SRA: Final. Crusaders vs Chiefs
-
@taniwharugby said in SRA: Final. Crusaders vs Chiefs:
@yeetyaah said in SRA: Final. Crusaders vs Chiefs:
Bridge didn't even try to ground the ball in the ingoal area which is a penalty.
Its only a penalty if he deliberately bats it dead, he doesn't have to try and ground it.
IMO he tried to hook at it to get it bagk to him, much like that attempt to intercept that doesn't quite come off.
*Law 10.2 (c) Throwing into touch. A player must not intentionally knock, place, push or throw the ball with his arm or hand into touch, touch-in-goal, or over the dead ball line.
Sanction: Penalty kick ...
A penalty try must be awarded if the offence prevents a try that would probably otherwise have been scored.*Sonny Bill did of course get a yellow card for deliberately doing it against France, and a penalty try against us. Angus Gardner did say afterwards that it shouldn't have been a yellow though (which he dished out).
The laws are so vague with regard to "intent" (refs aren't mind readers) but I agree in this case that he just failed to gather it or get it to ground cleanly.
-
@yeetyaah said in SRA: Final. Crusaders vs Chiefs:
@shark said in SRA: Final. Crusaders vs Chiefs:
@yeetyaah said in SRA: Final. Crusaders vs Chiefs:
@crazy-horse I didn't think they were too bad. After sobering up I don't think the Chiefs played to win. However, if Will Jordan's tackle on Jonah Lowe was high infront of the tryline, that's a penalty try. If the contact is direct to the head, that's a red card. Bridge didn't even try to ground the ball in the ingoal area which is a penalty.
Yeah you totally should have won. Any team who can't or won't take advantage of a two man advantage really deserves to win.
Did you actually read what I said?
Um, it's the fern...
-
@crucial said in SRA: Final. Crusaders vs Chiefs:
@booboo said in SRA: Final. Crusaders vs Chiefs:
@yeetyaah said in SRA: Final. Crusaders vs Chiefs:
@chris if it wasn't a penalty it should have been a Chiefs 5m scrum as he touched it last.
Not sure about the new flaw variation, but in normal laws it would have been a 22 as the Chief's put it into the in-goal area.
No. Defending player made it dead so 5m scrum. That isn't one of the reasons for goal line drop out either.
I think Pickerell was asleep at times.
Think I may be channelling some 1980s memories ...
-
Good game for the neutrals. Well done Chiefs for making it a great hour or so. If you had a decent kicker you might have taken it.😉
Amazing maul defence against 13!
All the confusion about red cards is entirely the fault of the rugby administrators. 3 red cards would have been dished out on the latest interpretations from the last world cup. We were told 2+2 always equals 4, and now it sometimes equals 3.
Bridge tried to force the ball my arse. Oh, it was a mistake so no penalty - do we apply that to every penalisable mistake?
Thank you Nisbo, time to go, your mis- naming is becoming a distraction.
Awesome defence and tackling from the Red forwards.
DMac will always only be a B+ player with intermittent flashes of an A player. Good lad though.
Havilli to start as AB 2nd five.
Gatland has improved his running game remarkably.
The best coach in NZ isn't in charge of the All Blacks
Well done Crusaders, great standards and excellent rugby.
Well done Chiefs, after last year and a paltry roster, they did bloody well. If it was my team I'd be proud as punch.Bring on the Aussies
-
@siam good summation. Especially the Nisbo comment. It's becoming quite frequent and with that frequency comes annoyance and yes, distraction. At that point it becomes untenable having him continue. They probably need to make a call on it immediately and give him a farewell tour this season so he can bow out only a little on the downward slide.
-
-
@siam said in SRA: Final. Crusaders vs Chiefs:
@shark it does mate. I find myself following the player instead of the ball as my brain processes the audio/visual disparity. Stupid old coot. Thanks for his years of service though🙂
I started a thread on this months ago as I don’t see the broadcasters doing anything to blood new talent to take over which leaves us with TJ becoming the “senior”
Sadly Nisbo has gone down the same path as his predecessor. -
@crazy-horse I wouldn't be surprised. Crusaders success is institutional. They could easily be making him look better than he is.
-
@derpus said in SRA: Final. Crusaders vs Chiefs:
@crazy-horse I wouldn't be surprised. Crusaders success is institutional. They could easily be making him look better than he is.
Maybe, but the Crusaders look like a well coached team. I think about the Blackadder days, where the team was arguably stronger on paper. They under achieved. At the time I was saying they didn't look well coached.
-
What's the deal with the reffing? There is no interpretation that allows the ref to award Reece a yellow. Direct contact to the head without a mitigating factor is red. O'Keefe seemed to say that it didn't result in serious harm and so it was just a yellow.
-
@booboo said in SRA: Final. Crusaders vs Chiefs:
@snowy said in SRA: Final. Crusaders vs Chiefs:
@booboo said in SRA: Final. Crusaders vs Chiefs:
Just the vibe I got from the game is I'm not as down about the All Blacks as I was. Played at pace with great skill.
Foster.
Don't buy in to the hate.
Me neither , I just don't get it.
-
@derpus said in SRA: Final. Crusaders vs Chiefs:
What's the deal with the reffing? There is no interpretation that allows the ref to award Reece a yellow. Direct contact to the head without a mitigating factor is red. O'Keefe seemed to say that it didn't result in serious harm and so it was just a yellow.
Both Nanai-Seturo's high tackles were also direct contact to the head.
-
@derpus said in SRA: Final. Crusaders vs Chiefs:
What's the deal with the reffing? There is no interpretation that allows the ref to award Reece a yellow. Direct contact to the head without a mitigating factor is red. O'Keefe seemed to say that it didn't result in serious harm and so it was just a yellow.
There's an enormous difference between how SRA is controlled and how other Rugby competitions are currently officiated. NZ-based players, coaches and fans are going to be shocked when they encounter the rest of the world's refereeing in 2021. I suspect there will be a lot of Yellow and Red cards for what in SRA has been deemed okay.
-
@cantab79 said in SRA: Final. Crusaders vs Chiefs:
@derpus said in SRA: Final. Crusaders vs Chiefs:
What's the deal with the reffing? There is no interpretation that allows the ref to award Reece a yellow. Direct contact to the head without a mitigating factor is red. O'Keefe seemed to say that it didn't result in serious harm and so it was just a yellow.
Both Nanai-Seturo's high tackles were also direct contact to the head.
That doesn’t seem to matter as it was the chiefs so it doesn’t count apparently.
Just makes winning sweeter to stick it up the jealous bitter ones. -
@sparky said in SRA: Final. Crusaders vs Chiefs:
@derpus said in SRA: Final. Crusaders vs Chiefs:
What's the deal with the reffing? There is no interpretation that allows the ref to award Reece a yellow. Direct contact to the head without a mitigating factor is red. O'Keefe seemed to say that it didn't result in serious harm and so it was just a yellow.
There's an enormous difference between how SRA is controlled and how other Rugby competitions are currently officiated. NZ-based players, coaches and fans are going to be shocked when they encounter the rest of the world's refereeing in 2021. I suspect there will be a lot of Yellow and Red cards for what in SRA has been deemed okay.
I think you're taking the sparky and being massively over dramatic on it. Our refs are massively inconsistent at the moment and it's really hard to figure out why, but watching the GP yesterday and while the ref was more consistent in his application, there wasn't any huge difference in interpretation.
-
@derpus said in SRA: Final. Crusaders vs Chiefs:
What's the deal with the reffing? There is no interpretation that allows the ref to award Reece a yellow. Direct contact to the head without a mitigating factor is red. O'Keefe seemed to say that it didn't result in serious harm and so it was just a yellow.
Wrapping the arm is the mitigation for me. Reece is trying to make a proper tackle.
-
@hydro11 said in SRA: Final. Crusaders vs Chiefs:
@derpus said in SRA: Final. Crusaders vs Chiefs:
What's the deal with the reffing? There is no interpretation that allows the ref to award Reece a yellow. Direct contact to the head without a mitigating factor is red. O'Keefe seemed to say that it didn't result in serious harm and so it was just a yellow.
Wrapping the arm is the mitigation for me. Reece is trying to make a proper tackle.
Huh? It's a high tackle.
