Chiefs v Blues
-
@Kirwan
I don't get that though? It's a damn daft thing to say 'why does the team get penalised for action on one person'(sic)It would not surprise me if Messam ends up wtih something similar but that is rugby, one persons actions always has an inmpact on the team
@Hooroo said in Chiefs v Blues:
@Kirwan
I don't get that though? It's a damn daft thing to say 'why does the team get penalised for action on one person'(sic)It would not surprise me if Messam ends up wtih something similar but that is rugby, one persons actions always has an inmpact on the team
I completely disagree with the sentiment of "why is the team getting penalised".
I do, however, think that a RC was more than enough of a punishment for that tackle. To add on potentially six weeks (reduced by two) is massive overkill.
If that's the standard (and I truely doubt it is, I expect to see massive inconsistency), then I expect to see bans like that every couple of weeks.
-
@Hooroo said in Chiefs v Blues:
@Kirwan
I don't get that though? It's a damn daft thing to say 'why does the team get penalised for action on one person'(sic)It would not surprise me if Messam ends up wtih something similar but that is rugby, one persons actions always has an inmpact on the team
I completely disagree with the sentiment of "why is the team getting penalised".
I do, however, think that a RC was more than enough of a punishment for that tackle. To add on potentially six weeks (reduced by two) is massive overkill.
If that's the standard (and I truely doubt it is, I expect to see massive inconsistency), then I expect to see bans like that every couple of weeks.
@Kirwan said in Chiefs v Blues:
@Hooroo said in Chiefs v Blues:
@Kirwan
I don't get that though? It's a damn daft thing to say 'why does the team get penalised for action on one person'(sic)It would not surprise me if Messam ends up wtih something similar but that is rugby, one persons actions always has an inmpact on the team
I completely disagree with the sentiment of "why is the team getting penalised".
I do, however, think that a RC was more than enough of a punishment for that tackle. To add on potentially six weeks (reduced by two) is massive overkill.
If that's the standard (and I truely doubt it is, I expect to see massive inconsistency), then I expect to see bans like that every couple of weeks.
Agreed, it seems harsh at the moment but I think we will get used to it, hopefully. No need for that sort of thing in Rugby.
Mistakes happen etc but that was off the ball dross and if they can eliminate that play by being so tough then I am all for it.
And if another team beat Messam to the punch for the ban, then that is even better!
-
I don't watch NH rugby so I have no idea if the new rules are being policed consistently between the hemispheres, but I have been thinking up until now the new head high laws haven't affected the games as much as I thought they would. And mainly because I am pessimistic bastard, this worries me. Are we seeing a difference in interpretation between NH and SH refs? Will we get a rude shock during the Lions series when/if interpretations are more in line with the NH? I would fucking hate it if the Lions series was shrouded in controversy over this.
@Crazy-Horse last tour here was shrouded in controversy too!
-
@Milk said in Chiefs v Blues:
A lot of people believe Luatua's card cost the Blues the game. If that's the case then the onfield punishment was massive for the whole organisation. I wish they would take the punishment already dished out when handing out the ban.
I agree with the sentiment but that adds whole new levels of subjectivity around the effect on the game and another level of unfairness depending on when in the game an offence occurred
-
@Crazy-Horse last tour here was shrouded in controversy too!
@taniwharugby yep and we all know how stupid that got!
-
-
@taniwharugby said in Chiefs v Blues:
Kaino should shut up and do his talking on the field.
Was dopey as hell from Luatua
-
Social media is full of muppets. I think his choice of words were poor.
Looking at the logo he's a Ta$man supporter anyway! :rolling_eyes:
@Bovidae yeah there is a tweet further down from Sumo https://twitter.com/sumostevenson/status/837611740649041920
-
At first in real time, I thought it was a misread by luatua and he pulled out too late..
When u see TNW coming in.. u just assume he's going to get the ball.. a good play by the chiefs
TNW being short just made it worse for luatuaOR he could've just tried to put a shoulder on the support runner.. only luatua knows lol
Either way I don't think it was stupid.. some people just got way too emotional.. and I don't think they've ever faced that situation in a game theyve ever played in..
These are split second decisions and it was just poor execution from luatua..
It's not like he's a dirty player..
-
Sure it was a split second decision but it was a pretty fucking reckless split second decision and as a result, pretty dumb. The 4 weeks was harsh and SANZAAR are clearly using him to set an example but I think it's a necessary evil. If they're ever going to drill it into players brains that they need to stay away from the head, they're going to have to be harsh. Judiciaries also need to be consistent, otherwise this is a complete waste of time.
That said, the Twitter guy is still a fucking prick.
-
What it does mean is that Luatua and SBW are probably going to be returning about the same time, in about a month. Blues really need to stay in touch over that period which starts with almost a must win game this weekend (as it obviously is for the Highlanders too).
-
@Bovidae yeah there is a tweet further down from Sumo https://twitter.com/sumostevenson/status/837611740649041920
@taniwharugby Good response by Sumo. Twitter really is a collection of arsehats.
@mimic said in Chiefs v Blues:
At first in real time, I thought it was a misread by luatua and he pulled out too late..
When u see TNW coming in.. u just assume he's going to get the ball.. a good play by the chiefs
TNW being short just made it worse for luatuaOR he could've just tried to put a shoulder on the support runner.. only luatua knows lol
Either way I don't think it was stupid.. some people just got way too emotional.. and I don't think they've ever faced that situation in a game theyve ever played in..
These are split second decisions and it was just poor execution from luatua..
It's not like he's a dirty player..
When I saw it I thought Luatua had been sold on TKB's dummy and thought TNW was going to ghost through the Blues defence again so he tackled him out of suspicion. I doubt he meant to hit him high, but he did and the resulting card was correct.
-
Its funny that people think four weeks is harsh but not the red. I would rather have Luatua out for four weeks and be able to replace him than not have him at all for 40 minutes.
@hydro11 said in Chiefs v Blues:
Its funny that people think four weeks is harsh but not the red. I would rather have Luatua out for four weeks and be able to replace him than not have him at all for 40 minutes.
Maybe - given the likelihood of many more cards being dished up - they need to revisit how the penalties work. e.g. a red card might mean you're allowed to replace the carded player with someone else after 10 minutes and the red carded player goes to the judiciary for further punishment.
Even yellow cards there seem to be many more being handed out than three or four years ago - and many games are being decided on the back of them. E.g. Fair chance the Highlanders might have held on if Fekitoa didn't go to the bin. TV3 clip last night was suggesting Dagg could equally have gone to the bin for his challenge on Tevita Li, but didn't, and neither did whomever took Taufua out - which looked as bad as the Fekitoa/Havili one.
I'd rather see games decided by scoring tries rather than not scoring yellow and red cards.
-
@SammyC said in Chiefs v Blues:
Those starting locks for the blues looked like little shrimps next to Retalick and Bird.
Blues totally smashed up front at set piece and breakdown. What the fuck has happened to Akira Ioane?
He was one of the most dynamic and involved players in the NPC last year. Now he stands around in the midfield waiting for someone to pass him the ball.
Why does Auckland rugby (and the Warriors) do this to promising players so consistently? (Turn them into lazy slobs)
It's more people judging players unfairly. Because Akira is a bit niggly (no worse than Brodie) people seem to enjoy getting stuck into him.
The stats just don't bear out any accusations of laziness.
I would like to see him run onto the ball more for his hit ups, but his acceleration and strength beats so many players it's hard to argue with his approach. It gets more effective as the game wears on, so being yanked at halftime thanks to Luatua reduced his highlight reel. But look who's doing the tackling and trying for turnovers at the rucks, it's usually him or Gibson.
@Kirwan said in Chiefs v Blues:
@SammyC said in Chiefs v Blues:
Those starting locks for the blues looked like little shrimps next to Retalick and Bird.
Blues totally smashed up front at set piece and breakdown. What the fuck has happened to Akira Ioane?
He was one of the most dynamic and involved players in the NPC last year. Now he stands around in the midfield waiting for someone to pass him the ball.
Why does Auckland rugby (and the Warriors) do this to promising players so consistently? (Turn them into lazy slobs)
It's more people judging players unfairly. Because Akira is a bit niggly (no worse than Brodie) people seem to enjoy getting stuck into him.
The stats just don't bear out any accusations of laziness.
Dropped by Umaga from this weeks match "due to poor work rate against the Chiefs"
-
@hydro11 said in Chiefs v Blues:
Its funny that people think four weeks is harsh but not the red. I would rather have Luatua out for four weeks and be able to replace him than not have him at all for 40 minutes.
Maybe - given the likelihood of many more cards being dished up - they need to revisit how the penalties work. e.g. a red card might mean you're allowed to replace the carded player with someone else after 10 minutes and the red carded player goes to the judiciary for further punishment.
Even yellow cards there seem to be many more being handed out than three or four years ago - and many games are being decided on the back of them. E.g. Fair chance the Highlanders might have held on if Fekitoa didn't go to the bin. TV3 clip last night was suggesting Dagg could equally have gone to the bin for his challenge on Tevita Li, but didn't, and neither did whomever took Taufua out - which looked as bad as the Fekitoa/Havili one.
I'd rather see games decided by scoring tries rather than not scoring yellow and red cards.
@Chris-B. Suggest you take a look at customer is always right thread. I like the idea of double yellow (player off but after 10 a replacement can come on) in cases where a clumsy tackle or jump leads to a mandatory card but not malicious and so ought not to be a red. For me double yellows wouldn't lead to subsequent ban.
-
-
This post is deleted!
This post is deleted!
