Talk:2006 Air New Zealand Cup

Repechage A

Why is Bay of Plenty highlighted in Silver? If Hawkes Bay beats Counties with a bonus point next week they will be tied with BOP. -- PageantUpdater • talk | contribs | esperanza 23:56, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Because if Hawke's Bay beats Counties with a bonus point and ties with Bay of Plenty on 10 points, the first tie-breaker is the outcome of the most recent match between the two teams. Bay of Plenty beat Hawke's Bay just yesterday (22 September 2006) so Bay of Plenty is guaranteed the top spot in Repechage A.

JCIACHNE 12:14, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, JCIACHNE --Leo 22:47, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

No problem --JCIACHNE 22:14, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Round 10

How did Southland get a bonus point? They lost by 10 points and did not score 4 tries...? -- PageantUpdater • talk | contribs | esperanza 03:40, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

I didn't see the game but I believe the end result was 19 - 12 to Northland so Southland only just managed to scrape through a bonus point to take the lead in Repechage B. -- JCIACHNE 08:47, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Bit of a bugger for Northland, missing out by one point on the opportunity to lose gloriously to the mighty Waikato next week. Orpheus 09:37, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree! The score was wrongly reported here at first, that's why I was confused... -- PageantUpdater • talk | contribs | esperanza 10:03, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

I think Southland's last penalty kick came pretty much right at the end of the game, that's probably why it was reported as 19 - 9. Tough luck for Northland, but I reckon the loss-loss situation from the Auckland vs Canterbury game is worse. Auckland lost their top placing, and despite Canterbury's win, they didn't get the bonus point to secure a home quarter-final. Now that's an unfortunate outcome. -- JCIACHNE 10:46, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

I read up about the game, Northland's ruck infringement came after the full time hooter. -- JCIACHNE

21:23, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

oh how frustrating for them! what a strange weekend it was overall.. winning didn't seem to matter :P

Oh, I don't know... Waikato's win was quite useful.

Knockout Structure

The AirNZ Cup is a bit different in this way, the teams aren't guaranteed of their next opponent being one of the two, is it?

According to: "Date Time Home team Score Away team Score - - Highest seed among quarterfinal winners - Lowest seed among quarterfinal winners - - - Second-highest seed among quarterfinal winners - Third-highest seed among quarterfinal winners - "

So, if theoretically. He're an example

Waikato (1) beat Southland (8), North Harbour (3) beat Otago (6) and Bay of Plenty (7) (miraculously) beat Auckland (2). Then it would mean that the BoP would 'shift' to the other side of the knock out and play Waikato, as they (7) would be lower than any of Otago, Harbour, Welly or Canterbury, right? Conversely if Southland beat Waikato, Auckland would move to the 'other' side of the knockout and host them at Eden Park; but, following on from my example, Welly or Canterbury would travel to Albany for their next match, right?

I'm curious though. Is this how other knockouts are structured, but this situation has never occurred?

-- Greaser 20:18, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm not exactly sure what you mean with the hypothetical outcomes, but I think this is how it works:

Once the quarter-final matches are played, the 4 winning teams that remain in the competition are ranked again, then the 1st-placed team hosts the 4th-placed team, and the 2nd-placed team hosts the 3rd-placed team.

-- JCIACHNE 21:27, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Given this structure, it seems a bit silly to have the playoff diagram. Any objections to removing it? Orpheus 02:23, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Actually I meant to recommend removing it last night... it is confusing! -- PageantUpdater • talk | contribs | esperanza 02:51, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, with Otago's victory the playoff diagram is now more harmful than helpful. I've removed it - feel free to revert if anyone disagrees. Orpheus 05:25, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree, when I first saw how it was laid out I thought it could be confusing, removal is the best option. -- JCIACHNE 10:15, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, the playoff diagram was re-added, with the reason "Replaced the playoff tree, as it shows the path the teams took more clearly". I disagree - the playoff tree implies that the winner of the Auckland/BoP match would definitely play the winner of the Wellington/Canterbury match. With the seeding system in place, that's just not true (if the Bay had won, they'd have played Waikato, not Wellington). We should come up with a consensus decision here and then stick to it. Comments? Orpheus 05:49, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

As a note, the 2006 Heartland Championship article doesn't use playoff trees, and it has the same seeding-based system as the Air NZ Cup. Orpheus 05:50, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, and if Southland had beaten Waikato, they'd be playing Auckland, not Otago. I agree, the pathways on the tree are misleading and unnecessary so I reckon get rid of it. A better way to represent it would be first column - Quarter-finals, then underneath you have the teams - 1st vs 8th, 2nd vs 7th, etc listing both their seed ranking and the team name. Then you move to the second column - Semi-finals, and underneath it is (as the situation is now) 1st vs 6th, 2nd vs 4th. Just my 2 cents. -- JCIACHNE 07:29, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Air New Zealand Cup Logo.jpg

I found Image:Air New Zealand Cup Logo.jpg and noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. Someone will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If it was obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self-no-disclaimers}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If there are other files on this page, consider checking that they have specified their source and are tagged properly, too. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 04:50, 27 May 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 04:50, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Air New Zealand Cup Logo.jpg

Image:Air New Zealand Cup Logo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 04:50, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Non-free file problems with File:Air New Zealand Cup.png

File:Air New Zealand Cup.png is currently tagged as non-free and has been identified as possibly not being in compliance with the non-free content policy. For specific information on the problems with the file and how they can be fixed, please check the message at File:Air New Zealand Cup.png. For further questions and comments, please use the non-free content review page. -- Toshio Yamaguchi 13:39, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 2006 Air New Zealand Cup. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140109233046/http://www.itmcup.co.nz/index.cfm?layout=showITMCupNews&newsArticle=4987 to http://www.itmcup.co.nz/index.cfm?layout=showITMCupNews&newsArticle=4987

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 12:59, 18 September 2016 (UTC)