Problem season for N.Z. basketball

Press, 25 September 1987, Page 20

Problem season for N.Z. basketball

It has been a year of indifference for basketball in New Zealand, but the sport will bounce back.

At every level, whether it be international, league or club, problems have surfaced.

Basically, the problems were administrative — some people with a lack of experience (and trying to push their own barrow over petty matters) attempting to influence others with a greater knowledge, but with little genuine thought of the sport

Most of the criticism missed the point overlooking the main factor that the depth or insecurity of any business depends on finance. It is an open secret that

basketball, financially, is going through hard times. But what sport isn’t? Sponsorship is drying up, mainly because of the lack of television exposure, something the sport was afforded before this year. Television New Zealand, because of a tightened budget, has become increasingly reluctant to screen sport “live.” Basically, it has been a case of “if you want your sport on the screen you pay for it.”

It has been hard “yakka” for basketball from the start of the year. Television did not even televise tests against Russia and Australia “live.”

This year, the New Zealand Basketball Federa-

tion has found it difficult to meet the bills, what with various overseas and internal tours.

For the men, the pinnacle was the test series against Russia and Australia. New Zealand may have lost all four games but did well, the exception being the last match against Australia when New Zealand got “done” because of a lack of pressure and with the Aussies smarting over an indifferent first match at Timaru. The Australians’ defence at Cowles Stadium in the deciding Oceania Olympic Games qualifying series had to be seen to be believed. It was the big “D2” (defence) to perfection and few New Zealanders ventured into the zone. Outside shots, in the main, proved fruitless and when put up by players of dubious three-point skills, generally landed into the open hands of Australian

By

FRANK DUGGAN

defenders. Little wonder the Australians gave New Zealand a drubbing. After all, they confirmed their air bookings home several days before the Christchurch match.

The Russians played it “cool.” The wins were decisive, smug in a six-nil series win over Australia earlier. “You don’t ruffle them,” said the New Zealand coach, Bob Bishop, of Christchurch, after the first test in Nelson. He aimed for a 20 to 30-point New Zealand deficit in both tests and eventually reached his objective. “When you get them upset with abrasive play, the Russians bring on the “big guns” and you can be slaughtered,” said Mr Bishop. “I didn’t want

New Zealand blood on the floor.” His game plans worked, except he did allow his team the luxury of going all out in the last five minutes.

Not so against Australia.

An excellent first test at Timaru turned sour in Christchurch when the visitors put New Zealand in its place. As one Australian player said before the deciding test, “you b... have beaten us in everything this year, but not this time.” New Zealand was rarely in the game, mainly throwing the ball from the backline after Australia had scored. In November New Zealand embarks on an exhausting 12-match tour of the United States, noted more for the mileage over

two weeks than anything else. It is not the best New Zealand team because several top players have pulled out because of other commitments. Realistically, and to contain some measure of the federation’s expense, it would have been better to bypass the tour. The league scene was no better than usual. Team and player disputes generally dominated the headlines, but this was mainly the domain of North Island teams, particularly Palmerston North which carried on a vendetta with the federation over the availability, or otherwise, of its American guard, Tyrone Brown. At great expense, the federation won its case, but it still left a sour taste in many mouths. Then a couple of American importations got into trouble, one for a garage robbery in Auck-

land and another last week in the South Island for alleged non-payment of telephone bills. The Canterbury league team, the 1986 champion, had highs and lows in its challenge to retain the title. To eventually finish runner-up was an achievement in itself, but it should have won. It was too inconsistent, although again it finished top qualifier. Inconsistency was rampant in the final against Saints (Wellington), a match it had won midway through the second half and then threw away. While Saints delved into every corner, Canterbury gave the impression of sitting on its that everything would come right in the end.

It didn’t and then the knives were out looking for a scapegoat. The cut went to Angelo Hill last week-end. His contract

has .not been renewed. But a lot of people have got short memories. He may not have played well in the final, but he was a major influence in getting Canterbury to the Wellington finals. Hill is not the easiest of people to get along with, but at a peak, has a playing standard equal to the best in this country.

Canterbury faces another difficult year in 1988. As yet it has no sponsor and if one is not forthcoming one suggestion is that it forms itself into a company, with the Canterbury association holding 51 per cent of the shares. Another idea is that the public be asked for subscriptions to help the team. This hand-to-mouth attitude does little for team morale. It will need all the help it can get when it embarks on another league season.