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

Lions v Hurricanes (SF)

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Rugby Matches
hurricaneslions
295 Posts 47 Posters 32.0k Views 1 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.
  • KruseK Kruse

    @ACT-Crusader said in Lions v Hurricanes (SF):

    @Winger said in Lions v Hurricanes (SF):

    @nzzp said in Lions v Hurricanes (SF):

    I quite like the idea of reducing travel by having the two conferences find a winner - ie an Australasian playoff, and then an African playoff. Kind of like the NFL playoffs - with NFC and AFC champs playing in a Superbowl. Would mean that the travel is inside the conference, and that one winner from each conference plays the Super Final. Cuts out the insanity of teams like the Chiefs having to potentially play Aus - SA - NZ - SA to win the comp.

    That's one option. They really need to find a way to give all teams that make the finals a reasonable chance. So the finals becomes a fair contest not the farce it is now

    Even with this current structure if the super rugby administrators had anyone with any common sense at all they would have set up a slight adjustment to ensure that one team having a travel schedule of SA >> back to NZ or Aust >>> back to SA or likewise for a SA team would never happen

    It would have been so simple to do this. In the situation we have where the Chiefs are in SA they would always play the SA team. Its not difficult to work out that the Chiefs situation might occur and to inset a clause where if it does the Chiefs will play the SA team to reduce travel. as it is they have changed the structure and made it worse. Its makes it almost impossible for the Chiefs to win (as they are stuffed with the travel factor). So one semi is almost meaningless. as the Chiefs / Canes semi was last year. and if the Canes win likewise for the final. And it happened last year for the Chiefs too so its not a rare occurrence.

    Under the current format, this years finals format is probably the best system. I don't think any team is disadvantaged commensurate to where they finished on the table.

    And - of course - this will be the last year of the current format. Has anybody seen even a hint of how they're thinking about organising the whole comp next year, with 3 (maybe) teams dropped?
    3 conferences of 5 teams each - NZ, Aus+Jp, Afr+Arg ?

    KruseK Offline
    KruseK Offline
    Kruse
    wrote on last edited by
    #34

    @Kruse said in Lions v Hurricanes (SF):

    @ACT-Crusader said in Lions v Hurricanes (SF):

    @Winger said in Lions v Hurricanes (SF):

    @nzzp said in Lions v Hurricanes (SF):

    I quite like the idea of reducing travel by having the two conferences find a winner - ie an Australasian playoff, and then an African playoff. Kind of like the NFL playoffs - with NFC and AFC champs playing in a Superbowl. Would mean that the travel is inside the conference, and that one winner from each conference plays the Super Final. Cuts out the insanity of teams like the Chiefs having to potentially play Aus - SA - NZ - SA to win the comp.

    That's one option. They really need to find a way to give all teams that make the finals a reasonable chance. So the finals becomes a fair contest not the farce it is now

    Even with this current structure if the super rugby administrators had anyone with any common sense at all they would have set up a slight adjustment to ensure that one team having a travel schedule of SA >> back to NZ or Aust >>> back to SA or likewise for a SA team would never happen

    It would have been so simple to do this. In the situation we have where the Chiefs are in SA they would always play the SA team. Its not difficult to work out that the Chiefs situation might occur and to inset a clause where if it does the Chiefs will play the SA team to reduce travel. as it is they have changed the structure and made it worse. Its makes it almost impossible for the Chiefs to win (as they are stuffed with the travel factor). So one semi is almost meaningless. as the Chiefs / Canes semi was last year. and if the Canes win likewise for the final. And it happened last year for the Chiefs too so its not a rare occurrence.

    Under the current format, this years finals format is probably the best system. I don't think any team is disadvantaged commensurate to where they finished on the table.

    And - of course - this will be the last year of the current format. Has anybody seen even a hint of how they're thinking about organising the whole comp next year, with 3 (maybe) teams dropped?
    3 conferences of 5 teams each - NZ, Aus+Jp, Afr+Arg ?

    Ah - ignore me, a very quick google, and indeed - discover it was all announced months ago. And looks like it could address most of the issues/whinges people have currently.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • ACT CrusaderA ACT Crusader

      @Winger said in Lions v Hurricanes (SF):

      @nzzp said in Lions v Hurricanes (SF):

      I quite like the idea of reducing travel by having the two conferences find a winner - ie an Australasian playoff, and then an African playoff. Kind of like the NFL playoffs - with NFC and AFC champs playing in a Superbowl. Would mean that the travel is inside the conference, and that one winner from each conference plays the Super Final. Cuts out the insanity of teams like the Chiefs having to potentially play Aus - SA - NZ - SA to win the comp.

      That's one option. They really need to find a way to give all teams that make the finals a reasonable chance. So the finals becomes a fair contest not the farce it is now

      Even with this current structure if the super rugby administrators had anyone with any common sense at all they would have set up a slight adjustment to ensure that one team having a travel schedule of SA >> back to NZ or Aust >>> back to SA or likewise for a SA team would never happen

      It would have been so simple to do this. In the situation we have where the Chiefs are in SA they would always play the SA team. Its not difficult to work out that the Chiefs situation might occur and to inset a clause where if it does the Chiefs will play the SA team to reduce travel. as it is they have changed the structure and made it worse. Its makes it almost impossible for the Chiefs to win (as they are stuffed with the travel factor). So one semi is almost meaningless. as the Chiefs / Canes semi was last year. and if the Canes win likewise for the final. And it happened last year for the Chiefs too so its not a rare occurrence.

      Under the current format, this years finals format is probably the best system. I don't think any team is disadvantaged commensurate to where they finished on the table.

      WingerW Offline
      WingerW Offline
      Winger
      wrote on last edited by
      #35

      @ACT-Crusader said in Lions v Hurricanes (SF):

      @Winger said in Lions v Hurricanes (SF):

      @nzzp said in Lions v Hurricanes (SF):

      I quite like the idea of reducing travel by having the two conferences find a winner - ie an Australasian playoff, and then an African playoff. Kind of like the NFL playoffs - with NFC and AFC champs playing in a Superbowl. Would mean that the travel is inside the conference, and that one winner from each conference plays the Super Final. Cuts out the insanity of teams like the Chiefs having to potentially play Aus - SA - NZ - SA to win the comp.

      That's one option. They really need to find a way to give all teams that make the finals a reasonable chance. So the finals becomes a fair contest not the farce it is now

      Even with this current structure if the super rugby administrators had anyone with any common sense at all they would have set up a slight adjustment to ensure that one team having a travel schedule of SA >> back to NZ or Aust >>> back to SA or likewise for a SA team would never happen

      It would have been so simple to do this. In the situation we have where the Chiefs are in SA they would always play the SA team. Its not difficult to work out that the Chiefs situation might occur and to inset a clause where if it does the Chiefs will play the SA team to reduce travel. as it is they have changed the structure and made it worse. Its makes it almost impossible for the Chiefs to win (as they are stuffed with the travel factor). So one semi is almost meaningless. as the Chiefs / Canes semi was last year. and if the Canes win likewise for the final. And it happened last year for the Chiefs too so its not a rare occurrence.

      Under the current format, this years finals format is probably the best system. I don't think any team is disadvantaged commensurate to where they finished on the table.

      For the Crusaders for sure it is (last year it was great for the Canes so I thought it was a great system 👏 ). They two other NZ teams that might beat the Crusaders (Chiefs and Canes) in the semis or finals are completely stuffed by travel.

      W ACT CrusaderA 2 Replies Last reply
      0
      • WingerW Winger

        @ACT-Crusader said in Lions v Hurricanes (SF):

        @Winger said in Lions v Hurricanes (SF):

        @nzzp said in Lions v Hurricanes (SF):

        I quite like the idea of reducing travel by having the two conferences find a winner - ie an Australasian playoff, and then an African playoff. Kind of like the NFL playoffs - with NFC and AFC champs playing in a Superbowl. Would mean that the travel is inside the conference, and that one winner from each conference plays the Super Final. Cuts out the insanity of teams like the Chiefs having to potentially play Aus - SA - NZ - SA to win the comp.

        That's one option. They really need to find a way to give all teams that make the finals a reasonable chance. So the finals becomes a fair contest not the farce it is now

        Even with this current structure if the super rugby administrators had anyone with any common sense at all they would have set up a slight adjustment to ensure that one team having a travel schedule of SA >> back to NZ or Aust >>> back to SA or likewise for a SA team would never happen

        It would have been so simple to do this. In the situation we have where the Chiefs are in SA they would always play the SA team. Its not difficult to work out that the Chiefs situation might occur and to inset a clause where if it does the Chiefs will play the SA team to reduce travel. as it is they have changed the structure and made it worse. Its makes it almost impossible for the Chiefs to win (as they are stuffed with the travel factor). So one semi is almost meaningless. as the Chiefs / Canes semi was last year. and if the Canes win likewise for the final. And it happened last year for the Chiefs too so its not a rare occurrence.

        Under the current format, this years finals format is probably the best system. I don't think any team is disadvantaged commensurate to where they finished on the table.

        For the Crusaders for sure it is (last year it was great for the Canes so I thought it was a great system 👏 ). They two other NZ teams that might beat the Crusaders (Chiefs and Canes) in the semis or finals are completely stuffed by travel.

        W Offline
        W Offline
        Wreck Diver
        wrote on last edited by
        #36

        @Winger I'm not worried mate we will travel to CHCH and beat the Saders to make it back to back championships

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • WingerW Winger

          @ACT-Crusader said in Lions v Hurricanes (SF):

          @Winger said in Lions v Hurricanes (SF):

          @nzzp said in Lions v Hurricanes (SF):

          I quite like the idea of reducing travel by having the two conferences find a winner - ie an Australasian playoff, and then an African playoff. Kind of like the NFL playoffs - with NFC and AFC champs playing in a Superbowl. Would mean that the travel is inside the conference, and that one winner from each conference plays the Super Final. Cuts out the insanity of teams like the Chiefs having to potentially play Aus - SA - NZ - SA to win the comp.

          That's one option. They really need to find a way to give all teams that make the finals a reasonable chance. So the finals becomes a fair contest not the farce it is now

          Even with this current structure if the super rugby administrators had anyone with any common sense at all they would have set up a slight adjustment to ensure that one team having a travel schedule of SA >> back to NZ or Aust >>> back to SA or likewise for a SA team would never happen

          It would have been so simple to do this. In the situation we have where the Chiefs are in SA they would always play the SA team. Its not difficult to work out that the Chiefs situation might occur and to inset a clause where if it does the Chiefs will play the SA team to reduce travel. as it is they have changed the structure and made it worse. Its makes it almost impossible for the Chiefs to win (as they are stuffed with the travel factor). So one semi is almost meaningless. as the Chiefs / Canes semi was last year. and if the Canes win likewise for the final. And it happened last year for the Chiefs too so its not a rare occurrence.

          Under the current format, this years finals format is probably the best system. I don't think any team is disadvantaged commensurate to where they finished on the table.

          For the Crusaders for sure it is (last year it was great for the Canes so I thought it was a great system 👏 ). They two other NZ teams that might beat the Crusaders (Chiefs and Canes) in the semis or finals are completely stuffed by travel.

          ACT CrusaderA Offline
          ACT CrusaderA Offline
          ACT Crusader
          wrote on last edited by
          #37

          @Winger whether it's the Saders, Canes, Landers or Chiefs, whoever finishes top of the NZ conference are going to get an advantage come playoff time. If the Saders finished somewhere other than top I would expect the travel and the fate in the hands of other results.

          1 Reply Last reply
          1
          • raznomoreR Offline
            raznomoreR Offline
            raznomore
            wrote on last edited by
            #38

            No one can run with us. That is all.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • BonesB Offline
              BonesB Offline
              Bones
              wrote on last edited by
              #39

              The Hurricanes repeat title hopes may well have died in the 54th minute of the Maori Vs Lions....

              W 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • BonesB Bones

                The Hurricanes repeat title hopes may well have died in the 54th minute of the Maori Vs Lions....

                W Offline
                W Offline
                Wreck Diver
                wrote on last edited by
                #40

                @Bones Please explain, you lost me.

                KruseK BonesB 2 Replies Last reply
                0
                • W Wreck Diver

                  @Bones Please explain, you lost me.

                  KruseK Offline
                  KruseK Offline
                  Kruse
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #41

                  @Wreck-Diver said in Lions v Hurricanes (SF):

                  @Bones Please explain, you lost me.

                  Proctor?

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  1
                  • W Wreck Diver

                    @Bones Please explain, you lost me.

                    BonesB Offline
                    BonesB Offline
                    Bones
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #42

                    @Wreck-Diver see above.

                    W 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • BonesB Bones

                      @Wreck-Diver see above.

                      W Offline
                      W Offline
                      Wreck Diver
                      wrote on last edited by Wreck Diver
                      #43

                      @Bones Proctor your taking the piss.

                      BonesB 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • W Wreck Diver

                        @Bones Proctor your taking the piss.

                        BonesB Offline
                        BonesB Offline
                        Bones
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #44

                        @Wreck-Diver I'll be sure to pass it onto him?

                        W 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • BonesB Bones

                          @Wreck-Diver I'll be sure to pass it onto him?

                          W Offline
                          W Offline
                          Wreck Diver
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #45

                          @Bones please do because he doesn't make the starting 15 and is at best a bench player.

                          BonesB 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • W Wreck Diver

                            @Bones please do because he doesn't make the starting 15 and is at best a bench player.

                            BonesB Offline
                            BonesB Offline
                            Bones
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #46

                            @Wreck-Diver said in Lions v Hurricanes (SF):

                            @Bones please do because he doesn't make the starting 15 and is at best a bench player.

                            Hah! Riiiight...what is that based on? The fact that until injured he was the starting centre for the Canes and their best player? Or the fact that they haven't quite been the same team since he got injured?

                            D 1 Reply Last reply
                            3
                            • BonesB Bones

                              @Wreck-Diver said in Lions v Hurricanes (SF):

                              @Bones please do because he doesn't make the starting 15 and is at best a bench player.

                              Hah! Riiiight...what is that based on? The fact that until injured he was the starting centre for the Canes and their best player? Or the fact that they haven't quite been the same team since he got injured?

                              D Offline
                              D Offline
                              Darren
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #47

                              Proctor was a loss.
                              But Aso has really stepped up, right now I'm not sure that Proctor would just walk back in.

                              BonesB 1 Reply Last reply
                              1
                              • D Darren

                                Proctor was a loss.
                                But Aso has really stepped up, right now I'm not sure that Proctor would just walk back in.

                                BonesB Offline
                                BonesB Offline
                                Bones
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #48

                                @Darren-Nicholson I think his defence alone would walk him in, that's not even taking into account how good he is at distribution/using space.

                                W canefanC 2 Replies Last reply
                                4
                                • BonesB Bones

                                  @Darren-Nicholson I think his defence alone would walk him in, that's not even taking into account how good he is at distribution/using space.

                                  W Offline
                                  W Offline
                                  Wreck Diver
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #49

                                  @Bones Proctor played a couple of games at the beginning of the season got injured came back got injured against the Lions (BIL that is). He's named as a utility in the squad. Aso came in and has played consistent rugby all season based on his consistency and being joint top try scorer he holds is position ahead of Proctor even he was fit after the Maori game.

                                  BonesB 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • W Wreck Diver

                                    @Bones Proctor played a couple of games at the beginning of the season got injured came back got injured against the Lions (BIL that is). He's named as a utility in the squad. Aso came in and has played consistent rugby all season based on his consistency and being joint top try scorer he holds is position ahead of Proctor even he was fit after the Maori game.

                                    BonesB Offline
                                    BonesB Offline
                                    Bones
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #50

                                    @Wreck-Diver yeah, 7 games is only a couple? Consistently selected ahead of Aso when fit, that's an odd one when according to you, Aso holds his place. That's not what I call holding your place.

                                    He's been the number 13 when fit this year and last.

                                    The stats are pretty telling too. Especially considering he's played less than half as many minutes as Aso ( who has been excellent on the wing, but pretty average at centre, especially when you look at defence, turnovers and breaking tackles).

                                    https://www.alloutrugby.com/stats/?seasonid=32&view=player_vs_player&action=main

                                    W 1 Reply Last reply
                                    2
                                    • BonesB Bones

                                      @Wreck-Diver yeah, 7 games is only a couple? Consistently selected ahead of Aso when fit, that's an odd one when according to you, Aso holds his place. That's not what I call holding your place.

                                      He's been the number 13 when fit this year and last.

                                      The stats are pretty telling too. Especially considering he's played less than half as many minutes as Aso ( who has been excellent on the wing, but pretty average at centre, especially when you look at defence, turnovers and breaking tackles).

                                      https://www.alloutrugby.com/stats/?seasonid=32&view=player_vs_player&action=main

                                      W Offline
                                      W Offline
                                      Wreck Diver
                                      wrote on last edited by Wreck Diver
                                      #51

                                      @Bones Stats don't mean shit. You say the Canes wont win back to back because Proctor is injured, bullshit. You even have said you don't trust J Barrett because defence. Well sorry Aso on current form makes the team in my book and is joint top try scorer in the comp as you say playing an average game at centre
                                      Oh and I nearly forgot Proctors got a fuckin top knock and that just rules him out

                                      BonesB 2 Replies Last reply
                                      0
                                      • W Wreck Diver

                                        @Bones Stats don't mean shit. You say the Canes wont win back to back because Proctor is injured, bullshit. You even have said you don't trust J Barrett because defence. Well sorry Aso on current form makes the team in my book and is joint top try scorer in the comp as you say playing an average game at centre
                                        Oh and I nearly forgot Proctors got a fuckin top knock and that just rules him out

                                        BonesB Offline
                                        BonesB Offline
                                        Bones
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #52

                                        @Wreck-Diver I agree and so do the selectors, Aso makes the team. On the wing.

                                        Stats help tell a story. So does consistently getting selected ahead of another player.

                                        No idea what Barrett has to do with it.

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        2
                                        • W Wreck Diver

                                          @Bones Stats don't mean shit. You say the Canes wont win back to back because Proctor is injured, bullshit. You even have said you don't trust J Barrett because defence. Well sorry Aso on current form makes the team in my book and is joint top try scorer in the comp as you say playing an average game at centre
                                          Oh and I nearly forgot Proctors got a fuckin top knock and that just rules him out

                                          BonesB Offline
                                          BonesB Offline
                                          Bones
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #53

                                          @Wreck-Diver by the way you may want to re-read my post when the mania has passed. That word "may"....

                                          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