Saturday, June 25, 2005
Oh shit, where did my two points go?!
Just been doing what I do on a wet weekend day when I'm bored.
Crunching the numbers.
I've gone through the rest of the NRL season and looked at who I think will win each game based on favouritism rather than my gut. And if it all falls this way teams would need 30 points to make the playoffs. Now I have the Rabbitohs and Knights down to lose the rest of their games but I reckon they will both pick up a couple of wins each which means a few teams up the ladder will come back down a few points but I still have a strong suspicion that 26 points will not be enough to make the playoffs. This year seems to be just a wee bit special with two sides doing so poorly and some 'weaker' teams looking set to occupy spots 3-8 meaning some good sides will just dip out.
Here's how it turned out with bracket figures what they are sitting on currently:
42 Broncos (26)
38 Cowboys (20)
38 Eels (22)
36 Sharks (22)
34 Roosters (18)
34 Sea Eagles (22)
30 Storm (16)
30 Dragons (18)
29 Bulldogs (15)
28 Panthers (12)
26 Warriors (14)
22 Raiders (16)
18 Tigers (14)
11 Rabbitohs (9)
4 Knights (4)
Last year the bottom two teams won 11 games and had 2 draws between them, with a combined total of 32 points. This year is going to be way down on that. The Knights and Rabbitohs have 3 wins and a draw and have 13 points between them.
Last year 26 points got the Raiders in but the next team was on 29 (Cowboys) then the Storm were on 30 and the Dragons 32.
In 2003 the Eels and Dragons finished on 26 points and didn't get near the playoffs as the 8th placed Broncos were sitting on 28 points. The bottom two teams had a 10 win, 38 loss record and 28 combined points meaning more points for the sides upstairs.
In 2002 the ladder looks bizarre. 25 points got the Dragons and Raiders home but that was partly thanks to the Bulldogs having 37 points taken from them. The REAL bottom two teams had 32 points between them after managing a combined 12 win 36 loss record.
As I stated earlier, when the bottom teams aren't punching bags for the rest of the league then the playoff points mark comes down. When they are shit and don't pick up so many points it's a higher target to make it.
The more I think about it the more I'm starting to believe that sides will need 30 points to make it unless Johns can fire the Knights to 3 or 4 wins and the Rabbits can find 2 or 3 wins. Even if they do sides will need 28 points in my humble opinion.
You heard it here first.
By the way, I'll update my long term predictions as each week goes by and it gets more concrete.
And for more of my own personal fun here's the hypothetical playoff scenario...
Broncos to beat Dragons
Cowboys to beat Storm
Eels to beat Sea Eagles
Sharks to lose to Roosters
Eels to beat Sharks
Roosters to beat Sea Eagles
Broncos to beat Roosters
Cowboys to beat eels
Peoples Champion: Cowboys
****************************************
And on a completely different note I can't believe so many (ALL) Blackcaps are happy to go to Zimbabwe. They can say all they like about it not being their decision but at the end of the day they don't have to go. If they opted out everybody would understand. Craig Cumming was interviewed the other day and when asked about what he thought when he saw what was going on in Zimbabwe on TV... he said he changed the channel. Well mate you can bury your head up your arse but unfortunately you are also representing the country and are also saying you have few morals and even less brains.
They are saying they are just cricketers and are just doing their job but would any of us here happily trot off to Zimbabwe because our boss has told us that is where we are working next. Especially when he has told us we are able to opt out of the tour and still be considered for the position next time.
The selectors would be crucified if they didn't select the player or players next time round regardless of what the reason was.
They should never have got into this situation in the first place though. If I was NZ cricket I would keep them home and politely ask the ICC how they reckon they will collect the 2 million dollars we will owe. Especially once we ask them how they would like to try their case in an international court with the human rights lawyers on our side versus the accountants on theirs.
And the ICC needs to stop voting on 'race' lines. It's fucking tired and fucking boring and a fucking disgrace.
Crunching the numbers.
I've gone through the rest of the NRL season and looked at who I think will win each game based on favouritism rather than my gut. And if it all falls this way teams would need 30 points to make the playoffs. Now I have the Rabbitohs and Knights down to lose the rest of their games but I reckon they will both pick up a couple of wins each which means a few teams up the ladder will come back down a few points but I still have a strong suspicion that 26 points will not be enough to make the playoffs. This year seems to be just a wee bit special with two sides doing so poorly and some 'weaker' teams looking set to occupy spots 3-8 meaning some good sides will just dip out.
Here's how it turned out with bracket figures what they are sitting on currently:
42 Broncos (26)
38 Cowboys (20)
38 Eels (22)
36 Sharks (22)
34 Roosters (18)
34 Sea Eagles (22)
30 Storm (16)
30 Dragons (18)
29 Bulldogs (15)
28 Panthers (12)
26 Warriors (14)
22 Raiders (16)
18 Tigers (14)
11 Rabbitohs (9)
4 Knights (4)
Last year the bottom two teams won 11 games and had 2 draws between them, with a combined total of 32 points. This year is going to be way down on that. The Knights and Rabbitohs have 3 wins and a draw and have 13 points between them.
Last year 26 points got the Raiders in but the next team was on 29 (Cowboys) then the Storm were on 30 and the Dragons 32.
In 2003 the Eels and Dragons finished on 26 points and didn't get near the playoffs as the 8th placed Broncos were sitting on 28 points. The bottom two teams had a 10 win, 38 loss record and 28 combined points meaning more points for the sides upstairs.
In 2002 the ladder looks bizarre. 25 points got the Dragons and Raiders home but that was partly thanks to the Bulldogs having 37 points taken from them. The REAL bottom two teams had 32 points between them after managing a combined 12 win 36 loss record.
As I stated earlier, when the bottom teams aren't punching bags for the rest of the league then the playoff points mark comes down. When they are shit and don't pick up so many points it's a higher target to make it.
The more I think about it the more I'm starting to believe that sides will need 30 points to make it unless Johns can fire the Knights to 3 or 4 wins and the Rabbits can find 2 or 3 wins. Even if they do sides will need 28 points in my humble opinion.
You heard it here first.
By the way, I'll update my long term predictions as each week goes by and it gets more concrete.
And for more of my own personal fun here's the hypothetical playoff scenario...
Broncos to beat Dragons
Cowboys to beat Storm
Eels to beat Sea Eagles
Sharks to lose to Roosters
Eels to beat Sharks
Roosters to beat Sea Eagles
Broncos to beat Roosters
Cowboys to beat eels
Peoples Champion: Cowboys
****************************************
And on a completely different note I can't believe so many (ALL) Blackcaps are happy to go to Zimbabwe. They can say all they like about it not being their decision but at the end of the day they don't have to go. If they opted out everybody would understand. Craig Cumming was interviewed the other day and when asked about what he thought when he saw what was going on in Zimbabwe on TV... he said he changed the channel. Well mate you can bury your head up your arse but unfortunately you are also representing the country and are also saying you have few morals and even less brains.
They are saying they are just cricketers and are just doing their job but would any of us here happily trot off to Zimbabwe because our boss has told us that is where we are working next. Especially when he has told us we are able to opt out of the tour and still be considered for the position next time.
The selectors would be crucified if they didn't select the player or players next time round regardless of what the reason was.
They should never have got into this situation in the first place though. If I was NZ cricket I would keep them home and politely ask the ICC how they reckon they will collect the 2 million dollars we will owe. Especially once we ask them how they would like to try their case in an international court with the human rights lawyers on our side versus the accountants on theirs.
And the ICC needs to stop voting on 'race' lines. It's fucking tired and fucking boring and a fucking disgrace.
Comments:
"If I was NZ cricket I would keep them home and politely ask the ICC how they reckon they will collect the 2 million dollars we will owe."
Simple, when the ICC goes to pay out TV revenues from the World Cup, they just won't give NZ cricket the money. I would also guess that TV revenues that comes from some other tournaments could be (ICC tournaments and possibly tri-series tournaments as well), the ICC could request/force that the money not be paid to NZ cricket.
With all respect to you Yamis, I don't quite get your suggestion to an international court, this is a matter of contract. I don't see how the International Court of Justice would have jurisdiction over this matter, it is a matter for national courts. It is NZ cricket which would need to seek enforcement of the contract to obtain the money from TV renveues. Based on what I heard from Snedden, I think it seems fairly clear if we don't tour, NZ cricket will have to pay the fine and then will be placed in serious financial trouble. If there was some way out of situation, I have confidence in Snedden being to able a way out of it (if one exists).
Personally, if it was me, I would go to Zimbabwe, I don't see how not going would actually change anything.
-Dinkas
Simple, when the ICC goes to pay out TV revenues from the World Cup, they just won't give NZ cricket the money. I would also guess that TV revenues that comes from some other tournaments could be (ICC tournaments and possibly tri-series tournaments as well), the ICC could request/force that the money not be paid to NZ cricket.
With all respect to you Yamis, I don't quite get your suggestion to an international court, this is a matter of contract. I don't see how the International Court of Justice would have jurisdiction over this matter, it is a matter for national courts. It is NZ cricket which would need to seek enforcement of the contract to obtain the money from TV renveues. Based on what I heard from Snedden, I think it seems fairly clear if we don't tour, NZ cricket will have to pay the fine and then will be placed in serious financial trouble. If there was some way out of situation, I have confidence in Snedden being to able a way out of it (if one exists).
Personally, if it was me, I would go to Zimbabwe, I don't see how not going would actually change anything.
-Dinkas
# posted by 
: 26 June 2005 at 23:20
: 26 June 2005 at 23:20
I think not going would send a message that dick-heads like Mugabe will not be tacitly endorsed by New Zealand or its sporting representatives.
Mugabe being the head of Zimbabwe cricket makes it a little more personal than just touring a country with dubious human rights practices.
What pisses me off that Stephen Fleming is happy to profiteer from his profile with his deoderant and air conditioning ads and yet is completely spineless when it comes to taking a stand against the current Zimbabwean atrocities - not to mention the Blackcaps competing against a racistly-selected sporting team.
Perhaps he could start hawking moral vaccums next?
I wonder what Andy Flower/Heath Streak et al think of cricketing nations' decisions to keep touring their old homeland?
Come on Dinkas this just ain't cricket.
News just in: NZ together with the Australian and UK governments are appealing to the ICC to have Zimbabwe boycotted from international cricket.
Mugabe being the head of Zimbabwe cricket makes it a little more personal than just touring a country with dubious human rights practices.
What pisses me off that Stephen Fleming is happy to profiteer from his profile with his deoderant and air conditioning ads and yet is completely spineless when it comes to taking a stand against the current Zimbabwean atrocities - not to mention the Blackcaps competing against a racistly-selected sporting team.
Perhaps he could start hawking moral vaccums next?
I wonder what Andy Flower/Heath Streak et al think of cricketing nations' decisions to keep touring their old homeland?
Come on Dinkas this just ain't cricket.
News just in: NZ together with the Australian and UK governments are appealing to the ICC to have Zimbabwe boycotted from international cricket.
Bennyasena: I doubt Heath Streak would mind as he has started playing for Zimbabwe again.
I should have fully explained my stance previously (unfortunately the lure of a good movie led me to cut short my post). I think any decision on whether a NZ sports team should not visit a country because of human rights abuses etc should be made by the NZ government and not be left to players/sports association. Individual players should have the option of not going if a tour goes ahead, but I don't expect the players to be able to make a proper assessment on whether the team should go.
On the question of whether the NZ government should stop the tour, I must first start of by saying I don't know that much about the situation in Zimbabwe, but from what I have read of the problems in Zimbabwe are not recent. There does seem to be sufficient evidence that there are severe human rights problem in Zimbabwe. MFAT have a diplomatic post in South Africa which is responsible for political reporting on Zimbabwe and are in a better position to know the extent of the human rights abuses. For once I actually agree with Keith Locke who has said that Goff/government has had since April to make a decision, but has done nothing. While preventing the tour would likely require legislation, I don't see why the government cannot enact legislation and leave it up to the discretion of the Minister of Foreign Affairs to make a decision. When will the government explain their inaction?
Now, as the government is not going to stop the tour and as NZ cricket have practically been forced (for financial reasons) to send a team, if I was a member of the team and was selected I would go. If Mugabe wanted to shake my hand, I would refuse to shake his hand and just turn around. I would wear a black armband throughout the tour. Given the consequences of not touring, I think this is the best option for the NZ players and NZ cricket.
Yamis: While I believe sports sanctions did play a role in South Africa, I don't think they will help for Zimbabwe. At best, Australia, England, and New Zealand would stop touring, but what about the other test playing nations? Unless there is complete agreement by all test playing nations, I see any decision on not to tour by New Zealand as being ineffectual.
-Dinkas
I should have fully explained my stance previously (unfortunately the lure of a good movie led me to cut short my post). I think any decision on whether a NZ sports team should not visit a country because of human rights abuses etc should be made by the NZ government and not be left to players/sports association. Individual players should have the option of not going if a tour goes ahead, but I don't expect the players to be able to make a proper assessment on whether the team should go.
On the question of whether the NZ government should stop the tour, I must first start of by saying I don't know that much about the situation in Zimbabwe, but from what I have read of the problems in Zimbabwe are not recent. There does seem to be sufficient evidence that there are severe human rights problem in Zimbabwe. MFAT have a diplomatic post in South Africa which is responsible for political reporting on Zimbabwe and are in a better position to know the extent of the human rights abuses. For once I actually agree with Keith Locke who has said that Goff/government has had since April to make a decision, but has done nothing. While preventing the tour would likely require legislation, I don't see why the government cannot enact legislation and leave it up to the discretion of the Minister of Foreign Affairs to make a decision. When will the government explain their inaction?
Now, as the government is not going to stop the tour and as NZ cricket have practically been forced (for financial reasons) to send a team, if I was a member of the team and was selected I would go. If Mugabe wanted to shake my hand, I would refuse to shake his hand and just turn around. I would wear a black armband throughout the tour. Given the consequences of not touring, I think this is the best option for the NZ players and NZ cricket.
Yamis: While I believe sports sanctions did play a role in South Africa, I don't think they will help for Zimbabwe. At best, Australia, England, and New Zealand would stop touring, but what about the other test playing nations? Unless there is complete agreement by all test playing nations, I see any decision on not to tour by New Zealand as being ineffectual.
-Dinkas
# posted by : 27 June 2005 at 23:43
: 27 June 2005 at 23:43
If NZ, England and Australia not touring would be ineffectual to changing anything in Zimbabwe then there's no need at all for the government to legislate to block the tour.
However regardless of whether or not it's ineffectual it's morally wrong in my mind and in the minds of many others.
If I post stuff on my blog site declaring outrage at some issue what have I done to change it? probably nothing, but at least I've made a statement.
If we limited all our efforts in life to things that made a difference we would only need about 100 people to vote every few years as my votes have never made a difference since the margins are invariably far greater than one.
But somewhere along the line those little numbers add up to complete the bigger picture and create change.
Short of the UN going in and executing Mugabe we could be looking at something which drags on for decades.
And since the UN won't so that we will get sanctions which Mugabe will be just fine from leaving those who oppose him to suffer first.
And regarding the 2 million dollars. that seems to be how much revenue will be lost by NZ touring a pissy little cricket nation.
So how much would be made from the Aussies or Poms touring or hosting NZ for a 3 match one day series and a test (all proceeds to world peace and all that shite).
And if we are going to tour Zimbabwe I'd like to see us request that not only is Mugabe there but that he also opens the batting for them so our quicks can beam the cunt.
However regardless of whether or not it's ineffectual it's morally wrong in my mind and in the minds of many others.
If I post stuff on my blog site declaring outrage at some issue what have I done to change it? probably nothing, but at least I've made a statement.
If we limited all our efforts in life to things that made a difference we would only need about 100 people to vote every few years as my votes have never made a difference since the margins are invariably far greater than one.
But somewhere along the line those little numbers add up to complete the bigger picture and create change.
Short of the UN going in and executing Mugabe we could be looking at something which drags on for decades.
And since the UN won't so that we will get sanctions which Mugabe will be just fine from leaving those who oppose him to suffer first.
And regarding the 2 million dollars. that seems to be how much revenue will be lost by NZ touring a pissy little cricket nation.
So how much would be made from the Aussies or Poms touring or hosting NZ for a 3 match one day series and a test (all proceeds to world peace and all that shite).
And if we are going to tour Zimbabwe I'd like to see us request that not only is Mugabe there but that he also opens the batting for them so our quicks can beam the cunt.
Post a Comment