Chiefs v Crusaders

[Machpants]

@Tim Yeah that's the thing I thought was pretty impressive

[Machpants]

Security Guard enjoying his work


[Crucial]

Haven’t read all the comments but surely the knock on decision is quite a simple equation.
Where did the ball touch ground in relation to where it was last touched.
That’s all you need to judge

[Yeetyaah]

@Machpants Lisa Fucking Lewis. She must be bored or maybe her publicity is down. She didn't even make it to the touch line before she got tackled.

[Chris]

@Bones said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

@Chris said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

@Bones said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

@Chris said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

@Bones said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

@Chris said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

@Bones said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

@No-Quarter said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

@Bones said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

@taniwharugby said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

@Bones when have I steered you wrong?

In this thread!

@No-Quarter yeah I posted up the law. Refs ruling it like forward pass when it's different.

Sorry I missed that. Yup amateur hour.

Crusaders too good in the end, but that kind of decision is similar to what drives people crazy when it happens to their team against the ABs. You just can't afford really basic mistakes like that going against you if you want to have a chance, especially when it directly leads to a try.

Also brings into question the supposed intentional knock on by Stevenson. His hand was facing backwards...

No downwards fair call Yc

Any chance you can explain where to find the law about downwards?

palm facing the ground on contact In front of your
body is a knock down not back wards
If he had attempted to knock it upwards to retain
The ball fair enough but he didn’t
So he knocked it downwards so penalty
I suppose it cost the chiefs the game well
no it didn’t
So who cares

Ignoring that he attempted to catch and not knock it down - I see you unskilfully avoided answering the question. Show me the law where it's a penalty for knocking the ball down.

Crusaders 32 Chiefs 19
5 tries to 1
Thanks for coming

Haha I figured you were talking out your arse.

You would know with you being an expert on Arse talk

[MN5]

@Machpants said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

Security Guard enjoying his work


She’s not as nimble as she was in 06

[Machpants]

No idea who she is, not going to find out either. They really need to up the penalties for streakers/pitch invasions. Realtive to the costs they are part of, like OK you were on the pitch , you can pay your share of the security costs.

[MN5]

@Machpants said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

No idea who she is, not going to find out either. They really need to up the penalties for streakers/pitch invasions. Realtive to the costs they are part of, like OK you were on the pitch , you can pay your share of the security costs.

Disagree. Penalties should be adjudicated entirely dependant on how good looking they are

[taniwharugby]

So how long was her ban last time, it was in hamilton then too wasnt it?

[kiwiinmelb]

@Machpants said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

Security Guard enjoying his work


Not sure if the security guy is supposed to look like he is enjoying himself

[Machpants]

The question is, where is his hand? And I wonder what his wife will say once she sees the pic

[Bones]

@Chris said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

@Bones said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

@Chris said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

@Bones said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

@Chris said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

@Bones said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

@Chris said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

@Bones said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

@No-Quarter said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

@Bones said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

@taniwharugby said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

@Bones when have I steered you wrong?

In this thread!

@No-Quarter yeah I posted up the law. Refs ruling it like forward pass when it's different.

Sorry I missed that. Yup amateur hour.

Crusaders too good in the end, but that kind of decision is similar to what drives people crazy when it happens to their team against the ABs. You just can't afford really basic mistakes like that going against you if you want to have a chance, especially when it directly leads to a try.

Also brings into question the supposed intentional knock on by Stevenson. His hand was facing backwards...

No downwards fair call Yc

Any chance you can explain where to find the law about downwards?

palm facing the ground on contact In front of your
body is a knock down not back wards
If he had attempted to knock it upwards to retain
The ball fair enough but he didn’t
So he knocked it downwards so penalty
I suppose it cost the chiefs the game well
no it didn’t
So who cares

Ignoring that he attempted to catch and not knock it down - I see you unskilfully avoided answering the question. Show me the law where it's a penalty for knocking the ball down.

Crusaders 32 Chiefs 19
5 tries to 1
Thanks for coming

Haha I figured you were talking out your arse.

You would know with you being an expert on Arse talk

Oooh an expert! You charmer you.

Just never stop making up imaginary laws ok, it's hilarious.

[Bones]

@Machpants said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

The question is, where is his hand? And I wonder what his wife will say once she sees the pic

Well you obviously know him if you know he's married! His left hand is hidden from view under.... waaaaait a miiinute.... you're Lisa Lewis?

[Yeetyaah]

The bans are only a trespass notice which is 2 years. There's probably a fine in there as well.

[Crucial]

@Yeetyaah said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

The bans are only a trespass notice which is 2 years. There's probably a fine in there as well.

A fine what?

[Yeetyaah]

@Crucial like a pay money fine.

[nzzp]

@Yeetyaah said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

@Crucial like a pay money fine.

woosh?

[Yeetyaah]

@nzzp honestly have no idea on this site sometimes.

[Chris]

@Bones said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

@Chris said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

@Bones said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

@Chris said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

@Bones said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

@Chris said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

@Bones said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

@Chris said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

@Bones said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

@No-Quarter said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

@Bones said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

@taniwharugby said in Chiefs v Crusaders:

@Bones when have I steered you wrong?

In this thread!

@No-Quarter yeah I posted up the law. Refs ruling it like forward pass when it's different.

Sorry I missed that. Yup amateur hour.

Crusaders too good in the end, but that kind of decision is similar to what drives people crazy when it happens to their team against the ABs. You just can't afford really basic mistakes like that going against you if you want to have a chance, especially when it directly leads to a try.

Also brings into question the supposed intentional knock on by Stevenson. His hand was facing backwards...

No downwards fair call Yc

Any chance you can explain where to find the law about downwards?

palm facing the ground on contact In front of your
body is a knock down not back wards
If he had attempted to knock it upwards to retain
The ball fair enough but he didn’t
So he knocked it downwards so penalty
I suppose it cost the chiefs the game well
no it didn’t
So who cares

Ignoring that he attempted to catch and not knock it down - I see you unskilfully avoided answering the question. Show me the law where it's a penalty for knocking the ball down.

Crusaders 32 Chiefs 19
5 tries to 1
Thanks for coming

Haha I figured you were talking out your arse.

You would know with you being an expert on Arse talk

Oooh an expert! You charmer you.

Just never stop making up imaginary laws ok, it's hilarious.

As long as it amusing you what more can we ask for
It was a YC game over sorry AT

[Bones]

@Chris what is AT?