Posts by Naly D
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
On the other hand, it seems that a significant number of players would regard an openly gay opponent as fair game for the extra hard hit, the slightly more aggressive fend, the extra shove in the back.
Yes, but, how would the other team know? It's not like the guy is going to go up to them before the game and say 'oh by the way, I'm gay' - and nor should he [or anybody] have to. And if he's on a 'proper' team [proper by my definition meaning one where you play as a team, not individuals] they'll look out for him. Rugby players are very good at noticing what's going on to their mates, even at the bottom of the ruck, as I, the smallest player on my team, learnt when watching our Number 8 blow off a guy who was trying to ruck me [when the ball was already out] and tell him 'if you don't leave the little fella alone I'll take your head off'.
-
1.5% of 1,440 = about 22.
Fuck!
-
There are 14 'professional' teams in the ANZC, with roughly 25 players in each squad giving a total of 350. If we take the 1.5% figure then there would be 4 or 5 gay players in there assuming they were representative (which I don't). personally I think the real number is someway north of 1.5%. Perhaps even as high as 5%. I'm just going by the circle of people I know from all walks of life, colleagues, relatives, friends, acquantiences... and these are the ones who are open about it.
So using that logic... There are 32 NFL teams, and they may have a squad of 45 players on game day. So, using 1.5% out of 1,440 NFL players, about 170 are gay? [I apologise for my poor maths]
-
Damn, ran out of time to edit my comment and add this;
The oft-used defence to appear not to be a sexist, bigoted prick by people I've run into is 'well I don't want to risk getting AIDS'.
What's to say your hetrosexual team-mate doesn't have the virus? And with the way blood laws work in union, if they're being followed it should be pretty hard to even get a zombie-movie scenario with a droplet in the eye infecting you.As a kid who was in love with basketball [and knew little about the world] Magic Johnson's openness about having HIV was a great educator for me about what the disease is.
Edit: @Hadyn I also understand the difficulties a player would face, but I doubt that they think it's the players who would cause the problems - more John Q Public.
-
When people who ask me that, I like to deflect. 'Which journalist is gay? Does it affect the way they report? Is Chris Carter a lesser politician?'
In other words, why the f**k do we care about the sexuality of a high-profile person? At the lower levels of club rugby there still seems to be a fear that gay men would try to do adulterous things to them on the field/in the showers...
... But John Hopoate isn't gay [or isn't openly].
Imagine how much an openly gay All Black could help the AIDS Foundation or Gay NZ, if the organisation/player wanted to. Imagine how they could help to alleviate the perception of social stigmas that say either a. You're gay or b. You play rugby. It'd take a while to get the ball rolling, but it could be very beneficial.
-
Along this line there is a shirt I've wanted to get for a while, from a site dedicated to LeBron James [and more specifically, keeping him at the Cleveland Cavaliers]. The shirt's been spotted at games and on broadcast, and it's beautiful in its simplicity. The dude also makes highlight reels that are something special [he used to do one per game, now it's just one per week]
noyork.com
And NZ's Shea shirt would be better being 'I'm still calling it the NPC' or 'NZRFU', since pretty much everyone does. -
I would wager that one big reason (not the only) for the change in the emphasis of the Canes was the abandonment of Athletic Park in favour of Westpac Stadium.
You're right. The Canes were getting capacity crowds in a 32,500 [though I've worked there on days when it's been 37,000 officially] stadium, so it was financially smart to stay there. Now that crowds have dropped off, maybe they should go to the Naki and Napier [PN's sewn up by Otago now] for a year to gauge interest. Remember when the Chiefs played in Rotorua [and got capacity crowds] during the refurbishment of Rugby Park? Now they don't get a look in
-
And this highlights the complete F'up that is Rugby in NZ at the moment. If they just booted the worst team each year (even if it was Canterbury) then they could pretend to be a sport. But instead because they can't possibly risk losing a profitable team from the premier competition (snort) they get some F'wit accountant to design the relegation rules.
And as I've said in the past, if they'd said 'we'll relegate the bottom four teams' the following would have happened:
If the minnows were in the relegation, they would have accused the union of being shortsighted, failing to acknowledge their importance to rugby, and failing to recognise the way they were building for the future.
On top of that, unions would bitch that since they can't have their best players, because they're with the All Blacks, they aren't able to field a full-strength team and that jeopardises their season, as do injuries. The TMO decision would have been blasted, because a try could have been the difference between the bottom 4 and middle 4, big unions would be accused of buying up all the talent, etc etc.
Like I posted in the 'get rid of Otago in the S14' thread, rugby is a fluctuating sport. Waikato were top of the ANZC four years ago, and Auckland were three. This season they were crap. Counties Manukau and Northland have been consistent in their shitness.There's no fair way to relegate teams, because people only care about their team when a. It wins or b. They think it's being given a raw deal.
-
After all, for most of the unions if they don't have NPC they have pretty much nothing. Remember back in the 90s when Napier, Palmerston North & New Plymouth would all get a Hurricanes game - now they're lucky to get a pre-season game.
Actually, the only time the Hurricanes have played all their home matches in Wellington was 2008. But I see your point, and agree with it.
1996
New Plymouth
Wellington [2 games]
Napier
Palmerston North
97
Wellington [3 games]
Napier
New Plymouth
Palmerston North
98
Wellington [2 games]
Napier
New Plymouth
Palmerston North
99
Wellington [3 games]
Napier
New Plymouth
Palmerston North
00
Wellington [3 games]
Palmerston North
New Plymouth
01
Wellington [4 games]
New Plymouth
Napier
02
Wellington [4 games]
Palmerston North
03
Wellington [5 games]
New Plymouth
04
Wellington [4 games]
New Plymouth
05
Wellington [5 games]
Palmerston North
06
Wellington [6 games]
New Plymouth
07
Wellington [6 games]
Palmerston North
08
Wellington [6 games]
09
Wellington [5 games]
New Plymouth -
Hey, at least England and Argentina have an easy road to the top 16, right?