*Unofficial* New Zealand Black Caps Thread

[SteveNZ]

As for the Weenink interview, I'd have to disagree with Immenso that it was excellent. Unless I'm missing a longer version than the 26 mins?

In terms of a sporting analogy, that was Weenink receiving some nice HVs and a couple of mildly threatening bouncers that passed harmlessly over his head. Or a bit of tee ball when Devlin could have thrown some fast balls. I thought the idea of independent media was to ask hard questions and get what the fans really want, not just a verbal press release? Calling the NZC CEO 'mate' a lot isn't cutting it.

As Immenso said, he touched on Southee but did not go into detail, which is fine because he is the CEO and not a selector (I learned today that Bryan Stronach is, which I find interesting). No one in the public cares about revenue slices. We might care about the position of TVNZ to be able to pick up the next TV detail, without Spark underwriting it as they are now, or as expected that SKY or another online presence may look to outbid them.

We hear that the team culture is 'incredible' - something I'd challenge for the White Ferns who basically didn't win a game outside the World Cup, and the issues the men's side had - and a bunch of other fluff. Interestingly again, he said Lockie would be made unavailable if his ILT20 side makes the final, and replaced by Duffy.

Devlin has often made himself out to be this maverick who doesn't conform to the general way of the media (hence why he worked for The Platform) but that's the same guff we get everywhere else. Why not go deeper on issues? Who is going to be the new coach, or what's that process like? What's the future of the FTP and windows for franchise cricket etc? Should Test cricket be a loss leader for the viability of the game, given that format is all anyone talks about with any depth of interest?

 

[Skyliner]

As for the Weenink interview, I'd have to disagree with Immenso that it was excellent. Unless I'm missing a longer version than the 26 mins?

In terms of a sporting analogy, that was Weenink receiving some nice HVs and a couple of mildly threatening bouncers that passed harmlessly over his head. Or a bit of tee ball when Devlin could have thrown some fast balls. I thought the idea of independent media was to ask hard questions and get what the fans really want, not just a verbal press release? Calling the NZC CEO 'mate' a lot isn't cutting it.

As Immenso said, he touched on Southee but did not go into detail, which is fine because he is the CEO and not a selector (I learned today that Bryan Stronach is, which I find interesting). No one in the public cares about revenue slices. We might care about the position of TVNZ to be able to pick up the next TV detail, without Spark underwriting it as they are now, or as expected that SKY or another online presence may look to outbid them.

We hear that the team culture is 'incredible' - something I'd challenge for the White Ferns who basically didn't win a game outside the World Cup, and the issues the men's side had - and a bunch of other fluff. Interestingly again, he said Lockie would be made unavailable if his ILT20 side makes the final, and replaced by Duffy.

Devlin has often made himself out to be this maverick who doesn't conform to the general way of the media (hence why he worked for The Platform) but that's the same guff we get everywhere else. Why not go deeper on issues? Who is going to be the new coach, or what's that process like? What's the future of the FTP and windows for franchise cricket etc? Should Test cricket be a loss leader for the viability of the game, given that format is all anyone talks about with any depth of interest?

I guess if Devlin doesn't 'play nice' then he loses access to Weenink. Throws the 'mate' stuff out there but also asks directly about Southee which no-one in the MSM would dare do. A pit of grit amongst the fawning. Just raising that with CEO is acknowledgment of the intense public interest there was in that story. Unfortunately everything is totally sanitised and corporatised these days, it's the same over at NZRU. The 'best corporate robot' invariably gets the CEO position and these types are past masters at saying plenty....while saying nothing at all of substance.
NZC should be paying attention to the bumper crowds that attended NZ test matches this year, the renaissance of test cricket in general with the BGT seeing a record crowd for a test in Australia, and the significant success that NZ has enjoyed in this format: winning the WTC and thumping India at home 3-0 are hugely significant results. Weenink and co have recently added another home test against the West Indies next summer, perhaps a sign that the penny is dropping. Now the organisation needs to recognise the paramount importance of the 4 test tour of Australia in 2026. Decisions need to be taken on how to give the team the best chance of success in this most important series. This is a huge chance for NZ cricket to secure further credibility and respect from the 'big nations', not least of which is our near neighbour Australia.

 

[SteveNZ]

Yep, great post. And you're right, it is a fine line to tread with asking hard questions and losing access, and also the human tendency to want to be socially righteous. Unfortunately (to a point) that's symptomatic of NZ sport - too small, too close, too nice. Hard to put pressure on, slightly different in rugby but not by too much.

 

[SteveNZ]

To be fair, most of my questions I'd have asked weren't 'tough' questions but a bit more relevant and engaging than the stuff Devlin used

 

[Immenso]

As for the Weenink interview, I'd have to disagree with Immenso that it was excellent. Unless I'm missing a longer version than the 26 mins?

I think that there is even a 25 minute interview with our nzc CEO is interesting in itself, tbh.

In a previous era, e.g. hayday of the 7pm current affair shows etc. You might get harder hitting interviews, but they would only be 5 minutes long etc fitting into ad breaks and so on.

 

[Immenso]

I thought the treatment of Fergusson's casual contract compared to the batsmen (Williamson and Cnway) was interesting. Expectations around preperation time for the freelancers for the CT tournament. I didn't catch it all as was doing breakfast routine stuff at the time, and will need to re-listen to that.

Adding an extra (third) test v Windies was interesting info.

The revenue slices:
- 25% Spark/TVNZ. (This deal ends in 18 months)
- 25% Sony (India). This is a 7 year deal, and still 6 years to go.
- other major slice being ICC distributions (but didn't put a % on it)

 

[Immenso]

So, on the Ferguson v Conway/Williamson casual contract.

My understanding from that interview is that Conway & Williamson each have a casual contract with NZC, while Ferguson does not.

This was based on working out their franchise commitments and seeing the percentage of clash of expected blackcaps commitments. For WIlliamson and Conway. They basically only were unavailble for the Sri Lanka JAM homes series, so were available for 90% of fixtures.

For Ferguson. As a while-baller (and whatever franchise leagues he was committing too) He was going to miss basically everything (or too much) of what they would want to give a casual contract for.

So, Fergusson is 100% operating on franshise money (plus match fees when he plays for NZ in the CT).
While Conway and Williamson, sounds to me, they have some sort of nzc retainer - despite not being on 'central contracts'.