The equation is simple: If we beat the Waratahs in Sydney this Friday night we make the top 4. That's it. If we beat the Tahs there is no way we can't make it in. If a few results go our way - the Crusaders beat the Brumbies and the Stormers lose to the Bulls [regardless of whether they get four tries and lose by less than 7] while we win with a bonus point - we can be back in Wellington next weekend. Hell, if we just win, the Crusaders beat the Brumbies and the Stormers lose without gaining a bonus point, we can get a home semi. But that's not the important thing.

The important thing is we have to win. If we lose we're out, there's no 'mathematical chance'.

Before I get into the teams, I'd like to take a brief trip down the history lane. The Hurricanes have met with the Waratahs 15 times, winning 8 and losing 7. If we take out the semi we won against them in 2006, both teams have won half of the games we've played. Three out of our seven wins have been by more than 13 points, while the Waratahs have beaten us by more than 13 4 times.

Since that 2006 semifinal win [by two points] however, we have not beaten the Tahs. Not once. Last year we lost 26-22, in 2008 there was that incredibly embarrassing 20-3 loss and the last time we met in round 14, 2007, we lost 38-14. That loss was also pretty embarrassing as although we weren't in contention for a top 4 spot, we should have beaten the Tahs. Until that final round, the Tahs had only won two matches - against the Lions and Reds.

These recent losses would suggest the Tahs have the wood on us, but it'll be interesting to see how the teams match up. I haven't watched a Tahs game in full since round 8 but at that point in the season they had not shown anything dramatic to impress me.

Their main strength has been their forward pack. Their loose forwards have adjusted to the new interpretations really well and are great at drawing penalties, particularly re-repatriated Kiwi Dean Mumm. Their front row hasn't appeared to be very good at scrum time, more so [again] at drawing penalties, but is a mobile unit which travels around the field at a great rate of knots.

Their backline has been an enigma. Sure, they've got Berrick Barnes, Tom Carter, Rob Horne, Drew Mitchell and Lachie Turner, but until they put Kurtley Beale [who I think is the JaMarcus Russell of S14 rugby] in at Fullback, they looked incredibly clunky and disjointed. In fact, the majority of the time their only saving grace was Barnes' ability to draw and pass. The only way to disrupt his playmaking ability has appeared to be to get at him.

If someone can get in his face quickly on each phase he tends to rush things, seemingly lacking the ability to simply take the tackle and go to the next phase [Hurricanes fans will be familiar with this style of play, having spent years cringing with Jimmy Gopperth in the side] and favours the step. If we could change our defensive style [though I don't see this happening as it's too large a change to make in a week] and have Piri/Tyson rush at Barnes from the ruck and Cruden cover, it could do a lot to nullify Barnes and also take away the cross-field kick he likes to send to those speedsters, Lachie and Drew.

Their problem appears to be in the centres - they've got two quality wings but can't get the ball out to them quickly enough - while that's one of the Canes' strengths. With Conrad 'Snakey' Smith and Ma'a Nonu we've got a centre pairing which will always be a tough opposition, but since the Crusaders game Ma'a has been in tremendous form [though I do wish he'd pass more often sometimes] and Conrad has been rock solid on defence.

Our forward pack has been - dare I say it - the best out of the NZ sides this competition. We've got the best scrummaging forward pack of all the teams, in my jaded opinion, and the work rate across the field of Victor Vito, Michael Paterson and Andrew Hore is phenomenal. Our problem though has been an indecisiveness at the ruck. We seem to struggle to decide whether to clean out or protect the ball when we're on attack, and whether to try and steal it or guard the fringes when we're on defence.

But our biggest concern heading into this week should be the Tahs biggest strength, the long bomb. We've got Cory Jane who's insanely gifted under the high ball, but aside from that there's Tamati Ellison and Hosea Gear - both are capable enough under the kick, but can't really return serve. And I'm not sure how they will compare to two of the fastest chasers in Australia without being able to rely on the kick to regain territory. If we can stick to our gameplan - phase play using the backs - and not get sucked in to a kicking battle, I think we'll have it in the bag. I'd love to see us get a semi at home, but ultimately let's just go out there and beat the Tahs and get in to the top 4!

•  At the other end of the table, the Lions play the Cheetahs this week and may create a bit of history if they lose. They'll be the first team to lose every game in the Super 14, and the second Super team to go through a season not winning a game since the Bulls in 2002.
• This year's Lions outfit has already conceded the most points ever in Super Rugby after that 2002 team, and if they lose by more than 2pts this weekend they'll officially hold the worst points differential in history. But seeing what that Bulls team has achieved in the last 8 years may give them hope...

I've noted with interest a few stories on declining attendance figures at Hurricanes' Super 14 matches. We got 11,479 to a blowout against the Force in week 2, 12,008 in a blowout against the Lions in week 3, 11,442 at the Sharks game and 19,777 to watch us draw with the Crusaders. An average to date of, not counting upcoming games against the Chiefs and Reds, 13,676.

Last season we got 12,835 for week 1 against the Waratahs, 11,706 in week 2 against the Highlanders, 6,294 in New Plymouth against the Cheetahs, 16,139 against the Bulls in week 6, 16,663 against the Brumbies in week 11 and 20,162 against the Blues in week 12. This made an average of 15, 501 for games at Westpac Stadium.

In 2008 we got 15,682 against the Reds in week 2, 16,913 for a lacklustre Chiefs side in week 3, 31,571 for the Crusaders in week 7, 13,500 for the Sharks in week 8, 13,986 for the Lions in week 12 and 16,459 for the Force a week later, a season average of 18,018.

In 2007 in week 3 we got 24,208 against the Blues, 21,194 for the Brumbies a week later, 16,000 against the Stormers in Palmerston North in week 5, 20,874 for the Bulls in week 9, 15,770 against the Cheetahs in week 11 and 19,790 against the Highlanders in week 13 and in the final game of the season, 25,290 watched us get pantsed by the Waratahs. That means 21,187 watched the 'Canes play at Westpac Stadium.

2006 saw 14,000 watch us play the Force in New Plymouth, 23,400 against the Lions, 19,800 against the Sharks, 34,500 against the Crusaders, 27,011 vs the Chiefs and 21,367 against the Reds. 2006 was, of course, the year we had a home semi-final which had a capacity crowd of 34,500. A total average of 25, 215 for Westpac Stadium games not counting the one-off semifinal.

That was a drop of 4,028 between 2006 and 2007, 3,169 between 2007 and 2008, 2,517 between 2008 and 2009, and 1,825 so far between last season and the present one.

The problem with 'solving' declining attendance figures is it's difficult to pinpoint one particular reason. There's always the issue of weather, and it's impossible to make people turn up if it looks like rain or is cold. Next there's the 'make the games be played in the early afternoon!' brigade.

Not to poo-poo on that too bad, but when the Lions played Manawatu in the ANZC last year at 5.30, they attracted 8,607. When they played Harbour 2 weeks later they got 10,160. In 2008 week 5, 15,242 watched the 2.30 game against the Bay of Plenty at the Cake Tin and 14,143 watched us defend the Ranfurly Shield against Tasman in a 5.30 game I remember clearly because it was fucking pissing down with rain. Compare that with 2007's game against Manawatu at 2.30 which attracted 14,081 and 11,000 against Harbour with a 5.30 kickoff.

All of those figures are well within the normal scope of Lions attendances, but there was not a significant rise in crowd numbers in early games. It's also worth noting that quite often those early games will include a 'take a kid for free' promotion or something similar, which may alter the final statistics if their tickets are counted.

Then there are the 'Most people watch it at home because it's better' supporters. Again there's some merit to this, but enough to account for 11,539 fewer punters over four seasons? I seriously doubt that. Besides, there'd surely still be some people who go to the game and record it on MY SKY like me.

Of course there's still the 'disenchanted with rugby following the 2007 world cup'. I don't think this is the case either - I included 2006 stats for this reason. If it was because people were sulking and decided [by some odd logic] to show their disenchantment by refusing to attend matches, wouldn't that have shown up immediately after the RWC?

And it can't be because the Hurricanes aren't experiencing success, can it? We've got seven[?] All Blacks from last year, a new franchise player in Aaron Cruden, a forward pack who are finally standing up and being counted... And until this season, we were winning more than we lost.

So what could it possibly be? An increase in ticket prices? Though I am told season ticket prices increased in 2007, I can't find anything to back it up. General admission tickets - to the best of my knowledge - definitely haven't increased in price since 2007.

Is it all these things working together that have caused this downfall? If that's the case, will winning a Super Rugby title really bring the punters back en masse? Will adding the Melbourne Rebels to the list of 'same old, same old' opponents help fans feel more excited? Will changing to a conference-based system where we play the other NZ franchises twice in the competition make people want to fork out to head along?

What is the problem? What is the solution? What what what?

Boomshanka starts us off with the lead-off single on the Blues

yeearch...

Sometimes when you get close there's no cigars for you.

The enertainment delivered, the lead changed, the Blues backs had
solidity, but 'just scored' complacency crept into the game... not
good against a hungry New South Welshman at home... chewing on the cud
and  shit. in that field that time.

What will the Blues make of this? Season vapour? Still semi's
potential if they focus?

Fuck Yeah. Aspects are improving. They are developing a rhythm. But
this is where it gets hard(er). And opportunitys like that will
require the opposition being in the coffin and having the nail put
into it.

Then there's Richard Irvine's interpretation of the Chiefs

Hopefully at the end of this season, we'll be laughing about this low point when we're celebrating our first Super 14 title while dancing through the streets of Hamilton trying to keep down Waikato Draught burps (WD is notoriously gassy, team).

Yes, this was a shitty game, and I was really shitty afterwards, having wasted valuable Friday night sleeping time (you may imagine the sportreview life is a rock n roll one, but you'd be wrong, very wrong) to watch it live. The Chiefs were up against a wave of emotion on the back of Julian Huxley's return to Rugby after a brain tumour and offside adjudicating as fair as a kick in the nuts.

And yet we were right in it until the end. I can't understand why Masanga wasn't given more ball, he looked dangerous to me. I also can't understand why we kicked all our posession away as if he ball was covered in sick. The bright spot was the defence - which was lucky, as we spent vast periods of time in our own half and without the ball like 15 unemployed ball boys.  

So, like I say, let's move on. Those wins on the road are becoming more and more handy, and if we can attack like we've been defending, we'll be right.

Next, poor bloody Jimmy who's actually the only supporter of a winning team this week - the Highlanders

Now I'm up about the Hurricanes.

I'm being lazy and linking to this, which says pretty much everything I was gonna write.

http://wotzon.com/diary/JBishop/

Other than to add WE'VE ALWAYS RUN IT FROM OUR OWN HALF.

Partly because we've never had a world-class first-five, partly because IT'S EXCITING!

Examples:

And last - and possibly least - Isaac Ross' fitness consultant.

I did see this live, but passed on it for Amberlamps. But due to a distinct lack of noteworthy hits, and this entry's ability to conclusively define the term 'hospital pass', it's in.

A wee while a back a story emerged about NH clubs pursuing Piri Weepu’s signature. As you'll know if you’ve listened to the podcasts, I was a bit upset by this.

Weepu’s young at 26 and has been with the Hurricanes for 6 years. I don’t want him to go because it would signal a massive change in the backline, at the same time as the team is beginning to brace for a new coach.

Weepu’s been a good halfback over the years. He’s serviced the backs well, he digs in at the ruck and he’s not afraid to put his own body on the line. His ability to kick goals has also been a bonus for both the Canes and the Lions.

But he’s leaving. He must. According to that article, he’ll only stay if he’s called up to the All Blacks.

Well the way he’s played this season, that’s not going to happen. I don’t like to rag on people, but I also believe on calling up those who deserve it. On that South African tour he was horrible.

It may have been the gameplan, I’m not sure, but handing the ball off to flat-footed forwards for 10+ phases when we’re not even in attacking territory is not an example of good decision making. And his box-kicking has been well off too. When you’re gonna kick from the ruck you have to make sure your wings know so they can chase it, and the idea is to angle it high so they have a chance to compete for it, not long so the opposite fullback gets a chance to field it safely and kick it 60m down field for a lineout.

Also, and it’s something you’ll see du Preez and Cowan [and Gregan] do well, as a halfback on defence your priority should always be getting the ball back. It’s all well and good to mark up, but as soon as a ruck has formed, while the ball’s still in there, you’ve gotta be digging in and doing all you can to get it back.

I really don’t see him getting selected this year unless he makes a dramatic about-face over the latter half of the season. Of course there’s always the possibility of an injury to Cowan and Leonard. Hell, he hasn't even been able to make the starting lineup the last two weeks. It seems the annual 'spare tyre' excuse isn't working any more.

I really want you to improve and stay Piri, but from where I sit your heart hasn't been in it this year.

Two entries over 5 weeks of the S14, both from my Hurricanes. What's going on?

You can see the first nominee here.

Rugby Review is a new series debuting for The Dropkicks. Put simply, it's a way of following a team through the fans eyes. Are Crusaders fans really one-eyed? Have Highlanders fans lost all hope? You'll follow the team through 5 fans. I'm looking for someone to do the

Blues each week, so please leave a comment if you want to do this!

The Chiefs: By long-time friend of The Dropkicks, Richard Irvine

John Mitchell talks you through the Chiefs vs Western Force.

G'day. I'm John Mitchell. You may remember me from 'sitting next to Clive Woodward like a sack of wet sand' and 'I can't believe the All Black coach hasn't been sacked yet!'. That one came out in 2003. So the Chiefs played the Force on Saturday night; I have fond memories of Waikato and the Chiefs - I had hair then - so I want to see them do well. On the other hand, the Force are a pack of whinging little bitches, and I want to see their hearts ripped out, piled on the 22, then set on fire.

Just joking!

Luckily, the Chiefs came to the party and bitchslapped them. Good one. If those Aussies hadn't gone all Lord Of The Flies on me, they'd be the fucking Crusaders by now. I think the lesson in this match is "This is what happens when you fuck Mitch in the arse". For the Chiefs, who are three from three, I think the lesson is "Watch your back" - life plays some fucked up hands, and just when your career is going great, there are ALWAYS people out there wanting to stick a knife in your back. Always. Take it from Mitch, I know.

The Crusaders by Ti'i Paulo's 'special nutritionist' As predicted, it was a good week for the Crusaders. They played the Sharks, at home, on Friday night and I was much more pleased by their performance. The Crusaders had not been defeated by a South African Super Rugby team at home since 1996, and I was glad to see this remain.

The game was light-years better than last week’s game, against the Reds. There wasn’t anything overly spectacular about the game. It was just a good game of rugby. It was such a massive improvement, it was like watching a completely different team!

As I have left this review to the last minute, I’m just going to sum up the Crusaders' ROUND THREE

Richie, AKA God, is back.

Outstanding scrums.

Up at half time: Ten – Six.

Never would've known we lost so badly last week.

Dan Carter overtook Matt Burke on the all-time Super rugby scorer’s list. (Now 3rd)

Thirty five – Six: Final Score.

Hottie, Zac Guildford: Multiple tries. One intercept try.

Runaway ending. Two tries in 10minutes.

Epically annihilating tackles.

Exceptional crowd attendance.

I'm looking forward to much of the same in Round Four.

Hurricanes, by me

King Carlos came to town and he brought the Clever kid. 'Los didn't do a hell of a lot - and got a lot of sledging thrown his way from those in the crowd - and I'm not sure what people expected him to do anyway. Lining up outside it looked like there'd be an amazing crowd - it took us 20m to get in in the first place. But it wasn't. It was an ok crowd, but surely not much more than 16,000.

If you could look up the Hurricanes on unencyclopedia, this would be the match that accompanied it, with this blurb.

The Hurricanes are a team based in Wellington, New Zealand. They play their home games at the Biscuit Tin. The Hurricanes have historically been a team with a lot of promising talent, but often that talent has been squandered in favour of white line fever. This sports team simply refuses to learn the basics, opting instead for flashy, 50/50 ball play [which is more often than not 20/80].

The February 27, 2010 match against the Lions was the personification of this. The Lions were not fancied to win this game, as they have been shown to have a weak defence. The Hurricanes decided to exploit this by trying to set up 60m solo tries, instead of getting the team to work together to get 4 quick tries - securing a bonus point - and then resort to flashy football.

We're off to South Africa for three weeks, minus Conrad and Tamati this week, and the Pig for a season.

Oh, and can I say the Seal Slayer's try against the Lions was amazing and hilarious. Best bit of rugby satire I've ever seen.

The Highlanders, by Jimmy. 

This game is the first one this year that's highlighted what for me is the major deficiency of "Super" rugby. Waking up at 4am on a Sunday is hard. You might wonder why I was waking up at 4am? Well, try as I might I just couldn't find a replay of the game being shown at a reasonable hour on Sunday. There were replays of the Crusaders' game, which you may recall was played at NZ time, and replays of the Blues' game which finished well before midnight. So someone at Sky clearly doesn't think anyone wants to watch the Highlanders play at a normal time of the day.*

The scheduling of the kickoff in the afternoon can't have helped either, it would have made more sense to have a night game in Africa, which I think could have been 6:30am here in New Zealand. These crazy time zone differences are why I got really excited by the idea of changing Super rugby to being more of a Champions League type competition, which would help to limit the amount of time players have to spend miles away from home. That, or just ditching the Africans from the competition and playing with Pacific and Asian teams; though I suppose that would probably kill the presumably big earner of the Tri-Nations.

Anyway, all of that is by the by, because I haven't been asked to deliver a state of the Union, but rather a fan's perspective of Highlanders games, so I should probably crack into it. The Highlanders won!!! I don't think they won pretty, and maybe they were robbed of a bonus point, but bagging 4 points in Africa is a big achievement at any stage; even if the win is agains the Cheetahs who apparantely haven't won back to back since they returned to the comp.

I couldn't believe the investment the Highlanders were making in Hobbs when they have Robbie Robinson in the squad, but the guy has sure proven me wrong. He's put in solid performances in the first 3 rounds, and scored 4 tries to boot. I think the balance of the team with Shoemark at 12 (surely he's more natural there than at centre, what with his good kicking game?) and Lynn at 13 was great. As awesome as Jayden Hayward can be, I think he's a little too inconsistent at this level yet, and having a relative veteran like Shoemark outside Hobbs must surely be a calming influence on him.

However, I also liked the tactic of bringing Berquist on at the end to calm the tempo and keep the Cheetahs pushed back in their own half - that backline trio might be a good starting trio against some of the teams that can control their game better than the Cheetahs. Then you can bring Lynn on for Berquist and push Hobbs in one to up the tempo in the last 30 minutes.

Having praised the win, I did have some questions about the tactics the backs employed a lot of the night. It doesn't seem to me that the new rules make kicking possession away constantly a good idea. While Ben Smith had a great Air NZ Cup campaign last year, that hasn't yet translated into Super 14 form, so putting bombs up constantly basically means only Dagg is going to be able to get up in the air & compete for the ball. Dagg by the way, had a reasonably good game, especially with the added responsibility of having the goal kicking duties.

My only other comment on the backs, is that Jimmy Cowan had, by his standards, an average game. A couple of kicks went awry and he just wasn't his usual sharp and decisive self. Jimmy is awesome, and not just because he shares my name. I think its great how he shook off all of that (admittedly fairly self-inflicted) crap, and has really stood up and made the most of the opportunities he's had. Here's hoping he's back to his best next week, because the Highlanders need him at top form.

The forwards had solid games for the most part - I don't think they were being out-scrummed, but rather that the referee was allowing some fairly iffy tactics from the Cheetahs front row. The loose forwards were solid, and though Thompson looked a bit out of place at times at No 8, I like the additional pace that the trio had. Up against Smith & Broussow I think the really held their own. Its interesting how the effectiveness of Broussow has been nullified by the new rules - last year he might have earnt his team 10 penalties from his efforts at the breakdown, but now with the law being interpreted correctly (ok, differently) he had a quiet game.

Apart that is, from scoring the first of 3 tries to be sent to the TMO, and the one that I thought was the most obviously not a try. The ball hit the ground, but to my eyes at least he had clearly lost control of it prior to that. Smith's try I would have given the benefit of the doubt to, even though you couldn't actually see it hitting the ground - but the 'daylight' between ball and line for Thompson's disallowed try wasn't visible on my telly.

So, robbed of a bonus point, but 4 points in the bag in their first fixture in Africa. The Stormers should be a tougher prospect, but a winnable game - and if the improvements continue week to week the Bulls might be a competitive game. But coming up against a team that's had a nice break with the Bye week, I think im being overly optimistic there! Anyway, this is one pretty chuffed 'almost' fan!

* I'm willing to admit that i'm either blind or stupid and there may have been a replay that I just couldn't find when searching the Sky website. But to be fair, when I entered 'Highlanders' into their search box, only one result showed, and that was for a replay of a game in the future anyway. So, instead of a handy search feature I had to scroll manually through their fugly TV Guide thing, which is slow so I gave up after getting to Tuesday.

Rugby Review is a new series debuting for The Dropkicks. Put simply, it's a way of following a team through the fans eyes. Are Crusaders fans really one-eyed? Have Highlanders fans lost all hope? You'll follow the team through 5 fans.

The Chiefs: By long-time friend of The Dropkicks, Richard Irvine

Nobody's saying this is the future of Rugby. 137 points with 18 tries might save you the bother of fast forwarding the boring bits, and leave defensive purists reaching for their well worn 2000 Super 12 final VHS, but feck it, I don't care - I LIKE that every so often two teams in the right mood can produce a freak game. It's fun. This is only the second round, and if you can't mix it up and throw the ball around now, when are you going to?

My Chiefs, who lost their first two games last year and still made the final, have got their South African leg out of the way early, and won both matches. Richard Kahui is back, and Stephen Donald looks comfortable at the level that suits him best - many teams would love his experience and execution in their side. They won't be defending like this in May, I think they'll be better for this attacking hit out, and better because Sione Lauaki probably won't be wearing the captain's armband again. Of course, the main thing is games like this annoy Stephen Jones more than a long train trip in a carriage full of clowns. All of New Zealand can enjoy that.

The Crusaders: reviewed by Dan Carter's 'Special Masseuse'.

It was the one game of the year that really would’ve been better suited to the Comedy Channel. Yes, the Reds v Crusaders game played on Friday night. It was up there with the worst rugby games I have ever watched. 80, excruciating, minutes of non-stop shit rugby by the Crusaders. It was actually laughable.

As an avid Crusaders fan, I understand that every year they always start off slowly. But this game was something else. They were barely even worthy of being a Super Rugby Team. Yeah, I just said that.

With such an amazing record attached to the Crusaders I, along with the rest of the rugby world, expected more of the supreme team. 7-time Super Rugby Champions and they get beaten by the Reds. A team barely anyone remembers. It was shocking. You know it must have been really bad for me to admit that it. I was, for a moment, embarrassed to be supporting the team. However, even on a bad day I will remain a devoted supporter. They are marvellous.

We all know they are the greatest team of the competition but they way they played on Friday night was not even as good as a Second Division team. Too many basic errors, school boy errors. I can’t pin-point one word that sums up their performance but many words come to mind: horrendous, appalling, disastrous, error-strewn, unbearable. Basically it was the most hideous display of Crusaders’ rugby for a long time.

They played so well the week before that I gloated to people supporting other teams, mentioning that the Crusaders would continue on that momentous roll. It was the first game of the season and heeeeeello bonus point. It became apparent during round two that I had spoken too soon.

I’ll give credit where it is due: the Reds deserved to win. Simply put, they were the better team on the night. They absolutely pummelled the Crusaders, and I think it is what we needed. The Crusaders needed to be shown that even though they are the best they can’t get cocky and think they are unbeatable. They are a better side than the one that played on Friday, and we will get to see that they are this week. I have no doubt that we will see the Crusaders at their best this Friday. They are back home and will have wonderful supporters like myself there cheering them on. And...

Richie is back!!! He’s on the beach. He’s been away because of a clause in his NZRU contract, or something-or-other. Anyway, most important thing is that he is back! Along with being gorgeously good looking for the female viewers, he actually adds so much to the team. I know a team isn’t one man but as soon as he pops back in the mix everything changes. I think it is a little obvious I think Richie is God.

I believe psychics would be saying that round three will be a good one for the Crusaders.

Bring on Friday.

The Hurricanes: by yours truly

Honestly I don't think I can say anything about this game I won't say in the podcast. It was a game the 'Canes obviously came into treating as a practice run. Tamati's league-style play to set up Cory and David was outstanding, other than that it was a confidence-building game for the team against a schoolboy XV.

The Highlanders, by 'fan' Jimmy.

I should probably admit straight away that I'm not really a Highlanders fan. I mean, I do really like that they have a guy running round from time to time wielding a fricking claymore but, I live in Wellington and thus my primary allegiance is to the Hurricanes. The Highlanders are my second favourite team though, and in all games where they aren't playing the Hurricanes I'm rooting for the boys from the deep south. This essentially means that I'm constantly rooting for the underdog, because admit it- who really expects the Highlanders to win on a regular basis?

Knowing this helps to know why it is that I like the Highlanders. My second favourite NPC / - AirNZ Cup team has pretty much always been Southland. Perrenial strugglers that have come good and are now dominating their bigger Super rugby franchise player. Winning the log of wood was awesome and, I think anyway, just reward for an area that's been putting on the hard yards, doing the basics before attempting the flash. I want to see a team thats suffered finally turn the corner, I want to have the good time that Chiefs fans last year had - albeit with a happier ending.

The other reason I'm such a Highlanders fan is the Magpies. Hawke's Bay rugby supporters have a complex. Some describe it as a sense of entitlement, but it's really more one of desperation. Hawke's Bay fans really didn't cope with being in the 2nd Division. But what was really hard was getting so close to promotion and never actually making it. It doesn't take too many years before you start seeing rule changes as being deliberately designed to keep you out. And every player having success in another team would have been the key to being promoted.

These were dark and horrible times, and I should know - I grew up in the Hawke's Bay. Other than the All Blacks, when I was a kid, you wanted to be in the Magpies. Guys from my high-school played for them, hell my old Head Boy Michael Johnston is still running around the paddock. So, with the use of so many Hawke's Bay players and our coach, its only natural that I want to see the Highlanders do well. Because if there's anything a fan of Hawke's Bay rugby needs, its validation that we actually are ok, and really do deserve to be in the top flight.

What a game the Crusaders v Highlanders match was. Weirdly, whenever the Highlanders play the Crusaders I get a sense of confidence about the victory out of all proportion to reality. I actually expect them to win every time. And had a couple of calls gone the way of the Highlanders we might have seen a different result - particularly when viewed with the hindsight of knowing what the one-eyes were going to bring the next week against the Reds.

I have to apologise though, as despite being the pseudo-fan that I am, I didn't actually manage to catch much of the game vs the Blues. Instead I was drinking Tsingtao and having a great dinner at Longxiang. So I can't help but feel a little bit personally responsible for their loss to the Blues, especially because its the Blues who haven't been a great team in some time.

If only the Highlanders could bring the passion they have when they play the Crusaders to every game, things might be different for their fans. Even a sort of, but not really fan like myself.

I'm still looking for someone to do the Blues. Leave your nomination in the comments section if you're keen.

If you haven't seen it yet there's a video doing the rounds on the internet at present, the newest video in a long line of videos of fights on American public transport. Put simply a racial disagreement escalates, quickly.

The key moment in this that's attracted a lot of attention on 4chan and the like is the line 'bring da amberlamps'. In honour of this the Dropkicks is starting the Bring Da Amberlamps Hall of Fame [henceforth known as Amberlamps HOF]. Each time I see a big hit in the Super 14, I'll post it up as a nominee. At the end of the season, we get to vote for one inductee.

Without a doubt, the first-ever Amberlamps HOF nomination has to be Aaron Cruden.

In last week's Hurricanes/Blues game Cruden came off the bench in place of Willie Ripia. I've said in the past that I'm a bit wary of putting too much faith in Wellington's new wunderkid first-five, after the amount of times this faith has been unrewarded in the past. His first touch of the ball didn't do a lot to change my mind either:

[Thanks to Rugbydump for the clip]

For the record, Cruden went great against the Force. And I think the Hurricanes have a great idea, handing Weepu the kicking duties. It's clear they want Aaron to focus on his ground game - something the 'Canes have lacked in a 10 - before getting him hunting down Carter's point scoring record.

If it's true that behind every good man there is a good woman, then behind every good sports team, there must be a good fan base.

Last year, you could have said 'No way, what about the Crusaders! They're a good team and get shit all fans' and I would have agreed with you. In fact, they probably still don't get as many fans as they should. But the Canterbury Rugby Union and Crusaders coach Todd Blackadder have identified this problem and are taking steps to resolve it. Lowering season ticket prices was the first step, and allowing fans onto the field was the second.

But other unions appear to be reluctant to adopt the 'bold' move. In this Stuff article, Westpac Stadium chief executive David Gray had this to say about pitch invasions;

"Once you start a culture of people going on to the pitch, you start to lose control of when that happens," he said.

"I just wonder if they've thought it through properly. You don't have to go far to see incidents of spectators attacking players. It happened in an ODI during the Australia-Pakistan series.

I say bullshit on both parts. First off, you have a PA system and security guards. If you broadcast over the PA 'xxx request you do not take to the field following this match' and combine that with the thuggish Red Badge staff, you'll be able to control it fine. Secondly, spectators already attack players. Except in New Zealand, it seems. Remember these two?

So I'd put forward that an act of violence against players can occur in any circumstance. Besides, does Cricket Australia allow fans to storm the pitch? If not, how is this even relevant to the current argument?

And then Gray suggested that protecting the turf was another reason working against us. Fair enough. Here's the quote as it was represented in that same article.

"Most other [stadiums] do probably 20 events. You only have to look at the three consecutive weekends of double-headers and another two coming up. We have to protect our grass.

"Most other stadiums after the rugby season don't have anything through to January, whereas we carry on right through, so if you lose a bit of grass the recovery is quite difficult."

Ok. Sure. Then explain how you let motorbikes romp around on the infield 2 weeks before the first Hurricanes match of the 2009 season? Or a giant stage and a tonne of people on the pitch a week before the Sevens... Where you let a whole bunch of dancers also on the pitch. Not to mention the Neil Diamond concert held in the middle of the Super 14 season, which placed punters on the field in seats and had a stage which took up the southern third of the stadium, and left the grass brown afterwards? Luckily you had two weeks to replace it with the reserve sod lumped out the back.

All we are asking for is a little bit of a concession to allow us to feel more emotionally invested in the team. The Caketin has already led to the severing of relationships with fans in Palmerston North and Napier, and with crowd numbers slowly but surely starting a trend of decline, surely anything helps. You'll allow 60,000 people [admittedly it is unclear how many of these were on the infield] to attend two concerts in a three day period, with a week turnaround before the Sevens, but you won't let at the very most a hundred people on the field after a game? Did you not see the awesome crowd at the end of the Lions v Otago Air NZ Cup match in 2008? Because unless we win the ruddy thing, that's probably the size you will expect.

If you feel as strongly about the issue as I do, I recommend you keep up with the Gen Ys and join the Facebook group.