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.
Please. Wrong words are actual violence.
-
Like last season, we lose to the Crusaders and then back it up with another loss. It took us a couple of games to recover after that loss.
Keen to see a few changes in the line-up next week. Some big calls to be made but some players need to be put on notice.
Wouldn't mind us going back to the conventional 5:3 split on the bench. I don't think Choat got on last night?
-
@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? 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.
May help that his forward pack is kinda ok
-
@nzzp said in Chiefs v Blues (27 March 2021):
Ruled out maul try by the Blues. I'm not an expert in mauls, as only watching rugby for 30 years, so god knows what the laws are any more. Ref seems keen on the moment the ball gets transferred from the lineout jumper - presumably that's the moment the maul starts. @crucial if that's the criteria for offside, there won't be many mauls left standing - transferring the ball backwards is very standard.
GCT looked to be marginally bound - someone had their arm aruond him the whole time. Personally, I think it shoudl have stood, absent an interpretation I'm not aware of right now. To a non-ref, it looks like everyone binds together as the lineout ends, and drives forward as a unit, the maul splinters and then some of the Blues forwards go forward,I think the words used by the ref are misleading people although ultimately he called obstruction.
The reason he wanted to see the moment of transfer was to see who was bound at that time.
GCT was bound at that time so was part of the 'original' maul.
DP wasn't bound as he received the ball or unbound just as he received it. By then binding back onto GCT he rejoined a player in front which is obstruction.
A more obvious example of this ruling is when at a line out the ball is passed back to a playing coming in (unbound) who then joins onto the players in front. For a moment that player is free to be tackled but being blocked by his team mates in front.
DP's one was slightly different in that he was bound then unbound (able to be tackled) then rebound.
I'd have to watch again to see if I got that 100% right though. He could also have decided that GCT unbound for a moment in which case he becomes offside if he then interferes with play.
Either is momentary which brings up the bugbear of consistency from refs in what constitutes a bind. Don't even get me started on players snaking out a ruck with only fingers on the back of the guy in front. If I was near that ruck I'd be making a play for it while yelling 'he isn't bound sir' -
@ploughboy said in Chiefs v Blues (27 March 2021):
@kev said in Chiefs v Blues (27 March 2021):
@siam said in Chiefs v Blues (27 March 2021):
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.
Yes I keep thinking Damien is not the guy to close out a game for the ABs
i looked at that a few times hard to tell definitively. there was an overlap but defence was splinted on him and next receiver was shut down with Stevenson not even in shot
I have just found a clip on Facebook with all the angles including the overhead. It is out of shot but I suspect that Blue 23 had rushed offside as T3 made the last pass. Mac certainly didn't have a safe option to pass 23 and 11 were both in the way.
I couldn't really work out how DMac got free to score and though DP had made a weak grasping tackle that flung him around to start. When you watch the reverse angle DPs original tackle was OK but DMac shows really good leg strength to hold himself upright meaning that he was able to break free. -
@crucial that how i saw it to.
on the maul penalty i would have been shitty if it was against us. but god we have had some shockers so was nice to have some go our way. ruleing just didnt seem clear ,i wondered if big karl bound in front of the lineout claimer and then shifted maul -
@ploughboy said in Chiefs v Blues (27 March 2021):
@crucial that how i saw it to.
on the maul penalty i would have been shitty if it was against us. but god we have had some shockers so was nice to have some go our way. ruleing just didnt seem clear ,i wondered if big karl bound in front of the lineout claimer and then shifted mauljust went back to teh Crusaders try last week (31 minutes in the first half).
They are so slick. The support players hold back and arms length to show they're onside and then just smoke into the maul full tilt. Very impressive play
-
@gt12 said in Chiefs v Blues (27 March 2021):
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.
What? Reiko missed 6 tackles, the most of any player in the game......including the miss on Jacobson that lead to the final try.
No defensive issues there aye, what a "weapon".
-
-
@kiwimurph said in Chiefs v Blues (27 March 2021):
@sammyc it wasn't a lazy miss on Jacobson but carry on with your agenda.
Edited, happy now?
-
-
@kiwimurph said in Chiefs v Blues (27 March 2021):
@sammyc Not really. Ruru was more to blame for the miss. But don't let context get in the way.
What about the other 5 missed tackles? at least 3 of them one on one with Tupaea by my count..... I just think it's a bit rich to imply he's a good defender at 13.
Leinert-Brown and Tupaea thoroughly outplayed the blues midfield in this one
No doubt an amazing ball runner, and should be playing 13 for the blues so he gets his hands on the ball. But I don't think he starts at 13 for the ABs
But yeah...... agenda
-
@sammyc I was commenting on your 'lazy miss' take. Lazy not a word i'd describe Rieko with - he also topped the tackle count for Blues backs.
I agree he wouldn't be my starting AB 13 either.
He's stuck in no man's land a bit - not outstanding enough at centre or wing to start for ABs.
It's worth noting Blues midfield defence improved greatly when Faiane came on.
-
@sparky said in Chiefs v Blues (27 March 2021):
Patrick Tuipulotu should be allowed to give an interview in any language he wants after his side has lost, he's played poorly and he's not looked like an All Black.
In Japanese or Portuguese? That would be handy in N Z
-
I feel in 2 minds about this result
One that's its good if and only if the Crusaders weren't so far ahead of everyone else. So if there were only 4 teams it would be a great result for the competition
Two an overall disappointment. The Blues aren't really that much better than the other three teams. Slightly better but not much. This means the Crusaders will walk it again. Even easier than last year. And this unevenness of the teams is unlikely to be ever addressed by NZR. -
@winger said in Chiefs v Blues (27 March 2021):
I feel in 2 minds about this result
One that's its good if and only if the Crusaders weren't so far ahead of everyone else. So if there were only 4 teams it would be a great result for the competition
Two an overall disappointment. The Blues aren't really that much better than the other three teams. Slightly better but not much. This means the Crusaders will walk it again. Even easier than last year. And this unevenness of the teams is unlikely to be ever addressed by NZR.I cannot agree that the difference should be addressed by the NZRFU. Blues player list is as impressive as the Crusaders, they need to look within to find out how they perform to Crusader level. They should be evens if not slightly stronger in the forward pack as well.
-
@nevorian said in Chiefs v Blues (27 March 2021):
@winger said in Chiefs v Blues (27 March 2021):
I feel in 2 minds about this result
One that's its good if and only if the Crusaders weren't so far ahead of everyone else. So if there were only 4 teams it would be a great result for the competition
Two an overall disappointment. The Blues aren't really that much better than the other three teams. Slightly better but not much. This means the Crusaders will walk it again. Even easier than last year. And this unevenness of the teams is unlikely to be ever addressed by NZR.I cannot agree that the difference should be addressed by the NZRFU. Blues player list is as impressive as the Crusaders, they need to look within to find out how they perform to Crusader level. They should be evens if not slightly stronger in the forward pack as well.
If NZR don't address it no-one will. As the current financial system benefits teams too much with ABs in them. The best next level down players eventually take off because money
And its not just about the Blues and Crusaders. I want all teams to be fairly exactly strong (or weak) over time. With starting ABs shared out between teams
But I know it would need a lot of thought. But my view is teams with hardly any ABs should have more money to attract the best young talent. (And maybe its not possible to do)
edit Was think about this while walking outside (I've hurt my back so am a bit restricted - and bored - at present)
At present the player contracting is centralised (I hope I'm right). Personally ive always preferred decentralised set - up. So if I was the rugby chief with unlimited power. I would look at moving to a decentralised set-up. When all the payments to the ABs and super rugby players are added. 10% (or less. Just enough to add a bit as required)say goes to the NZR to top up players salary as required. The rest divided between the 5 teams to contract players as they see fit.
-
@nevorian said in Chiefs v Blues (27 March 2021):
@winger said in Chiefs v Blues (27 March 2021):
I feel in 2 minds about this result
One that's its good if and only if the Crusaders weren't so far ahead of everyone else. So if there were only 4 teams it would be a great result for the competition
Two an overall disappointment. The Blues aren't really that much better than the other three teams. Slightly better but not much. This means the Crusaders will walk it again. Even easier than last year. And this unevenness of the teams is unlikely to be ever addressed by NZR.I cannot agree that the difference should be addressed by the NZRFU. Blues player list is as impressive as the Crusaders, they need to look within to find out how they perform to Crusader level. They should be evens if not slightly stronger in the forward pack as well.
Yeah it seems crazy to weaken teams instead of teams working harder to get better
It’s sport some teams dominate maybe we don’t give out trophies and we don’t keep score in case it offends some people.
