Skip to content
  • Categories
Collapse

The Silver Fern

  • Tipping
  • Team Sheets
  • Highlights
  • Results
    • All Blacks

      Search every All Blacks Test. Filter results by year, opposition, location, venue, city and RWC stage

    • Super Rugby

      Search every Super Rugby since match 1996

    • NPC

      Search NPC results. Only first division matches from 1976-2005. All results from the 14 team competition (2006-present) are included

Chiefs v Blues

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Rugby Matches
chiefsblues
115 Posts 31 Posters 3.1k Views 2 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • M Machpants

    @Dan54 said in Chiefs v Blues:

    @Mr-Fish said in Chiefs v Blues:

    Finlay Christie has (rightfully) copped a lot of criticism on here but Sam Nock's kicking was abysmal on Saturday.

    I agree really , not really a Christie fan, but in general would start him ahead of Nock. I don't get the Nock love , he's ok ,but in I don't think he anything special by any means.
    I do suspect we mark players who are or have been ABs a lot harder? Understand why up to a point, but for some players don't seem to be makred the same.

    The point about Christie is how slow he is to get to and/or clear the ball. The Blues last year were all about fast ball and getting moving close in. This year they're slower but also have gone a long way from last years blueprint. I find it confusing how people are saying 'they haven't evolved their gameplan'. I think that is rubbish, they have gone too far - they are kicking probably twice as much as last year, for example

    P Offline
    P Offline
    pakman
    wrote on last edited by
    #96

    @Machpants said in Chiefs v Blues:

    @Dan54 said in Chiefs v Blues:

    @Mr-Fish said in Chiefs v Blues:

    Finlay Christie has (rightfully) copped a lot of criticism on here but Sam Nock's kicking was abysmal on Saturday.

    I agree really , not really a Christie fan, but in general would start him ahead of Nock. I don't get the Nock love , he's ok ,but in I don't think he anything special by any means.
    I do suspect we mark players who are or have been ABs a lot harder? Understand why up to a point, but for some players don't seem to be makred the same.

    The point about Christie is how slow he is to get to and/or clear the ball. The Blues last year were all about fast ball and getting moving close in. This year they're slower but also have gone a long way from last years blueprint. I find it confusing how people are saying 'they haven't evolved their gameplan'. I think that is rubbish, they have gone too far - they are kicking probably twice as much as last year, for example

    On ARP Bryn Hall mentioned that the stats indicated that Christie was fastest NZ halfback at getting to rucks. After that…

    1 Reply Last reply
    2
    • Dan54D Dan54

      @KiwiMurph said in Chiefs v Blues:

      @Dan54 said in Chiefs v Blues:

      @Mr-Fish said in Chiefs v Blues:

      Finlay Christie has (rightfully) copped a lot of criticism on here but Sam Nock's kicking was abysmal on Saturday.

      I agree really , not really a Christie fan, but in general would start him ahead of Nock. I don't get the Nock love , he's ok ,but in I don't think he anything special by any means.
      I do suspect we mark players who are or have been ABs a lot harder? Understand why up to a point, but for some players don't seem to be makred the same.

      This feels like gaslighting. Christie doesn't get marked hard because he was an All Black.

      The Blues attack when Christie starts looks really poor because he has real issues on attack - he's both a slow and poor decision maker from the breakdown, he has a high error rate and he struggles with messy ball.

      That's not to say Nock is perfect - Nock has issues on defence and his kicking game is weak.

      However - on balance I'd prefer Nock to keep starting. I'm willing to roll with Nock's weaknesses and get the benefit of the attacking shape.

      I not a Blues man, so I don't probably really examine how some of their players go. But just my opinion is that Nock and Plummer are handbrakes on Blues if they trying to play anything but power style they played last year. I also said same about BB, he wasn't Blues'problem in first few games (neither were Nock,Chistie etc) , the problem in first games were forwards, and their ability to support.
      Mind you that's just how I saw it, and as I say I pretty neutral on how Blues go.

      P Offline
      P Offline
      pakman
      wrote on last edited by pakman
      #97

      @Dan54 said in Chiefs v Blues:

      @KiwiMurph said in Chiefs v Blues:

      @Dan54 said in Chiefs v Blues:

      @Mr-Fish said in Chiefs v Blues:

      Finlay Christie has (rightfully) copped a lot of criticism on here but Sam Nock's kicking was abysmal on Saturday.

      I agree really , not really a Christie fan, but in general would start him ahead of Nock. I don't get the Nock love , he's ok ,but in I don't think he anything special by any means.
      I do suspect we mark players who are or have been ABs a lot harder? Understand why up to a point, but for some players don't seem to be makred the same.

      This feels like gaslighting. Christie doesn't get marked hard because he was an All Black.

      The Blues attack when Christie starts looks really poor because he has real issues on attack - he's both a slow and poor decision maker from the breakdown, he has a high error rate and he struggles with messy ball.

      That's not to say Nock is perfect - Nock has issues on defence and his kicking game is weak.

      However - on balance I'd prefer Nock to keep starting. I'm willing to roll with Nock's weaknesses and get the benefit of the attacking shape.

      I not a Blues man, so I don't probably really examine how some of their players go. But just my opinion is that Nock and Plummer are handbrakes on Blues if they trying to play anything but power style they played last year. I also said same about BB, he wasn't Blues'problem in first few games (neither were Nock,Chistie etc) , the problem in first games were forwards, and their ability to support.
      Mind you that's just how I saw it, and as I say I pretty neutral on how Blues go.

      I am an admirer of Harry Plummer as a great asset in the Blues squad. That said, it is obvious that BB and SP have dramatically upped the Blues’s tempo when they’ve been at 10. That has significantly improved the effectiveness of the Blues backs.

      Crazy HorseC Dan54D 2 Replies Last reply
      3
      • P pakman

        @Dan54 said in Chiefs v Blues:

        @KiwiMurph said in Chiefs v Blues:

        @Dan54 said in Chiefs v Blues:

        @Mr-Fish said in Chiefs v Blues:

        Finlay Christie has (rightfully) copped a lot of criticism on here but Sam Nock's kicking was abysmal on Saturday.

        I agree really , not really a Christie fan, but in general would start him ahead of Nock. I don't get the Nock love , he's ok ,but in I don't think he anything special by any means.
        I do suspect we mark players who are or have been ABs a lot harder? Understand why up to a point, but for some players don't seem to be makred the same.

        This feels like gaslighting. Christie doesn't get marked hard because he was an All Black.

        The Blues attack when Christie starts looks really poor because he has real issues on attack - he's both a slow and poor decision maker from the breakdown, he has a high error rate and he struggles with messy ball.

        That's not to say Nock is perfect - Nock has issues on defence and his kicking game is weak.

        However - on balance I'd prefer Nock to keep starting. I'm willing to roll with Nock's weaknesses and get the benefit of the attacking shape.

        I not a Blues man, so I don't probably really examine how some of their players go. But just my opinion is that Nock and Plummer are handbrakes on Blues if they trying to play anything but power style they played last year. I also said same about BB, he wasn't Blues'problem in first few games (neither were Nock,Chistie etc) , the problem in first games were forwards, and their ability to support.
        Mind you that's just how I saw it, and as I say I pretty neutral on how Blues go.

        I am an admirer of Harry Plummer as a great asset in the Blues squad. That said, it is obvious that BB and SP have dramatically upped the Blues’s tempo when they’ve been at 10. That has significantly improved the effectiveness of the Blues backs.

        Crazy HorseC Offline
        Crazy HorseC Offline
        Crazy Horse
        wrote on last edited by
        #98

        @pakman said in Chiefs v Blues:

        @Dan54 said in Chiefs v Blues:

        @KiwiMurph said in Chiefs v Blues:

        @Dan54 said in Chiefs v Blues:

        @Mr-Fish said in Chiefs v Blues:

        Finlay Christie has (rightfully) copped a lot of criticism on here but Sam Nock's kicking was abysmal on Saturday.

        I agree really , not really a Christie fan, but in general would start him ahead of Nock. I don't get the Nock love , he's ok ,but in I don't think he anything special by any means.
        I do suspect we mark players who are or have been ABs a lot harder? Understand why up to a point, but for some players don't seem to be makred the same.

        This feels like gaslighting. Christie doesn't get marked hard because he was an All Black.

        The Blues attack when Christie starts looks really poor because he has real issues on attack - he's both a slow and poor decision maker from the breakdown, he has a high error rate and he struggles with messy ball.

        That's not to say Nock is perfect - Nock has issues on defence and his kicking game is weak.

        However - on balance I'd prefer Nock to keep starting. I'm willing to roll with Nock's weaknesses and get the benefit of the attacking shape.

        I not a Blues man, so I don't probably really examine how some of their players go. But just my opinion is that Nock and Plummer are handbrakes on Blues if they trying to play anything but power style they played last year. I also said same about BB, he wasn't Blues'problem in first few games (neither were Nock,Chistie etc) , the problem in first games were forwards, and their ability to support.
        Mind you that's just how I saw it, and as I say I pretty neutral on how Blues go.

        I am an admirer of Harry Plummer as a great asset in the Blues squad. That said, it is obvious that BB and SP have dramatically upped the Blues’s tempo when they’ve been at 10. That has significantly improved the effectiveness of the Blues backs.

        This might explain why Plummer's AB chances were somewhat limited.

        1 Reply Last reply
        1
        • DuluthD Offline
          DuluthD Offline
          Duluth
          wrote on last edited by
          #99

          He’s playing worse than he has for a few years. Probably checked out a bit

          1 Reply Last reply
          7
          • P pakman

            @Dan54 said in Chiefs v Blues:

            @KiwiMurph said in Chiefs v Blues:

            @Dan54 said in Chiefs v Blues:

            @Mr-Fish said in Chiefs v Blues:

            Finlay Christie has (rightfully) copped a lot of criticism on here but Sam Nock's kicking was abysmal on Saturday.

            I agree really , not really a Christie fan, but in general would start him ahead of Nock. I don't get the Nock love , he's ok ,but in I don't think he anything special by any means.
            I do suspect we mark players who are or have been ABs a lot harder? Understand why up to a point, but for some players don't seem to be makred the same.

            This feels like gaslighting. Christie doesn't get marked hard because he was an All Black.

            The Blues attack when Christie starts looks really poor because he has real issues on attack - he's both a slow and poor decision maker from the breakdown, he has a high error rate and he struggles with messy ball.

            That's not to say Nock is perfect - Nock has issues on defence and his kicking game is weak.

            However - on balance I'd prefer Nock to keep starting. I'm willing to roll with Nock's weaknesses and get the benefit of the attacking shape.

            I not a Blues man, so I don't probably really examine how some of their players go. But just my opinion is that Nock and Plummer are handbrakes on Blues if they trying to play anything but power style they played last year. I also said same about BB, he wasn't Blues'problem in first few games (neither were Nock,Chistie etc) , the problem in first games were forwards, and their ability to support.
            Mind you that's just how I saw it, and as I say I pretty neutral on how Blues go.

            I am an admirer of Harry Plummer as a great asset in the Blues squad. That said, it is obvious that BB and SP have dramatically upped the Blues’s tempo when they’ve been at 10. That has significantly improved the effectiveness of the Blues backs.

            Dan54D Offline
            Dan54D Offline
            Dan54
            wrote on last edited by
            #100

            @pakman said in Chiefs v Blues:

            @Dan54 said in Chiefs v Blues:

            @KiwiMurph said in Chiefs v Blues:

            @Dan54 said in Chiefs v Blues:

            @Mr-Fish said in Chiefs v Blues:

            Finlay Christie has (rightfully) copped a lot of criticism on here but Sam Nock's kicking was abysmal on Saturday.

            I agree really , not really a Christie fan, but in general would start him ahead of Nock. I don't get the Nock love , he's ok ,but in I don't think he anything special by any means.
            I do suspect we mark players who are or have been ABs a lot harder? Understand why up to a point, but for some players don't seem to be makred the same.

            This feels like gaslighting. Christie doesn't get marked hard because he was an All Black.

            The Blues attack when Christie starts looks really poor because he has real issues on attack - he's both a slow and poor decision maker from the breakdown, he has a high error rate and he struggles with messy ball.

            That's not to say Nock is perfect - Nock has issues on defence and his kicking game is weak.

            However - on balance I'd prefer Nock to keep starting. I'm willing to roll with Nock's weaknesses and get the benefit of the attacking shape.

            I not a Blues man, so I don't probably really examine how some of their players go. But just my opinion is that Nock and Plummer are handbrakes on Blues if they trying to play anything but power style they played last year. I also said same about BB, he wasn't Blues'problem in first few games (neither were Nock,Chistie etc) , the problem in first games were forwards, and their ability to support.
            Mind you that's just how I saw it, and as I say I pretty neutral on how Blues go.

            I am an admirer of Harry Plummer as a great asset in the Blues squad. That said, it is obvious that BB and SP have dramatically upped the Blues’s tempo when they’ve been at 10. That has significantly improved the effectiveness of the Blues backs.

            Mate, I always been a Plummer fan, would be in my squad too. Remember he was mainly at 12 for Blues until Perofeta and Sullivan were out last year.
            Not against him, but he not what I would call a creative 10.

            1 Reply Last reply
            1
            • Dan54D Dan54

              @KiwiMurph said in Chiefs v Blues:

              @Dan54 said in Chiefs v Blues:

              @Mr-Fish said in Chiefs v Blues:

              Finlay Christie has (rightfully) copped a lot of criticism on here but Sam Nock's kicking was abysmal on Saturday.

              I agree really , not really a Christie fan, but in general would start him ahead of Nock. I don't get the Nock love , he's ok ,but in I don't think he anything special by any means.
              I do suspect we mark players who are or have been ABs a lot harder? Understand why up to a point, but for some players don't seem to be makred the same.

              This feels like gaslighting. Christie doesn't get marked hard because he was an All Black.

              The Blues attack when Christie starts looks really poor because he has real issues on attack - he's both a slow and poor decision maker from the breakdown, he has a high error rate and he struggles with messy ball.

              That's not to say Nock is perfect - Nock has issues on defence and his kicking game is weak.

              However - on balance I'd prefer Nock to keep starting. I'm willing to roll with Nock's weaknesses and get the benefit of the attacking shape.

              I not a Blues man, so I don't probably really examine how some of their players go. But just my opinion is that Nock and Plummer are handbrakes on Blues if they trying to play anything but power style they played last year. I also said same about BB, he wasn't Blues'problem in first few games (neither were Nock,Chistie etc) , the problem in first games were forwards, and their ability to support.
              Mind you that's just how I saw it, and as I say I pretty neutral on how Blues go.

              KiwiMurphK Offline
              KiwiMurphK Offline
              KiwiMurph
              wrote on last edited by
              #101

              @Dan54 said in Chiefs v Blues:

              But just my opinion is that Nock and Plummer are handbrakes on Blues if they trying to play anything but power style they played last year.

              I can understand the comment regarding Plummer

              I don't understand how Nock is a handbrake and Finlay Christie isn't?

              Dan54D 1 Reply Last reply
              2
              • KiwiMurphK KiwiMurph

                @Dan54 said in Chiefs v Blues:

                But just my opinion is that Nock and Plummer are handbrakes on Blues if they trying to play anything but power style they played last year.

                I can understand the comment regarding Plummer

                I don't understand how Nock is a handbrake and Finlay Christie isn't?

                Dan54D Offline
                Dan54D Offline
                Dan54
                wrote on last edited by
                #102

                @KiwiMurph said in Chiefs v Blues:

                @Dan54 said in Chiefs v Blues:

                But just my opinion is that Nock and Plummer are handbrakes on Blues if they trying to play anything but power style they played last year.

                I can understand the comment regarding Plummer

                I don't understand how Nock is a handbrake and Finlay Christie isn't?

                I not sure Nock is more of a handbrake than Christie, although maybe Christie is a little quicker. I maybe thinking of the Christie/Nock battle being a couple of similar ability 9s, so no sure why only one gets pointed at. Once again, both are capable players at super level, I believe.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • A Offline
                  A Offline
                  ARHS
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #103

                  Nock has a great pass, just not a great tactician or kicker. I don't get the heavy criticism of Christie.
                  I assume that team tactics mean having the collision points in the opposition half, so a lot more kicks by 9. But they need to get contestable to work.

                  TimT 1 Reply Last reply
                  1
                  • A ARHS

                    Nock has a great pass, just not a great tactician or kicker. I don't get the heavy criticism of Christie.
                    I assume that team tactics mean having the collision points in the opposition half, so a lot more kicks by 9. But they need to get contestable to work.

                    TimT Offline
                    TimT Offline
                    Tim
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #104

                    @ARHS said in Chiefs v Blues:

                    Nock has a great pass, just not a great tactician or kicker.

                    Nock has all the skills, but has never been able to execute them. despite excelling at times - the turnover at Eden Park against the Hurricanes last year was a notable example.

                    His passing is excellent, he has sometime been very good to the ruck or poor, same with his box kicking which has been good or poor.

                    A very frustrating player. That was the performance profile that we expected from the Blues for a long time. Reversion to that mean is unacceptable.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    4
                    • M Online
                      M Online
                      Mr Fish
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #105

                      Nock can't kick, Christie can't pass. It's a tough world.

                      A 1 Reply Last reply
                      1
                      • M Mr Fish

                        Nock can't kick, Christie can't pass. It's a tough world.

                        A Offline
                        A Offline
                        African Monkey
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #106

                        @Mr-Fish said in Chiefs v Blues:

                        Nock can't kick, Christie can't pass. It's a tough world.

                        I wouldn't say Nock can't kick. He's got a big box kick. Just tends to overcook his kicks sometimes.

                        taniwharugbyT 1 Reply Last reply
                        1
                        • A African Monkey

                          @Mr-Fish said in Chiefs v Blues:

                          Nock can't kick, Christie can't pass. It's a tough world.

                          I wouldn't say Nock can't kick. He's got a big box kick. Just tends to overcook his kicks sometimes.

                          taniwharugbyT Offline
                          taniwharugbyT Offline
                          taniwharugby
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #107

                          @African-Monkey yea he certainly has a.kicking game, but like most of his game, inconsistent.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          1
                          • nzzpN Online
                            nzzpN Online
                            nzzp
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #108

                            Crikey!

                            https://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/rugby/super-rugby/chiefs-fined-for-conversion-interference-during-super-rugby-pacific-win-over-blues/YUXCQEOT2ZFW5B6RNGHVGXDZWY/

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            2
                            • M Offline
                              M Offline
                              Machpants
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #109

                              That should be a points loss, disgusting

                              nzzpN 1 Reply Last reply
                              4
                              • M Machpants

                                That should be a points loss, disgusting

                                nzzpN Online
                                nzzpN Online
                                nzzp
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #110

                                @Machpants said in Chiefs v Blues:

                                That should be a points loss, disgusting

                                You can't ding the team for that. The individual should lose pitchside privileges for some time though - it's a muppet thing to do... twice!

                                M antipodeanA 2 Replies Last reply
                                1
                                • nzzpN nzzp

                                  @Machpants said in Chiefs v Blues:

                                  That should be a points loss, disgusting

                                  You can't ding the team for that. The individual should lose pitchside privileges for some time though - it's a muppet thing to do... twice!

                                  M Offline
                                  M Offline
                                  Machpants
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #111

                                  @nzzp said in Chiefs v Blues:

                                  @Machpants said in Chiefs v Blues:

                                  That should be a points loss, disgusting

                                  You can't ding the team for that. The individual should lose pitchside privileges for some time though - it's a muppet thing to do... twice!

                                  Disagree, they're part of the team. It affected the game, and it's cheating.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  1
                                  • DuluthD Offline
                                    DuluthD Offline
                                    Duluth
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #112

                                    I looked at the footage. You can't see the incidents because they are showing replays. But you can tell that the trainer had to move a decent distance to get to the ball, particularly the second time

                                    I hope they checked previous matches too

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • YeetyaahY Online
                                      YeetyaahY Online
                                      Yeetyaah
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #113

                                      Some supreme shithousery really. But is what it is and the club has been fined.

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • BonesB Offline
                                        BonesB Offline
                                        Bones
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #114

                                        Dick thing to do and I wouldn't be against it being reclassified as a loss for the chiefs... but I don't really understand players getting rid of the ball post try anyway, so lesson learned on both sides.

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        1
                                        • nzzpN nzzp

                                          @Machpants said in Chiefs v Blues:

                                          That should be a points loss, disgusting

                                          You can't ding the team for that. The individual should lose pitchside privileges for some time though - it's a muppet thing to do... twice!

                                          antipodeanA Offline
                                          antipodeanA Offline
                                          antipodean
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #115

                                          @nzzp said in Chiefs v Blues:

                                          @Machpants said in Chiefs v Blues:

                                          That should be a points loss, disgusting

                                          You can't ding the team for that. The individual should lose pitchside privileges for some time though - it's a muppet thing to do... twice!

                                          The rot starts at the top: “We have co-operated fully with Sanzaar on this matter and accept responsibility for the technical breach and the outcome of this process,” Graafhuis said. “As this is an employment matter, we will not be making any further comment.”

                                          What a great catch-all comment that is as practically everything can be considered an employment matter.

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Search
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Search