Christchurch quake won't ruin Rugby World Cup

Jerry, of course he can, but in written text among other comments that make perfect sense, and with no suggestion otherwise, it's not clear to me that that comment was a joke. Spiro has set me straight below, but a simple "Sneddon joked" would have made all the difference to the interpretation..

Spiro, thanks for this, it's a shame that wasn't made clear in the article. Viewed as it is there, and in amongst other comments that make perfect sense, it just seemed a strange thing to say even if it were true. That all said, the commitments being given to the re-development of Christchurch are very encouraging, and indeed it will be interesting to watch the city's recovery over the next ten years or so. It's a shame the RWC games had to be rescheduled, though perfectly understandable, as I'm sure hosting the Cup would have been massive for the region, to show it's "back in business" as Queensland is currently showing...

Brett, Martin Snedden said it as an aside, a sort of joke. That was the way it was taken by the journalists who were present. The point is that this did NOT happen after RWC 2007. I think, or to this may be putting an unduly smart interpretation on what happened, that the NZRU thought about how Sir Clive Woodward won a RWC tournament on his second attempt. So Henry and Co were given their second chance. Of course, there will be no third chance if they don't win in RWC 2011. This was the obvious point that Snedden was making. There was one other aspect of the presentation that impressed me. It is clear that the organisers have learnt from the RWC 2007 and, especially, RWC 2003, both most successful tournaments. The planning appears to be impressively detailed and ahead of the curve. Snedden pointed out, for instance, that they were able to take a proper amount of time before announcing that Christchurch had to miss out on hosting games because they were AHEAD of schedule up to that time in their planning. The new enclosed stadium at Dunedin is part of this ahead of schedule aspect of the preparation. The stadium is a rugby-only ground. Enclosed with a roof that allows the sun to get on to the grass. The grass is part natural and part artificial. The turf will be brilliant. And the stadium is a great asset to Dunedin as it is close to the centre of town and is right by the university. England will play Argentina at the stadium and I believe this will be a stand-out match in an outstanding venue.

God's sake, it's just a joke. Guy can't have a sense of humour?

PHB, I know who it is, and the extent of his influence, and Thurl, I fully understand the context in which the comment was made, but that still doesn't explain why the comment would be made. The fact he has nothing to do with the NZRU makes the comments all the more bewildering to me. He'd just finished telling people not to just focus on the ABs and enjoy the Cup for the event it is, yet he himself is already laying blame should the ABs lose?!?

I think they have missed the point of Martins comment which was about how seldom we can host the world cup as opposed to how regularly we can compete for the trophy

Hi Brett, this is Martin Snedden the CEO of org organising the cup - nothing to do with the NZRU or the rugby establishment. He has no influence over what hapens to the coaches pre or post world cup.

Good post, ABF...& I agree 100% with the sentiment. Even though we here in Oz have to compete with a bunch of other codes, the 2003 RWC was certainly a fantastic event that was well supported at local community level all around the country. & to take your point re the USA v Russia game a little further, of all the games I saw live at the 03 Cup my absolute favorite was the USA v Japan up in Gosford. Outstanding local support, a packed stadium (ok, it only holds 20k, but still), & a great game between 2 very close rivals made for one of the best experiences of watching rugby I've ever seen.

Having a look at the Crusaders play at venues like Timaru and Nelson has given me an insight into what the WC will be like. Granted, the stadiums will be smaller and not like the European and Australian tournaments. A lot more people will not be able to watch their particular game (ouch!!) but what it lacks in logistical capability, I believe it will compensate for in atmosphere, both on and off field. I'm hoping that the smaller teams in particular will benefit from what will be a total rugby experience. For a change, players from the likes of Russia, Georgia and even USA will get a taste of what it feels like to be a sports star in ways they can't experience back home due to the popularity of soccer. (I point to the excitement building over the Russia-US game as an example). Hopefully that will rejuvenate their passion for the game and they can go home and spread the good word! Then there's the fact that this will arguably be the first RWC to be held in a country where RU is the dominant national sport (SA has to share the stage with soccer); where it doesn't have to compete with soccer. NZ is a small country and its capacity is constrained but that also means RWC atmosphere will reverbrate from north to south and back again. Transport will be easier to arrange and the country is still underdeveloped enough to escape the RWC madness, if need be. Looking forward (if mother nature will only behave). I may be biased. :-)

I know this is a bit of a long bow, Brett, but knowing certain personalities sometimes negative comments (like this one), spurs them along a bit. This probably wasn't the case here, however, at times to say something like 'don't even consider that, you're not at that standard' can equate to 'is that so, well, I'll show you'...and in some circumstances, they do. The old reverse psychology. This was probably the furthermost thing from his mind, in this case:) Just a loose, but 'matter of fact' comment.

I agree completely Cattledog (and Sam), and I understand he most likely is speaking the truth, but it's just another case where I find myself wondering why that comment would be made publicly, even if it IS the plan?!? What does saying a comment like that achieve??

Extraordinary, yes, but actually stating reality...yes. Understand your sentiment, Brett, and administrators have to be a little wary about what gets said, but if there's anybody who believes what he said wouldn't be the case, they are either on drugs or another planet. Quite frankly, I'm sick of administrators, politicians, bureaucrats etc saying one thing whilst firmly believing something else. A bit of honesty goes a long way in gaining support. He only stated what everyone knows would be the obvious outcome...and Henry would know it as well:)

It's New Zealand Brett - there is really no problem with someone saying that!

Did he really say "If we don’t win, we’ll get rid of the coaches and get another chance in 2015"?? What an extraordinary comment from an administrator!!

Martin Snedden's description of the devastation of Christchurch after the February 22 earthquake, the second shake, was very moving. The city,especially its heart around the famous square, is out of action for over a year. 10,000 houses in Christchurch, many thousands of them around the stadium, will have to be demolished. 60,000 people have left Christchurch, many of them never to return. The stadium suffered from liquefaction, water rising irresistibly to the surface, turning grass into swirling mud. The feeling was that everything being equal the field and stadium could be put right in time for for the RWC tournament. But there would be no leeway for something going wrong. This suggests to me that next year the Crusaders will play at the stadium for their home games. The other statistic that was interesting is that the RWC organisers believe that up to 85,000 people will visit New Zealand for the tournament. This is up on the earlier estimations made before the earthquakes. I have no doubt that, despite everything being thrown at them by the fates, New Zealand is going to turn on a memorable RWC tournament.