSQ'd on a technicality - lining up in the wrong order at a baton change which apparently would have gained them about a one-tenth of a second advantage).

It's heartening to see that even in Australia, the "winning at all costs" mentality is not met with universal approval. A couple of people in Wellington should take note.

Super 14 Week 9

Friday means Super 14 tips time, although judging by my recent record if you do exactly the opposite of what I suggest, you'll be making heaps. The P/L for rugby this year is now in the red, but (ever the optimist) there's plenty more rugby to come. One of my goals this year (yes, I set goals related to betting - rules, targets are all part and parcel of a semi-pro punter's life) is to at least break even on ALL my major betting sports (which are cricket, rugby and tennis) - obviously the intention is to win money but when betting multi-sports chances are you'll have a bit of a lean trot in one of them. Another goal is to not get tempted into betting on sporting events outside these, which apart from three league bets in NRL Round 1 I've managed to do. Although I'm still a little peeved I didn't back the Warriors last weekend after I heard the news Johns was out.

Anyway, back to the rugby. From a betting perspective, it is not exactly a round that has me drooling at the lips although of course the first match tonight is a must-see.

CRUSADERS ($1.31) v WARATAHS ($4.50)

I do believe the Saders price is too short and am searching for reasons to back the Tahs, but I can't find too many. It's a pity Mat Rogers is out, and I feel his absence is material. The Crusaders have shown all season they'll step up their game to the level required to beat the opposition, although this is the first time they will have met two decent sides in consecutive weeks. The only possible chink in their armour is how much of a pounding did they take from the Canes game?

$1.31 is definitely too short, but I'm reluctant to put money on the Tahs in this game. Even the handicap of 10.5 at $1.90 doesn't interest me. No bet. Or maybe a small one ... decisions, decisions.

HIGHLANDERS ($1.14) v FORCE ($8)

And I don't think the Highlanders deserve to be this short for this game either. They showed against the Cats two weeks ago they are not likely to run up a cricket score against lesser opposition, although that game was in Invercargill and if Latham thinks Hamilton is a boring city then he obviously hasn't played in some other parts of our country.

Actually the main thing that worries me here is (and some will laugh at this), being a day game, the Force are playing at the equivalent of 10.30 a.m. Perth time and rugby players are not known as early risers. If it wasn't for that, I'd probably have a go on the handicap with the Force getting 16.5 points, but at $1.81 on Betfair it's not tempting enough. No bet.

CHIEFS ($1.37) v BULLS ($3.60)

Yes well. I'm still trying to forget last weekend. To the Bulls' credit the midfield has been replaced and Steyn is a more than capable replacement for Hougaard so SURELY they can't play as bad as they did against the Blues? Surely? And can Lauaki put last weeks' performance week in week out? The Bulls forwards are a bit bigger, although that doesn't necessarily mean they can tackle - that number 28 still haunts me ...

I will probably regret it, but I will give the Bulls one more chance. It's actually a critical game for both sides - I think the loser can kiss their semi-final chances goodbye whle the victors are still in with a sniff. For that reason alone, it's second on the list of games to watch this weekend.

BLUES ($1.25) v STORMERS ($5)

Another favourite possibly too short, but I ain't backing the Stormers here. No bet.

BRUMBIES ($1.16) v CHEETAHS ($7.60)

Giteau back, which the Brumbies need as they have looked a little off-colour in his absence. I see Jeremy Paul is back too. The Cheetahs did well with their negative tactics for 70 minutes last week against the Tahs and I can see a similar pattern here - one team trying to play a game, the other trying not to let the other play. It's a shame, 'cause the Cheetahs won the Currie Cup last year playing positively so I haven't quite worked out why they haven't transferred that to the Super 14. If I thought they were going to go out there and throw the ball around, I'd back them, but I suspect the same game plan as last week, and the same result. No bet. However $2.02 on a 16.5 point start is worth considering.

CATS ($1.55-$1.60) v REDS ($2.64-$2.80)

Not much liquidity in this market, so not sure what the prices will settle at. Both the NZ and Oz TAB have the Cats at $1.50. Worst game of the round watching-wise, best game of the round betting-wise. I see Andre Pretorious is back for the Cats, but cannot fathom why they are not starting Januarie inside of him. I'll hang my hat on the fact he may need a game or two to get the rust out of the system, the Reds are not completely hopeless so I have these two sides reasonably evenly matched and I'd price the game around the $1.80 vs $2.20 mark. So I have to have a bet on the Reds.

So again I'm not spending my full quota of $100 for the JWOC team. I'll have:

$40 on the Reds at say 2.70
$30 on the Bulls at 3.60

and that's it.

Nah fk it, I'll put $10 on the Waratahs at 4.50 and the remaining $20 can go on the Cheetahs at 2.02 to cover the 16.5 point handicap.

The power of the Net

One of the bigger (if not the biggest) blogs in NZ is David Farrar's , which I occasionally check as it has a good mix of political and humourous content.

Today there was a piece about a couple in the USA who have had a bet - the essence being if the guy wins he gets a threesome - and to win the bet he needed to set up a website and get 2 million hits - you can read the full story at his website here . Don't know if it's legit or a hoax, but reasonably amusing nonetheless.

Progress so far:

March 28: 1,000
April 5, 10.30 am: 10,000
April 5, 2.00 pm: 50,000
April 5, 5.00 p.m.: 300,000
April 5, 9.00 p.m.: 1,000,000

I think we can say the target will be safely reached well ahead of schedule, probably tomorrow.

No.1 in the World

The trouble with blogs is they become an avenue for venting the spleen and become unduly negative. So today, it's accentuate the positive time.

We, in tiny New Zealand, currently have the world's No 1. female mountain bike orienteer. Yes, you read it here last - I haven't read the papers lately but I'm sure it was headline news in the sports pages up and down the country.

On the back of her trend-setting fourth place (yes, we orienteers are ahead of our time) at one of the races at last year's World Championships, together with recently going over and shoving it up the Aussies in their world champ selection trial races (who knows, this may also become a trand in NZ sport - see, I told you this was going to be positive), our own Marquita G. is currently ranked No.1 in the world.

This is going to be so positive I am even going to thank SPARC. Yes, SPARC have a hand in this - anything good that happens in NZ sport is usually down to them (and anything bad in NZ sport has nothing to do with them). Last year (or 2004, can't remember), they changed the rules for elite athletes' Performance Enhancement Grants for non-carded sports (i.e. sports that do not matter to New Zealanders, in other words sports they wish would drop off the face of the earth) from Top 3 in World Champs to Top 8.

So in went the application, out came the money, which allowed Marquita to travel to Oz and thus gain the No. 1 ranking. So it's SPARC we need to back-slap for this outstanding achievememnt.

Well done Marquita. Well done SPARC. Now been ranked No. 1 in the world does not necessarily mean she is the best (but I will be very very VERY VERY happy to be proved wrong - no pressure now Marquita, we are not going to put expectations on you and threaten anatomical surgery if you don't come home from this year's World Champs without a medal), and by the time the European season kicks in she might find herself sliding off the top of the tree, but for one month at least, we can say:

New Zealand has the world's best female mountain bike orienteer.

P.S. The normal shit-stirring sarcasm from this sad cynical sack will resume tomorrow.

So who is going to win?

The third cricket test between Australia and South Africa, in case you were wondering. 44 runs to get for the Aussies, 4 wickets (well, 3 as I don't think Langer will bat unless the ninth wicket falls with 1 run to get) to get for the Saffers. Deja vu anyone? - Kaspa out with 2 runs to get as in the Ashes last year?

One thing I do know, I ain't betting. Oz are 1.44 and the Saffers over 3's. With the new ball due in 2 overs, I think the Saffers do have a chance and am tempted to get involved, but I'll just take my dosh from laying the draw pregame and run.

Passing the Buck

This just keeps getting better. Now we have Barry Maister (Secretary General of the New Zealand Olympic Committee) saying in the NZ Herald that they didn't set the medal targets for the Commonwealth Games either.

Sigh. I've quoted this before: "The figure was calculated by Sparc's high performance chief Marty Toomey, in consultation with Dave Currie, chef de mission of the New Zealand Commonwealth and Olympic games teams". (Herald on Sunday 11 Dec 2005)

Now doesn't the chef de mission come from NZOC? Talk about passing the parcel in an Irish pub.

Writing a cheque to Apia

I just don't get this. We are a small country, with limited resources, and if you believe everything you read, we don't have a lot of money to throw around at things like elite athletes, at least at a level sufficient to compete with the big boys. Indeed, SPARC in their current Statement Of Intent tell us:

"It is evident that New Zealand cannot compete on the basis of size and funding, as we are unable to equal the seemingly endless resources of the larger major sporting countries. While the level of investment is important, we do not have the resources to simply outspend our rivals, so we have to outsmart them and be wise, innovative and strategic in how we invest"

Given this, I just about lost my lunch when I read (at the same time our athletes were "failing" at the Commonwealth Games) that the generosity of our current Government knows no bounds and we are spending $375,000 on a project to develop sport in Samoa. You can read about it at Scoop - it's worth a look. Especially the bit where the "aim is to exchange knowledge" - I look forward to reading about the nutritional benefits of taro in due course.

I'll admit my bias. Being involved with the NZ Orienteering Federation which receives a massive $18,000 p.a. from SPARC, seeing $375,000 of NZ taxpayers money flying offshore to help sport in another country just makes me want to puke.

I don't care that it is coming out of another bucket - the funds are coming from NZAID (an organisation designed to help eliminate poverty in other countries; using money to develop sport under the auspices of eliminating poverty is stretching credibility just a tad) - it is still money from the NZ taxpayer helping develop sport in another country when many sporting organisations in this country are running on the smell of an oily rag and apparently we don't have the resources to develop high performance sport in this country to a level we desire.

I suppose I shouldn't expect logical and consistent thinking from politicians. I hope the Samoa project is so successful that in 10 years time their rugby team is beating the All Blacks at the Rugby World Cup or a Samoan boxer is knocking a Kiwi (probably of Samoan heritage) out of the ropes in a gold medal bout at the Commonwealth Games. I'm sure in such a scenario the NZ public will be thrilled to know that their taxes have gone to help produce such champions in another country.

Once we have helped Samoa, no doubt we'll turn our attention to Niue, the Cook Islands, Tokelau and a handful of other Pacific Island nations while the minor sports in this country continue their struggle to survive. Fucking marvellous.

28 missed tackles

I don't mind losing money on the punt if I'm wrong. I do mind losing said money when the individual or team I have backed display a complete lack of intelligence.

The Bulls are one of the better sides in Super 14, despite yesterday's loss, but on a tactical scale they rate poorly. So, they pick gigantic midfielders as a defensive measure and then miss an unbelievable 28 tackles in 80 minutes, many by these so-called defensive monsters. They have one of the world's best wingers in the side and continue to play 10-man rugby. Their tactical kicking consisted of putting the ball down the throats of one of the most potent back three in the comp (the Highlanders were guilty of that too).

Halfway through the comp, most sides continue to display a lack of consistency in performance from week to week, which makes betting a tad difficult. Even the Waratahs put in a bit of a muddling performance, so unless someone gets their act together reasonably quickly, the Super 14 trophy may as well be gift-wrapped and sent to Christchurch now.

So a losing weekend on the Super 14; thankfully another lay of the draw in a cricket test looks like coming through after 2 days of the final SAF / Australia test. 5 days of fine weather forecast, a test involving Australia, and the draw was down to 2.7 pregame. Almost as unfathomable as the tactical nous of some of the Super 14 rugby sides.