Prepare to see a new billboard appear soon.

"There's not much top-quality sport on at the moment. Yeah right."

What an extraordinary feast we sports lovers have been served up in the last few weeks or so!

The Super 14 Finals. The All Blacks squad announced. The start of the Lions tour in South Africa. The Wallabies/Barbarians game. The French Tennis Open. Roger Federer. The State of Origin. The NRL. The pathetic Warriors. The Twenty/20 World Cup. The Memorial golf tournament. Tiger Woods. The NBA.

Such a wonderful array to have become immersed in, I feel compelled to cover three aspects to have emerged from the events of late.

RICHIE MCCAW. WHAT'S AHEAD?

Perhaps because it all seems so inconceivable, the story came and went without much reaction.

I'm referring to the comment that Richie McCaw made only a few days ago when discussing his latest injury that he wouldn't be adverse at all to changing positions if that's what the selectors required.

Hello? How odd on the face of it to have arguably the greatest openside ever contemplating such a bizarre notion.

But after researching the topic a little more, I've discovered the irrefutable evidence that has escaped me until now.

In fact, this possibility has been bubbling away on Graham Henry's mind since the end of the 2007 World Cup disaster.

Even that far back, Henry said that moving the All Black captain from No.7 to No.6 was a viable option to ensure he would play more tests.

"No. 7 is the most demanding position in the game physically. It takes Richie three to four days to recover from a test and that's huge," said Henry.

So given McCaw has had three major injury breaks since then and given his recent remarks, obviously this is an ongoing issue between the megastar and his boss.

At this stage, I really have no strong feelings either way, except to say that if McCaw's battered body continues to undergo regularly injured, maybe there is no choice in the lead-up to the 2011 World Cup.

What are your thoughts? Please inform and enlighten me as to what's ahead for Richie?

THE WARRIORS. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.

I have to give the Warriors praise where praise is due.

They really are one of the few sports clubs I can think of who have gone so damn close to prove that the supposed impossible is true.

That being that you can fool most of the people most of the time.

From where I see it, that's because I reckon most high-profile critics, commentators and personalities surrounding the Warriors rarely if ever, take off their cheerleading uniforms and hand out criticism on occasion instead of the plethora of excuses and accusations of disloyalty that they regularly dish out.

Excuses I've heard of late have ranged from "the new, two-referee system doesn't suit the Warriors' game because it has sped up the overall tournament" to "the Warriors just need time to blend in some youth alongside the more experienced players."

And then there's the perennial, dumb accusation when any criticism from Warriors' fans pops up. "Are you for them or against them?" the cheerleaders ask.

These excuse and accusation merchants also trot out an incessant stream of statistics to support their cheerleading like "did you know the Warriors have to travel an average of approximately 28,000 kilometres compared to an average of 7,500 kilometres for the Roosters etc. etc?"

Excuses. Accusations. Statistics. They never stop and only serve to wrap the Warriors in an undeserved and false layer of cotton wool.

Here's a statistic I've got for them. After the fourteen years since their inception, the Warriors have finished in an average position of 9th after every minor premiership. That's a fail mark.

So when the hell will they get a halves combination that really rates? Why did reappointing Stacey Jones become a decision where the heart ruled the head? And is Steven Price still worth his big salary?

Surely it's time to exterminate the half-truths that the Warriors continue to hide behind?

TWENTY20 RULES. OK?

There are still undoubtedly some cricket fans intent on burying their heads in the sand whenever the topic of the Twenty20 game emerges.

But just as certain is the fact that they are not nearly as prolific as they were when the last World Cup took place.

That's because most of the diehard haters of change amongst them have now realised that the Twenty20 phenomenon fits the times, is a major money-spinner and despite the nonsense that critics have put forth, quality shot-making, accurate bowling and superior fielding are essential to winning.

Sure it's fast food cricket. That's why it will never challenge the sanctity of the ultimate true-blue game, test cricket.

But whether or not it displaces the more-established, stodgier 50 overs version is very much up in the air.

One thing I do know is that the two week duration of the Twenty20 game is a far more attractive proposition that the seemingly never-ending, dull nature of the 50 overs, 2007 World Cup marathon in the West Indies.

I'll end on a foot-note. In brief, the world's greatest golfer ever, Tiger Woods and the world's greatest tennis player ever, Roger Federer are back where they belong. At the top of their magnificent powers. All hail.

Your opinions of any or all of the above please.