Blues v Drua
-
The second intercept attempt by RI is an example of why I hate the rule we have now regarding failed intercept attempts. RI was lucky the ball went behind his body after he touched it. If it had gone forward (which it could very easily have done because he barely touched the ball with one hand) there is a good chance he would have seen a yellow.
-
The second intercept attempt by RI is an example of why I hate the rule we have now regarding failed intercept attempts. RI was lucky the ball went behind his body after he touched it. If it had gone forward (which it could very easily have done because he barely touched the ball with one hand) there is a good chance he would have seen a yellow.
@Crazy-Horse said in Blues v Drua:
The second intercept attempt by RI is an example of why I hate the rule we have now regarding failed intercept attempts. RI was lucky the ball went behind his body after he touched it. If it had gone forward (which it could very easily have done because he barely touched the ball with one hand) there is a good chance he would have seen a yellow.
And that's the risk you take, what's the problem?
-
@Crazy-Horse said in Blues v Drua:
The second intercept attempt by RI is an example of why I hate the rule we have now regarding failed intercept attempts. RI was lucky the ball went behind his body after he touched it. If it had gone forward (which it could very easily have done because he barely touched the ball with one hand) there is a good chance he would have seen a yellow.
And that's the risk you take, what's the problem?
@Bones said in Blues v Drua:
@Crazy-Horse said in Blues v Drua:
The second intercept attempt by RI is an example of why I hate the rule we have now regarding failed intercept attempts. RI was lucky the ball went behind his body after he touched it. If it had gone forward (which it could very easily have done because he barely touched the ball with one hand) there is a good chance he would have seen a yellow.
And that's the risk you take, what's the problem?
It's supposed to be a 'genuine' attempt apparently. Intent etc. RI got lucky. Like I said, ball goes forward he probably gets a card. It's another instance in rugby where a judgement on someone's 'intent' can have a big impact if it ends up a yellow card.
-
@Bones said in Blues v Drua:
@Crazy-Horse said in Blues v Drua:
The second intercept attempt by RI is an example of why I hate the rule we have now regarding failed intercept attempts. RI was lucky the ball went behind his body after he touched it. If it had gone forward (which it could very easily have done because he barely touched the ball with one hand) there is a good chance he would have seen a yellow.
And that's the risk you take, what's the problem?
It's supposed to be a 'genuine' attempt apparently. Intent etc. RI got lucky. Like I said, ball goes forward he probably gets a card. It's another instance in rugby where a judgement on someone's 'intent' can have a big impact if it ends up a yellow card.
@Crazy-Horse said in Blues v Drua:
@Bones said in Blues v Drua:
@Crazy-Horse said in Blues v Drua:
The second intercept attempt by RI is an example of why I hate the rule we have now regarding failed intercept attempts. RI was lucky the ball went behind his body after he touched it. If it had gone forward (which it could very easily have done because he barely touched the ball with one hand) there is a good chance he would have seen a yellow.
And that's the risk you take, what's the problem?
It's supposed to be a 'genuine' attempt apparently. Intent etc. RI got lucky. Like I said, ball goes forward he probably gets a card. It's another instance in rugby where a judgement on someone's 'intent' can have a big impact if it ends up a yellow card.
Intercepts are pretty easy, if it looks and smells like a turd...
Let's not fix what's not broken.
-
@Crazy-Horse said in Blues v Drua:
@Bones said in Blues v Drua:
@Crazy-Horse said in Blues v Drua:
The second intercept attempt by RI is an example of why I hate the rule we have now regarding failed intercept attempts. RI was lucky the ball went behind his body after he touched it. If it had gone forward (which it could very easily have done because he barely touched the ball with one hand) there is a good chance he would have seen a yellow.
And that's the risk you take, what's the problem?
It's supposed to be a 'genuine' attempt apparently. Intent etc. RI got lucky. Like I said, ball goes forward he probably gets a card. It's another instance in rugby where a judgement on someone's 'intent' can have a big impact if it ends up a yellow card.
Intercepts are pretty easy, if it looks and smells like a turd...
Let's not fix what's not broken.
@Bones said in Blues v Drua:
@Crazy-Horse said in Blues v Drua:
@Bones said in Blues v Drua:
@Crazy-Horse said in Blues v Drua:
The second intercept attempt by RI is an example of why I hate the rule we have now regarding failed intercept attempts. RI was lucky the ball went behind his body after he touched it. If it had gone forward (which it could very easily have done because he barely touched the ball with one hand) there is a good chance he would have seen a yellow.
And that's the risk you take, what's the problem?
It's supposed to be a 'genuine' attempt apparently. Intent etc. RI got lucky. Like I said, ball goes forward he probably gets a card. It's another instance in rugby where a judgement on someone's 'intent' can have a big impact if it ends up a yellow card.
Intercepts are pretty easy, if it looks and smells like a turd...
Let's not fix what's not broken.
Fixing something that wasn't broken is how we got to this stage. I would rather go back to how it used to be. Give the defender the benefit of the doubt or a penalty at worse. Let's get away from dishing out cards. I am getting card fatigue.
-
@Bones said in Blues v Drua:
@Crazy-Horse said in Blues v Drua:
@Bones said in Blues v Drua:
@Crazy-Horse said in Blues v Drua:
The second intercept attempt by RI is an example of why I hate the rule we have now regarding failed intercept attempts. RI was lucky the ball went behind his body after he touched it. If it had gone forward (which it could very easily have done because he barely touched the ball with one hand) there is a good chance he would have seen a yellow.
And that's the risk you take, what's the problem?
It's supposed to be a 'genuine' attempt apparently. Intent etc. RI got lucky. Like I said, ball goes forward he probably gets a card. It's another instance in rugby where a judgement on someone's 'intent' can have a big impact if it ends up a yellow card.
Intercepts are pretty easy, if it looks and smells like a turd...
Let's not fix what's not broken.
Fixing something that wasn't broken is how we got to this stage. I would rather go back to how it used to be. Give the defender the benefit of the doubt or a penalty at worse. Let's get away from dishing out cards. I am getting card fatigue.
@Crazy-Horse said in Blues v Drua:
@Bones said in Blues v Drua:
@Crazy-Horse said in Blues v Drua:
@Bones said in Blues v Drua:
@Crazy-Horse said in Blues v Drua:
The second intercept attempt by RI is an example of why I hate the rule we have now regarding failed intercept attempts. RI was lucky the ball went behind his body after he touched it. If it had gone forward (which it could very easily have done because he barely touched the ball with one hand) there is a good chance he would have seen a yellow.
And that's the risk you take, what's the problem?
It's supposed to be a 'genuine' attempt apparently. Intent etc. RI got lucky. Like I said, ball goes forward he probably gets a card. It's another instance in rugby where a judgement on someone's 'intent' can have a big impact if it ends up a yellow card.
Intercepts are pretty easy, if it looks and smells like a turd...
Let's not fix what's not broken.
Fixing something that wasn't broken is how we got to this stage. I would rather go back to how it used to be. Give the defender the benefit of the doubt or a penalty at worse. Let's get away from dishing out cards. I am getting card fatigue.
It's only a card if it's clearly denying the opposition the opportunity for a break/try. Again you're excusing the players doing something reckless and desperate just because they apparently had no other option. If you can't make an intercept without it being a good option, fucken don't do it! If you decide to do it, you know the risk.
-
Getting a bit pissed off with what the Drua are getting away with. Offside is stoll offsodw
.... and as I watch Lam is in ...
-
Blues were pretty poor tonight. Just no intensity at all. RI good of course and Lam went well, too. Sotutu seemed frustrated with the lack of support. Really wanted to see the Blues 12 perform but he was pretty meh.
-
I love Rieko’s speed. I cant see any reason why he needs to be on the wing, he’s showing how he can use it on offense and defense.
@gt12 said in Blues v Drua:
I love Rieko’s speed. I cant see any reason why he needs to be on the wing, he’s showing how he can use it on offense and defense.
No one in New Zealand is playing as well as he is at centre.
-
Good hitout in all fairness. The Drua never really let us settle and their loose style of play was proving quite difficult to adjust to. Think we'll take a fair bit put of that, its far more helpful going forward having games like that as opposed to big blowouts.
-
@Tim ex all of those teams, is up here now
-
Getting a bit pissed off with what the Drua are getting away with. Offside is stoll offsodw
.... and as I watch Lam is in ...
@booboo said in Blues v Drua:
Getting a bit pissed off with what the Drua are getting away with. Offside is stoll offsodw
.... and as I watch Lam is in ...
Just watched the remainder of the game (after Lam's try) this morning.
Some extremely charitable reffing in favour of the Drua.
-
-
I love Rieko’s speed. I cant see any reason why he needs to be on the wing, he’s showing how he can use it on offense and defense.
@gt12 said in Blues v Drua:
I love Rieko’s speed. I cant see any reason why he needs to be on the wing, he’s showing how he can use it on offense and defense.
I think he's out best centre currently but would still prefer him on the left wing, which I think he'd also be our best (if he played there).
At any rate he's clearly going to be one of the first names on the teamsheet I'd assume.
-
@gt12 said in Blues v Drua:
I love Rieko’s speed. I cant see any reason why he needs to be on the wing, he’s showing how he can use it on offense and defense.
I think he's out best centre currently but would still prefer him on the left wing, which I think he'd also be our best (if he played there).
At any rate he's clearly going to be one of the first names on the teamsheet I'd assume.
@Nepia said in Blues v Drua:
@gt12 said in Blues v Drua:
I love Rieko’s speed. I cant see any reason why he needs to be on the wing, he’s showing how he can use it on offense and defense.
I think he's out best centre currently but would still prefer him on the left wing, which I think he'd also be our best (if he played there).
At any rate he's clearly going to be one of the first names on the teamsheet I'd assume.
captaincy aside, it's him and Aaron Smith that are in the first XV. Everyone else has questions about the gameplan/fit with others.
Also, Sam Cane has been a monster the last few weeks. His passing has been noticeably awesome in a way I haven't seen from him before. We are blessed with both him and Dalton as 7's in a similar mould
