Speaker 1: You're listening to a podcast from News Talk sat B.
Speaker 1: Follow this and our wide range of podcasts now on iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2: Yeah, take another prick, it is out. The test is over.
Speaker 2: Don't smoke a beauty, it is out here he goes.
Speaker 2: This delivery has in the user to gool.
Speaker 1: On the Front Foot with Brian Waddell and Jeremy Cody
Speaker 1: powered by News Talks d B at iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2: This week on the Front Foot, what does the future
Speaker 2: hold for the young cricket facing a tough decision on
Speaker 2: domestic T twenty opinions are divided. He's even to set
Speaker 2: to earn big in the one hundred Our BT moves
Speaker 2: to South Africa b in a T twenty opener. Then
Speaker 2: they write the ship for a couple of wounds. But
Speaker 2: is the integrity of international cricket the diminished? A blanket
Speaker 2: shield down to the wire with a round to go
Speaker 2: and some fond memories of a good mate who passed
Speaker 2: away last week and you'll remember him well, Jeremy Cady
Speaker 2: tg is we knew him. You knew him as Silvery.
Speaker 2: I think he had a couple of nicknames, but Trevor
Speaker 2: McMahon was just a wonderful friend to us all and
Speaker 2: as was mentioned that his funeral service on last week,
Speaker 2: a life well a fun man.
Speaker 3: Absolutely right, Brian good Man. Yes, Silvery to me always
Speaker 3: looked forward to playing against him as a club. At
Speaker 3: a club level, you had a little glimpse, you know,
Speaker 3: at just how good keepers used to be when you
Speaker 3: played against him, and it was always actually just a
Speaker 3: very quick couple of sentences in a team meeting. We
Speaker 3: even mentioned him watch out for Silvery's you know, he
Speaker 3: would always he would virtually every club match you'd go
Speaker 3: through and there would be stump McMahon Bold Taylor or
Speaker 3: stump McMahon Bold Harry, you know, I mean it was,
Speaker 3: it was. It was a brilliant He was brilliant, and
Speaker 3: it was always mentioned. The second sentence was if you
Speaker 3: are at the non striker's end and he creeps up,
Speaker 3: you stop the bowler bowl and throw your bat across
Speaker 3: in front.
Speaker 2: Save that.
Speaker 3: Yeah. If I get stumped, oh I'm going to get
Speaker 3: you later on. Gee was good, wasn't he?
Speaker 2: You always read.
Speaker 3: Down leg side and you overbalanced slightly and the backfoot
Speaker 3: came up bang. Yeah.
Speaker 2: I had the pleasure of playing both with and against him,
Speaker 2: at club level, and he was he was an interesting character. Yeah.
Speaker 2: He What he used to do was he used to
Speaker 2: hide behind the batsman and sneak up down excited. You're
Speaker 2: not allowed to do that now, and so they've killed that.
Speaker 2: But I always remember him, and he denied it when
Speaker 2: I said it to him, but his sons agreed with
Speaker 2: me at the funeral that he had a hardware store
Speaker 2: in the Eastern Suburbs and when they started playing cricket
Speaker 2: at midday, he was struggling to get there for the
Speaker 2: start of play. He always got there just on time.
Speaker 2: But he arrived in his car. He's in his whites,
Speaker 2: He's got his pads on because if it was the
Speaker 2: first day, he knew he was either going to hope.
Speaker 3: He had automatic words.
Speaker 2: I think it might have been a manual.
Speaker 3: I I bet he doesn't. I bet he didn't. I
Speaker 3: bet he didn't.
Speaker 2: But he had the pads on because he knew he
Speaker 2: was either keeping wickets if it was day one or
Speaker 2: day two, and he'd be opening the batting, so it
Speaker 2: didn't it didn't really matter. And I always remember when
Speaker 2: I first played against me, he had a vicious square
Speaker 2: cut like most wicket keepers, you know, you think of
Speaker 2: all the keepers around the world, they all seem to
Speaker 2: know how to play the cut stroke.
Speaker 3: They do they do, you quite right, and he was
Speaker 3: I mean the other aspect, I mean, apart from his
Speaker 3: playing on the field, which she was. You know, I
Speaker 3: don't is there any problem with the keepers moving up? Yes,
Speaker 3: of course the batsman can't see you, but the non
Speaker 3: striker can. Yeah, you know, I don't have really not
Speaker 3: a huge problem with that. Yeah, it's a bit sneaky,
Speaker 3: but lots of sneaky things happen over the years, so
Speaker 3: I mean, and if he's good enough to get it,
Speaker 3: If he's good enough to get it, A lot of
Speaker 3: keepers wouldn't pick that up on you know, they wouldn't
Speaker 3: pick the line up or the batsman's in the way
Speaker 3: of the ball, or it's full, you know, as you
Speaker 3: try and clip it away to the leg side, and
Speaker 3: that's why you lift the back foot. So you know,
Speaker 3: he's got to be a good keeper to do that
Speaker 3: as well. Just sneaking up alone is not really the
Speaker 3: point of it, is it, really, I don't think so.
Speaker 2: It was a skill.
Speaker 3: It was skill, yeah, And of course, you know, you
Speaker 3: think back to those sides fifty five fifty six that
Speaker 3: he went on that tour to Pakistan and India, was
Speaker 3: it or was it just India? I can't hope, yeah,
Speaker 3: both of them. And he played his first Test there,
Speaker 3: didn't he he did, I think, and that he came
Speaker 3: back also to New Zealand and might have had one
Speaker 3: further test. Yes, but they batted number eleven, number ten
Speaker 3: and eleven, didn't they the keepers?
Speaker 2: Yeah, well, he he did the first Test at the
Speaker 2: NEED and I think it was against the West Indies
Speaker 2: in fifty six and then he was dropped in favor
Speaker 2: of Sammy Gillen And there was also Ian Kahuna around
Speaker 2: then and I think they probably thought that they were
Speaker 2: better bat at batting than the TG. But you know,
Speaker 2: he was a long servant of the domestic game, the
Speaker 2: club game. He played a club senior game I think
Speaker 2: when he was fifty and played either with or against
Speaker 2: his sons, one of his sons, and it was you know,
Speaker 2: I mean that that was just the TG. And he
Speaker 2: got through to be the second oldest living Test player, yes,
Speaker 2: and he was a good friend of the oldest living
Speaker 2: Test player, who was Neil Harvey ninety seven. But it's
Speaker 2: interesting to think about you know New Zealanders who have
Speaker 2: survived through into the nineties. Ian Leggett is coming up
Speaker 2: ninety six in June, still alive. Bob Blair in England
Speaker 2: turns ninety four this tune. And John Guy.
Speaker 3: He was in that side, wasn't he fifty five?
Speaker 2: He's the only surviving member of that too, got one
Speaker 2: hundred and that game an underrated player, John Guy, and
Speaker 2: he's still alive in his nineties as well. So you know,
Speaker 2: it's nice to remember and reflect and pay our respects
Speaker 2: to those people because they have been wonderful servants of
Speaker 2: the game and the you know, the forerunner of what
Speaker 2: you became and what other people have become. Have they?
Speaker 2: I mean you would have did you play Plunket Shield
Speaker 2: with TG? Or was he the selector?
Speaker 1: No?
Speaker 3: Ian Sirkleson was the Wellington keeper at that time, but
Speaker 3: I you know, TG would not have disgraced himself in
Speaker 3: the slightest at that level. I mean he was a
Speaker 3: very very good mover, great hands and better than that. Actually,
Speaker 3: as you look back, it tends to be the sort
Speaker 3: of person he was on the field. You know, he
Speaker 3: was a decent bloke and he he always always was
Speaker 3: there to have a chat too after and there would
Speaker 3: you know, irrespective of the result or any tensions on
Speaker 3: the field, you know, Silvery would always come over and
Speaker 3: have a quick beer and then shoot away, you know.
Speaker 3: But he was a good guy. And imagine playing against
Speaker 3: your sons, I mean, and things like that. I mean,
Speaker 3: it's a shame his wife didn't play, you know, really well.
Speaker 2: She had to bring up not only TV.
Speaker 3: Imagine cleaning all those green stains off trousers for years.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, for a long long time. Plunket Shield was
Speaker 2: of course something that he will remember with fondness. And
Speaker 2: we're talking about the Plunket Shield. It's coming down to
Speaker 2: the wire now, and you have got an interest because
Speaker 2: grandson is playing in Otago and they've got a big
Speaker 2: chance of picking up the trophy. There's four in with
Speaker 2: a hunt for the Plunket Shield and Otago had just
Speaker 2: quiet worked themselves up to second spot and they play
Speaker 2: Wellington in the final round. That's coming up.
Speaker 3: They do and at home I think they're playing down
Speaker 3: in Otago University of which is a pitch that just
Speaker 3: gives a little bit to the bowlers. So it is
Speaker 3: a kind of semi result pitch if you like. Yeah,
Speaker 3: it's It's interesting, isn't it. Otago have always been a
Speaker 3: younger team. I think because it's a university town, and
Speaker 3: that's not a bad thing. I think they introduce younger
Speaker 3: players and we see how they develop and how they
Speaker 3: go and if they're good enough. I don't have any
Speaker 3: problem with that at all. But what it's meant is
Speaker 3: it's been difficult for them to get Reno, to win
Speaker 3: a Plunket Shield or to be up there in contention
Speaker 3: for what forty years? I remember we won in eighty seven.
Speaker 3: I think we won the Plunket Shield Wellington. I don't
Speaker 3: think they've won since then, have they? No?
Speaker 2: They won the next year I think was yeah, yeah,
Speaker 2: so you know, and in of course in times gone by,
Speaker 2: Wally Lee's and the bracelets and the Blairs and all
Speaker 2: sorts made up there name. There's no household names as
Speaker 2: such when you think about Otago, but one household name
Speaker 2: will be Shane O'Connor his son Tom.
Speaker 3: Oh. Yes, what a debut.
Speaker 2: He's got twenty three wickets at eleven.
Speaker 3: You know, he left arma two wads left arm.
Speaker 2: They say he's just picked up a yard or two
Speaker 2: of pace as well, which will help him get the
Speaker 2: ball to swing. And the other thing is he played
Speaker 2: a beginning of the bat. They won the game against
Speaker 2: Northern Districts and he got eighty odd to help them
Speaker 2: through to that. So you know, these young players and
Speaker 2: you know you were Tom and some of the other
Speaker 2: young players that are playing for Otago have really worked
Speaker 2: pretty hard and that they could well win it. It would
Speaker 2: be encouraging if they because the Canterbury playing Auckland. Canterbury
Speaker 2: leading at the moment and they're playing Auckland in Auckland,
Speaker 2: anything could happen there, couldn't it.
Speaker 3: Yeah?
Speaker 2: Could?
Speaker 3: That'll be the number two ground, won't it on? So
Speaker 3: that's usually a reasonably decent pitch. Small boundaries of course,
Speaker 3: so runs become you know, the currency there and leaving
Speaker 3: and both teams will want to win, so there will
Speaker 3: be there'll be some striving going on in fact between
Speaker 3: those two games, won't there great It's a great finish
Speaker 3: to the local season, which is you know, it's it's
Speaker 3: it's encouraging. I think that we've got, you know, those
Speaker 3: sides together at the top. I think Otago a third
Speaker 3: at the moment and maybe Auckland just behind. But look,
Speaker 3: it's it's going to be a good a good match
Speaker 3: because every side could potentially get there. They've got bonus
Speaker 3: points on the first innings only now and then you've
Speaker 3: got to crack on, don't you. So it was a
Speaker 3: good game. Otago needed something like three hundred and fifty odd,
Speaker 3: didn't they? They do, and that's a big chase to
Speaker 3: keep going for that length of time, and they managed
Speaker 3: a couple of partnerships of fifty and a couple of
Speaker 3: one hundred, so it was kind of a team effort
Speaker 3: when you think of it in those terms. So enough
Speaker 3: of them were just good enough. I think O'Connor at
Speaker 3: four consecutive sixers, didn't they. They got to the point
Speaker 3: where Jeep Reval went to short pitched, bought bowling and
Speaker 3: he loved them over to very good support apparently from
Speaker 3: the boundary from all the local club players who had
Speaker 3: finished their match and were then sitting and watching as well.
Speaker 3: And even Jeep Reval went across and sank them. I
Speaker 3: think he's in about his second to last match before
Speaker 3: he retires. I'm not sure, but he was over and
Speaker 3: said thanks so much. You know, you presented such a
Speaker 3: really good atmosphere and a lot of humor and he
Speaker 3: enjoyed it and good on him for doing that.
Speaker 2: Yes, and we won't mention Wellington, who are bringing up
Speaker 2: the rear of the competition at the moment they will return.
Speaker 3: Yeah, absolutely, They've got some dangerous players, you know. And
Speaker 3: Sneddon Snedden's coming be got a five for, didn't he
Speaker 3: And he'll be better for that runout, won't he?
Speaker 2: Yes he will.
Speaker 1: Brian Waddell Jeremy Cooney on the front foot the.
Speaker 2: T twenty competition is something we're going to talk about
Speaker 2: today before we do. The interest in the T twenties
Speaker 2: against South Africa B featuring New Zealand B has been
Speaker 2: pretty minimal. I'm disappointed that the New Zealand side have
Speaker 2: come home with silver medals from the World T twenty.
Speaker 2: They're sharing over a million dollars about one point four
Speaker 2: million US dollars and prize money, so they get about
Speaker 2: one hundred and fifty thousand each. I don't know how
Speaker 2: they saught that to the coaches if we get any
Speaker 2: share of the prize winning money, do the players contribute
Speaker 2: in any way?
Speaker 3: To God? I would I couldn't tell you. We didn't
Speaker 3: have coaches. We got a what at which we used
Speaker 3: to sell and split the money up. Padal's got a
Speaker 3: car once and split the money on that and got
Speaker 3: a car the second time, and fair enough he decided,
Speaker 3: I've given it to you once, fellas. But really we
Speaker 3: weren't with a very different game nowadays, let's put it
Speaker 3: that way. So but yeah, I can understand your view
Speaker 3: about you know, international cricket. I'm afraid it is a
Speaker 3: way of the world now days. We kind of are
Speaker 3: told we have to live with this. We don't necessarily
Speaker 3: see the marquee players all the time, and that's going
Speaker 3: to continue. I think, whils, it's not going to get better,
Speaker 3: it's probably going to get worse. And it means you've
Speaker 3: got to have more players who can play international cricket,
Speaker 3: don't you. That's really effectively what it means. And he
Speaker 3: twenties are probably of the three formats the better one
Speaker 3: to enter, I would guess through that. I mean, the
Speaker 3: worst part would be as if you were a red
Speaker 3: bull cricketer only.
Speaker 2: Yes, well, yeah, I've got to have Yeah, you've got
Speaker 2: to have wider skills, don't you. What I mean what
Speaker 2: gets at me is that you have a competition, you're
Speaker 2: selling it to the local market. Here, people aren't going along.
Speaker 2: What do they want to go along for? Well, they
Speaker 2: want to go and see Tim Seifertt, they want to
Speaker 2: go and see Fanellen, and they want to see the
Speaker 2: stars playing here at home. It's all very well seen
Speaker 2: on TV. But if you're going to go to a ground,
Speaker 2: you want to see those players. They've featured pretty prominently
Speaker 2: in the one hundred in England in terms of being
Speaker 2: signed up. I mean, Mitchell Center has been playing and
Speaker 2: he's the highest paid New Zealander there one hundred and
Speaker 2: seventy five thousand. But you know, these guys are all
Speaker 2: getting upwards of one hundred thousand in contracts, and even
Speaker 2: the women are getting contracts that are substantial as well.
Speaker 2: Sophie Devine is getting two hundred and ten thousand pounds
Speaker 2: for goodness sake, merely kure eighty thousand. But at least
Speaker 2: we're seeing those women playing in New Zealand, We're not
Speaker 2: seeing the men. So that's the issue that I take
Speaker 2: with it.
Speaker 3: Yeah, well, I don't know. We haven't got an answer
Speaker 3: to this, have we. There's no as in fact, there's
Speaker 3: no answer. The players just make their selections and they
Speaker 3: move on and they go and they try and I
Speaker 3: guess carry out their contracts that they that they are,
Speaker 3: you know, legally obliged to do. But they can get
Speaker 3: out of those as well.
Speaker 2: Some times they seem to be able to. And we
Speaker 2: have a number of them playing in various competitions and
Speaker 2: there's going to be a lot more of than but
Speaker 2: T twenty, well, are we destined to have the best
Speaker 2: part of our summer overrun by T twenty tests being
Speaker 2: played either overseas or in the rainy season? October November
Speaker 2: December is when we had the last lot and it
Speaker 2: seems that's the way it's going to be. But it's
Speaker 2: an issue that's being addressed by New Zealand Cricket at
Speaker 2: the moment. Is the New Zealand twenty T twenty competition
Speaker 2: or team in the Big Bess League or any other
Speaker 2: prospect available, what should they be thinking about? We don't
Speaker 2: hear too much, Dury. We don't know what is being
Speaker 2: put forward as a case study.
Speaker 3: Do we No, don't. It's the details we don't know,
Speaker 3: And I mean it obviously appears that the current options
Speaker 3: have been limited now to two. One of them obviously
Speaker 3: the Big Bash Australian option and the other one the
Speaker 3: n Z twenty, the Indian kind of backed league. But
Speaker 3: we're short on details. You're absolutely right, and that's why
Speaker 3: there's all this kind of speculation that goes on about it.
Speaker 3: The BBL. We know that they are offering one New
Speaker 3: Zealand side with the prospect of a second depending upon
Speaker 3: various KPIs and whether they reach those, a second team
Speaker 3: could go in. So if they reach those, yeah, they
Speaker 3: would be playing. We'd have two teams playing in front
Speaker 3: of a large and well established, you know, competition and
Speaker 3: the large crowds good grounds. The women's game, I do
Speaker 3: hear in the there's my understanding is that an offer
Speaker 3: has been made for the women as well to join
Speaker 3: and give it a bit of a boost and maybe
Speaker 3: protect a little bit in the future. Whether that's an
Speaker 3: immediate one with the men's side, I don't know whether
Speaker 3: that's going to happen. The other thing is that they
Speaker 3: will be known and the New Zealand is as locals
Speaker 3: in other words, and not internationals. In other words. They
Speaker 3: will become if you are on the New Zealand team,
Speaker 3: a local Australian player, and therefore they would not take
Speaker 3: up the other international players' positions in the squads for
Speaker 3: the BBL. So that's actually quite an advantage, isn't it.
Speaker 3: If they are good enough and you don't make the
Speaker 3: New Zealand Big Bash, say team, you can still go
Speaker 3: through another route, which is you could become a local
Speaker 3: player and play for the Sydney Sixers or whatever as
Speaker 3: a local Australian player. So that's quite another little option.
Speaker 3: I think that option also allows for the opportunity to
Speaker 3: still play international tests. You were mentioning that a moment
Speaker 3: ago in what is the kind of the January and
Speaker 3: a bit of fab which is generally a better time
Speaker 3: to play test cricket, isn't it. The weather is a
Speaker 3: bit more consistent, The pitchers are a little bit better
Speaker 3: certainly than the cooler and the windier November December you
Speaker 3: talk about when you've got to pack as a supporter
Speaker 3: a coat and a rug and get a thermos. But
Speaker 3: and you know that's what I'm afraid Test cricket could
Speaker 3: be consigned to where the margins of our summer. You know,
Speaker 3: New Zealand Cricket may feel they've got to make some
Speaker 3: cash out of n Z twenty. Well you can understand that,
Speaker 3: but they could also lose out on tests, I think
Speaker 3: even more than they do now with just November December.
Speaker 3: It's not it's not the better times a year and
Speaker 3: it is it. I mean, they don't really market the tests,
Speaker 3: to be honest, I don't know what I'm assuming. The
Speaker 3: Big Bash, despite the large crowds and established competition, is
Speaker 3: losing a bit of cash, I would say, while they
Speaker 3: want to sell it otherwise.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's an interesting scenario and we should be looking
Speaker 2: across the Tasman to see what's going on because this
Speaker 2: is an important decision that New Zealand cricket have to
Speaker 2: make private investment buying equity and the lasting implemation implications.
Speaker 2: They can't afford to get it wrong. I was just
Speaker 2: reading Mel Farrell, who will know, a journalist who does
Speaker 2: a lot of work around the cricketing world, had a
Speaker 2: tweet interesting times for Australian cricket running at a loss
Speaker 2: for several years and all the eggs are in the
Speaker 2: home test BBL, WBBL Broadcast Basket, other domestic competitions all
Speaker 2: but invisible. And Daniel Breedegan, another journalist, has written an
Speaker 2: article about the same thing and one of the interesting
Speaker 2: points he makes is estimates of the value of the
Speaker 2: sale of these franchises in Australia based around the concept
Speaker 2: of selling say forty nine percent stake in six of
Speaker 2: the clubs and one hundred percent stake in one of
Speaker 2: the other two Melbourne and Sydney. They've got two teams
Speaker 2: in both those places. Have ranged between six hundred million
Speaker 2: and eight hundred million. You know, that's the money they're
Speaker 2: talking about now that that money is obscene when you
Speaker 2: think about it in New Zealand terms.
Speaker 3: Isn't it? It is? Well? Yeah, well where do New
Speaker 3: Zealand Cricket make their money? For a start? Do they
Speaker 3: make it basically from the ICC? Don't they there hand
Speaker 3: out their percentage?
Speaker 2: Yeah?
Speaker 3: World championships have sponsorship, they'll have sponsorship. And one might
Speaker 3: as well ask we've had the A n Z, you know,
Speaker 3: consistent solid supporters of the game. I'm not sure you'd
Speaker 3: want to be supporting as an A and Z. You know,
Speaker 3: an Indian owned or who does own it? We don't
Speaker 3: know who owns this tournament, but an Indian driven league,
Speaker 3: do you know what I mean?
Speaker 2: It seems to be the plan does what's that? Would
Speaker 2: you want that I.
Speaker 3: Mean, what did I mean? New Zealand Cricket get their
Speaker 3: cash from those three main avenues plus the broadcasting of course,
Speaker 3: and with that they fund all our local competitions planket
Speaker 3: shield under nineteen, under seventeen, all that and two of
Speaker 3: us going away.
Speaker 2: That's right, that's what we want them, that's what is
Speaker 2: best for the game.
Speaker 3: YEP and A and Z come under the sponsorship of course,
Speaker 3: but I'm not sure whether they'll be quite so keen
Speaker 3: in sponsoring that they're coming from, you know. And what
Speaker 3: about the time seeing we've mentioned broadcasting, what about the
Speaker 3: time for eyeballs Indian eyeballs? You know, we've basically got
Speaker 3: when are we going to play these games? If you
Speaker 3: go at seven pm, that's eleven twenty in cold Cutter.
Speaker 3: Now most people are at work. If you've got a
Speaker 3: job at eleven twenty in the morning, if you want
Speaker 3: to get them for their best time, of course, it's
Speaker 3: after six when once they've got home that's two am
Speaker 3: in New Zealand. So you kind of need lights. And
Speaker 3: can you see in the South Island University of Otago
Speaker 3: ground they don't have lights. Difficult to play a match there.
Speaker 3: Then you've got. We've been downsizing the size of our
Speaker 3: stadia throughout New Zealand for some time, and that's you know,
Speaker 3: we've got Hagley, a wonderful ground, both in the university
Speaker 3: ground as too lovely ground, intimate and banks and so on.
Speaker 3: So about would you say nine thousand nine to ten
Speaker 3: thousand is fair for a size of Hagley?
Speaker 2: Pretty much? I would think. I mean the basin reservers
Speaker 2: are the same, and that they used to get crowds
Speaker 2: of about twelve thousand in the days when they were
Speaker 2: having big numbers. But of course health and safety now
Speaker 2: prevents any more than say around about eight or nine
Speaker 2: thousand at many of those grounds, and you know, up
Speaker 2: and down the country those have got even in Bay Oval.
Speaker 2: You know there's a limitation. It's not a it's not
Speaker 2: a ground where there are stands. You sit on the bank,
Speaker 2: don't you say that? You know they have to limit
Speaker 2: the numbers. I mean the other thing too, is you see.
Speaker 3: What I mean though, Yeah, they are relying on bums
Speaker 3: on seats as a component of money and fandom and
Speaker 3: buying them dies and all that kind of stuff. I
Speaker 3: just wonder how does it work, because there's only really
Speaker 3: you could only you could play day games at University Oval.
Speaker 3: I don't know how many would be there. It's not
Speaker 3: a big ground one stand basically, isn't it. And then
Speaker 3: you've got one stand at you know in christ Church
Speaker 3: as well. That's not They're not big numbers compared to
Speaker 3: even the big Bash. And if they are losing money,
Speaker 3: I just I just because they always look quite big
Speaker 3: crowds fifteen twenty twenty five thousand have yes, I just
Speaker 3: wonder about some of that.
Speaker 2: Yeah, you have to have atmosphere with the fans. There's
Speaker 2: no point in playing these games in front of the
Speaker 2: limited numbers. And you know that there's limited numbers in
Speaker 2: this South African tour. That that is just one of
Speaker 2: the things that they will have to be honing up on,
Speaker 2: won't they when they make their decision. I mean, yeah,
Speaker 2: well they had a beating this recent week, but we
Speaker 2: still haven't heard anything about what's going to happen.
Speaker 3: Well, that says quite a lot too to me. You
Speaker 3: know a number of things, doesn't it how big this
Speaker 3: decision is. But yeah, I mean even the players, what
Speaker 3: sort of players are they going to attract to this competition?
Speaker 3: The SA twenty is a competitor. The Big Bash is
Speaker 3: a competitor both played during January and a little bit
Speaker 3: of February, and then I think it might even hit
Speaker 3: the start of the Dubai as well. But the South
Speaker 3: Africa twenty has seemingly captured the better English players. You
Speaker 3: need labor, don't you. You need good labor to make
Speaker 3: these things work to attract players, and the Big Bash
Speaker 3: has got some Pakistan players, you know, and they also
Speaker 3: had what you might call second tier English players, you know,
Speaker 3: Billings and co. But you know, the reason the Big
Speaker 3: Bash works for me was that it was it's the
Speaker 3: Australian component, isn't it. It's the local players that have
Speaker 3: an impressive you know, they're quite high quality and competitive,
Speaker 3: and so that works because of that. The other thing
Speaker 3: I think that should be mentioned about that Big Bash
Speaker 3: is that they are offering back in New Zealand because
Speaker 3: they're still going to have to be a Super Smash,
Speaker 3: even though the Indian think you need to have the
Speaker 3: Super Smash going on underneath that to provide some player development,
Speaker 3: and the Australians have offered three Australian players into each
Speaker 3: of those Super Smash New Zealand sides as well, and
Speaker 3: they've also taken not a big steak, but they've also
Speaker 3: taken a small steak out of the Super into the
Speaker 3: Super Smash as well. So it's not a huge out
Speaker 3: of money, but that's there, as I suppose, a bit
Speaker 3: of a token kind of thing to keep it going.
Speaker 3: So I think those are quite decent kind of thoughts.
Speaker 3: At least we've got some some idea, But when it
Speaker 3: comes to the in z twenty, I don't think we
Speaker 3: have much at all. We know how it's come about.
Speaker 3: There's a bit of fractured stuff, there's some uncertain stuff,
Speaker 3: there's some stuff going on behind in the background, let's
Speaker 3: put it that way. And then we got six teams
Speaker 3: New Zealand rugby probably our main game, working hard to
Speaker 3: remain there. I think you'd probably say, but they can
Speaker 3: only get five professional sides, they can't get six. Can't
Speaker 3: hold that. We've talked about the timing of this. Certainly
Speaker 3: this option wants to confirm a window of January and
Speaker 3: ferry that's slightly different and sending some players over. We
Speaker 3: could still, in other words, play test cricket with the
Speaker 3: first option, but not with the second, not during January.
Speaker 3: In a bit of February. So that's that's selling summer
Speaker 3: to me in New Zealand and it consigns cricket to
Speaker 3: those margins for tests. So but who was funding this words,
Speaker 3: who owns this competition?
Speaker 2: Well, that's the issue that I think we need to know.
Speaker 2: And it seems very much as though it's going to
Speaker 2: be an Indian franchise scenario, which is what is going
Speaker 2: on and creating discussion in Australia. And you look at
Speaker 2: the sides that they have in South Africa. Of course
Speaker 2: they're named after the IPL sides, aren't they're owned by
Speaker 2: the IPL franchises as such.
Speaker 3: Yet six out of six all owned by the Indians.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm not sure whether I'm for or against that.
Speaker 2: What I'm for is what is best for the entire
Speaker 2: New Zealand game. Not the matter of the rich getting
Speaker 2: richer and the rest just taking the crumbs, which is
Speaker 2: sometimes the case when you think about the money that's
Speaker 2: being talked about in terms of franchise leagues. But what
Speaker 2: is best for the New Zealand game. That's what New
Speaker 2: Zealand Cricket has the responsibility to do. It happens, whatever
Speaker 2: happens competition wise, they have to take a cut and
Speaker 2: they have to approve it, don't they.
Speaker 3: The other question over who runs it? We don't know
Speaker 3: who owns it. We don't know who runs it. I mean,
Speaker 3: is New Zealand Cricket part of this or will there
Speaker 3: be another company?
Speaker 2: Yes, have to be a part another company, wouldn't it?
Speaker 3: Well? Is the resignation, for example, of Mills, is that
Speaker 3: a sign that he might be part of that company?
Speaker 3: That's just my mind working that way. May not? Oh
Speaker 3: that's fair? And would some of the people on the
Speaker 3: board be some of those other people involved, the Flemings
Speaker 3: and the Vottories as board members. We just don't know. Look,
Speaker 3: I don't mind the money. I'm with you on that.
Speaker 3: I don't mind that. But where does it go? That's
Speaker 3: the issue, isn't it? Does it just go to Santner's
Speaker 3: and Mitchell's and all the New Zealand top players. I'm
Speaker 3: not quite so keen on that. We've talked about sponsorship
Speaker 3: in New Zealand. Who's the broadcaster awards? I suppose it's
Speaker 3: Sky is it?
Speaker 2: Wow? That's another thing that hasn't been described or confirmed correct.
Speaker 3: And we don't and we know that the time zones
Speaker 3: are not going to be easy for the number of eyeballs,
Speaker 3: So I don't know. And we've talked about where the
Speaker 3: games will be played. South Island not so easy obviously,
Speaker 3: Hamilton Wellington, which is a bit sterile sometimes Wellington, isn't it,
Speaker 3: Let's be fair, But it's a stadium that can handle
Speaker 3: bums on seats, and also Auckland obviously as well. That's
Speaker 3: where the bulk of it would be played, wouldn't it.
Speaker 3: That's all I can see. And then the other point,
Speaker 3: my last, my last point would be about player development.
Speaker 3: Isn't that That comes to the heart of what you
Speaker 3: were saying. We need to have players who can be
Speaker 3: the best they can be and given the opportunities to
Speaker 3: become as good as they can in the tree twenty format. Now,
Speaker 3: is it going to involve these teams? Christian Clark? Is
Speaker 3: it going to evolve you mentioned O'Connor. I meant, you know,
Speaker 3: a moment ago, Tim Robinson, the Namick Kelly's, the Muhammad Abbass,
Speaker 3: the rich Hayes, those kinds of people, Lenox, you know
Speaker 3: as it those So I think we'll see Bolt. I
Speaker 3: think we'll see we'll see Trent Bolt. It's those kinds
Speaker 3: of players. I think that are be going to be
Speaker 3: coming down so loads of questions I have in my mind.
Speaker 3: No answers yet, No, but it's a very big decision.
Speaker 2: Yes indeed, and we're waiting for those answers. Surely they're
Speaker 2: going to have to make a decision at some stage.
Speaker 2: I can understand them not making it straight after their meeting.
Speaker 2: The initial inference I got was it was sort of
Speaker 2: fifty to fifty cut on the board, which makes it
Speaker 2: difficult to get consensus. We've got to get everybody on
Speaker 2: the same page. We know the page the players are on.
Speaker 2: We've heard from Rutch and Ravender, We've heard from Daryn Mitchell,
Speaker 2: We've heard from Tom Latham that they are in favor
Speaker 2: of the New Zealand twenty competition. That tends to suggest
Speaker 2: that they have already decided within the player ranks. There
Speaker 2: was some talk on the news during the week about
Speaker 2: a player strike if they don't get what they wanted.
Speaker 2: I hope goodness doesn't occur. But it was a question
Speaker 2: that was posed, and that was a posed was posed
Speaker 2: to Susie Bates. So there's quite clear evidence that there's
Speaker 2: women's cricket involved in this some way or another. It's
Speaker 2: just hard to know. But you know, the last thing
Speaker 2: we want is for talk of strike or any of those.
Speaker 2: We want everybody on the same page. And it's a
Speaker 2: matter of however the vote goes. You've got to accept it,
Speaker 2: whether you're opposed to it, and move on and make
Speaker 2: it work. Isn't that fair?
Speaker 3: Yeah? I think that is fair. I mean I don't.
Speaker 3: It feels a bit like I once saw a cartoon
Speaker 3: from Tom Scott with a guy holding a knife at
Speaker 3: his neck. There's a little bit like that for the
Speaker 3: players too, because if the ones who aren't, if they're
Speaker 3: not in this in these teams, these six teams, and
Speaker 3: they and New Zealand Cricket are slightly bypassed. What we'll
Speaker 3: hear is of course in conjunction with New Zealand Cricket.
Speaker 3: That's the sort of thing I think that will be released.
Speaker 3: But how much will New Zealand Cricket be getting from this?
Speaker 3: We don't know anything like that. A lot percentage, We
Speaker 3: won't know anything about that. So how are they going
Speaker 3: to fund the game? This is supposed to be the
Speaker 3: main part of the money when they take January out.
Speaker 2: Of action, that's what they're going to have to tell
Speaker 2: us when they make the decision, and I guess that's
Speaker 2: in the very near future. We'll have a chance to
Speaker 2: discuss I'm sure the final decision at some stages. I say,
Speaker 2: over seven days ago. They had a meeting, so it's
Speaker 2: been discussed. They've had the report from the Lutes that
Speaker 2: they were expecting, They've got all the material in front
Speaker 2: of them. As we are led to believe, it's now
Speaker 2: making the right decision and achieving some unanimity with it.
Speaker 3: Big decision. We'll just wait to see what happens, and then,
Speaker 3: as you say, it'll annoy some people, other people will
Speaker 3: be very pleased, and let's see if it works.
Speaker 2: Won't be the last time we're talking about this.
Speaker 3: Will not? We'll go it won't.
Speaker 2: We'll go away and give it some thought, and perhaps
Speaker 2: next week we may know a little more and be
Speaker 2: able to discuss the value and merits of what they are. Thanks,
Speaker 2: thanks for your time, Keep working hard, enjoying.
Speaker 3: Yeah, well yeah, doing the harvest wads. It's a funny
Speaker 3: thing when you start wabbling around because you're a bit tired.
Speaker 3: But however, twelve hour shifts and from picton I'm us
Speaker 3: two ten. My alarm goes off two am.
Speaker 2: Two.
Speaker 3: Yeah, so that's that's it. It's busy, it's busy. It's
Speaker 3: not for too long.
Speaker 2: It would be next week.
Speaker 3: Oh what's good Man.
Speaker 2: Summer?
Speaker 1: For more from News Talks B listen live on air
Speaker 1: or online, and keep our shows with you wherever you
Speaker 1: go with our podcasts on radio