Accusations of Crusaders race based selection: Your thoughts?

02 Jun 2010 08:10p.m.

Joe wrote:

Define a Maori....... Every time someone said they are proud of the Maori roots, aren't they proud of the roots of the other half they belong? Just plain opportunists.

02 Jun 2010 11:00a.m.

jan.. wrote:

Hayden have told by most people to leave the Rugby and vanished before he brings further badluck to the Rugby World Cup..

31 May 2010 07:15p.m.

D morley wrote:

Andy Hayden quotes darkies, Hone Hawera quotes white mother F**kers, whats more offensive? We need neither of these people represinting our country.

30 May 2010 03:50p.m.

yeah right wrote:

crusaders will always be favourites if you have mostly white officials who come out of an era of admitting maori's were excluded because of their ethnicity.. how would it look if the darky teams win the competitions and not many are selected in the national teams.Why is it that most of the age group rep teams are dominated by brown faces but when it comes to higher honours they are rare... you don't have to be a rocket scientist to work out that their is still a lot of racist influences involved. Hayden's comments has highlighted a raw nerve as to some of the realities that many of us brownies have lived, experienced our whole lives. ... at least Hayden has the guts to tell it as it is... Auckland dominated the eighties and the nineties but they were not all selected for the all blacks in one year... crusaders wins the following and almost the whole team become all blacks... have we won anything since??? .. yes!!! a big fat 0000000 !!!!!!

30 May 2010 03:45p.m.

stuart wrote:

well i think haydens right...ya never see mre than 2_3 of them on at any given time unless there injury raverage and havent got there original line up avaliable good on him for standing up and voice,n his oppion

30 May 2010 02:45p.m.

John wrote:

Why no mention of the Maori All Blacks? There is a team with a blatant racist selection process.

30 May 2010 01:34p.m.

nigel wrote:

The Crusaders team does look awfully white! Even if management do not have a race biased mode of selection, one might be forgiven for thinking they did, I am certainly very suspicious. Whatever the selection process we cannot deny the success of the Crusaders overly white team, the most successful in the history of the competition.

30 May 2010 08:42a.m.

AJ wrote:

I see the big slug is now saying that it refers to the Crusaders never recruiting more than 3 'darkies'...hello...a big u turn straight back up his own a**e

29 May 2010 06:56p.m.

RobertM wrote:

Does Andy think the Crusaders have an unfair advantage or is he just like Laidlaw suffering from PC outrage about the success of what he regards as a 'outdated' largely white Rugby team. Just possibly the reason why South Africa and Australia largely win when it matters in modern Rugby is due to the fact there teams are very white and possibly play a more thinking planned game compared with the explosive instinctive game of Pacific Islanders. Also the South African and Australian game has always been planned by professor or lecturer types who play a more ruthless strategy and have always been prepared to switch whole packs, backlines and teams around to match a specific opponent rather than just select the physically best players. But its all relative because Canterbury Crusader Rugby has always been working class brutal and anything but pretty particularly if you remember the Notorious clashes with the Lions in 66,71 and 77 and according to my memory Canterbury lost and were crucified as neathendrals by the British press. The Canterbury players on the 72-73 UK tour were the centre of the hotel wrecking and general mafia thuggery and hey wasn't that Otago player Keith murdoch , white.

29 May 2010 11:33a.m.

Carlos wrote:

They have a winning system. The ABs don't.
South Africa will win the 2011 RWC.