Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
"jamrock":1jeat7zw wrote:"thirteen":1jeat7zw wrote:as much as i want the stampede to win, i think the swarm are the best team the nzihl has ever had right now
[/quote:1jeat7zw]no way. Devils ’09 was the best nzihl team ever assembled no team(16games) has ever had the top 3 positions in points and i dont think it will ever happen again:
Heyd, Eaden, Ruddle, Papai, Harrop, Soffer, Kaszala, Nicholls, Speck, Nowland, H. Lewis etc etc
[/quote:1jeat7zw]If I’m not mistaken, they were kiwis as well.
hmmm…interesting theory Blake except for the fact that they have greater numbers of registered players in centers that are larger then ours. Not saying we can’t compete but your stats analysis is pretty crap. haha. They have a greater talent pool to draw from. (not to mention that our IB’s came from 5 teams and the AIHL select team came from 2).
I personally think our season is too short anyways so extra games would be nice. The extra games will certainly help draw higher quailty imports to the teams that have qualified for the champions league.
"thirteen":3w2tbt65 wrote:as much as i want the stampede to win, i think the swarm are the best team the nzihl has ever had right now
[/quote:3w2tbt65]they are a more well rounded team then other years however I don’t think they are the best ever. No disrespect intended to them.
ice and inline traditionally don’t get along. Ryan’s point is also valid. At present, Auckland is the only city with a presence by both sports. Christchurch was the only other one where both have been played however we no longer have a venue after the sept quake so inline in the South Island is collapsing. Nelson is the only location with a team.
"kelf6966":3fri4jo2 wrote:4 posts I can see!
[/quote:3fri4jo2]hmmm. I see a couple posts referring to the aussies being at a higher level then us. That statement is true but neither post said it was a bad idea. Two posts said Aus has jumped the gun and by all accounts they have. I see a couple of facts written but not one bitch.
That leaves my post wanting to know about scheduling which is a genuine curiosity. I’ve been involved in both leagues and think its relevant. Imports were the difference in the NZWG so its a potential issue. Existing NZIHL roster rules could also be an issue. I think the set rosters should be changed regardless of what happens with TTCL. Nobody has said it was a bad idea or has bitched about anything.
Let’s not forget that a forum is about exchanging ideas.
"kelf6966":29lc29tq wrote:If you guys actually want the league to grow, then the addition of a Trans Tasman Tournament is the obvious next step.
This has amazing potential:
The access to Import players who are willing to travel in their off season,
Potential Sponsorship opportunities, Media coverage for players, coaches, teams and both leagues.Think we need to focus on the positives on this one, rather than bitching about costs, scheduling etc.
I think the teams that do make it would be stoked for a Weekend in Aussie facing some good opposition.
As to the state of the Ice Blacks vs “The Australian Team”, if we had staked our national team with a line of the NZIHL imports there may have been a different result.
As it was to lose 4 -1 in the final I think we can hold our heads high with the standard of the New Zealand National Team.Stop bitching about it and embrace it as an opportunity to showcase Ice Hockey in both countries.
[/quote:29lc29tq]
Who is bitching?
I want to know the scheduling. If it doesn’t happen during the season when imports are available, then the aihl teams will have a massive advantage. Also in the aihl’s favor is that they can add players at any point during the season. NZIHL can’t replace players without consent from the other teams. If star Johnny has a bad case of the flu that week, tough luck is the case in nz. AIHL teams can bring in any registered player at any time…or atleast that used to be the case.
8-2 loss (4-1, 3-0, 1-1). Third was obviously best period. Possible rematch if nz gets by China tomorrow
"Ryan":18c6y357 wrote:I didn’t understand that line inside the goal business. What’s wrong with the existing red line?Making smaller goals is sensible if it can be done safely. 44″ -> 40″ seems like an annoying amount to shrink it though if it means everyone needs to replace their nets though. 20″ would be nice
” title=”Smiley” /> I guess the goal would risk toppling over if it was that skinny though.[/quote:18c6y357]
With goal mouth camera’s , it is sometimes hard to determine if a puck has fully crossed the goal line or not. Often due to players or their equipment in the way. Having a second line further in the net gives another reference point for reviews. If the puck is touching the back line then it most certainly has fully crossed the goal line. Simple but effective system i think
