• Categories
Collapse

The Silver Fern

Chiefs v Blues (27 March 2021)

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Rugby Matches
blueschiefs
445 Posts 54 Posters 19.4k Views
Chiefs v Blues (27 March 2021)
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • P Offline
    P Offline
    pakman
    replied to gt12 on last edited by
    #361

    @gt12 said in Chiefs v Blues (27 March 2021):

    The absolute best thing about this game was that we won and that (most of) the Blues players who I want to see play well, did do so. Both Paps and Robinson were awesome, and I think that Rieko is starting to get the defensive issues sorted as a 13 (which is fucking hard). If Rieko can sort out when to distribute and do it well, he could be an absolute weapon at 13 for the ABs.

    For the Chiefs, I was really impressed by the work rate of the second rowers - both of whom are really 6s, and I was happily surprised by the performance of the scrum. The lineout is still a fucking mess, and our exits are a shambles. I can't help but wonder whether we'd be doing Trask a favor by putting him at 15, but either way I'd like it if he showed bigger effort on defense - he lets through some easy ones.

    From an AB perspective, on the Chiefs side Cane, and Jacobson in particular, looked good in forward. Tuapea looked very promising in backs. DMac and ALB seemed good in parts.

    For Blues Paps test quality performance, and Robinson on fire when he arrived. AIoane and Sotutu both a bit off boil. Christie very sharp. RIoane seems to me to run away from support still. Thought Perofeta was classy.

    Wonder what Foxy and Fozzie made of it?

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • mofitzy_M Offline
    mofitzy_M Offline
    mofitzy_
    wrote on last edited by
    #362

    Don't think it was forward. See that kind of floating pop offload as a player is going to ground all the time. Wasn't forward out of the hands, even if it might have floated forwards a few cm due to momentum.

    BonesB 1 Reply Last reply
    3
  • BonesB Offline
    BonesB Offline
    Bones
    replied to mofitzy_ on last edited by
    #363

    @mofitzy_ it didn't even appear to travel forward on the drone replay.

    1 Reply Last reply
    7
  • BonesB Offline
    BonesB Offline
    Bones
    replied to pukunui on last edited by
    #364

    @pukunui said in Chiefs v Blues (27 March 2021):

    @yeetyaah said in Chiefs v Blues (27 March 2021):

    Is a deliberate knock down not a yellow anymore? Blatant from Dalton.

    I must have missed when they made them an automatic yellow like Justin Marshall seemed so convinced it was.

    Yeah he was being an egg most of the game. A lot tend to end in a yellow due to the nature of it - last gasp attempt to stop a try scoring attack. This wasn't that.

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • broughieB Offline
    broughieB Offline
    broughie
    replied to KiwiMurph on last edited by
    #365

    @kiwimurph The more the competition moves forward the more he is being shown up and if the Blues forwards aren’t going forward it is more obvious. Just wondering are all our first fives midgets? Mounga gets away with it because he is quick and can break the line with his elusiveness. The rest appear to be excellent NPC players.

    BovidaeB boobooB 2 Replies Last reply
    0
  • P Offline
    P Offline
    pakman
    replied to ARHS on last edited by pakman
    #366

    @arhs said in Chiefs v Blues (27 March 2021):

    And great improvement from Tupaea. Ross was massive too

    Chiefs front row held up much better than expected. Odd considering starting front row had edge over Chch starters? 🤷🏽‍♂

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • CrucialC Offline
    CrucialC Offline
    Crucial
    replied to pakman on last edited by
    #367

    @pakman said in Chiefs v Blues (27 March 2021):

    Without rewatching that, in the world of competent officials Blues won.

    The GCT obstruction is pretty ludicrous. The maul laws are built around legalised obstruction. To not give that makes a mockery of a mockery. Granted, if ref had blown real time, slightly harder to complain.

    As for final awarded non-try, on a close watch the ball was plainly marginally forward. It wasn't clear and obvious, and it wasn't much forward, but it WAS forward.

    So the ref misses a forward pass because it wasn't clear and obvious, and awards a try. But because the forward pass wasn't clear and obvious (as it wasn't in the first place) the TMO can't overturn it.

    Almost a paradox.

    Two wrongs do not make a right.

    The rules need to be amended to state that if there is a mistake, even if not clear and obvious, the decision is overturned.

    Having said that, apalling performance by the Blue. The fact they were the legitimate winners is not excuse for the huge dropping of standards.

    Some brilliantly baffling logic in that post.
    It wasn’t clear and obvious but it did happen because I saw it
    🤔 🤔 🤔 🤔

    P 1 Reply Last reply
    6
  • P Offline
    P Offline
    pakman
    replied to Crucial on last edited by pakman
    #368

    @crucial said in Chiefs v Blues (27 March 2021):

    @pakman said in Chiefs v Blues (27 March 2021):

    Without rewatching that, in the world of competent officials Blues won.

    The GCT obstruction is pretty ludicrous. The maul laws are built around legalised obstruction. To not give that makes a mockery of a mockery. Granted, if ref had blown real time, slightly harder to complain.

    As for final awarded non-try, on a close watch the ball was plainly marginally forward. It wasn't clear and obvious, and it wasn't much forward, but it WAS forward.

    So the ref misses a forward pass because it wasn't clear and obvious, and awards a try. But because the forward pass wasn't clear and obvious (as it wasn't in the first place) the TMO can't overturn it.

    Almost a paradox.

    Two wrongs do not make a right.

    The rules need to be amended to state that if there is a mistake, even if not clear and obvious, the decision is overturned.

    Having said that, apalling performance by the Blue. The fact they were the legitimate winners is not excuse for the huge dropping of standards.

    Some brilliantly baffling logic in that post.
    It wasn’t clear and obvious but it did happen because I saw it
    🤔 🤔 🤔 🤔

    When you watch the overhead forensically is it clear the ball went forward. It ISN’T obvious — you have to look very carefully to see it.

    Jacobson passes just after he places his right knee on ground. Arm comes up. Possibly goes forward (not clear) but not back. Ball goes forward, probably a foot.

    He’s grounded so it’s not momentum.

    Just wasn’t a try.

    In the old days wouldn’t have been questioned and try would have stood.

    But now we DO have the technology, and TMO consistently getting decisions wrong.

    If ref didn’t see the offload, his opinion oughtn’t to count.

    But as a Blues fan I’m almost glad they didn’t get the win, because their drop in standards didn’t deserve one.

    BonesB CrucialC 2 Replies Last reply
    0
  • BonesB Offline
    BonesB Offline
    Bones
    replied to pakman on last edited by
    #369

    @pakman I didn't see it go forward.

    P 2 Replies Last reply
    5
  • P Offline
    P Offline
    pakman
    replied to Bones on last edited by pakman
    #370

    @bones said in Chiefs v Blues (27 March 2021):

    @pakman I didn't see it go forward.

    You need to do play/pause repeatedly to be clear. If you watch other angles to see exactly when ball released and then do pause/play on overhead, marking where ball left hands, you’ll see it.

    Ball let go a bit before five yard line and caught almost on it.

    All that said and done, it’s in the book now.

    BonesB Dan54D 2 Replies Last reply
    1
  • P Offline
    P Offline
    pakman
    replied to Bones on last edited by pakman
    #371

    @bones P.S. I think Jacobson’s body from overhead obscures the initial release, and it’s already gone a little forward when it comes into view.

    Not obvious.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • BonesB Offline
    BonesB Offline
    Bones
    replied to pakman on last edited by
    #372

    @pakman said in Chiefs v Blues (27 March 2021):

    @bones said in Chiefs v Blues (27 March 2021):

    @pakman I didn't see it go forward.

    You need to do play/pause repeatedly to be clear. If you watch other angles to see exactly when ball released and then do pause/play on overhead, marking where ball left hands, you’ll see it.

    Ball let go a bit before five yard line and caught almost on it.

    All that said and done, it’s in the book now.

    We already concluded last week that I should be TMO. Stop challenging for my title.

    1 Reply Last reply
    5
  • BovidaeB Offline
    BovidaeB Offline
    Bovidae
    replied to broughie on last edited by
    #373

    @broughie said in Chiefs v Blues (27 March 2021):

    @kiwimurph The more the competition moves forward the more he is being shown up and if the Blues forwards aren’t going forward it is more obvious. Just wondering are all our first fives midgets?

    Black might not look it but he is easily the biggest of the 1st 5s. Listed as 1.85 m and 86 kg. Larger than Perofeta, for example.

    broughieB 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • CrucialC Offline
    CrucialC Offline
    Crucial
    replied to pakman on last edited by
    #374

    @pakman said in Chiefs v Blues (27 March 2021):

    @crucial said in Chiefs v Blues (27 March 2021):

    @pakman said in Chiefs v Blues (27 March 2021):

    Without rewatching that, in the world of competent officials Blues won.

    The GCT obstruction is pretty ludicrous. The maul laws are built around legalised obstruction. To not give that makes a mockery of a mockery. Granted, if ref had blown real time, slightly harder to complain.

    As for final awarded non-try, on a close watch the ball was plainly marginally forward. It wasn't clear and obvious, and it wasn't much forward, but it WAS forward.

    So the ref misses a forward pass because it wasn't clear and obvious, and awards a try. But because the forward pass wasn't clear and obvious (as it wasn't in the first place) the TMO can't overturn it.

    Almost a paradox.

    Two wrongs do not make a right.

    The rules need to be amended to state that if there is a mistake, even if not clear and obvious, the decision is overturned.

    Having said that, apalling performance by the Blue. The fact they were the legitimate winners is not excuse for the huge dropping of standards.

    Some brilliantly baffling logic in that post.
    It wasn’t clear and obvious but it did happen because I saw it
    🤔 🤔 🤔 🤔

    When you watch the overhead forensically is it clear the ball went forward. It ISN’T obvious — you have to look very carefully to see it.

    Jacobson passes just after he places his right knee on ground. Arm comes up. Possibly goes forward (not clear) but not back. Ball goes forward, probably a foot.

    He’s grounded so it’s not momentum.

    Just wasn’t a try.

    In the old days wouldn’t have been questioned and try would have stood.

    But now we DO have the technology, and TMO consistently getting decisions wrong.

    If ref didn’t see the offload, his opinion oughtn’t to count.

    But as a Blues fan I’m almost glad they didn’t get the win, because their drop in standards didn’t deserve one.

    Hate to tell you but momentum is still on the ball when a player stops.

    'Clear and Obvious' was a term they started using to draw a line in the sand on decision making.
    Unlike fans that will make a ruling on 'likely' or 'probable' the idea is that unless you can clearly see an obvious happening then you don't overturn a decision.
    Even after viewing in over and over and frame by frame as you suggest it still isn't clear and obvious so it beggars belief that you can say that it happened. On what evidence?
    It was a line ball that was easy to declare a challenge on even in real time. That still doesn't mean it happened.

    I suggest you apply the same rigour to the maul non-try and you will see Dalton receive the ball then unbind (or unbind just before or as he received it) the join back onto a player in front. Pretty clear and pretty obvious. He didn't keep one arm bound to the original maul and the guy in front had also unbound

    P 1 Reply Last reply
    2
  • taniwharugbyT Offline
    taniwharugbyT Offline
    taniwharugby
    wrote on last edited by taniwharugby
    #375

    I think some of Black's less than ideal performance last night sits with Mcdonald, he is fucking around with the 9, not allowing a combo to be built.

    Week 1 - Nock
    Week 2- good Ruru
    Week 3 - shit Ruru
    Week 4 - Christie

    I think Dalton is playing like Cane circa 2014/2015, and also better than the AB captain.

    Dan54D 1 Reply Last reply
    3
  • broughieB Offline
    broughieB Offline
    broughie
    replied to Bovidae on last edited by
    #376

    @bovidae Well that’s encouraging. Maybe we groom Jordie as a back 1st five to add a bit of starch to that position.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • Dan54D Offline
    Dan54D Offline
    Dan54
    replied to pakman on last edited by
    #377

    @pakman said in Chiefs v Blues (27 March 2021):

    @bones said in Chiefs v Blues (27 March 2021):

    @pakman I didn't see it go forward.

    You need to do play/pause repeatedly to be clear. If you watch other angles to see exactly when ball released and then do pause/play on overhead, marking where ball left hands, you’ll see it.

    Ball let go a bit before five yard line and caught almost on it.

    All that said and done, it’s in the book now.

    Yep pakman, but if you do that and still struggling to work out if ball came out forwards or backwards the right decision was made, it has to be clearly forward to over rule the try. I think if the ref had called it no try because of forward pass it wouldn't have been over ruled either. So as a neutral I pretty content with decision.

    P 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • Dan54D Offline
    Dan54D Offline
    Dan54
    replied to taniwharugby on last edited by
    #378

    @taniwharugby said in Chiefs v Blues (27 March 2021):

    I think some of Black's less than ideal performance last night sits with Mcdonald, he is fucking around with the 9, not allowing a combo to be built.

    I think the reality is Otere is not a top 10, he was pretty ordinary last year until he had BB helping him from 15 and he has had only a couple of good games this year when Blue's pack was absolutely on top.

    1 Reply Last reply
    4
  • sparkyS Offline
    sparkyS Offline
    sparky
    wrote on last edited by
    #379

    The Blues are too ordinary at 9 and 10 to be serious title contenders.

    K 1 Reply Last reply
    2
  • SiamS Offline
    SiamS Offline
    Siam
    wrote on last edited by
    #380

    The match winning try. Damien McKenzie is a good player, no doubt about it. A really good player would have passed it.

    Good win Chiefs though, now if someone can beat the red team we might have a half interesting comp.

    K 1 Reply Last reply
    3

Chiefs v Blues (27 March 2021)
Rugby Matches
blueschiefs
  • Login

  • Don't have an account? Register

  • Login or register to search.
  • First post
    Last post
0
  • Categories
  • Login

  • Don't have an account? Register

  • Login or register to search.