-
AuthorPosts
-
I disagree that NA’s commercial focus has sacrificed Australian pathways. The shift in rules for SSN (eg super shot) has improved circle defence, long range shooting and made a short movving circle a viable alternative to pinging feeds from the mid court to a tall holding shooter.
I agree with al_ex that it doesn’t make sense for NA to accept NZ teams into the SSN in their current form. Any consolidation would need to address
the financial costs associated with extending to NZ
The lack of crowd/viewer interest in cross-Tasman clashes to justify external investment through sponsorship or broadcast rights
The small venue sizes in NZ (could they accommodate the 10,000+ crowds of the bigger SSN games)?
The lack of depth in the ANZ comp. The Mystics (and maybe the Pulse) are the only current ANZ premiership team who could compete on level terms with the SSN teams.Looking at the standard of the nz league this year I think only two nz teams should enter the ssn league if they do let us back in! Nz does not have enough high end players that could compete if there were three teams. Either that or they allow three nz teams but allow imports in those nz teams. Maybe Fowler would like to play for a nz based team again….
The reason the Aussies didn’t want so many nz teams back in 2016 was because it was a waste of time playing teams that weren’t up to standard where the outcome was known before the game started and it’s very costly with air travel etc.
Looking at the nz mens basketball league this year sky have thrown a shipload of money at basketball with player interviews etc and nz basketball is going from strength to strength here.
As for the New Zealand men’s basketball league, it’s great to hear that there’s significant investment and growth. Such developments can only bode well for the sport’s future in the country, potentially leading to a stronger pool of talent for other sports leagues as well.
Sport NZ boss Raelene Castle
"…we have started conversations with both Sky and TVNZ about how we can unlock opportunities for more free-to-air coverage for women's sport. Netball is one of the sports which will be involved in these discussions." https://t.co/eAAZ5w4GWJ— Bridget Tunnicliffe (@bridgettunni) May 28, 2024
This is just basically a government bailout of the sport. Having a game broadcast free to air isn’t going to the grow the sport in nz. Any netball fan wanting to watch the sport has a sky tv subscription. NNZ have to innovate the game with things like the 2 point shot. Be interesting to see what Wyllie comes up with. She can talk a big game but a bit short on delivery. Take for eg the debacle of reappointing Taurua as coach.
Sky is backing basketball at least in because it is an Olympic sport and more unisex in nature. Mens netball is nowhere in comparison.
I posted a lengthy post elsewhere on why Netball NZ seeks a return to the old days of a trans tasman competition. The player and coaching drain for New Zealand netball has been enormous. Half the current Giants team in the SSN are literally from the 2016 Magic in the old ANZ Championship. Julie Fitz, Sammy Winders (nee Saunders), Jo Harten and Jamie Lee.
Extrapolate that across the competition and you can see why Netball New Zealand is concerned. That sort of talent drain to your biggest rival is seemingly insurmountable in the medium and long term.But I just can’t see why it would happen. Netball Australia does not have the leverage with its broadcast partners to seek expansion like the AFL or NRL have done. It’s pointless to pretend otherwise. The eight team, four game model of SSN was literally designed to be broadcaster friendly and Foxtel acquired the rights to it on that basis. The SSN covers the Brisbane, Perth, Sydney, Melbourne and Adelaide markets. Adding regional markets will significantly add to broadcast cost for an extremely limited return. The advertising dollars and broadcasting slots aren’t really there either.
What is in this for Netball Australia? What is in this for Foxtel? It just seems like a non starter to begin with.
I don’t really think there has been a huge exodus of nz players to the ssn. There’s hardly been any nz players cross the Tasman. They’re all too scared because of NNZ sanctions. We’ve only really lost Harten and Fowler. Julie Fitz and Price are Aussies so logically would go back there for those roles.
Sky is pivoting away from netball because there’s not enough content in a six team league.
There’s an eleven team men’s nz basketball league with curtain raisers with the upcoming bench players which is also very exciting. There’s basketball on 5/7 days of the week. All the teams have up to three very good import players which ensures a great standard.sky are targeting the espn audience, especially the wnba players. There’s a huge audience of 330 m pairs of eyeballs in the US. Even though basketball isn’t as well attended as netball, sky is going after the broadcast market.
I’m a big netball fan but I’ve kinda lost interest in watching except for the Pulse. Since Nweke went down the games have been less exciting. There has been no innovation in nz netball for decades. Can someone tell me what has changed for the better? Tinkering with the short pass rule and introducing rolling subs isn’t going to do it for me. I’m not interested in the fast 5 league either. Also the umpires are still way too dominant in the nz league. Never play advantage etc… They don’t even change the coaches who have losing records year in, year out.
- This reply was modified 11 months, 1 week ago by Kwkiwi.
I think the lack of coaching variation is an interesting point. Why does this happen?
It also seems that since the competition split it has been a bit of a dud option for imports as they largely bench warm for a season and depart.
Also, when I think about my own viewing tendencies obviously I love netball or wouldn’t be on the forum, but I’m more time poor the past couple of years and I just don’t really watch the NZ comp anymore (I used to try and catch each game) and I haven’t paid for the overseas subscription this year. I still follow the results and read this forum each round and may watch the finals, but my engagement has certainly declined the last couple of seasons. And some of the matches I have just turned off.
I could not name 1 Basketball player male or female that plays the NZ comp. Yes I’m sure there are plenty attending the USA College set up, it’s really not difficult to get into college over there, especially if female, as they have to give out the same amount of scholarships to female as they do to males.
International was New Zealand is poor at Basketball, we are not going to the Olympics.
@kwkiwi – It’s not the departure of NZ girls to Australia that is the issue. The problem is NZ girls not being exposed week in week out to that level of elite competition.
I still think Jane Watson is the best defender in NZ netball and I’ve no doubt playing and training with and against Fowler is a huge part of her development story. Fowler went to SSN and played and trained with and against Courtney Bruce – who was named the best player in the world last year. The two Aryang sisters look like potential world beaters. They play and train with and against Fowler.
You can repeat this across the competition. The English Roses, Jamaican Sunshine Girls and South African Proteas have made huge strides in international netball in the last eight years, and largely at the Silver Ferns expense. This is because they are happy to send their top players to the SSN and expose them to the elite competition because it makes them better players. Shamera Sterling, Latty Wilson, Kadie-Ann Dehaney, Shanice Beckford, Karla Pretorius, Geva Mentur, Helen Housby, Jo Harten, Ine-Mari Venter, Rolene Streutker, Fran Williams, Romelda Aiken, Jodie-Ann Ward, Francis-Bayman, Ell Cardwell, Shimona Jok and more all moved to the SSN and helped elevate the level of competition.
In the old ANZ Championship NZ girls got to compete week in and week out with and against that level of talent, literally the best in the world. Since the split, NZs comp has obviously suffered in quality. This is partly the reason for SKY lowball offer in the first place. The ANZ now doesn’t attract the best players in the world to make current and future Silver Ferns better. Recruitment is distinctly second tier in comparison – the ANZ championship imports are literally girls right on the edge of SSN viability. Bassett, Samasson, George Fisher and Potgeiter are all girls that weren’t quite good enough for SSN when they took a NZ contract.
Obviously this is not sustainable. The Silver Ferns need their players playing the very highest level of club netball possible to develop them for international netball. This hasn’t been happening for eight years and NZ Netball is facing an existential crisis around it. The Silver Ferns-Diamonds rivalry will always be special, but the talent gap between the countries is widening rapidly. With SKY pulling the pin, it’s not unfair to call this an almost existential crisis in NZ netball. A shrinking domestic league and no access for Silver Ferns players to develop at the highest level is a recipe for future disaster.
Both leagues are losing money so I don’t know whether AU or NZ have the answers. However, I think NNZ made things difficult for themselves with their incredibly restrictive import rule, where imports could only be classified under Tier 2 and were approved discretionally only (i.e. teams had to prove there was no equivalent local option available).
Damned if they do, Damned if they don’t @Museboy.
The import rules were in part designed to stop clubs getting into a direct bidding war against either each other or SSN, encouraging local development over buying in talent.
With the financial situation being what it is for NNZ, I think saving teams from themselves through controlling their costs may well have been a necessary evil. The alternative would have been the ANZ clubs stuck with either contracts they couldn’t honour once the SKY cut came, or at the very best a simultaneous mass player exodus as salaries got cut when the pay tv money ran out anyway.
Netball Australia I doubt would have been anywhere near as prudent in the same situation.
@deucelow I 100% agree with you. To be the best you have to compete with the best.
As @Ian has said on other posts, NZ use to have a strong competition back in the NBC days. So what’s changed?I personally think it’s fitness. I think there’s a massive reason why DNT had/made fitness standards for the Ferns. Even though I didn’t agree with some of her selections, however I do think as an elite athlete you should be easily able to hit the fitness targets.
When I look back to the NBC days, all our midcourters could play C at an international level. Even if they were specialist WA/WD. Adine Wilson, Anna Rowberry, Lesley Nicol, Vic Edwards, Jenny-May, Amigene Metcalfe, Sonia Hardcastle, Langman, Bowden, Frew, Leota, Lees and the list goes on. There was no question about them playing C. Julie Seymour and Temepara were just a given at C, so there was never a question mark there.
Now-a-days when we look at Toeava and Crampton, I could not see them run out a full game at C. Don’t get me wrong they are both amazing WAs, and it’s the only position I’d want them in. But I think it’s sad that one of them couldn’t run at C with the other at WA.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
