Blues v Chiefs
-
not straight was before the high tackle
-
self doubt gonna start creeping in now...?
-
@crucial said in Blues v Chiefs:
@antipodean said in Blues v Chiefs:
@crucial I'd suggest the technique was perfect. Had he been tackling someone who weighed +80kg, he would've wrapped his arms.
That's like saying it isn't a high shot because the player was short.
No, really it's not. There's nothing in the laws that supports your assertion. The tackle wasn't a shoulder charge, nor was it high.
@antipodean said in Blues v Chiefs:
@crucial said in Blues v Chiefs:
@antipodean said in Blues v Chiefs:
@crucial I'd suggest the technique was perfect. Had he been tackling someone who weighed +80kg, he would've wrapped his arms.
That's like saying it isn't a high shot because the player was short.
No, really it's not. There's nothing in the laws that supports your assertion. The tackle wasn't a shoulder charge, nor was it high.
Not saying that tackle was high.
The fact that he connected with the point of the shoulder before the arm came around is what I am saying. The wording of the law supports your view, which is why I don't have a big issue but the object of the law is to stop point of shoulder contact.
Hence the reason I suggested a word from the ref about timing. -
Poor pass there
-
@antipodean someone said before the game if the Blues cant win this one...
-
Apart from a couple of questionable backs, I wouldn’t call that a terrible Chiefs team at all.
Even if they play pretty well, The Blues will find a way to lose, so what are you Chiefs fans claiming the moral underdog status for anyway?
