Canes vs Chiefs

Stargazer

This interview with Rennie confirms what I said before; the footage starts too late and it's necessary to look at what happened before that line-out.
 
<a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://www.radiosport.co.nz/sport-news/rugby/dave-rennie-furious-over-chiefs-cheating-accusations/'>http://www.radiosport.co.nz/sport-news/rugby/dave-rennie-furious-over-chiefs-cheating-accusations/</a>

Crazy Horse

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Baron Silas Greenback" data-cid="575386" data-time="1461816779">
<div>
It is just an accusation with incredibly shaky evidence at this stage. What part of what I said do you think is untrue? or irrelevant?
</div>
</blockquote>
I am sure you will correct me if I am wrong, but it seemed to me you were dismissing the accusations point blank. There is enough evidence to warrant a further investigation if the relevant authorities can be bothered. To categorically dismiss the possibility the Chiefs tried to manipulate the rules to their advantage is as foolhardy as convicting the chiefs on that evidence.
 
I suspect it is stone they will leave unturned. For one, it will be incredibly hard to prove without admissions, and two, I am sure every team has done something similar. Do they really want to open that can of worms?

Siam

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Stargazer" data-cid="575414" data-time="1461819737">
<div>
This interview with Rennie confirms what I said before; the footage starts too late and it's necessary to look at what happened before that line-out.
 
<a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://www.radiosport.co.nz/sport-news/rugby/dave-rennie-furious-over-chiefs-cheating-accusations/'>http://www.radiosport.co.nz/sport-news/rugby/dave-rennie-furious-over-chiefs-cheating-accusations/</a>
</div>
</blockquote>
 
Fair enough Dave, that was a very good response - can I suggest the team doctor checks for sciatica, might save some diagnosis time later on? ;)

Chris B.

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote">
The Chiefs, as is their right under scrum safety rules, declared that Siegfried Fisiihoi - who came on to the field apparently ready to play - was not proficient enough as a tighthead prop to play at Super Rugby level. That meant he had to leave the field, reducing the Chiefs to 14 men but negating the Hurricanes' clear advantage at scrum time.
The Chiefs starting tighthead prop Atunaisa Moli had left the field late in the first half with an injury and was replaced by Tokolahi.
The new footage will fuel critics' claims that the Chiefs manipulated the rules to their advantage. Fisiihoi, a converted No. 8, has played as a tighthead for Bay of Plenty in NPC rugby.
But Rennie suggested to Radio Sport earlier this week that Fisiihoi was not up to the jump in standard, saying he had been "hammered" when trying out as a tighthead scrummager at Chiefs trainings.
 
</blockquote>
 
Christ - it's the "Cropper Incident" all over again. Where's Keith Quinn when you need him? "We know he can play tighthead prop - we've seen him".
 
Poor old Cropper was just a flanker being asked to play hooker. :)

Siam

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Chris B." data-cid="575419" data-time="1461820682">
<div>
Christ - it's the "Cropper Incident" all over again. Where's Keith Quinn when you need him? "We know he can play tighthead prop - we've seen him".
 
Poor old Cropper was just a flanker being asked to play hooker. :)
</div>
</blockquote>
 
I was thinking that and kept getting mentally blocked with "Coffey" instead of poor old Phil - couldn't reconcile why a 1st 5 had to go into the front row :)

Chris B.

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Siam" data-cid="575421" data-time="1461820835">
<div>
I was thinking that and kept getting mentally blocked with "Coffey" instead of poor old Phil - couldn't reconcile why a 1st 5 had to go into the front row :)
</div>
</blockquote>
 
Greg Coffey - played lower grade cricket against him. He played for Marist, so probably would have pulled this sort of trick if he could have.
 
I guess the key question is how many points the Chiefs should be docked for this?
 
I'm thinking definitely the four for the match and then applying the same logic as was applied to Nadolo, double it to provide a deterrent to other teams - so that's eight and then maybe another couple just in case they win in Fiji?
 
So that's ten - a nice round number and very fair.

Baron Silas Greenback

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Crazy Horse" data-cid="575416" data-time="1461820171">
<div>
I am sure you will correct me if I am wrong, but it seemed to me you were dismissing the accusations point blank. There is enough evidence to warrant a further investigation if the relevant authorities can be bothered. To categorically dismiss the possibility the Chiefs tried to manipulate the rules to their advantage is as foolhardy as convicting the chiefs on that evidence.
 
I suspect it is stone they will leave unturned. For one, it will be incredibly hard to prove without admissions, and two, I am sure every team has done something similar. Do they really want to open that can of worms? 
</div>
</blockquote>
 
 
I am dismissing that video and the commentary... yes. The commentary is laughable.

Billy Tell

Ah. The days when you could take drop goals from free kicks...

taniwharugby

I liked the 'half-story Herald' comment.

fcc

So to summarise Rennie's defence:
<ul><li>I think he's pissed off, but I'm not sure because he only mentions it about 7,000 times</li>
<li>The video evidence isn't complete because we had rubbed some deep heat on his back previously</li>
<li>Tokolahi didn't want to go off but we knew he had to. How did we know? He was monstered in the previous 2 scrums</li>
<li>Its ridiculous to think the fact that we pulled him off had anything to do with our scrum being under pressure.</li>
</ul> 
So the scrum had nothing to do with the substitution but the fact that he was going backwards proved he was injured, therefore proving he should go off... oh and apparently he's pissed off.

taniwharugby

So in summary, you think Rennie is a liar

Chris B.

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="fcc" data-cid="575433" data-time="1461823471">
<div>
So to summarise Rennie's defence:
<ul><li>I think he's pissed off, but I'm not sure because he only mentions it about 7,000 times</li>
<li>The video evidence isn't complete because we had rubbed some deep heat on his back previously</li>
<li>Tokolahi didn't want to go off but we knew he had to. How did we know? He was monstered in the previous 2 scrums</li>
<li>Its ridiculous to think the fact that we pulled him off had anything to do with our scrum being under pressure.</li>
</ul> 
So the scrum had nothing to do with the substitution but the fact that he was going backwards proved he was injured, therefore proving he should go off... oh and apparently he's pissed off.
</div>
</blockquote>
 
He'll be even more pissed off when he's docked ten points. :)

SammyC

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="fcc" data-cid="575433" data-time="1461823471">
*]Tokolahi didn't want to go off but we knew he had to. How did we know? He was monstered in the previous 2 scrums </blockquote>
 
That Japanese prop has obviously been injured all season then!

Baron Silas Greenback

This thread is interesting, it is full of people really wanting to seriously accuse the Chiefs of cheating and Rennie of being a liar. But they just quite manage it, so they dance around the edges.
Lets have some people actually say they think the Chiefs cheated and Rennie is a liar... based on that video from the Herald.

Baron Silas Greenback

<ul><li>I think he's pissed off, but I'm not sure because he only mentions it about 7,000 times</li>
</ul>Wouldnt you be pissed off if you were a pro coach accused of cheating by a newspaper?
<ul><li>The video evidence isn't complete because we had rubbed some deep heat on his back previously</li>
</ul>You have no idea what level of treatment he had or discussions that were had between the player and the trainer, trivializing the injury is just dishonest. The video isnt complete because they showed fuck all about when the injury occurred, previous treatment and previous activity.
<ul><li>Tokolahi didn't want to go off but we knew he had to. How did we know? He was monstered in the previous 2 scrums</li>
</ul>And maybe he was monstered previously because of the injury? You just dont know.
<ul><li>Its ridiculous to think the fact that we pulled him off had anything to do with our scrum being under pressure.</li>
</ul>It is ridiculous, unless you think the Chiefs cheated and Rennie lied about it. But we are back to actual proof rather than smear.

Toddy

I haven't seen the video, but during the game I thought Rennie cheated and is now lying.

Crucial

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Toddy" data-cid="575450" data-time="1461827695">I haven't seen the video, but during the game I thought Rennie cheated and is now lying.</blockquote>
 
You are directly accusing one of the straightest, most up front guys in Rugby of cheating and lying even after he has debunked the shonky accusations to uphold the integrity of his team? 
Sad.

Toddy

I'm fine with that. Though I'd hardly expect his biggest fluffer to say any different.

Baron Silas Greenback

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Toddy" data-cid="575450" data-time="1461827695">
<div>
I haven't seen the video, but during the game I thought Rennie cheated and is now lying.
</div>
</blockquote>
 
Crikey..... :idiot2:

Nepia

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Toddy" data-cid="575457" data-time="1461829160">
<div>
I'm fine with that. Though I'd hardly expect his biggest fluffer to say any different.
</div>
</blockquote>
That's me you son of a bitch!
 
;)

The Silver Fern

Canes vs Chiefs