Untitled

edit

Removed the short paragraph in the history section as they were a bizarre collection of unrelated 'facts'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.216.25.110 (talk) 23:24, 4 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Arthur Ollivier

edit

I've written an article about Arthur Ollivier and it appears he was quite an important person for New Zealand cricket. It would probably fair to say that I don't understand cricket at all, so maybe editors interested in cricket history might want to have a look and see whether there's anything of note to add there, or anywhere else for that matter (he was a national selector and instrumental in the purchase of Lancaster Park). Schwede66 20:32, 18 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Cricket in New Zealand. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:51, 14 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit

I’m a New Zealander and I’m a bit perplexed about the opening claim on this article that cricket is the second biggest sport in NZ.

I’ve never had much time for cricket. Granted: That’s just me I’m speaking for, but I’ve never known that many people among social associates & colleagues who were big on cricket. Certainly nothing remotely like the big mainstream fanbase that Rugby enjoys. I never played it outside of PE class at school, but almost all the boys had played rugby at some stage. And I’ve never heard of dozens of young men out there playing cricket like I have for yo7 f men playing club rugby, hockey or soccer. There’s only 6 teams in the 1st class cricket competition in New Zealand! I never really encountered anyone who followed cricket much until I left home and went to ‘varsity and encountered lots of middle class former boys high students. When was the last time cricket games pulled big crowds in NZ? Didn’t they have to shorten test series in NZ to only 2 games because they kept losing money trying to host a proper 3 game series because not that many Kiwis were interested in going along? And one of the few things I know about cricket is that the NZ team is usually pretty useless and never wins anything. I know the NZ sports media bombards us with boring cricket stories every summer but I thought that that was just them being mostly former boys high bores and not having much else to work a story with, it doesn’t mean that everyone is paying attention.

I would assume that something like Netball would be the second most popular sport in NZ, not cricket. Funny how the reference to this claim opens some completely irrelevant tourism page. Maybe it’s “the second biggest sport” in Christchurch or among men who went to all-boys schools, but I really can’t see how it is for most of the country. 123.243.0.176 (talk) 09:57, 18 August 2023 (UTC)Reply