Crusaders v Blues
-
@KiwiMurph Oh snap.
How do the media always manage to find the worst photos of players? I'm sure they do it on purpose.
-
-
@Hooroo said in Crusaders v Blues:
@KiwiMurph said in Crusaders v Blues:
Crusaders: David Havili, Sevu Reece, Jack Goodhue, Ryan Crotty, George Bridge, Richie Mo'unga, Bryn Hall, Whetukamokamo Douglas, Matt Todd, Jordan Taufua, Sam Whitelock (captain), Scott Barrett, Michael Alaalatoa, Andrew Makalio, Joe Moody. Reserves: Brodie McAlister, Isi Tu'ungafasi, George Bower, Luke Romano, Ethan Blackadder, Mitchell Drummond, Mitchell Hunt, Braydon Ennor.Pull your pants down, Blues. This may tickle a little
I thought it would pinch?
-
Crusaders team looks weak...
-
Looks Strong enough to me with Moodey back. Read Missing but Douglas has been one of our best players this season.Great to Brodie McAlister get a run he's a talented young hooker.
The only Question Mark for me is Head Space after all the pathetic allegations (which seems to have no substance) that have been thrown at the team. -
Most interesting feature, perhaps, is the bench props.
Bower and Tuúngafasi supplanting Allan and Jager.
A few weeks ago there were Moody, Taylor, Read and Bridge still to do rests in this period between our byes. Just George left to rest, I think - perhaps waiting for Jordan to be back on board?
-
-
@Stargazer Did he miss those since our bye? If so, I've just forgotten he didn't play.
If not, I think he has to miss one to avoid playing a streak of seven games.
-
@Stargazer said in Crusaders v Blues:
@KiwiMurph From that article:
But Umaga is pretty sure they won't see a Crusaders side with visible cracks from the inquiry that has been launched over the off-field incidents, even if they will be missing All Blacks skipper Kieran Read from their pack this week as he takes a designated rest to coincide with the stinger he picked up in Cape Town.
I'm not so sure. The Crusaders were very rattled after the Chch terror attack; this will affect at least the players concerned, and one of them is probably the most important player in their team.
And no Read.
If there's one week in which the Blues have a good chance of beating the Saders, it's this week.
Slight difference between a terrorist attack and some weak allegations against a couple of players.
Can’t see it affecting the team at all, other than to bunker down and support their teammates.
-
@Hooroo said in Crusaders v Blues:
@Tim said in Crusaders v Blues:
@Hooroo 57 points worth of tickling?
It will be some sorta ticklin, make no mistake.
We have the forward pack to keep it close, like in round one. We aren’t going to win this, especially away and especially against the Crusaders.
But we can make them work for it.
-
@Chris-B He missed the games against the Chiefs in round 4; Hurricanes, Brumbies and Highlanders in round 7, 8 & 9; the bye was round 10 ... yup, you're right; he still has to miss one. But they've not been consistent with the requirements, for example, with Rieko Ioane and Dmac (and I think another players, can't remember who), so maybe they will be lenient in his case as well, because he already missed 4 games. We'll see. I guess the Rebels game will be the one to miss.
-
@Kirwan said in Crusaders v Blues:
Slight difference between a terrorist attack and some weak allegations against a couple of players.
Can’t see it affecting the team at all, other than to bunker down and support their teammates.
Razor just has to give Richie the right amount of pre-game beer. Enough so he forgets about the allegations, but not so much that he runs amok!
-
@Chris-B said in Crusaders v Blues:
@Kirwan said in Crusaders v Blues:
Slight difference between a terrorist attack and some weak allegations against a couple of players.
Can’t see it affecting the team at all, other than to bunker down and support their teammates.
Razor just has to give Richie the right amount of pre-game beer. Enough so he forgets about the allegations, but not so much that he runs amok!
Mo'unga really doesn't have to play that well to be better than what Cameron was vs Tahs.
-
@Kirwan said in Crusaders v Blues:
@Stargazer said in Crusaders v Blues:
@KiwiMurph From that article:
But Umaga is pretty sure they won't see a Crusaders side with visible cracks from the inquiry that has been launched over the off-field incidents, even if they will be missing All Blacks skipper Kieran Read from their pack this week as he takes a designated rest to coincide with the stinger he picked up in Cape Town.
I'm not so sure. The Crusaders were very rattled after the Chch terror attack; this will affect at least the players concerned, and one of them is probably the most important player in their team.
And no Read.
If there's one week in which the Blues have a good chance of beating the Saders, it's this week.
Slight difference between a terrorist attack and some weak allegations against a couple of players.
Can’t see it affecting the team at all, other than to bunker down and support their teammates.
If you're accused of something bad, even if it's based on no or few facts, and you are already condemned by the trial of (social) media and receiving lots of hateful messages because you're in the limelight, it's going to affect you, however weak the allegations are. These are young players and this will be hard for them. I have no doubt it will affect at least the four players involved, esp RM and GB. Hopefully, it won't affect their game, but it wouldn't surprise me at all.
Edit: different situation, but remember that interview with Pat T after that affair with the positive A sample and the media already finding him guilty of doping? In that interview he clearly stated how hard it had been, for him and his family, eventhough he knew he hadn't used anything.
-
Keep safe Blues, these Crusaders are dodgy and have a horrible culture.
-
@African-Monkey said in Crusaders v Blues:
Keep safe Blues, these Crusaders are dodgy and have a horrible culture.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/opinion/112939715/super-rugby-crusaders-push-the-letter-of-the-law
Bunch of cheating bar stewards, too....
🙄
-
@Machpants
"The Crusaders must be applauded for playing with incredible intensity but is that intensity always disciplined? The big argument at the moment is that South African referees aren't objective because they award many more penalties against foreign teams. The insinuation is that SA referees are dishonest but a way more logical explanation is that the game is played differently in South Africa…"I'd agree with Mr Venter if I didn't see South African sides doing the same thing with various degrees of success.
-
@Stargazer said in Crusaders v Blues:
@Kirwan said in Crusaders v Blues:
@Stargazer said in Crusaders v Blues:
@KiwiMurph From that article:
But Umaga is pretty sure they won't see a Crusaders side with visible cracks from the inquiry that has been launched over the off-field incidents, even if they will be missing All Blacks skipper Kieran Read from their pack this week as he takes a designated rest to coincide with the stinger he picked up in Cape Town.
I'm not so sure. The Crusaders were very rattled after the Chch terror attack; this will affect at least the players concerned, and one of them is probably the most important player in their team.
And no Read.
If there's one week in which the Blues have a good chance of beating the Saders, it's this week.
Slight difference between a terrorist attack and some weak allegations against a couple of players.
Can’t see it affecting the team at all, other than to bunker down and support their teammates.
If you're accused of something bad, even if it's based on no or few facts, and you are already condemned by the trial of (social) media and receiving lots of hateful messages because you're in the limelight, it's going to affect you, however weak the allegations are. These are young players and this will be hard for them. I have no doubt it will affect at least the four players involved, esp RM and GB. Hopefully, it won't affect their game, but it wouldn't surprise me at all.
Edit: different situation, but remember that interview with Pat T after that affair with the positive A sample and the media already finding him guilty of doping? In that interview he clearly stated how hard it had been, for him and his family, eventhough he knew he hadn't used anything.
Perhaps, I was more raising my eyebrows at you trying to compare the teams mental state after the Christchurch attacks where people died and a misunderstanding in a McDonalds.
