Crusaders v Hurricanes - SF
-
Can't remember whether I already posted this.
https://twitter.com/DominicHarris8/status/1023170870322200582
@stargazer said in Crusaders v Hurricanes - SF:
Can't remember whether I already posted this.
https://twitter.com/DominicHarris8/status/1023170870322200582
Should really be a sell out though. TBF, it isn't just the Crusaders who struggle, it is everyone but all playoff games should sell out a 20k seat stadium.
-
have to think if Razor can go back to back (without even considering what he might do next year) he puts himself right into reckoning post Hansen, forcing NZR to have a rethink about thier current 'succession plans' for the ABs coaching team.
-
@damo said in Crusaders v Hurricanes - SF:
@dingo said in Crusaders v Hurricanes - SF:
@damo said in Crusaders v Hurricanes - SF:
@dingo said in Crusaders v Hurricanes - SF:
TBF Grant Nesbit made a fair statement there. What was the penalty for when Codie Taylor popped his bind first? J Marshall appear to answer that its the zen of the thing.
Though Codie came up first, the reason he popped up was because the canes players were back pedalling and bailed out, forcing the scrum up rather than backwards.
Looked a reasonable call to me.
So what were they penalised for exactly? From the rules book.
They didn't collapse. They weren't popped. To me it didn't look like their Loose forwards released early...So what?
I'm not arguing it wasn't the right decision but why? What was the exact infringement ruled?
Not maintaining a bind is the technical offence.
Colloquially it is standing up under pressure, causing the scrum to disintegrate.
Yeah, so the Crusader who stood up should be penalised. Not the canes.
Going backwards while maintaining a bind is not penalisable.
@dingo said in Crusaders v Hurricanes - SF:
@damo said in Crusaders v Hurricanes - SF:
@dingo said in Crusaders v Hurricanes - SF:
@damo said in Crusaders v Hurricanes - SF:
@dingo said in Crusaders v Hurricanes - SF:
TBF Grant Nesbit made a fair statement there. What was the penalty for when Codie Taylor popped his bind first? J Marshall appear to answer that its the zen of the thing.
Though Codie came up first, the reason he popped up was because the canes players were back pedalling and bailed out, forcing the scrum up rather than backwards.
Looked a reasonable call to me.
So what were they penalised for exactly? From the rules book.
They didn't collapse. They weren't popped. To me it didn't look like their Loose forwards released early...So what?
I'm not arguing it wasn't the right decision but why? What was the exact infringement ruled?
Not maintaining a bind is the technical offence.
Colloquially it is standing up under pressure, causing the scrum to disintegrate.
Yeah, so the Crusader who stood up should be penalised. Not the canes.
Going backwards while maintaining a bind is not penalisable.
Especially as the ball actually came out of the scrum past the hurricane number 8
It was one of those terrible ruck or maul must end in a penalty decisions
-
@dingo said in Crusaders v Hurricanes - SF:
@damo said in Crusaders v Hurricanes - SF:
@dingo said in Crusaders v Hurricanes - SF:
@damo said in Crusaders v Hurricanes - SF:
@dingo said in Crusaders v Hurricanes - SF:
TBF Grant Nesbit made a fair statement there. What was the penalty for when Codie Taylor popped his bind first? J Marshall appear to answer that its the zen of the thing.
Though Codie came up first, the reason he popped up was because the canes players were back pedalling and bailed out, forcing the scrum up rather than backwards.
Looked a reasonable call to me.
So what were they penalised for exactly? From the rules book.
They didn't collapse. They weren't popped. To me it didn't look like their Loose forwards released early...So what?
I'm not arguing it wasn't the right decision but why? What was the exact infringement ruled?
Not maintaining a bind is the technical offence.
Colloquially it is standing up under pressure, causing the scrum to disintegrate.
Yeah, so the Crusader who stood up should be penalised. Not the canes.
Going backwards while maintaining a bind is not penalisable.
Especially as the ball actually came out of the scrum past the hurricane number 8
It was one of those terrible ruck or maul must end in a penalty decisions
-
At least last night's game eases the AB midfield 'logjam' with Laumape having by far his worst game of the season. No pressure to select him now.
@shark I like Laumape - he brings something different. Was wasted last night - should have had him smashing it up.
The more I think about it, the more I think they'll pick just four outside backs - BFA, Jordie, Rieko and Naholo and stick with their five midfielders. For the Rugby Championship, I don't really see a huge point in having a fifth outside back (e.g. NMS).
I wouldn't mind seeing them try one of the midfielders on the wing - probably ALB who is probably the quickest - to see if he can play a Kahui role if necessary.
For the Crusaders, Razor needs to look at his injury ward for next week, but hopefully Crotty and Makalio, at least, will be fit to play. We can cover pretty well for Taufua if he's not.
I reckon Razor threw the dice a little bit in giving Tim Perry the bench for the semi and will bring Wyatt back in for the final. That would be a fair and respectful way of handling things - especially, because I don't think there's much between those two these days.
-
@shark I like Laumape - he brings something different. Was wasted last night - should have had him smashing it up.
The more I think about it, the more I think they'll pick just four outside backs - BFA, Jordie, Rieko and Naholo and stick with their five midfielders. For the Rugby Championship, I don't really see a huge point in having a fifth outside back (e.g. NMS).
I wouldn't mind seeing them try one of the midfielders on the wing - probably ALB who is probably the quickest - to see if he can play a Kahui role if necessary.
For the Crusaders, Razor needs to look at his injury ward for next week, but hopefully Crotty and Makalio, at least, will be fit to play. We can cover pretty well for Taufua if he's not.
I reckon Razor threw the dice a little bit in giving Tim Perry the bench for the semi and will bring Wyatt back in for the final. That would be a fair and respectful way of handling things - especially, because I don't think there's much between those two these days.
-
At least last night's game eases the AB midfield 'logjam' with Laumape having by far his worst game of the season. No pressure to select him now.
@shark said in Crusaders v Hurricanes - SF:
At least last night's game eases the AB midfield 'logjam' with Laumape having by far his worst game of the season. No pressure to select him now.
Agreed. His defense was woeful at times - it’s a real shame because, on attack, I think he has the tools to be awesome at the next level. On defense though, he looks a liability right now.
-
@chris-b yeah the canes game plan was puzzling, kicking for one, but even with the saders mid-field is usually pretty tough to crack, Laumape barely ran at it with any venom to test it last night
@taniwharugby said in Crusaders v Hurricanes - SF:
@chris-b yeah the canes game plan was puzzling, kicking for one, but even with the saders mid-field is usually pretty tough to crack, Laumape barely ran at it with any venom to test it last night
It looked even more puzzling because when they final had someone (Savea I think) hit it up in midfield he broke the line and made a good 20-30 metres. But then they never tried it again. It felt a bit like the 'canes had out-thought themselves, trying to double bluff the crusaders and hoping that Laumape would draw defenders in by reputation creating opportunities elsewhere, and then for whatever reason didn't switch up when that wasn't working.
I'm still confused about the application of the rules for Barrett's almost-try. I get that because the ref stopped play the restart is a scrum, but surely the ball was still live after it was placed, so the 'turnover' (i..e Bridge picking up the ball after Barrett placed it) was good so it should have been a Crusader's feed?
-
TBF Grant Nesbit made a fair statement there. What was the penalty for when Codie Taylor popped his bind first? J Marshall appear to answer that its the zen of the thing.
@dingo said in Crusaders v Hurricanes - SF:
TBF Grant Nesbit made a fair statement there. What was the penalty for when Codie Taylor popped his bind first? J Marshall appear to answer that its the zen of the thing.
I'm wondering a bit more about this, because you often hear the commentators talk about "who has come up first".
I'm certainly no expert on the front row, but surely if only the hooker has come up, as in the case of Taylor, the only way that can happen is if the bind between the opposition hooker and tighthead has fractured? Otherwise - under pressure - Taylor's head is trapped beneath their shoulders?
Who's in the front row club to explain this?
-
Laumape defended poorly and his ordinarily eye-catching wrecking-ball runs were nowhere to be seen. Was there also an appalling kick? Truly showed his lack of dimensions last night.
@shark said in Crusaders v Hurricanes - SF:
Laumape defended poorly and his ordinarily eye-catching wrecking-ball runs were nowhere to be seen. Was there also an appalling kick? Truly showed his lack of dimensions last night.
He, like most of the Canes, was not helped by their poor pattern and the superior pattern of the crusaders. Just like their pattern cast the entire team in a good light
-
@shark said in Crusaders v Hurricanes - SF:
Laumape defended poorly and his ordinarily eye-catching wrecking-ball runs were nowhere to be seen. Was there also an appalling kick? Truly showed his lack of dimensions last night.
He, like most of the Canes, was not helped by their poor pattern and the superior pattern of the crusaders. Just like their pattern cast the entire team in a good light
@canefan poor game plan, execution and players not in top form all contributed, but ultimately the Crusaders were just too good.
Right now:
Head to Head - Crusaders $1.08, Lions $7.00
$1.87 to give the LIons an 18.5 point start
$3.50 for 12 and under
$1.42 for 13+ -
@pukunui said in Crusaders v Hurricanes - SF:
Two things.
- Has a deliberate knock down really jumped from a penalty to an automatic yellow card as the commentators seem to keep suggesting? Or are they talking shit again. Either way im sick of these things. Turning me off the game big time.
This is what the lawyer, who defends cited players before the WR and SANZAAR judiciary has to say about that:
https://twitter.com/AaronLloydNZL/status/1023318200602124290
@stargazer said in Crusaders v Hurricanes - SF:
@pukunui said in Crusaders v Hurricanes - SF:
Two things.
- Has a deliberate knock down really jumped from a penalty to an automatic yellow card as the commentators seem to keep suggesting? Or are they talking shit again. Either way im sick of these things. Turning me off the game big time.
This is what the lawyer, who defends cited players before the WR and SANZAAR judiciary has to say about that:
https://twitter.com/AaronLloydNZL/status/1023318200602124290
Fantastic. That is exactly what i wanted to see. It has been creeping into the commentary more and more. IMO that law's worth is debatable in the first place when it is a penalty only. To have constant calls for automatic yellow on top gives me the shits.
-
Laumape defended poorly and his ordinarily eye-catching wrecking-ball runs were nowhere to be seen. Was there also an appalling kick? Truly showed his lack of dimensions last night.
@shark said in Crusaders v Hurricanes - SF:
Laumape defended poorly and his ordinarily eye-catching wrecking-ball runs were nowhere to be seen. Was there also an appalling kick? Truly showed his lack of dimensions last night.
Yes also plenty of missed tackles and poor distribution. Not a memorable night.
-
Feeling sorry for the lad. Taufua deservedly called into the ABs in May, but couldn't play because of injury. If he had any chance of being called up for the RC, that chance is gone now, too. I know there's disagreement about whether he should be an AB or not, but this is just really tough luck.
-
Feeling sorry for the lad. Taufua deservedly called into the ABs in May, but couldn't play because of injury. If he had any chance of being called up for the RC, that chance is gone now, too. I know there's disagreement about whether he should be an AB or not, but this is just really tough luck.
@stargazer said in Crusaders v Hurricanes - SF:
Feeling sorry for the lad. Taufua deservedly called into the ABs in May, but couldn't play because of injury. If he had any chance of being called up for the RC, that chance is gone now, too. I know there's disagreement about whether he should be an AB or not, but this is just really tough luck.
Deservedly in you opinion. He’s fine in patches at Super Rugby level, but the Crusaders are stronger with Samu at 6, much better work rate.
-
@stargazer said in Crusaders v Hurricanes - SF:
Feeling sorry for the lad. Taufua deservedly called into the ABs in May, but couldn't play because of injury. If he had any chance of being called up for the RC, that chance is gone now, too. I know there's disagreement about whether he should be an AB or not, but this is just really tough luck.
Deservedly in you opinion. He’s fine in patches at Super Rugby level, but the Crusaders are stronger with Samu at 6, much better work rate.
@kirwan Yes, in my opinon and that of the All Blacks selectors. Taufua played at 8 before the June break and was massive until then. It was only after not playing for weeks due to injury and being moved to 6 that he wasn't as strong as before, although not half as bad as some people want to believe. For example, did anyone notice how he ran through Shields last night?
-
@kirwan Yes, in my opinon and that of the All Blacks selectors. Taufua played at 8 before the June break and was massive until then. It was only after not playing for weeks due to injury and being moved to 6 that he wasn't as strong as before, although not half as bad as some people want to believe. For example, did anyone notice how he ran through Shields last night?
@stargazer said in Crusaders v Hurricanes - SF:
@kirwan For example, did anyone notice how he ran through Shields last night?
Before he got the ball ripped off him by Jordie.
-
@stargazer said in Crusaders v Hurricanes - SF:
@kirwan For example, did anyone notice how he ran through Shields last night?
Before he got the ball ripped off him by Jordie.
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc()/half-full-and-empty-157672090-57a8f6553df78cf45952581a.jpg)
