Newsgroups: rec.sport.rugby
Subject: Re: Waikato v Otago and finals format
From: cctr123@csc.canterbury.ac.nz (Alan Murray, CSC Operations, Uni of Canty)
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 23:18:20 GMT
Organization: University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand

Well Waikato certainly scored a great win against Otago in the first division
final but I'm afraid I disagree with those who are calling the game a massacre
and of little spectator appeal. Whilst the scoreboard never showed a close
match there was some tremendous rugby played by both sides and much to admire
in the Otago effort in defeat, as of course there was in the deeds of the men
from Waikato. For Otago Stephen Bachop was both steady and enterprising at
first five, John Timu put in some amazing tackles from fullback - one to stop
Wayne Warlow in the corner was an awesome effort - and Andre Bell, who came on
for an injured Gerg Cooper, never missed a tackle all day. In fact the tackling
of the whole Otago team was superb and it adds even more credit to Waikato's
win to point out that it wasn't achieved the easy way, by way of missed tackles
and bad positional play. For Waikato I thought the stand-out players in an
outsatnding team performance were Duane Monkley and first five Ian Foster who,
after outplaying Fox last week, went on to record another complete performance
yesterday.
I also disagree with those calling for some kind of life system to be
introduced to the sem-finals and finals. Over the last few years there have
been a few provincial teams in New Zealand who have been steadily narrowing the
gap between Auckland and the rest of the country and there is now a top group
of four teams as opposed to one out on its own. The four who made the
semi-finals are clearly a cut above the rest of the first division and are also
capable of beating each other on any given day. This, surely, lends more
excitement to this end of season climax where everything hinges on 80 minutes
of football. The intensity generated is equal to that of a test match and with
the current format we get three such matches in both semis and the final which
is great for public interest. Maybe a separate trophy for the preliminary round
is in order but leave the finals as they are - remember there's always the
danger of overkill present.
Another disagreement I have is with the call for a neutral ground for the
final. One thing that was highlighted by all three finals was the desire to see
top rugby that has some *real* meaning in the provincial centres. People in
Hamilton, New Plymouth and Levin showed they will support these games probably
even more so than those in the big city - witness the pathetic crowd at the
Waikato Auckland semi-final (and note also Waikato were the only team to win an
away semi). The finals have been a tremendous boost for smaller unions - until
this year who really cared about second division rugby let alone third - and
surely part of the overall plan is to give these unions the chance to rake in a
bit of money at the turnstiles. Maybe the method of choosing the ground could
use some fine-tuning but even there I can understand the logic behind it. Apart
from the fact that having to travel to Carisbrook twice in one season would
seem a little unfair on Waikato, then at least with the current system if the
same two teams were to meet again in next year's final it would definitely be
held at Carisbrook so provided your team shows consistency over the years you
will get a fair crack at actually being present at a final.

Cheers
Alan