Crusaders v Rebels
-
@Chris-B If the Highlanders win with a bonus point and the Chiefs without, the Highlanders have a competition point more, so will finish above the Chiefs. Now doing that, is another matter, of course.
@Stargazer Yeah - they also need a bit of help from the South African teams. Anyone the Highlanders end up tied with, they lose the tie-breaker.
-
@Canes4life I reckon Weber instead of Hall. He's been outstanding in recent weeks.
I'm expecting SBW instead of Laumape.
They should take 14 backs, but I'd be taking Josh Ioane rather than another outside back. However, if they only take two first fives, Ennor is a good shot - probably marginally ahead of Reece, with Will Jordan unlucky that he hasn't had the chance to press his case.
Possible that Ennor could also push out George Bridge by dint of being a right wing.
@Chris-B it's harsh on Laumape because he has been brutally consistent all season and would probably give us more impact over an ageing SBW.
If it comes down to the two I would say Bridge gets the nod, purely from the fact he can cover all three backfield positions. I don't see a need for Ennor if we already have four midfielders.
-
@Chris-B it's harsh on Laumape because he has been brutally consistent all season and would probably give us more impact over an ageing SBW.
If it comes down to the two I would say Bridge gets the nod, purely from the fact he can cover all three backfield positions. I don't see a need for Ennor if we already have four midfielders.
@Canes4life said in Crusaders v Rebels:
@Chris-B it's harsh on Laumape because he has been brutally consistent all season and would probably give us more impact over an ageing SBW.
If it comes down to the two I would say Bridge gets the nod, purely from the fact he can cover all three backfield positions. I don't see a need for Ennor if we already have four midfielders.
Wouldn’t be harsh at all. At every World Cup good players have always missed out.
-
@Canes4life said in Crusaders v Rebels:
@Chris-B it's harsh on Laumape because he has been brutally consistent all season and would probably give us more impact over an ageing SBW.
If it comes down to the two I would say Bridge gets the nod, purely from the fact he can cover all three backfield positions. I don't see a need for Ennor if we already have four midfielders.
Wouldn’t be harsh at all. At every World Cup good players have always missed out.
@ACT-Crusader said in Crusaders v Rebels:
@Canes4life said in Crusaders v Rebels:
@Chris-B it's harsh on Laumape because he has been brutally consistent all season and would probably give us more impact over an ageing SBW.
If it comes down to the two I would say Bridge gets the nod, purely from the fact he can cover all three backfield positions. I don't see a need for Ennor if we already have four midfielders.
Wouldn’t be harsh at all. At every World Cup good players have always missed out.
Doesn’t not make it harsh.
-
@Canes4life said in Crusaders v Rebels:
@Chris-B it's harsh on Laumape because he has been brutally consistent all season and would probably give us more impact over an ageing SBW.
If it comes down to the two I would say Bridge gets the nod, purely from the fact he can cover all three backfield positions. I don't see a need for Ennor if we already have four midfielders.
Wouldn’t be harsh at all. At every World Cup good players have always missed out.
@ACT-Crusader they usually miss out to other players that are actually playing. For Laumape to be playing like he is and miss out on selection to someone that has hardly shown any form for the last 2 years, has hardly played this year and cost us the Lions tour, it must be hard to swallow.
-
@ACT-Crusader they usually miss out to other players that are actually playing. For Laumape to be playing like he is and miss out on selection to someone that has hardly shown any form for the last 2 years, has hardly played this year and cost us the Lions tour, it must be hard to swallow.
@Canes4life said in Crusaders v Rebels:
@ACT-Crusader they usually miss out to other players that are actually playing. For Laumape to be playing like he is and miss out on selection to someone that has hardly shown any form for the last 2 years, has hardly played this year and cost us the Lions tour, it must be hard to swallow.
Would be hard to swallow. Let’s wait until squad named first.
-
@Damo said in Crusaders v Rebels:
That is an example when advantage should be over in my book. Rebels might have gone 80m if that pass had stuck. They had a clear advantage.
Instead we go back for a scrum 10 metres back from where the lineout would have been. Especially since it was only a scrum advantage. PK advantage would be different.
And again. Scrum advantage should be over once a team gets clean ball and are free to use it as they wish.
@Damo said in Crusaders v Rebels:
@Damo said in Crusaders v Rebels:
That is an example when advantage should be over in my book. Rebels might have gone 80m if that pass had stuck. They had a clear advantage.
Instead we go back for a scrum 10 metres back from where the lineout would have been. Especially since it was only a scrum advantage. PK advantage would be different.
And again. Scrum advantage should be over once a team gets clean ball and are free to use it as they wish.
Except that's not what the rules say.
And I prefer referees who play to the actual rules, not dodgy commentators on chat groups.
-
@Canes4life said in Crusaders v Rebels:
@ACT-Crusader they usually miss out to other players that are actually playing. For Laumape to be playing like he is and miss out on selection to someone that has hardly shown any form for the last 2 years, has hardly played this year and cost us the Lions tour, it must be hard to swallow.
Would be hard to swallow. Let’s wait until squad named first.
@Billy-Tell Hasn't Hansen already said SBW's in the squad if fit?
-
@Damo said in Crusaders v Rebels:
@Damo said in Crusaders v Rebels:
That is an example when advantage should be over in my book. Rebels might have gone 80m if that pass had stuck. They had a clear advantage.
Instead we go back for a scrum 10 metres back from where the lineout would have been. Especially since it was only a scrum advantage. PK advantage would be different.
And again. Scrum advantage should be over once a team gets clean ball and are free to use it as they wish.
Except that's not what the rules say.
And I prefer referees who play to the actual rules, not dodgy commentators on chat groups.
-
@Billy-Tell Hasn't Hansen already said SBW's in the squad if fit?
@Canes4life in the RC squad, yes. Still gotta prove himself to go to Japan
-
More than harsh if Laumape misses out. More like criminal.
-
@Chris said in Crusaders v Rebels:
@MN5 As I remember. Cooper got his fair share of boos at the Cake tin a few games back.
Room temperature, flat Monteiths mid strength at $8 a cup is enough to make any crowd get angry and hostile.
-
@MN5 They weren't booking Quade Cooper at Addington last night, they were booing the tepid Tui.
-
In replace of who though? Man we have some talent in NZ atm.
My backs atm are: Smith, Perenara, Hall, Barrett, Mo'unga, Leinert-Brown, Laumape, Goodhue, Crotty, Ioane, Bridge, Barrett, Smith, assuming they go with 13 backs - add in Ennor if they take 14.
@Canes4life said in Crusaders v Rebels:
In replace of who though? Man we have some talent in NZ atm.
My backs atm are: Smith, Perenara, Hall, Barrett, Mo'unga, Leinert-Brown, Laumape, Goodhue, Crotty, Ioane, Bridge, Barrett, Smith, assuming they go with 13 backs - add in Ennor if they take 14.
That would be my ABs Baxka Lisr IF they were taking 13
BUT I'd rather have Weber over Hall
Naholo will pay price for going to England has no future for ABs
Ennor is a player I rate very early
-
And even better the Crusaders have to fork out cash to the visiting team. Apart from taking four competition points from them there is nothing more pleasurable than receiving a nice cash handout from them.
@Higgins said in Crusaders v Rebels:
And even better the Crusaders have to fork out cash to the visiting team. Apart from taking four competition points from them there is nothing more pleasurable than receiving a nice cash handout from them.
This is one of the ways in which our dump of a stadium hurts us. I think it was last year when we barely made a buck from three home finals games, topped off by having to pay a large share of the Lions' costs. Even with temporary seating (extra that is, because it's important to differentiate between temporary and really temporary when it comes to this dump) it only seats around 22,000. The capacity just isn't great enough to make good coin. Maybe this year if we host the final the ticket price will be higher. Wouldn't surprise me.
This is another argument for having a much larger capacity in the new stadium. A state of the art 35,000 - 40,000 seater without a roof would still attract punters for the novelty of having a cool, comfortable stadium, and the capacity would maximise the benefit of hosting big games.
-
@Higgins said in Crusaders v Rebels:
And even better the Crusaders have to fork out cash to the visiting team. Apart from taking four competition points from them there is nothing more pleasurable than receiving a nice cash handout from them.
This is one of the ways in which our dump of a stadium hurts us. I think it was last year when we barely made a buck from three home finals games, topped off by having to pay a large share of the Lions' costs. Even with temporary seating (extra that is, because it's important to differentiate between temporary and really temporary when it comes to this dump) it only seats around 22,000. The capacity just isn't great enough to make good coin. Maybe this year if we host the final the ticket price will be higher. Wouldn't surprise me.
This is another argument for having a much larger capacity in the new stadium. A state of the art 35,000 - 40,000 seater without a roof would still attract punters for the novelty of having a cool, comfortable stadium, and the capacity would maximise the benefit of hosting big games.
@shark the real issue is you are victims of your own success though.
Even with a big shiny new stadium, would you get significantly higher numbers for all the finals?
I mean chances are you will have the Rebels here again for the 1st round, would that be enough of a drawcard to get punters through the gates, knowing that you just pumped them, and then the next week would likely be a bigger more competitive match and again, if they win that, the final.
-
Well said from the commentators, you would think after 8 years we have moved on from booing Quade Cooper..seriously people..!
@Steven-Harris said in Crusaders v Rebels:
Well said from the commentators, you would think after 8 years we have moved on from booing Quade Cooper..seriously people..!
Disagree. Sport is theatre and the paying fans like to be involved and Quade has made himself the villain. Some could even say it is a mark of respect and Cooper is probably not bothered in the slightest.
-
I also remember prior to the quake, Christchurch was the only place the ABs test didn't always sell out - so is the demand there, long term?
@Machpants said in Crusaders v Rebels:
I also remember prior to the quake, Christchurch was the only place the ABs test didn't always sell out - so is the demand there, long term?
I think Jade/AMI Stadium had a capacity of approx 38,000 in 2010. That year we hosted the Wallabies. The brand new Deans Stand was unofficially re-named the Henry stand for the night. The ground was sold out. Prior to that the capacity was greater - possibly closer to 45,000 which at more than 10% of the population was possibly a little high and some tests may not have sold out.
Our population now is greater than pre-quakes and at a function I attended last year a senior CCC official predicted our population would be 750,000 by the middle of this century.
