Really disappointed in that game from Wellington. Enough chances but couldn't finish.
Love I thought played poorly. Similar to the Canes semi against the Chiefs. His run or kick decision making is often off. Hopefully learns from it as his aerial and running game is very good.
Not normally one to mention the ref but gee he was poor first half.
@Dan54 How about - if you haven't had a challenge for five years, you automatically get the first challenge of the NPC season.
In a supposedly professional competition, where the Shield is one of the biggest money-spinners it is grossly negligent of NZ Rugby to allow teams to go for a decade without a challenge.
@Chris-B Yep-Nah mate, means you change the NPC etc. I understand your desire mate, but we have changed enough shit without stuffing the Shield around. You will then get argument that if more than one team haven't had a challenge for 5 years etc etc. There is no perfect way of doing it, and we will agree to disagree. The shield concept was never meant to be about sharing it around.
@Dan54 I wonder if you'd be so relaxed if Taranaki didn't get a challenge for the next 10 years?
Next one in 2034.
What I'm suggesting is a pretty minor and easily implemented change.
And the simple fact is that it is not by chance that Ta$man and Auckland missed so many years.
In the years that the Shield bounced around the Championship - and with Razor's Canterbury winning the Premiership almost every year - the selection of crossover games meant Canterbury always picked the Shield holder - and the Shield holders always picked the weakest Premiership teams possible. Teams like Waikato got regularly rewarded for losing - Ta$man and Auckland got punished for being good.
I don't think it's outrageous to suggest that you perhaps put all teams into a hat, weighted by time since last challenge, and then randomly draw to determine order of challenges.
Of course, as soon as the shield is lost it goes out the window until the off season, but would at least mean the teams who've gone the longest without a challenge have the highest chance of first crack in the new season.
Bloody hell the Invitational XV hold the Shield for one challenge and @Chris-B appoints himself the RS commissioner. 
I think this is accurate
Aucklands record shield reign - 2926 days
Days in between challenges this time - 3295 days
@Chris-B
Also Auckland had a five year gap before their last challenge. So it's one challenge in 14 years
Unless every PU plays all the other unions each year you are always at the mercy of the draw, and the schedule. Even putting the RS aside, it's not like there is an even spread of home and away games between the same PUs over the last decade either (e.g., Northland played in Hamilton in a regular season game this year for the first time since 2013).
@Chris-B said in Ta$man vs Wellington (RS):
@Dan54 I wonder if you'd be so relaxed if Taranaki didn't get a challenge for the next 10 years?
Next one in 2034.
What I'm suggesting is a pretty minor and easily implemented change.
And the simple fact is that it is not by chance that Ta$man and Auckland missed so many years.
In the years that the Shield bounced around the Championship - and with Razor's Canterbury winning the Premiership almost every year - the selection of crossover games meant Canterbury always picked the Shield holder - and the Shield holders always picked the weakest Premiership teams possible. Teams like Waikato got regularly rewarded for losing - Ta$man and Auckland got punished for being good.
Mate I lived in Horowhenua for many years without a shield challenge, and never thought anything of it. And tell me are only the top teams allowed to challenge? The fact is what makes the shield special is it's history etc. As for the cossover games, it all depends where you end up on the table, the teams don't select them. Ta$man can't moan, they won the shield within 18 years of being formed! Stuff any idea of handing it around so we all get a share, the shield will lose it's gloss within 5 years!
Isn't the current system (at the mercy of the draw) a lot more palatable than situations pre-NPC when some provinces would pick and choose their challengers? I can't remember which province it was that was accused of overly protecting the shield through strategic selection of challengers, but there was one.
The Ranfurly Shield is full of quirks - the way one team might get three challenges in a season (North Harbour I think one year) while another might not get a challenge for nine like Ta$man is just another quirk. If the holder gets toppled, the butterfly effect might mean the above scenarios get flipped on their head and Ta$man could have ended up with three challenges next year (if the shield had changed hands this year). As Bruce Hornsby sings, that's just the way it is.
I'm a bit surprised how quickly @Chris-B has turned into Grant Dalton. Looking forward to Ta$man taking any future defences to Barcelona.
@Duluth said in Ta$man vs Wellington (RS):
@Chris-B
Also Auckland had a five year gap before their last challenge. So it's one challenge in 14 years
I was quite enjoying seeing Auckland miss out on challenges year after year, now we actually have one!
@Smudge said in Ta$man vs Wellington (RS):
Isn't the current system (at the mercy of the draw) a lot more palatable than situations pre-NPC when some provinces would pick and choose their challengers? I can't remember which province it was that was accused of overly protecting the shield through strategic selection of challengers, but there was one.
The Ranfurly Shield is full of quirks - the way one team might get three challenges in a season (North Harbour I think one year) while another might not get a challenge for nine like Ta$man is just another quirk. If the holder gets toppled, the butterfly effect might mean the above scenarios get flipped on their head and Ta$man could have ended up with three challenges next year (if the shield had changed hands this year). As Bruce Hornsby sings, that's just the way it is.
I'm a bit surprised how quickly @Chris-B has turned into Grant Dalton. Looking forward to Ta$man taking any future defences to Barcelona.
Yeah, until very very recently it was up to the holder to select challengers.
IIRC your end of the country conspired to keep it down there floating between Otago and Southland for a number of years
@Dan54 said in Ta$man vs Wellington (RS):
@Chris-B said in Ta$man vs Wellington (RS):
Mate I lived in Horowhenua for many years without a shield challenge, and never thought anything of it. And tell me are only the top teams allowed to challenge? The fact is what makes the shield special is it's history etc. As for the cossover games, it all depends where you end up on the table, the teams don't select them. Ta$man can't moan, they won the shield within 18 years of being formed! Stuff any idea of handing it around so we all get a share, the shield will lose it's gloss within 5 years!
That's part of the problem - the teams did select them! And it happened exactly as I wrote above - I railed about it here at the time. The Championship Shield holders picked the weakest Premiership teams. As usual NZR was asleep at the wheel - probably didn't notice and if they did they certainly didn't care.
Frankly - it would take a minor change to avoid teams having these long gaps so I think your arguments are pretty weak.
Right now, most teenagers in Auckland - the largest union - won't recall their team ever having had a challenge. I really fail to see how this is remotely a good thing.
If it were up to me, Auckland would get a guaranteed three-match tour of whichever province holds the Ranfurly Shield every year (which midweek games against club sides of course).
