Crusaders v Chiefs (SF)

[pakman]

@taniwharugby said in Crusaders v Chiefs (SF):

another forward pass missed there, but Crusaders get a penalty.

Love the Chiefs' ambition, but boy do they throw a lot of 40:60 passes!
TKB getting distance on his passes, but half the time Crudes has to reach over his head to collect, and tempo slowed.

[Winger]

@taniwharugby
watched it again. It clearly went backwards. also watched the Chiefs try again. chiefs fans could be feeling rightly pissed off

[Canerbry]

Try not given was justice for two forward passes missed by Waikato's Glen Jackson in the movement.

Crusaders been very patient, Chiefs spent a lot of time slowly going backwards, will run out off puff with trip across the Indian Ocean and wet track.

[taniwharugby]

@Winger dunno, I think there was seperation, therefore no try, but think it was wrong that the TMO stepped in when he wasnt asked.

[pakman]

For me TNW had skin contact with ball all the way to ground, so try. And I didn't think fumble at end of half went forward. So 6-10 seems tough on Chiefs.

Great scrambling by Saders.

Second will be a case of tackle fatigue versus travel fatigue. A try early in second might be enough to swing it...

[hydro11]

@pakman said in Crusaders v Chiefs (SF):

For me TNW had skin contact with ball all the way to ground, so try. And I didn't think fumble at end of half went forward. So 6-10 seems tough on Chiefs.

Great scrambling by Saders.

Second will be a case of tackle fatigue versus travel fatigue. A try early in second might be enough to swing it...

Only balance to that is that Lowe should have gone to the bin.

[taniwharugby]

shame we didnt see this from Cruden a few weeks back

[Gunner]

I have zero emotional attachment to this game, but that ruling infuriates me.

We are consistently led to believe that not rolling away is a penalty, regardless if it is intentional, or the defending player has 17 guys lying on top of him at the tackle...

Just don't get it when on the odd occasion a ref rules a scrum because it was 'unplayable'....

[Donsteppa]

James Lowe... FFS

[KiwiMurph]

@Gunner Yep there is no consistency with that ruling.

[KiwiMurph]

And that is why James Lowe was never an All Black...

[taniwharugby]

@Donsteppa wtf....I am 30 sec behind you

[hydro11]

James Lowe has a great left boot but his right boot has been a big liability.

[Canerbry]

Bahahaha. That was insane.

[mimic]

I'm sorry, but that was a knock on.
That went back into Lowe, which meant that it was propelled forward by the Cantab

[Gunner]

@KiwiMurph said in Crusaders v Chiefs (SF):

And that is why James Lowe was never an All Black...

Oh is that why? I always thought it was because he had a fucking terrible hair cut.

[hydro11]

@mimic said in Crusaders v Chiefs (SF):

I'm sorry, but that was a knock on.
That went back into Lowe, which meant that it was propelled forward by the Cantab

I can see why some people will feel that way but IMO it wasn't clear and obvious.

[Nepia]

@KiwiMurph @Donsteppa Settle down you two - that was a freakish play, likely the same result with any kicker.

[taniwharugby]

@mimic yeah the laws of physics would say it had to have gone 'forward' off red into LOwe to have then gone back into Dagg

[hydro11]

@Nepia said in Crusaders v Chiefs (SF):

@KiwiMurph @Donsteppa Settle down you two - that was a freakish play, likely the same result with any kicker.

It happened because Lowe mucked around to pivot on his left because he doesn't back his right foot. At test level, players are analysed so much. I don't think you can get away with being a kicker who only kicks off one foot in international rugby. Mo'unga knew this and targeted his left foot. Good reward for reviewing the tape during the week.