Genius of Cipriani can follow path of Woods and Pietersen

In the jet-lagged sleepless hours, New Zealand TV can be a refuge. Last week, between old episodes of Baywatch and cookery programmes of interest to serial poisoners, they showed staggering sport.

We saw the once-in-a-lifetime Tiger Woods winning the US Open with an amazing display of brilliance and courage (we found out afterwards that he had a broken leg) and also Kevin Pietersen tearing up the coaching manual with sublime, brilliant improvisation. Good on the sport’s authorities for not being so po-faced as to rule his shots illegal. Both men displayed genius upon genius.

Rugby can seem dull by comparison with these staggering deeds. There is, of course, no shame in the ultimate team sport if the strength is in the collective not the individual. But which rugby players threaten to transcend the sport itself, as have Woods and Pietersen, by taking it to another level, by making unique or brilliant personal plays or touches or innovations?

My colleagues threw in some names, such as Gareth Edwards and Dan Carter. I disagreed. I feel that the brilliance of both laid in their extraordinary performance of orthodox skills. David Campese? Yes. He took it to his own personal, even lonely, level.

Is Danny Cipriani next? It’s an intolerable burden to ask a young man to emulate Woods and Pietersen, but he has a shot at it. He has an unorthodox, cheeky, elevated capability. We’ll wait and wonder.

World Cup will be a show without a stage

It has all been said before about the process by which the 2011 World Cup was awarded to New Zealand: the behind-the-scenes deals, the potential overloading of the country’s fragile infrastructure by the incoming thousands and the rather colourless outward appearance and demeanour of rugby here and its grounds.

A little of the concern dissipated last week when one of the chief organisers accepted the very key to New Zealand 2011 – that it will be judged not by the depth of the nation’s ridiculous obsession with the All Blacks, nor by whether the hosts win it or not, but by the warmth of welcome given to outsiders and visitors and the sympathy and support for ALL competing countries.

There is one remaining problem, however, and it will not be solved: the stadiums.

We have only been to Eden Park, Auckland and Lancaster Park, Christchurch on this England trip. The first is a mid-sized and decent ground, the latter is a building site. There is simply no arena here remotely equipped to give the tournament - especially the major matches - the imposing backdrop it deserves, craves and that it had in Australia 03, Wales 99 and South Africa 95, and will have again in 2015 in England. (And please don’t tell me that England should not get the event).

Why on earth were there not enough Kiwis with the energy and foresight to demand - yes demand - that a giant, soaring signature stadium was built in Auckland for the 2011 tournament, for the aspirations of the nation and for the backdrop for the world? The lack of that kind of vision, that statement of intent, will haunt New Zealand up until 2011 and well beyond.