Posts by Yamis
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
It's really quite creepy. But can one of the lawyers explain tome when evidence stops being evidence as to the character of the accused, and starts being "prejudicial"? I'm not clear on this.
ditto for me. I was confused by that legal guff when I read it and was going to ask the same thing... until dad came knocking with a truckload of firewood to unload. You little ripper, warmth for our wooden tent for another few weeks.
I would have thought though that the prosecution's case involved the idea that he deliberately used his paper run to create an alibi and here was evidence that he had previously thought of doing that to commit a crime. Don't get how that works. Probably why I've never seen the inside of a court room.
-
I myself have experienced some traumatic events. One being the discovery of a friends dead body, with all nine pints on the ground. When I telephoned the services, I made Crystal clear sense.
You hadn't just murdered your entire family (hypothetically speaking) and then jogged around your paper run earlier than usual and opening gates to arouse attention.
Bain on the phone was groaning and (apparently) very distressed but when asked some questions (address, phone number) his tone of voice suddenly changed and he became very clear with the details as though he was ready to answer them. He gave his phone number faster and clearer than I can do in a normal state. He was clearly listening to the emergency caller despite giving the impression that he was in his own world the rest of the time.
In saying that I probably would have found him not guilty because of all the cockups with the investigation ruining what could have been a much tighter case.
And Robin Bain didn't sound like much of a family man!
-
I could never really make my mind up but perhaps slightly drifted towards Robin being the killer...
until the retrial.
During the proscecutions case I was swung the other way, and then I heard the recording of the emergency phone call and that basically sealed the deal for me.
The way he simply answered the callers questions sheesh...
-
Do you lot think that if there was a national MENS netball competition that it would rate as highly on TV and bums on seats?
I say this because the Canterbury mens team are now 2-1 up in matches played against the tactics (some of you may have seen them showing some of the match on the TV news a night or two ago) and assume that if it became a professional sport for men the quality would be significantly higher since a lot more men would take it up combined with the physical advantages men have.
But would people still prefer to watch women playing it over men or would there be an equal place for both like there is for tennis for example?
-
Unless we can see it on our TV screens it doesn't exist.
-
That PNC video and song "Tonight" are the shit if anybody hasn't checked it out yet.
http://www.myspace.com/pncmusic
You'll have to turn off the song that automatically starts playing on the right of the screen and scroll down a touch to see the video and hit play.
-
Problem is that people are complaining about the rules now but in actual fact if you were to watch some old tapes of games from the 80s and 90s you'd slit your wrists. It is a problem now with forwards not comitting to the breakdown because the breakdown is over so much faster and theres no time or need to commit 5, 6, 7 guys.
A lot of the enjoyment/tension we remember from years gone by isn't that it was a spectacular extravaganza of running rugby, but stems through the fact that there was less rugby on and so what rugby was on meant something big. There was ONE final in NZ worth watching each year (the NPC final) and so it meant something. There were fewer test matches and they meant something. There were tours where your side played the touring Aussies or Lions or Poms and those games really meant something.
So really its not the rules that need changing its the entire freakin season. They are going on about good crowds in the NH and they love the game. Well thats because they have a simplified structure over there, the games are all played in the same fu*%ing time zone so you can see all of your teams games (when teams go to SA for 3 weeks it like they disappeared down a black hole). The quality of the rugby there is mud regardless of how they think or tell us it is. There sides are made up of many second rate NZers (Riki Flutey anyone) and a whole load of PI players none of you would ever have heard of and if the quality is so great how come Aussie, NZ and SA dick them pretty much all the time?
Nope, the problem is with a comp that starts too early and it being over complicated with club teams, super 14 teams, NPC teams, AB teams, Junior ABs, Maori ABs.
But there is no major solution. They can certainly make things a bit better but what people want is what we used to have and that doesn't make enough money to sustain a quality product. Maybe an inferior product that starts at the right time and is simple and easy to follow will actually work though and maybe thats what they have to look at.
I doubt it though, we will no doubt end up with a super sized version of what we have now with games played in 10 different time zones instead of 5.
-
You make some good points Naly but
The fact that the Blues play their games two hours after peak traffic time on Fridays. This means that workers, if they want to get changed etc, have to sit in traffic, go home, get changed and leave straight away. Oh and the lack of parking around Eden Park could have something to do with it too. Then you've got the issue of travel for Highlanders fans too.
these things have never changed but both teams used to get near double the support.
Tom:
No Super rugby = no professional rugby in NZ, the NPC would only semi pro at best, To earn a living top players will head off shore, so it would be either:
a semi pro all blacks (i.e. not even remotely the best players) or none or very few all blacks playing in the the NPC.
Partly true but not completely for the following reasons
1) we already lost 15 AB players from last year to the Northern hemisphere under the comp we have right now so it's not like that will be a new issue.2) the Northern Hemisphere unions are looking at capping the number of foreign players as it is making it hard for them to field decent international sides as they have piss all depth (and talent for that matter).
3) Our players won't be going to Australia as they would have no comp.
4) Our players won't go to South Africa because they are too tribal to accept our players.
We would definately lose more than now, and more of the top players but then we change our eligibility rules for the ABs so they all still play several games a year in an AB jersey. Then we could like,... be, ummmm, regarded as NORMAL and actually professional. Also, remember that most of the money the NZRU earns comes from the ABs, NOT the Super 14 and NPC. I'd say going for broke with an NPC comp would mean a 20-30% (max) paycut for every professional rugby player in NZ. But there's no way it would be semi professional for the first division players. They would still be earning 60,000+ each (for the worst players) and if they feel they need another job during the week then they're a tad greedy.
-
I'd just like to stick up for babies everywhere who don't have a voice (or are still speaking gibberish anyway) and call for the immediate banning of these
these... -
Aussie rugby in the past was based around two average teams pulling together to try to beat NZ sides picked from several strong sides and the results generally spoke for themselves. It was a bit like the Kiwis v the Kangaroos. Now the playing field is a lot more level with 4 professional Aussie sides and they can even afford to poach a few top class league players from time to time. All that would disappear in the blink of an eye if they are locked out of a NZ comp.
The thing with the broadcasting deal is that at least the Super 14 has some appeal to South African viewers (because they are in it), Australian viewers 9because they are in it) and European viewers because they are watching the very best 14 teams that the South Hemisphere can offer.
If you cut back to a NZ domestic comp the number of people abroad who want to watch it would dry up massively. Aussies aren't going to watch Otago v Northland and the South Africans will pay it as much attention as we do to the curry cup. I mean how many curry cup teams can we even name let alone know the result of a single game from last year?
The money our professionals get paid would dry up massively and the NZRU would be forced to play more and more test matches and exhibition style matches to attempt to maintain current pay packets.
I suspect they will go for a 12 team NZ, Aussie, Pacific and Japanese based comp (possibly no PI team) with some conference style to keep interest up. Only problem is do they make it go for 20 weeks or 10?
I think their only real option to keep the quality high is to keep them as franchises but in terms of interest and current complaints from G9 sides that is going to cause an enormous shit storm and be a PR disaster.
Basically they are royally f$%ked whatever they come up with as it will either make people feel nice but earn less money or earn more money and further alienate people.