Canes vs Chiefs
-
<p>I liked the 'half-story Herald' comment.</p>
-
<p>So to summarise Rennie's defence:</p>
<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><p> </p>
<p>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.</p> -
<p>So in summary, you think Rennie is a liar</p>
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="fcc" data-cid="575433" data-time="1461823471">
<div>
<p>So to summarise Rennie's defence:</p>
<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><p> </p>
<p>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.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>He'll be even more pissed off when he's docked ten points. :)</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="fcc" data-cid="575433" data-time="1461823471"><p>
*]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<br><br></p></blockquote>
<br>
That Japanese prop has obviously been injured all season then! -
<p>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.</p>
<p>Lets have some people actually say they think the Chiefs cheated and Rennie is a liar... based on that video from the Herald.</p> -
<ul><li>I think he's pissed off, but I'm not sure because he only mentions it about 7,000 times</li>
</ul><p style="margin:0px;">Wouldnt you be pissed off if you were a pro coach accused of cheating by a newspaper?</p>
<ul><li>The video evidence isn't complete because we had rubbed some deep heat on his back previously</li>
</ul><p style="margin:0px;">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.</p>
<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><p style="margin:0px;">And maybe he was monstered previously because of the injury? You just dont know.</p>
<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><p style="margin:0px;">It is <span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">ridiculous, unless you think the Chiefs cheated and Rennie lied about it. But we are back to actual proof rather than smear.</span></p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Toddy" data-cid="575450" data-time="1461827695"><p>I haven't seen the video, but during the game I thought Rennie cheated and is now lying.</p></blockquote>
<br>
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?<br><br>
Sad. -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Toddy" data-cid="575450" data-time="1461827695">
<div>
<p>I haven't seen the video, but during the game I thought Rennie cheated and is now lying.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Crikey..... :idiot2:</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Toddy" data-cid="575457" data-time="1461829160">
<div>
<p>I'm fine with that. Though I'd hardly expect his<strong> biggest fluffer </strong>to say any different.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>That's me you son of a bitch!</p>
<p> </p>
<p>;)</p> -
<p>I haven't seen the game myself but SANZAAR have defended the application of the rules. Time to move on.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>BTW, the Chiefs got shafted by the TMO in both games against the Canes last year. I bet Coles et al weren't complaining then. </p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Baron Silas Greenback" data-cid="575445" data-time="1461826756">
<div>
<p>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.</p>
<p>Lets have some people actually say they think the Chiefs cheated and Rennie is a liar... based on that video from the Herald.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>I see it as a situation where, live, everyone would have thought "that could be will full manipulation to get depowered scrums" - paraphrasing Dane Coles</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Some purposely edited video footage appears of what could be considered "suspect" and people raising that question</p>
<p> </p>
<p>And Chiefs fans point blank refuting Rennie could, would or did cheat. Led by you and your sciatica theory</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The vehemence has come from Chief's fans denials not the accusations.</p> -
<p>I can certainly see how it could be seen as manipulation of the rules, especially basing it solely on that one clip, even if there was a valid explanation on that one clip, however, as has turned out, Half-story-Herald didnt bother speaking to the Chiefs and unsurprisingly, there was more to it, and above board, Chiefs management were also aware that because of it, they would be playing with 14, I honestly doubt any coach would willingly do this either.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>As highlighted in the other stuff forum, NZ media is in a shitty place right now.</p> -
I think he totally did this so I'm not defending him in that sense. I'm defending the reason he did it. Thank goodness Canes scrum would have smoked us at the end and every chance we would have conceded the penalty and lost the game. <br><br>
Good work Mr Rennie -
<p>I guess the only way a team forced to concede to depowered scrums wouldn't be questioned is if that team had clear superiority in the scrum. i.e. if the Canes ran out of props in this case</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Has that ever happened?</p>
<p> </p>
<p>But then I think this old adage would apply:</p>
<p> </p>
<p><em>Football is 90 minutes of players pretending they are hurt</em></p>
<p><em>Rugby is 80 minutes of players pretending they aren't</em></p> -
<p>When the Highlanders went to golden oldies v the Force, they didnt have the rule enforced where they had to drop a player did they, they remained at 15 v 15?</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Is this rule the same for all levels of rugby?</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Siam" data-cid="575470" data-time="1461832651"><p>I see it as a situation where, live, everyone would have thought "that could be will full manipulation to get depowered scrums" - paraphrasing Dane Coles<br><br>
Some purposely edited video footage appears of what could be considered "suspect" and people raising that question<br><br>
And Chiefs fans point blank refuting Rennie could, would or did cheat. Led by you and your sciatica theory<br><br>
The vehemence has come from Chief's fans denials not the accusations.</p></blockquote>
The refuting from me has come after hearing the other side of the story not before. <br>
Check back in this thread and the insinuations are similar to those in the herald with only a selective view. <br>
I don't see the accusers explaining why the trainers were treating the player well before the so called evidence. <br>
I understand why there were suspicions. I just don't understand why the still exist, or are amplified to calling Rennie a liar and cheat after he has explained the full story. That's just choosing to ignore evidence contrary to your half baked views. -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Siam" data-cid="575470" data-time="1461832651">
<div>
<p>I see it as a situation where, live, everyone would have thought "that could be will full manipulation to get depowered scrums" - paraphrasing Dane Coles</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Some purposely edited video footage appears of what could be considered "suspect" and people raising that question</p>
<p> </p>
<p>And Chiefs fans point blank refuting Rennie could, would or did cheat. Led by you and your sciatica theory</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The vehemence has come from Chief's fans denials not the accusations.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>You are just making stuff up.</p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Baron Silas Greenback" data-cid="575428" data-time="1461822560">
<div>
<p>I am dismissing that video and the commentary... yes. The commentary is laughable.sayRennie </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>I dismissed the video as proving precisely nothing. What other proof is there of dishonesty?</p>
<p>Where did I say that point blank that Rennie would cheat? I just said that evidence was crap.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Have you been taking lessons from Gollum on how to just make stuff up?</p>
