Halberg judges defend All Whites

All Whites hold their Team of the Year and overall Halberg Award. Photo / Getty Images

Halberg Awards judge Jayne Kiely said she was saddened by Dick Tayler's decision to quit the judging panel because the All Whites won the supreme award last night.

Earlier today Tayler publicly attacked the choice of the All Whites as winners of the Halberg Award and said he would resign from the judging panel.

Tayler, who himself took away the Halberg Award in 1974 after his thrilling victory in the 10,000 metres at the Christchurch Commonwealth Games, didn't mince his words when revealing what he thought of his fellow judges' decision to plump for the All Whites.

"They didn't get my vote and they were well away from it," he told Radio Live.

"I'm absolutely irate, almost speechless."

Former athlete Kiely said she admires Tayler but was saddened by his move to quit the judging panel.

"It's sad because Dick is obviously a well-respected guy and he's an athlete that I've always admired but I guess he's entitled to do what he wants to do.

"It's a surprise but I guess he's got to stand up for what he believes in," she said.

Kiely said she trusts the current voting format which saw the All Whites win three awards last night - team of the year, coach of the year and the supreme award.

The side also won an award for best moment for Winston Reid's goal against Slovakia, which was the only category voted for by the public.

"...there's 28 judges so you'd think with the spread of sport that everyone is representing, and the media is representing, you'd think you would get a good fair overview of the whole thing," she said.

"As I judge I take my responsibilities very seriously and do a lot of research. We get given a lot of information and I'm very careful at who I pick and what I choose."

Tayler told Radio Live that he needed to apologise to listeners and said he would notify the award organisers of his resignation today, "because I just don't want to be associated with the way the whole thing was handled".

He had presumed that what most of the 28 judges would have looked at were sports people who had either won things or had "been right up there".

"Unfortunately for football people who care about the All Whites, they performed reasonably well in the World Cup, but they didn't win anything," he said.

"So for me, it's a complete no-no."

Former Black Cap and commentator Mark Richardson was one of the judges who voted for the All Whites.

The team's unbeaten record at the FIFA World Cup, including a draw against then world champions Italy, was exceptional because it was achieved in a massive world tournament where they were rank outsiders, he said.

"They just punched so far above their weight.

"What they achieved was in the biggest sporting event in the world outside the Olympics. Football is the world's biggest sport, hands down. I think you can say they were the outstanding sporting performers of the year."

Richardson said the All Blacks, whose season featured only one close loss to the Wallabies, were also a strong contender for the award.

But they did not have the same underdog factor as the All Whites, he said.

"I don't think what the All Blacks achieved was as remarkable.

"The All Blacks are the best in the world. That's the benchmark they've set for themselves. For them to be the team of the year they have to perform above and beyond what is their own benchmark."

He said the Halberg awards are a "fantastic" event for the intense discussion and debate they provoke every year.

The topic has provided plenty of discussion today with Herald readers having their say on the issue as the age-old rugby vs soccer debate took off.

"The All Whites shouldn't have even been there," said Viv Courtis. "Giving them the team award is an insult to all the sports men and women who actually won something - not get knocked out of the first round of a multi-round competition."

Don agreed. "I don't know how a team that didn't win anything can scoop the awards. I think they did extremely well in a world event, but to win the awards, no."

But Bill Wilson said: "Of course the All Whites should have won it and it would have been idiotic for anything else. The World Cup is played in over 190 countries when Rugby at best is 20 with 10 of them, Rugby being a very minority sport. To be at the World Cup was great but to get three results, especially against the reigning World Champs will always be special."

Andrew Mulligan, who hosted the Halberg Awards last night, also backs the voting process and says the public just need to be made aware of the voting criteria.

"I think that the problem is that there's no set criteria that everybody's aware of but that's what the 28 panel members get sent and they also get sent a comprehensive blurb of why they're finalists. They don't just punch in some numbers and send it off to deliberate.

"I can understand why today people are getting up in arms about it. It sort of diminishes what the All Whites have achieved. Sure they didn't win but they captured the public's imagination and they were the team of the year last year for New Zealanders."

- Herald online / NZPA