Blues v Crusaders
-
The author of this article is clearly a Perofeta fan.
The 22-year-old Perofeta was one of the Blues best players on the night. -
The author of this article is clearly a Perofeta fan.
The 22-year-old Perofeta was one of the Blues best players on the night.@Stargazer said in Blues v Crusaders:
The author of this article is clearly a Perofeta fan.
The 22-year-old Perofeta was one of the Blues best players on the night.Wow. Just wow. And rugby media wonders why we gravitate to teh Fern and other fan sites.
In fairness, he's better at 15 than 10, but he hasn't kicked on. Not the first 10 to get wrecked by the Blues...
-
Still no update about Jager's head injury.
-
The author of this article is clearly a Perofeta fan.
The 22-year-old Perofeta was one of the Blues best players on the night.@Stargazer said in Blues v Crusaders:
The author of this article is clearly a Perofeta fan.
The 22-year-old Perofeta was one of the Blues best players on the night.That's sarcasm. He did a chip kick he was lucky to regather and everything else about his work was dreadful. Normally a developing five-eighth can see opportunities but needs to develop their execution - he's bad at both.
-
@Stargazer said in Blues v Crusaders:
The author of this article is clearly a Perofeta fan.
The 22-year-old Perofeta was one of the Blues best players on the night.Wow. Just wow. And rugby media wonders why we gravitate to teh Fern and other fan sites.
In fairness, he's better at 15 than 10, but he hasn't kicked on. Not the first 10 to get wrecked by the Blues...
@nzzp said in Blues v Crusaders:
In fairness, he's better at 15 than 10, but he hasn't kicked on
It's been obvious for a couple of seasons that his best position is 15.
Forget the Blues, his best games for Taranaki have been at 15 and his good cameos at 10 have dried up. Without remembering the individual games, I suspect that small sample of good matches at 10 were behind a dominant Taranaki pack.
The mistake the Blues are making is continuing to select him at 10. It's not his natural position and it's wasting his potential as a fullback -
@cgrant McKenzie at fullback is not a given. BB might get that 15 jersey, and McKenzie 22.
@Stargazer said in Blues v Crusaders:
@cgrant McKenzie at fullback is not a given. BB might get that 15 jersey, and McKenzie 22.
Shit, I agree. There seems a lot of of love on the Fern for Dmac post RWC, but I personally have never been a fan. Obvs he is good, but he's still too helter skelter for me. I dont mind him.on the bench, as there are certain open games he can be really effective in. But equally I think there are lots of tighter games that he adds little value but plenty of danger to.
[Braces self for intense rebuttal from the Fern]
-
Am not sure why Blues supporters are upset. Did anyone really think they had a chance?
I still expect Blues to be third in the NZ conference, so if you lose to the Canes and/or the Clan then toys should be thrown with abandon.
@booboo if you think back to last year, they were only a missed penalty away from beating a much stronger Saders team, there’s nothing wrong with having expectation ..
-
Am not sure why Blues supporters are upset. Did anyone really think they had a chance?
I still expect Blues to be third in the NZ conference, so if you lose to the Canes and/or the Clan then toys should be thrown with abandon.
@booboo said in Blues v Crusaders:
I still expect Blues to be third in the NZ conference
A confident statement but I'm not really sure your expectations are realistic. The Chiefs, Crusaders and Canes all look alot stronger than the Blues and all have a proven track record of making the playoffs year in and year out. The Blues look like the same rabble of years gone by, a true reflection of a broken culture.
-
@booboo said in Blues v Crusaders:
I still expect Blues to be third in the NZ conference
A confident statement but I'm not really sure your expectations are realistic. The Chiefs, Crusaders and Canes all look alot stronger than the Blues and all have a proven track record of making the playoffs year in and year out. The Blues look like the same rabble of years gone by, a true reflection of a broken culture.
@Canes4life said in Blues v Crusaders:
@booboo said in Blues v Crusaders:
I still expect Blues to be third in the NZ conference
A confident statement but I'm not really sure your expectations are realistic. The Chiefs, Crusaders and Canes all look alot stronger than the Blues and all have a proven track record of making the playoffs year in and year out. The Blues look like the same rabble of years gone by, a true reflection of a broken culture.
They've played three games.
Two against what I believe are the top two teams in the comp, which they lost. As expected.
I'm not about to head off to the knee-jerk reaction thread just yet.
A fortnight with a couple of good results does amazing things for a team's and fan's confidence.
Imagine if they'd lost any of those games 27 nil (nil!) say.
-
@Canes4life said in Blues v Crusaders:
@booboo said in Blues v Crusaders:
I still expect Blues to be third in the NZ conference
A confident statement but I'm not really sure your expectations are realistic. The Chiefs, Crusaders and Canes all look alot stronger than the Blues and all have a proven track record of making the playoffs year in and year out. The Blues look like the same rabble of years gone by, a true reflection of a broken culture.
They've played three games.
Two against what I believe are the top two teams in the comp, which they lost. As expected.
I'm not about to head off to the knee-jerk reaction thread just yet.
A fortnight with a couple of good results does amazing things for a team's and fan's confidence.
Imagine if they'd lost any of those games 27 nil (nil!) say.
@booboo yeah but the same old signs are there of a team that wilters when things get tough. They had a massive lead against the Chiefs and blew it and they hardly fired a shot against the Crusaders. For you to say that you expected them to lose is a great reflection of where the mindset around the Blues stands.
The Canes had a shocker first game (no excuses) but turned around and beat the Jaguares who were on a 10 game winning streak at home, they then returned home and got the job done against a red hot Sharks side. The Canes don't all of a sudden go from Semi-Finalists to the scrap heap just because a certain someone decides to defect North. This is still a very good side, with enough talent in my mind to win the whole thing.
We will see in a few weeks time where these two teams are at, but I'm picking the Canes to comfortably put away the Blues at home and make it 10 wins in a row.
-
We're three games into the season. Way too early for any conclusions ...
On top of that, the Blues, Chiefs, Crusaders have played two NZ derbies and the Canes and Highlanders have only played overseas' opposition.
@Stargazer we will see where things are at when the Blues come to town in a few weeks.
-
@booboo yeah but the same old signs are there of a team that wilters when things get tough. They had a massive lead against the Chiefs and blew it and they hardly fired a shot against the Crusaders. For you to say that you expected them to lose is a great reflection of where the mindset around the Blues stands.
The Canes had a shocker first game (no excuses) but turned around and beat the Jaguares who were on a 10 game winning streak at home, they then returned home and got the job done against a red hot Sharks side. The Canes don't all of a sudden go from Semi-Finalists to the scrap heap just because a certain someone decides to defect North. This is still a very good side, with enough talent in my mind to win the whole thing.
We will see in a few weeks time where these two teams are at, but I'm picking the Canes to comfortably put away the Blues at home and make it 10 wins in a row.
@Canes4life said in Blues v Crusaders:
For you to say that you expected them to lose is a great reflection of where the mindset around the Blues stands.
You're kidding, right? The TAB expected the Blues to lose; we've on the improve, but you don't go to those games doing anything but hoping for a win.
-
A team that withers when things get tough. Loses after having a massive lead. Because it's tough having a massive lead?
@Bones said in Blues v Crusaders:
A team that withers when things get tough. Loses after having a massive lead. Because it's tough having a massive lead?
You obviously haven't had the misfortune of watching the mentally fragile Blues for a while. They're hard to support, adn seem mostly shot mentally. I think we're getting better, but it takes time. Oh god, it takes time.
-
@Bones said in Blues v Crusaders:
A team that withers when things get tough. Loses after having a massive lead. Because it's tough having a massive lead?
You obviously haven't had the misfortune of watching the mentally fragile Blues for a while. They're hard to support, adn seem mostly shot mentally. I think we're getting better, but it takes time. Oh god, it takes time.
-
@nzzp watched them last weekend! Was just pointing out how odd it is to say they're a team that loses when the going gets tough and use losing after having a big lead to support that.
