**Official** New Zealand in Australia 2015

[Kippax]

 

[Bahnz]

That settles it, we can't pick Wagner. He'll totally **** our reputation for being a group of nice guys.

 

[nevermind]

Ch9 NZ XI for Perth:

Mark Latham
Martin Crowe (the only NZ batsman Australians know, also related to famous Australian actor Russell Crowe)
Kane Richardson
Ross "Out of Form" Taylor
Brendon "he only plays one way this guy (despite playing plenty of innings that weren't that way mind you)" McCullum
Aussie Luke Ronchi (hes played a lot of his cricket here x1000)
Brad Haddin
Daniel Vettori (nz have never had another spinner have they? so that has to be Vettori bowling)
Mitch Johnson/Starc/Marsh
Tim Tam
Trent Bond

 

[TheJediBrah]

All I'm saying, and I was pretty implicit in it, is that the average Australian cricket fan is far less learned than any other nation in the world. Good luck to them if they're happy with it.

I don't watch overseas Tests either. But I read, I listen, I take in information. It seems to me, after living in Australia for 2+ years, that the public only knows what the CH9 team tells them. And that's SFA. Except that their team is awesome, the Marshes are really great and that Michael Slater likes to giggle a lot.

Oh I see now. You're just making somethin up to whinge and bitch about and try to make yourself feel superior.

Carry on.

Haha, I can understand the logic behind this. We are a bit homer-ish about Tim, it'd be fair to admit. All I meant though is a guy who takes 5-for and scores 70 on debut isn't exactly an unknown.

Yeah, he is.

 

[SteveNZ]

He was labelled unheralded because that's exactly what he was. I can't think of many players, from any nation, who's been massively hyped prior to their international debuts. Ajantha Mendis is probably the closest I can think of.

edit: probably Phil Hughes as well.

That wasn't prior to his debut. It was 6 months after. As I said, he was one of the first in Test history to take 5-for and score 50 on debut. Apparently that's unknown.

There's really no need to get defensive, Jedi. If someone said to me that our All Blacks fans are arrogant and unneccesarily gloat, I'd agree. If they said we're unreasonably pessimistic about our cricket side, I'd agree. Just cop it. Or say your cricket side is superior and that's all that matters. It's cool. I'm not saying just we are more learned, I'm saying every nation is. I'm just offering an insight from someone who lived there and was able to get a real gauge.

 

[Prince EWS]

That wasn't prior to his debut. It was 6 months after. As I said, he was one of the first in Test history to take 5-for and score 50 on debut. Apparently that's unknown.

There's really no need to get defensive, Jedi. If someone said to me that our All Blacks fans are arrogant and unneccesarily gloat, I'd agree. If they said we're unreasonably pessimistic about our cricket side, I'd agree. Just cop it. Or say your cricket side is superior and that's all that matters. It's cool. I'm not saying just we are more learned, I'm saying every nation is. I'm just offering an insight from someone who lived there and was able to get a real gauge.

Furball is Scottish ffs. He just disagrees with you; you can't make it nationalistic here.

EDIT: Misread, never mind.

 

[Furball]

That wasn't prior to his debut. It was 6 months after. As I said, he was one of the first in Test history to take 5-for and score 50 on debut. Apparently that's unknown.

There's really no need to get defensive, Jedi. If someone said to me that our All Blacks fans are arrogant and unneccesarily gloat, I'd agree. If they said we're unreasonably pessimistic about our cricket side, I'd agree. Just cop it. Or say your cricket side is superior and that's all that matters. It's cool. I'm not saying just we are more learned, I'm saying every nation is. I'm just offering an insight from someone who lived there and was able to get a real gauge.

So what? Test cricket is full of players who've done amazingly on debut before fading into obscurity because they were actually a bit **** and their Test performance was a massive outlier.

Southee would've been what, 19, 20 at most when he debuted? IIRC he had a bit of pedigree from his U19 days but he would have had little to **** all FC experience before being thrown in at the deep end.

 

[Kippax]

He addressed Jedi there, at the start of the second paragraph.

 

[Furball]

Actually KP would've been pretty hyped up prior to his Test debut, but he had slightly unusual circumstances - having to qualify for England meant he was given the opportunity to dominate County Cricket for 3 seasons uninterrupted, and he'd had some terrific ODI performances prior to his Test debut - 3 hundreds in South Africa in really hostile environments, and smashed the living daylights out of the Australian bowlers the first time he'd come up against them at Bristol (IIRC).

 

[Prince EWS]

He addressed Jedi there, at the start of the second paragraph.

Ah yeah my bad.

 

[Spark]

The majority of Australian cricket watchers are casual fans for whom cricket is just something vaguely interesting to have on during the day during the summer, so don't actually care about the sport at all because their emotional investment in it is low.

For other fans whose only other access to cricket is on pay TV, the fact that they have to pay money to access the sport at all on TV means they're naturally more invested in the sport as a whole, plus they get equal and equivalent access to global cricket that the vast majority of Australian cricket watchers do not.

This really should not be hard to understand unless you're out to prove that Australian cricket culture is preternaturally inferior and a stain on global cricket, of course.

 

[Furball]

What do you guys get covered on FTA vs pay TV anyway?

For example:

Football/soccer - FTA has England internationals, selected FA Cup games including final, Scottish League Cup, League Challenge Cup and Scottish Cup ties, weekly highlights packages of league games, and the World Cup and European Championships when they roll round.

Pay TV has 100+ EPL games, Football League and SPFL games, Champions League, Europa League, Scotland, Wales and NI internationals, live coverage of various top European Leagues, FA Cup, English League Cup and Scottish Cup.

Cricket - FTA has highlights. Sky have England games, plus home internationals for Australia, New Zealand, India, South Africa and West Indies, domestic cricket, Big Bash, South African T20, IPL. BT Sport have Caribbean T20 and will be getting Australian home games from next year.

Rugby Union - FTA has 6 nations, the odd Pro12 game and some of the Autumn internationals (from memory tends to be Wales and Scotland), as well at the World Cup when it rolls round.

Sky have Lions tours, away Tests for the home nations, Autumn Tests, Rugby Championship, Super Rugby, Premiership, Pro12, might also possibly show New Zealand and South African domestic rugby.

BT also have Premiership and possibly some Pro12 (possibly a Sky exclusive), French Top14 I think (might actually be Sky who have that), also not sure how the European Championship and Challenge Cups are covered (might be split between the two or BT exclusive, can't remember.)

Tennis - FTA has Wimbledon and I think that's it. Got a feeling one or two other slams (Australian?) might pop up on the Beeb as well.

Sky have ATP tour (definitely exclusive rights to US Open), BT have WTA, Eurosport I think tends to cover the Australian and French Opens (Sky might have French).

 

[Prince EWS]

What do you guys get covered on FTA vs pay TV anyway?

Games played in Australia, and the Ashes in England, are on FTA.

Most other cricket ends up on pay TV but sometimes they will decide not to buy the rights to certain series if they're not going to rate, or don't show a session here or a session here if it clashes with something else they'd rather show.

 

[SteveNZ]

The majority of Australian cricket watchers are casual fans for whom cricket is just something vaguely interesting to have on during the day during the summer, so don't actually care about the sport at all because their emotional investment in it is low.

For other fans whose only other access to cricket is on pay TV, the fact that they have to pay money to access the sport at all on TV means they're naturally more invested in the sport as a whole, plus they get equal and equivalent access to global cricket that the vast majority of Australian cricket watchers do not.

This really should not be hard to understand unless you're out to prove that Australian cricket culture is preternaturally inferior and a stain on global cricket, of course.

Right, I'm a lot closer to seeing your point - fair enough. It's something that annoyed me when I lived there (in terms of the jingoistic approach and lack of worldly knowledge on the game) and now I can appreciate why when your average fan is just tuning in and out of it on free TV, rather than consciously paying for the privilege and therefore more likely to ingest more from across the world. Suppose that stands to reason that with the Big Bash presented so well on FTA as well, that there's not a lot of time for anything else.

What I'm saying with Tim, was it was disrespectful to say he's unheralded when the bloke had played the way he did on debut. It was lazy journalism where people who write and commentate on the game, and get paid well to do so, are obligated to be better informed.

 

[Furball]

In fact, having just checked, the list of what has to be shown live on FTA in the UK is surprisingly small.

Football wise, it's all World Cup and European Championships finals games, the FA Cup Final, and the Scottish Cup Final (in Scotland). The Grand National, Epsom Derby, Wimbledon men's and women's finals, Rugby Union World Cup Final, Rugby League Challenge Cup Final, and the Olympics and Paralympics are all that remain on the list.

 

[Furball]

Games played in Australia, and the Ashes in England, are on FTA.

Most other cricket ends up on pay TV but sometimes they will decide not to buy the rights to certain series if they're not going to rate, or don't show a session here or a session here if it clashes with something else they'd rather show.

Sorry, I should have made it clear that I was referring to all sports (particularly sports that would be of interest to the general Australian public), not just cricket. IIRC NRL is shown on Channel 9 as well, for example, isn't it?

 

[TNT]

Right, I'm a lot closer to seeing your point - fair enough. It's something that annoyed me when I lived there (in terms of the jingoistic approach and lack of worldly knowledge on the game) and now I can appreciate why when your average fan is just tuning in and out of it on free TV, rather than consciously paying for the privilege and therefore more likely to ingest more from across the world. Suppose that stands to reason that with the Big Bash presented so well on FTA as well, that there's not a lot of time for anything else.

What I'm saying with Tim, was it was disrespectful to say he's unheralded when the bloke had played the way he did on debut. It was lazy journalism where people who write and commentate on the game, and get paid well to do so, are obligated to be better informed.

I know how you feel bro, for an intelligent conversation about cricket here requires a trip down to centrelink and find a Kiwi.

 

[Kippax]

Right, I'm a lot closer to seeing your point - fair enough. It's something that annoyed me when I lived there (in terms of the jingoistic approach and lack of worldly knowledge on the game) and now I can appreciate why when your average fan is just tuning in and out of it on free TV, rather than consciously paying for the privilege and therefore more likely to ingest more from across the world. Suppose that stands to reason that with the Big Bash presented so well on FTA as well, that there's not a lot of time for anything else.

What I'm saying with Tim, was it was disrespectful to say he's unheralded when the bloke had played the way he did on debut. It was lazy journalism where people who write and commentate on the game, and get paid well to do so, are obligated to be better informed.

Would Smith and Waddle know their Jake Dorans from their Gurinder Sandhus though? I very much doubt it. Cricket is just sort of senile and chauvinistically slow on the uptake, "High Tory" in most places.

 

[hendrix]

Ch9 NZ XI for Perth:

Mark Latham
Martin Crowe (the only NZ batsman Australians know, also related to famous Australian actor Russell Crowe)
Kane Richardson
Ross "Out of Form" Taylor
Brendon "he only plays one way this guy (despite playing plenty of innings that weren't that way mind you)" McCullum
Aussie Luke Ronchi (hes played a lot of his cricket here x1000)
Brad Haddin
Daniel Vettori (nz have never had another spinner have they? so that has to be Vettori bowling)
Mitch Johnson/Starc/Marsh
Tim Tam
Trent Bond

Ian Smith's Eternal Inferiority Complex Player Notes:

Martin Guptill:
- "Better than his average"
- "Great ODI player"
- "Will turn around his record"
- "Any guy that can score 200 in short format cricket against a popgun attack must come good at test cricket"
- "Plays straight"
- "Therefore, must have a good technique"

Ross Taylor:
- "Averages over 40"

BJ Watling:
- "Averages over 40"
- "Battler"

Doug Bracewell:
- "Won a test 4 years ago"
- "Has a surname"
- "Has extended family"

 

[Spark]

Sorry, I should have made it clear that I was referring to all sports (particularly sports that would be of interest to the general Australian public), not just cricket. IIRC NRL is shown on Channel 9 as well, for example, isn't it?

The full anti-siphoning list is here: https://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2010L03383