Skip to content
  • Categories
Collapse

The Silver Fern

  • Tipping
  • Team Sheets
  • Highlights
  • Results
    • All Blacks

      Search every All Blacks Test. Filter results by year, opposition, location, venue, city and RWC stage

    • Super Rugby

      Search every Super Rugby since match 1996

    • NPC

      Search NPC results. Only first division matches from 1976-2005. All results from the 14 team competition (2006-present) are included

Chiefs v Blues

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Rugby Matches
chiefsblues
115 Posts 31 Posters 3.1k Views 2 Watching
  • 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 pakman

    @Dan54 said in Chiefs v Blues:

    @KiwiMurph said in Chiefs v Blues:

    @Dan54 said in Chiefs v Blues:

    @Mr-Fish said in Chiefs v Blues:

    Finlay Christie has (rightfully) copped a lot of criticism on here but Sam Nock's kicking was abysmal on Saturday.

    I agree really , not really a Christie fan, but in general would start him ahead of Nock. I don't get the Nock love , he's ok ,but in I don't think he anything special by any means.
    I do suspect we mark players who are or have been ABs a lot harder? Understand why up to a point, but for some players don't seem to be makred the same.

    This feels like gaslighting. Christie doesn't get marked hard because he was an All Black.

    The Blues attack when Christie starts looks really poor because he has real issues on attack - he's both a slow and poor decision maker from the breakdown, he has a high error rate and he struggles with messy ball.

    That's not to say Nock is perfect - Nock has issues on defence and his kicking game is weak.

    However - on balance I'd prefer Nock to keep starting. I'm willing to roll with Nock's weaknesses and get the benefit of the attacking shape.

    I not a Blues man, so I don't probably really examine how some of their players go. But just my opinion is that Nock and Plummer are handbrakes on Blues if they trying to play anything but power style they played last year. I also said same about BB, he wasn't Blues'problem in first few games (neither were Nock,Chistie etc) , the problem in first games were forwards, and their ability to support.
    Mind you that's just how I saw it, and as I say I pretty neutral on how Blues go.

    I am an admirer of Harry Plummer as a great asset in the Blues squad. That said, it is obvious that BB and SP have dramatically upped the Blues’s tempo when they’ve been at 10. That has significantly improved the effectiveness of the Blues backs.

    Dan54D Offline
    Dan54D Offline
    Dan54
    wrote on last edited by
    #100

    @pakman said in Chiefs v Blues:

    @Dan54 said in Chiefs v Blues:

    @KiwiMurph said in Chiefs v Blues:

    @Dan54 said in Chiefs v Blues:

    @Mr-Fish said in Chiefs v Blues:

    Finlay Christie has (rightfully) copped a lot of criticism on here but Sam Nock's kicking was abysmal on Saturday.

    I agree really , not really a Christie fan, but in general would start him ahead of Nock. I don't get the Nock love , he's ok ,but in I don't think he anything special by any means.
    I do suspect we mark players who are or have been ABs a lot harder? Understand why up to a point, but for some players don't seem to be makred the same.

    This feels like gaslighting. Christie doesn't get marked hard because he was an All Black.

    The Blues attack when Christie starts looks really poor because he has real issues on attack - he's both a slow and poor decision maker from the breakdown, he has a high error rate and he struggles with messy ball.

    That's not to say Nock is perfect - Nock has issues on defence and his kicking game is weak.

    However - on balance I'd prefer Nock to keep starting. I'm willing to roll with Nock's weaknesses and get the benefit of the attacking shape.

    I not a Blues man, so I don't probably really examine how some of their players go. But just my opinion is that Nock and Plummer are handbrakes on Blues if they trying to play anything but power style they played last year. I also said same about BB, he wasn't Blues'problem in first few games (neither were Nock,Chistie etc) , the problem in first games were forwards, and their ability to support.
    Mind you that's just how I saw it, and as I say I pretty neutral on how Blues go.

    I am an admirer of Harry Plummer as a great asset in the Blues squad. That said, it is obvious that BB and SP have dramatically upped the Blues’s tempo when they’ve been at 10. That has significantly improved the effectiveness of the Blues backs.

    Mate, I always been a Plummer fan, would be in my squad too. Remember he was mainly at 12 for Blues until Perofeta and Sullivan were out last year.
    Not against him, but he not what I would call a creative 10.

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
    • Dan54D Dan54

      @KiwiMurph said in Chiefs v Blues:

      @Dan54 said in Chiefs v Blues:

      @Mr-Fish said in Chiefs v Blues:

      Finlay Christie has (rightfully) copped a lot of criticism on here but Sam Nock's kicking was abysmal on Saturday.

      I agree really , not really a Christie fan, but in general would start him ahead of Nock. I don't get the Nock love , he's ok ,but in I don't think he anything special by any means.
      I do suspect we mark players who are or have been ABs a lot harder? Understand why up to a point, but for some players don't seem to be makred the same.

      This feels like gaslighting. Christie doesn't get marked hard because he was an All Black.

      The Blues attack when Christie starts looks really poor because he has real issues on attack - he's both a slow and poor decision maker from the breakdown, he has a high error rate and he struggles with messy ball.

      That's not to say Nock is perfect - Nock has issues on defence and his kicking game is weak.

      However - on balance I'd prefer Nock to keep starting. I'm willing to roll with Nock's weaknesses and get the benefit of the attacking shape.

      I not a Blues man, so I don't probably really examine how some of their players go. But just my opinion is that Nock and Plummer are handbrakes on Blues if they trying to play anything but power style they played last year. I also said same about BB, he wasn't Blues'problem in first few games (neither were Nock,Chistie etc) , the problem in first games were forwards, and their ability to support.
      Mind you that's just how I saw it, and as I say I pretty neutral on how Blues go.

      KiwiMurphK Offline
      KiwiMurphK Offline
      KiwiMurph
      wrote on last edited by
      #101

      @Dan54 said in Chiefs v Blues:

      But just my opinion is that Nock and Plummer are handbrakes on Blues if they trying to play anything but power style they played last year.

      I can understand the comment regarding Plummer

      I don't understand how Nock is a handbrake and Finlay Christie isn't?

      Dan54D 1 Reply Last reply
      2
      • KiwiMurphK KiwiMurph

        @Dan54 said in Chiefs v Blues:

        But just my opinion is that Nock and Plummer are handbrakes on Blues if they trying to play anything but power style they played last year.

        I can understand the comment regarding Plummer

        I don't understand how Nock is a handbrake and Finlay Christie isn't?

        Dan54D Offline
        Dan54D Offline
        Dan54
        wrote on last edited by
        #102

        @KiwiMurph said in Chiefs v Blues:

        @Dan54 said in Chiefs v Blues:

        But just my opinion is that Nock and Plummer are handbrakes on Blues if they trying to play anything but power style they played last year.

        I can understand the comment regarding Plummer

        I don't understand how Nock is a handbrake and Finlay Christie isn't?

        I not sure Nock is more of a handbrake than Christie, although maybe Christie is a little quicker. I maybe thinking of the Christie/Nock battle being a couple of similar ability 9s, so no sure why only one gets pointed at. Once again, both are capable players at super level, I believe.

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • A Offline
          A Offline
          ARHS
          wrote on last edited by
          #103

          Nock has a great pass, just not a great tactician or kicker. I don't get the heavy criticism of Christie.
          I assume that team tactics mean having the collision points in the opposition half, so a lot more kicks by 9. But they need to get contestable to work.

          TimT 1 Reply Last reply
          1
          • A ARHS

            Nock has a great pass, just not a great tactician or kicker. I don't get the heavy criticism of Christie.
            I assume that team tactics mean having the collision points in the opposition half, so a lot more kicks by 9. But they need to get contestable to work.

            TimT Offline
            TimT Offline
            Tim
            wrote on last edited by
            #104

            @ARHS said in Chiefs v Blues:

            Nock has a great pass, just not a great tactician or kicker.

            Nock has all the skills, but has never been able to execute them. despite excelling at times - the turnover at Eden Park against the Hurricanes last year was a notable example.

            His passing is excellent, he has sometime been very good to the ruck or poor, same with his box kicking which has been good or poor.

            A very frustrating player. That was the performance profile that we expected from the Blues for a long time. Reversion to that mean is unacceptable.

            1 Reply Last reply
            4
            • M Offline
              M Offline
              Mr Fish
              wrote on last edited by
              #105

              Nock can't kick, Christie can't pass. It's a tough world.

              A 1 Reply Last reply
              1
              • M Mr Fish

                Nock can't kick, Christie can't pass. It's a tough world.

                A Offline
                A Offline
                African Monkey
                wrote on last edited by
                #106

                @Mr-Fish said in Chiefs v Blues:

                Nock can't kick, Christie can't pass. It's a tough world.

                I wouldn't say Nock can't kick. He's got a big box kick. Just tends to overcook his kicks sometimes.

                taniwharugbyT 1 Reply Last reply
                1
                • A African Monkey

                  @Mr-Fish said in Chiefs v Blues:

                  Nock can't kick, Christie can't pass. It's a tough world.

                  I wouldn't say Nock can't kick. He's got a big box kick. Just tends to overcook his kicks sometimes.

                  taniwharugbyT Offline
                  taniwharugbyT Offline
                  taniwharugby
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #107

                  @African-Monkey yea he certainly has a.kicking game, but like most of his game, inconsistent.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  1
                  • nzzpN Offline
                    nzzpN Offline
                    nzzp
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #108

                    Crikey!

                    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/rugby/super-rugby/chiefs-fined-for-conversion-interference-during-super-rugby-pacific-win-over-blues/YUXCQEOT2ZFW5B6RNGHVGXDZWY/

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    2
                    • M Offline
                      M Offline
                      Machpants
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #109

                      That should be a points loss, disgusting

                      nzzpN 1 Reply Last reply
                      4
                      • M Machpants

                        That should be a points loss, disgusting

                        nzzpN Offline
                        nzzpN Offline
                        nzzp
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #110

                        @Machpants said in Chiefs v Blues:

                        That should be a points loss, disgusting

                        You can't ding the team for that. The individual should lose pitchside privileges for some time though - it's a muppet thing to do... twice!

                        M antipodeanA 2 Replies Last reply
                        1
                        • nzzpN nzzp

                          @Machpants said in Chiefs v Blues:

                          That should be a points loss, disgusting

                          You can't ding the team for that. The individual should lose pitchside privileges for some time though - it's a muppet thing to do... twice!

                          M Offline
                          M Offline
                          Machpants
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #111

                          @nzzp said in Chiefs v Blues:

                          @Machpants said in Chiefs v Blues:

                          That should be a points loss, disgusting

                          You can't ding the team for that. The individual should lose pitchside privileges for some time though - it's a muppet thing to do... twice!

                          Disagree, they're part of the team. It affected the game, and it's cheating.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          1
                          • DuluthD Offline
                            DuluthD Offline
                            Duluth
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #112

                            I looked at the footage. You can't see the incidents because they are showing replays. But you can tell that the trainer had to move a decent distance to get to the ball, particularly the second time

                            I hope they checked previous matches too

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • YeetyaahY Offline
                              YeetyaahY Offline
                              Yeetyaah
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #113

                              Some supreme shithousery really. But is what it is and the club has been fined.

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • BonesB Offline
                                BonesB Offline
                                Bones
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #114

                                Dick thing to do and I wouldn't be against it being reclassified as a loss for the chiefs... but I don't really understand players getting rid of the ball post try anyway, so lesson learned on both sides.

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                1
                                • nzzpN nzzp

                                  @Machpants said in Chiefs v Blues:

                                  That should be a points loss, disgusting

                                  You can't ding the team for that. The individual should lose pitchside privileges for some time though - it's a muppet thing to do... twice!

                                  antipodeanA Offline
                                  antipodeanA Offline
                                  antipodean
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #115

                                  @nzzp said in Chiefs v Blues:

                                  @Machpants said in Chiefs v Blues:

                                  That should be a points loss, disgusting

                                  You can't ding the team for that. The individual should lose pitchside privileges for some time though - it's a muppet thing to do... twice!

                                  The rot starts at the top: “We have co-operated fully with Sanzaar on this matter and accept responsibility for the technical breach and the outcome of this process,” Graafhuis said. “As this is an employment matter, we will not be making any further comment.”

                                  What a great catch-all comment that is as practically everything can be considered an employment matter.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  Reply
                                  • Reply as topic
                                  Log in to reply
                                  • Oldest to Newest
                                  • Newest to Oldest
                                  • Most Votes


                                  • Login

                                  • Don't have an account? Register

                                  • Search
                                  • First post
                                    Last post
                                  0
                                  • Categories
                                  • Search