• Categories
Collapse

The Silver Fern

Crusaders v Blues

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Rugby Matches
bluescrusaders
159 Posts 32 Posters 12.6k Views
Crusaders v Blues
    • 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.
  • TimT Away
    TimT Away
    Tim
    replied to hydro11 on last edited by
    #90

    @hydro11 The NZRU has no reason to tolerate consistent failure, especially in their biggest market. They're not a science experiment, they're a business.

    H 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • KiwiMurphK Offline
    KiwiMurphK Offline
    KiwiMurph
    wrote on last edited by
    #91

    Cracking game! Very predictable 2nd half but much better Blues performance. The midfield out and outside backs were excellent - even Collins!

    You have to remember the Crusaders have 7 All Black tight 5 players - it told in the end.

    How the fuck did Simon Hickey keep Mitch Hunt on the bench 2 years ago for Auckland - Paul Feeney you are a fucking moron.

    M 1 Reply Last reply
    4
  • H Offline
    H Offline
    hydro11
    replied to Tim on last edited by
    #92

    @Tim said in Crusaders v Blues:

    @hydro11 The NZRU has no reason to tolerate consistent failure, especially in their biggest market. They're not a science experiment, they're a business.

    The Blues do well in general. They just suck against New Zealand teams and the competition punishes them for that. Making the Blues do better will just be at the expense of other New Zealand teams and it is something that wouldn't be afforded to another franchise.

    TimT 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • M Offline
    M Offline
    muddyriver
    replied to KiwiMurph on last edited by
    #93

    @KiwiMurph a player can get a whole lot better in 2 years. Hunt wasn't even starting 10 for Ta$man last year. Feeny had the Auckland backline humming

    DiceD KiwiMurphK 3 Replies Last reply
    0
  • TimT Away
    TimT Away
    Tim
    replied to hydro11 on last edited by
    #94

    @hydro11 Do you think that the NZRU is a disinterested observer dedicated to objective analysis of provincial organisations?

    Their objective is to maximise the performance of NZ Rugby. That means that they have to deliver performance for their largest market.

    They run the game. They contract the players. Tolerating continual non-performance in their largest market is negligence. What kind of competent business would operate like that?

    H 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • H Offline
    H Offline
    hydro11
    replied to Tim on last edited by
    #95

    @Tim said in Crusaders v Blues:

    @hydro11 Do you think that the NZRU is a disinterested observer dedicated to objective analysis of provincial organisations?

    Their objective is to maximise the performance of NZ Rugby. That means that they have to deliver performance for their largest market.

    They run the game. They contract the players. Tolerating continual non-performance in their largest market is negligence. What kind of competent business would operate like that?

    In what sort of competition does the national governing body intervene to ensure that their favourite team wins?

    It would be like the NRL letting the Storm breach the salary cap because they want to grow the game in Melbourne. It's preposterous.

    1 Reply Last reply
    3
  • TimT Away
    TimT Away
    Tim
    wrote on last edited by
    #96

    I did not say win the competition. I said ensure competence. You have created a strawman there.

    NZ Rugby could not be more different to the NRL. There are many franchises in Sydney, not one. Players are centrally contracted by the NZRU. They have near total control of everything. They cannot abdicate responsibility in their largest market.

    If they want to keep losing ground to soccer in Auckland, they are going the right way.

    H 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • StargazerS Offline
    StargazerS Offline
    Stargazer
    wrote on last edited by
    #97

    Looking at the Crusaders starting line-up:

    1 - first choice/AB
    2 - first choice/AB
    3 - first choice/AB
    4 - first choice/AB
    5 - first choice/AB
    6 - first choice
    7 - injury replacement
    8 - injury replacement
    9 - rotating duo
    10 - injury replacement
    11 - injury replacement
    12 - first choice/AB
    13 - injury replacement (and a late one, too)
    14 - injury replacement
    15 - injury replacement

    Very heavy at the front, very light at the back.

    TimT StargazerS 2 Replies Last reply
    2
  • TimT Away
    TimT Away
    Tim
    replied to Stargazer on last edited by
    #98

    @Stargazer Given that, it's amazing that the Blues dropped their game plan to attack out wide in the second half. Tried to defend the lead and really went into their shell.

    1 Reply Last reply
    2
  • StargazerS Offline
    StargazerS Offline
    Stargazer
    replied to Stargazer on last edited by
    #99

    @Stargazer said in Crusaders v Blues:

    Looking at the Crusaders starting line-up:

    1 - first choice/AB - 28
    2 - first choice/AB - 25
    3 - first choice/AB - 29
    4 - first choice/AB - 23
    5 - first choice/AB - 28
    6 - first choice - 25
    7 - injury replacement - 26
    8 - injury replacement - 26
    9 - rotating duo - 25
    10 - injury replacement - 21
    11 - injury replacement - 21
    12 - first choice/AB - 28
    13 - injury replacement (and a late one, too) - 21
    14 - injury replacement - 20
    15 - injury replacement - 22

    Very heavy at the front, very light at the back.

    It's even clearer if you look at their age!

    Chris B.C 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • DiceD Offline
    DiceD Offline
    Dice
    replied to muddyriver on last edited by
    #100

    What's Tom Coventry up to? He's an expert at getting the most out of his packs. Things like maul defense is his bread and butter.

    TimT 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • TimT Away
    TimT Away
    Tim
    replied to Dice on last edited by
    #101

    @Dice said in Crusaders v Blues:

    Tom Coventry

    New North Harbour coach.

    DiceD 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • KiwiMurphK Offline
    KiwiMurphK Offline
    KiwiMurph
    replied to muddyriver on last edited by
    #102

    @muddyriver Hickey still had an average season despite the luxury ride he got that season. Auckland fans were calling for him to be dropped - for example he cost Auckland home advantage in Eden Park loss to Canterbury during regular season. Hunt barely got a run.

    TimT 1 Reply Last reply
    2
  • DiceD Offline
    DiceD Offline
    Dice
    replied to muddyriver on last edited by Tim
    #103

    @muddyriver said in Crusaders v Blues:

    @KiwiMurph a player can get a whole lot better in 2 years. Hunt wasn't even starting 10 for Ta$man last year. Feeny had the Auckland backline humming

    Hunt was pretty good for Auckland off the bench. I wouldn't hold it against Hunt not starting for Ta$man, Marty Banks is kind of like a superstar at ITM Cup level.

    Although our backline was humming, Hickey was atrocious(him and his brother) that year. I've never seen a 10 look so average behind such a dominant pack, especially at ITM Cup level.

    (Editors note: dominant, not dominate. Common Fern grammatical error.)

    TimT 1 Reply Last reply
    2
  • TimT Away
    TimT Away
    Tim
    replied to KiwiMurph on last edited by
    #104

    @KiwiMurph Yep. Hickey was obviously not up to it, and Hunt showed some class every time he came on. Jeez the Auckland forwards were good that year.

    Same organisation that appointed Nick White. Who ruined the Auckland pack.

    M 1 Reply Last reply
    2
  • DiceD Offline
    DiceD Offline
    Dice
    replied to Tim on last edited by
    #105

    @Tim said in Crusaders v Blues:

    @Dice said in Crusaders v Blues:

    Tom Coventry

    New North Harbour coach.

    Oh yeah, I know that, I just want him to pop in and give us a helping hand.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • TimT Away
    TimT Away
    Tim
    replied to Dice on last edited by
    #106

    @Dice Yep, we lost the final because they replaced the halfback. Johno Hickey was so slow. Completely changed the game.

    If I become a biotech billionaire success I will dedicate myself fulltime to video analysis for Auckland/NH/Blues.

    1 Reply Last reply
    2
  • H Offline
    H Offline
    hydro11
    replied to Tim on last edited by
    #107

    @Tim said in Crusaders v Blues:

    I did not say win the competition. I said ensure competence. You have created a strawman there.

    NZ Rugby could not be more different to the NRL. There are many franchises in Sydney, not one. Players are centrally contracted by the NZRU. They have near total control of everything. They cannot abdicate responsibility in their largest market.

    If they want to keep losing ground to soccer in Auckland, they are going the right way.

    They are competent though. They are probably the 7th or 8th best team in the competition. You haven't backed up your assertion that they aren't competent.

    TimT 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • M Offline
    M Offline
    muddyriver
    replied to Tim on last edited by
    #108

    @Tim Nick white was the forwards coach that year....

    TimT 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • Chris B.C Offline
    Chris B.C Offline
    Chris B.
    replied to Stargazer on last edited by Chris B.
    #109

    @Stargazer said in Crusaders v Blues:

    @Stargazer said in Crusaders v Blues:

    Looking at the Crusaders starting line-up:

    It's even clearer if you look at their age!

    And even more so if you look at the changes made around halftime when we were down heavily.

    Well, actually, a different point, but crikey, the second/third string did well.

    1 Reply Last reply
    1

Crusaders v Blues
Rugby Matches
bluescrusaders
  • 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.