Super Rugby News
-
Does anyone know if the citing window has closed,and if anyone has copped a citing from the weekend? Can't see anything on the Sanzar website
I thought it was longer.
Citing process and Timelines:
• Teams have four hours post match to request in writing for the Citing Commissioner to review and incident of foul play.
• The SANZAR Citing Commissioners have 12 hours post match to review any incidents from the match via broadcast footage and or additional angles of an incident if available.
-
I thought it was longer.
Citing process and Timelines:
• Teams have four hours post match to request in writing for the Citing Commissioner to review and incident of foul play.
• The SANZAR Citing Commissioners have 12 hours post match to review any incidents from the match via broadcast footage and or additional angles of an incident if available.
@taniwharugby said in Super Rugby News:
I thought it was longer.
Citing process and Timelines:
• Teams have four hours post match to request in writing for the Citing Commissioner to review and incident of foul play.
• The SANZAR Citing Commissioners have 12 hours post match to review any incidents from the match via broadcast footage and or additional angles of an incident if available.
thanks fella - that's a seriously short window. Crikey.
-
@taniwharugby said in Super Rugby News:
I thought it was longer.
Citing process and Timelines:
• Teams have four hours post match to request in writing for the Citing Commissioner to review and incident of foul play.
• The SANZAR Citing Commissioners have 12 hours post match to review any incidents from the match via broadcast footage and or additional angles of an incident if available.
thanks fella - that's a seriously short window. Crikey.
@nzzp said in Super Rugby News:
@taniwharugby said in Super Rugby News:
I thought it was longer.
Citing process and Timelines:
• Teams have four hours post match to request in writing for the Citing Commissioner to review and incident of foul play.
• The SANZAR Citing Commissioners have 12 hours post match to review any incidents from the match via broadcast footage and or additional angles of an incident if available.
thanks fella - that's a seriously short window. Crikey.
Aumua has got away with daylight robbery if he's not cited
He was head hunting in that tackle vs the Bulls
He would've likely been sent off if TMO or AR had spotted it real time
But then we know about the invisibility cloak ABs have around foul play
-
@nzzp said in Super Rugby News:
@taniwharugby said in Super Rugby News:
I thought it was longer.
Citing process and Timelines:
• Teams have four hours post match to request in writing for the Citing Commissioner to review and incident of foul play.
• The SANZAR Citing Commissioners have 12 hours post match to review any incidents from the match via broadcast footage and or additional angles of an incident if available.
thanks fella - that's a seriously short window. Crikey.
Aumua has got away with daylight robbery if he's not cited
He was head hunting in that tackle vs the Bulls
He would've likely been sent off if TMO or AR had spotted it real time
But then we know about the invisibility cloak ABs have around foul play
@Jaguares4real said in Super Rugby News:
But then we know about the invisibility cloak ABs have around foul play
Mate, it's great to have you here on the Fern, but don't get lazy and slip into the mainstream media narrative. Aumua was stupid, adn could easily have copped a card on the day - but to suggest that refs and citing commissioners are somehow influenced by the poorest Tier 1 team is laughable.
Just look at Lions 2 and Lions 3 for examples of ref interpretation NOT favouring kiwis.
Good luck for the weekend anyway; and if you do get up, I'm really not sure a trip to Chc is winnable for you, especially if the Canes can demo your scrum. Crusaders are smart enough to exploit that to the hilt,a nd take the points, territory and possession that cancome with it
-
@nzzp said in Super Rugby News:
@taniwharugby said in Super Rugby News:
I thought it was longer.
Citing process and Timelines:
• Teams have four hours post match to request in writing for the Citing Commissioner to review and incident of foul play.
• The SANZAR Citing Commissioners have 12 hours post match to review any incidents from the match via broadcast footage and or additional angles of an incident if available.
thanks fella - that's a seriously short window. Crikey.
Aumua has got away with daylight robbery if he's not cited
He was head hunting in that tackle vs the Bulls
He would've likely been sent off if TMO or AR had spotted it real time
But then we know about the invisibility cloak ABs have around foul play
@Jaguares4real I suppose the Canes get one back after TJ Perenara’s head was taken off against the Lions.
-
@Jaguares4real said in Super Rugby News:
But then we know about the invisibility cloak ABs have around foul play
Mate, it's great to have you here on the Fern, but don't get lazy and slip into the mainstream media narrative. Aumua was stupid, adn could easily have copped a card on the day - but to suggest that refs and citing commissioners are somehow influenced by the poorest Tier 1 team is laughable.
Just look at Lions 2 and Lions 3 for examples of ref interpretation NOT favouring kiwis.
Good luck for the weekend anyway; and if you do get up, I'm really not sure a trip to Chc is winnable for you, especially if the Canes can demo your scrum. Crusaders are smart enough to exploit that to the hilt,a nd take the points, territory and possession that cancome with it
-
@nzzp I'm pretty sure it won't be long until the poaching of south sea islanders is brought up, just to go for the full house.
-
I agree with this.
https://twitter.com/sumostevenson/status/1143272805418450945
-
I agree with this.
https://twitter.com/sumostevenson/status/1143272805418450945
@Stargazer said in Super Rugby News:
I agree with this.
https://twitter.com/sumostevenson/status/1143272805418450945
The flip side to that is that youngsters want to play with the best. As a short term plug in a disastrous team, I think he is a great purchase.
I'd have him in the Chiefs in a heartbeat
-
one thing about it if he does move, the Blues will no doubt have to shell out some cash to get him here, for which Super rugby season? 2021? 2022?
So they still need someone in the interim, lets say one of Plummer, Perofeta or Black start to fulfill thier potential, next thing BB is back, sorry son, back to the bench with you?
Not sure it is a good idea to sign him given the break he is supposedly seeking, this will stagnate the growth of others with the expectation that someone is just keeping his jersey warm until he returns.
Maybe this is why the canes arent fighting so hard to retain his services?
-
one thing about it if he does move, the Blues will no doubt have to shell out some cash to get him here, for which Super rugby season? 2021? 2022?
So they still need someone in the interim, lets say one of Plummer, Perofeta or Black start to fulfill thier potential, next thing BB is back, sorry son, back to the bench with you?
Not sure it is a good idea to sign him given the break he is supposedly seeking, this will stagnate the growth of others with the expectation that someone is just keeping his jersey warm until he returns.
Maybe this is why the canes arent fighting so hard to retain his services?
@taniwharugby Meh, we'll probably play him at fullback...
SS is full of shit, Crusaders (and other teams) import plenty of players. Not to mention our best ever ten was from Levin! Hardly new territory for the Blues.
-
what the fuck Sumo? That is some of your dumbest work.
-
I agree with this.
https://twitter.com/sumostevenson/status/1143272805418450945
@Stargazer said in Super Rugby News:
I agree with this.
https://twitter.com/sumostevenson/status/1143272805418450945
Umm, no. The message it sends is we’re fuckentired of being bottom-feeders. What’s good for the goose...
-
I agree with this.
https://twitter.com/sumostevenson/status/1143272805418450945
@Stargazer said in Super Rugby News:
I agree with this.
https://twitter.com/sumostevenson/status/1143272805418450945
Did his brain leave along with most of his weight? What youngster wouldn't want to understudy an All Black of his stature in what would almost immediately become a finals team?
-
@Stargazer said in Super Rugby News:
I agree with this.
https://twitter.com/sumostevenson/status/1143272805418450945
Did his brain leave along with most of his weight? What youngster wouldn't want to understudy an All Black of his stature in what would almost immediately become a finals team?
@antipodean said in Super Rugby News:
@Stargazer said in Super Rugby News:
I agree with this.
https://twitter.com/sumostevenson/status/1143272805418450945
What youngster wouldn't want to understudy an All Black of his stature in what would almost immediately become a finals team?
Wait what!!!
-
@antipodean said in Super Rugby News:
@Stargazer said in Super Rugby News:
I agree with this.
https://twitter.com/sumostevenson/status/1143272805418450945
What youngster wouldn't want to understudy an All Black of his stature in what would almost immediately become a finals team?
Wait what!!!
-
I see a lot of short-term thinking in some of the reactions. The Blues would sign an aging All Black (Barrett will be 30 years and 9 months at the beginning of the 2022 SR season), who hasn't played SR for two years. He won't get better during his two years absence, to put it mildly.
In 2020 and 2021, the Blues would - presumably - stick with at least two of Plummer, Black and Perofeta. In those two years - you'd hope - these players develop into better players than they are now. One of them might end up becoming the incumbent no. 10.
And then - boom - Barrett comes into the squad in 2022. Is he going to get that starting 10 jersey based on past glory, or does he actually have to earn it? So that incumbent of 2021, whoever it is, suddenly drops to the bench? And his back-up drops out of the 23 and will only be used for rotation or injury cover? Good chance that at least two of those three that have played in 2020-21 will leave.
And then, when it's 2024, Barrett leaves or retires. You've only one of those original 3 from 2020-21 left. Maybe one or two young rookies, who've maybe trained with Barrett during the previous years and learned a few tricks from the old dog.
What have the Blues actually gained? They've had two years with an aging All Black, which by no means guarantees a better performance of the Blues at all, because one player cannot carry the team and other crucial players may have left (one or two of the Ioanes, for example; or Tuipulotu etc). The Blues will probably have lost one or two players they developed in previous years. If they're lucking, they've still one of those players left, and a few rookies. Whoopee, what a progress!
-
@KiwiMurph said in Super Rugby News:
@Nepia I'm assuming finals = playoffs.
I think my point still stands.
(I may have missed reading the S on final
) -
Yeah it's the same old story for the Blues.
Go for the flashy signing to help cover things up.
They've tried it numerous times and it hasn't worked
- Benji
- SBW - aside from one brilliant performance v BIL he was a dud signing for Blues. Played well mostly when he was on the field but the problem was he rarely was. He barely played a full season combined in the 3 years he played for Blues.
- Nonu (multiple times). Nonu actually played well for the last 2 of his 3 total seasons at the Blues but especially this last stint what value did it actually add to the Blues? Not Nonu's fault at all of course - he played well but they are now stuck with a gap in their midfield for next year. You could argue he helped develop Faiane's game however it could also be argued Faiane's development came in last year's Mitre 10 Cup.
- Weepu.
