Rugby World Cup Opening Ceremony

35 comments on “Rugby World Cup Opening Ceremony ”

• Comments are now closed

1. ianmac 1

   13 November 2010 at 10:03 am

   It must be OK whatever is decided, because McCulley has the ultimate power, and may not be questioned. He has a royal decree which makes any questioning of his role, treasonable. Off with yer head!
2. Sean Brooks 2

   13 November 2010 at 10:30 am

   Peter Jaskson doesnt owe the government of New Zealand anything. Why the fuck would he want to direct a opening cermony of a third rate sport, that no one outside our country gives a shit about, despite all the BS we get from the media, the government and the rugby loving public.
   • felix 2.1

     13 November 2010 at 10:56 am

     He doesn’t seem to have any trouble taking our money to make 3rd-rate movies though.
     • Sean Brooks 2.1.1

       13 November 2010 at 11:01 am

       Third rate movies????

       His movies may be hollywood, but they arent third rate.
       • felix 2.1.1.1

         13 November 2010 at 11:03 am

         Matter of opinion I suppose. I haven’t enjoyed much of his work since Heavenly Creatures.
         • freedom 2.1.1.1.1

           14 November 2010 at 9:16 am

           Felix, did you not see The Lovely Bones?
           • The Voice of Reason 2.1.1.1.1.1

             14 November 2010 at 9:38 am

             Roger Ebert’s seen it, freedom, and he reckons it’s all Jackson’s fault:

             http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100113/REVIEWS/100119992/1023
       • Draco T Bastard 2.1.1.2

         13 November 2010 at 12:08 pm

         Third rate seems to be a good description of TLotR. Long winded and boring is another good description. Of course, so were the books.
         • The Voice of Reason 2.1.1.2.1

           13 November 2010 at 12:31 pm

           I’m sure one of the reasons for Jackson’s pompous over-reaction to the AE request for a meeting is that it is many, many years since anyone has had the guts to say anything but yes to him. I appreciate that the LOTR needed many hours of screen time to do the story justice, but King Kong? 3 hours of bum numbing boredom in the cinema and even longer on the DVD.
   • bbfloyd 2.2

     13 November 2010 at 12:02 pm

     peter jackson owes the people of NZ for being part of warner bros raid on our wallets, and for helping them to make us look like a bunch of yokels to the rest of the world.
   • Descendant Of Smith 2.3

     13 November 2010 at 1:56 pm

     “media, the government and the rugby loving public”

     That’s a lot of people that like rugby. I venture there’s more people like it that even remotely care about your opinion.

     There’s plenty of sports that I don’t like but I don’t feel the need to criticise others for playing or liking them or denigrate the sport in any way.

     Your comments are both intolerant and ignorant. The bullshit doesn’t come from the rugby public – it certainly does come from the anti-rugby brigade who can’t seem to get over the fact that it’s popular and we are good at it.

     You might as well go to the US and tell them that gridiron is a second rate sport cause no-one else plays it – or you could just pee into the wind for all the good it will do you.
3. Nick C 3

   13 November 2010 at 10:31 am

   *cough*XENOPHOBIA*cough*
   • felix 3.1

     13 November 2010 at 10:55 am

     It’s xenophobic to want some of the money we’re spending on this ungodly piss-up to circulate in our own economy?

     Fuck it then, why bother hosting at all? We could just pay some other country to host it for us.
     • Nick C 3.1.1

       13 November 2010 at 12:55 pm

       The post wasnt so much suggesting that, as that kiwis are somehow more talented and creative than Australians and therefore deserve the contract. I’m not going to comment on who deserves the contract because I dont know, but I dont think we should nessesarily rule out an Australian company having more expertise and being able to do a better job than a New Zealand company. To do so is xenophobic.

       As for the idea that hiring a New Zealand company will mean there is more money circulating in our economy: like so many commentors on this blog you dont know the first thing about trade. Watch this video from 1 minute in and you might learn something: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0pl_FXt0eM
       • Tigger 3.1.1.1

         13 November 2010 at 6:12 pm

         Nick – the point here is that this is our event and therefore, as hosts, surely we want it to best reflect our people, our culture, our place. Can someone from overseas do that? No. The Aussies would never hire a Kiwi-based company for their ceremony but I bet you wouldn’t call them xenophobes, but nationalistic.
       • Bunji 3.1.1.2

         13 November 2010 at 10:19 pm

         You spin it how you like Nick, but I’m not really trying to say that we are God’s chosen race, uber alles. But we have people talented enough to do the job, and it’s our show, so we should put it on.

         And I have no trouble favouring our country over others. Why support someone else’s economy in preference to New Zealanders? I don’t think anyone is going to trade with us less because we support our own World Cup…
       • felix 3.1.1.3

         14 November 2010 at 12:48 am

         I’m not going to watch that but I assume it’s the same old Friedman clip you get all your lines from.

         Care to address the question in your own words rather than just hinting that your god has already answered it?
         • Nick C 3.1.1.3.1

           14 November 2010 at 1:43 pm

           @ Felix and Bunji: Here is how trade works.

           1) We import goods and services from overseas (in this case an $8million opening ceremony) with New Zealand dollars because thats the money that we have.
           2) The Australian company doesnt want the $NZ, it wants Australian dollars. So it sells the $NZ on the foriegn exchange market.
           3) Whoever buys those $NZ wants them to buy goods in NZ, as thats the only place that $NZ will buy anything. This is an export.

           So basically in order for export industries to bring money into our economy it is nessesary for imports to take money out of our economy, and vise versa. Basically this means that we dont lose any jobs or money from trade, we just have those jobs and money concentrated in different industries. These tend to be industries that we have a comparitive advantage in, which means we achieve a more efficient allocation of resourses.
           • Bunji 3.1.1.3.1.1

             14 November 2010 at 8:41 pm

             Or, they could use the $NZ to buy NZ companies. And next time someone spent NZ$ they might get some slice of that pie as well, instead of us. Before you know it, we have a ballooning current account deficit and all our wealth being repatriated overseas… oop, that’s already happened. Bye-bye profits, enjoy your trip to Australia.

             Also, which industries do we have a comparative advantage in? Dairy? We’re already doing too much of that, to the environment’s harm.
             What do we want to get a comparative advantage in, because they’re good earners? Creative industries? How better to advertise that than by showing it off when the world is watching you put on an event…
   • bbfloyd 3.2

     13 November 2010 at 11:36 am

     very weak Nick… very weak… another pathetic attempt from the apologists from the right… it must be true that you guys have no imaginations if all you can do is repeat buzzwords ad nausium.
4. Robert Atack 4

   13 November 2010 at 11:08 am

   CAMPAIGN, “WORLD CUP DON’T COME”

   Our campaign to stop the madness of a country pretending to have some conern for climate change while working hard to get many tourists to fly the world, burning precious oil and producing greenhouse gases, to watch a game of rubgy is though too “confrontational by many environmental groups. We have provided an article for the ECO paper, ECOlink. This can be viewed on http://www.ibwswrc.blogspot.com/.
   • Sean Brooks 4.1

     13 November 2010 at 11:24 am

     As much as I cant stand the sport of rugby, I wouldnt try to sign anything that would stop it coming.
5. Tiger Mountain 5

   13 November 2010 at 1:00 pm

   Comprador capitalist is a fitting term for McCully and Lord Jackson. They are administering certain features of the NZ economy on behalf of corporations that then take the money and run. The RWC will be a good pressure point to stick it to some of these selfish buggers, I agree with UNITE-$15 per hour minimum rate for all hospitality workers during the cup.
6. pollywog 6

   13 November 2010 at 2:01 pm

   so was there a tender process for applicants to submit their proposals ?

   i wonder if Mike Mizrahi put one in and got passed over for pissing McCully off so much over the shed ten/party central giant maggot on Auckland’s waterfront ?
   • handle 6.1

     13 November 2010 at 2:17 pm

     Mizrahi would do a fantastic job of it, true
7. Irascible 7

   13 November 2010 at 3:24 pm

   I don’t see any real problem here. The “All Blacks” is a brand owned by a German company, adidas, who contract the brand to a subsiduary company, the NZRFU, to manage and take risks in New Zealand. The other “teams” attending the RWC are merely brands associated with other clothing and other companies rather than real representatives of the countries they purport to represent.
   For McCully, who doesn’t believe in NZ anyway, to give the opening ceremony to another overseas company is in keeping with the whole fiasco.
8. Treetop 8

   13 November 2010 at 3:39 pm

   Perhaps Jackson can direct the drunks in the grandstand. He might get a Mexican wave out of them, if this is too ambitious he could make a movie of how NZders handle alcohol at the rugby.
9. Joachim's 9

   13 November 2010 at 11:12 pm

   “As for the idea that hiring a New Zealand company will mean there is more money circulating in our economy: like so many commentors on this blog you dont know the first thing about trade.”

   If hard currency is going out of NZ its not staying in NZ = bad for our citizens, good for another country’s citizens.
10. Carol 10

    14 November 2010 at 6:40 am

    Isn’t it time people started cuttting back on opening ceremonies? I can’t remember the last time I watched one – for the Olympics, Comm Games FIFA world cup etc. They are just pissing contests where each country tries to out do the other. And they seem to have escalated the excess during neoliberal times. Why not do something different? Like a big outdoor music gig with a range of NZ music talent?
11. ak 11

    14 November 2010 at 8:49 am

    anyhoo, who gives the slightest fat rat’s about the apartheid kick ‘n clap game when you’re world champs in the real game…..beats me how anyone can ever watch elitist ra-ra again after watching a single game of league – let alone last night’s classic.
    • The Voice of Reason 11.1

      14 November 2010 at 10:41 am

      Too right, ak. World and Four Nations Champions and what does Stuff lead with this morning? The AB’s win against some lacklustre European team. Bugger Graeme Henry, if winning things is the bottom line, then the best coach in NZ is clearly Stephen Kearney.
12. Sean Brooks 12

    14 November 2010 at 10:15 am

    ak

    Agree, go the kiwis!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
13. Sean Brooks 13

    14 November 2010 at 2:43 pm

    Yes, there has been a big push by rugby union people and the New Zealand sport media to say Richie McCaw and Henry should get nominated at the halbergs, I wonder if those same media people will push for Kernary and the kiwis?

Links to post

1. The Standard: posted on 7 November 2010 at 4:59 pm
2. The Standard: posted on 12 November 2010 at 7:11 pm

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS