Crusaders v Chiefs
-
@crucial said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@hydro11 said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@crucial said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@hydro11 said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@crucial said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
Upshot is that it shows how hard it can be to break a losing run when subconcious decision making and confirmation bias by refs is added into the general malaise. Blues copped it for ages in a number of losing runs. I remember Ali Williams totally losing his rag against one ref such was the way that they were being judged as if they could do no right. The ref was judging them very differently to the dominant side.
This happens a lot at the moment with momentum periods. Penalties are coming in batches against one side as they get judged more and more on a fine line each one. That penalty against Weber stealing the ball at the back of the scrum was one. He kept ahead of the flanker until the ball came out but the ref's immediate thought was that he was wrong (and he may have been by a toe) rather than that the Saders had had a bad scrum and lost control, leaving the ball open for a steal.I'm not sure I get where you are coming from. The Chiefs' losing run shows that they are a substandard Super Rugby team, just as the Blues were. The Weber penalty at the scrum was marginal (the call came from the AR, BTW). The Chiefs were given marginal penalties too (like Jacobson's turnover when he was on his knees). There is another confirmation bias which is people remember decisions more against the team who lost.
The TMO got one big call wrong last night and that is disappointing. The Chiefs were reemed in the scrum, dreadful defensively and had poor discipline. I'm sure it is theoretically possible but it is hard to see the Chief beating that Crusaders team, if they played them 10 more times. As Stargazer has pointed out, the Chiefs should probably have had another man in the bin at some point. They conceded a lot of penalties (especially if you count the advantages).
Why is it that whenever a supporter of the losing side makes a point about poor reffing someone else shouts it “you would have lost anyway “
That point has been well accepted by every Chiefs fan. It doesn’t negate the shit reffing discussion which is being supported by the sameTMO again today.
I’m pretty sure there have been studies over other sports that indicate how top teams get more “run of the green “ than weak teams. This just adds another few inches to the hole you are trying to dig yourself out of.I just thought we were here to discuss rugby and not refereeing. It is a strange phenomenon that a team gets thrashed and we still spend 90% of the time talking about the referee. There is zero analysis of the actual game. If the refereeing did not affect the result, why bother talking about it so much? Why not spend time talking about the idiotic decision to go from a scrum instead of a 22 when you are getting done in that facet? People absolutely use refereeing as a distraction point even when they acknowledge their team was 2nd best. It is better than talking about the reality of the situation.
Having said that, I am glad you are "pretty sure" there are studies. The Crusaders got more penalties last night because they dominated the scrum, held the ball and made line breaks (put the Chiefs under pressure). It was nothing to do with the Chiefs being shit last year and everything to do with them being shit last night.
A bit of 'whoosh' again.
I hate to let you in on this but the game doesn't happen without a reffing team and no points are scored without them deciding so. Considering the part they play it is only normal to discuss them.
I think you'll be struggling to find a Chiefs fan that thinks the refs decided the game or one that hasn't already thrown things at the screen over their play and decision making. Plenty of comments were made about their play during the game.
Discussion about about unconscious decision bias is an interesting sporting point that may provide an element toward a losing streak. I never suggested that every (or even most) decisions were affected. It is obviously the line calls or the closer watching and assumptions that can happen.
As for the rest of the game? The Chiefs simply lack forward impact which makes everything more difficult.A couple of quite reasonable, but opposite, TMO decisions and Chiefs are leading after 55.
The TMO decisions were game changers in a very fundamental way.
As a neutral, IMO the ones which were made destroyed the game.
-
@chris said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@nepia said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@hydro11 said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@crucial said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
Upshot is that it shows how hard it can be to break a losing run when subconcious decision making and confirmation bias by refs is added into the general malaise. Blues copped it for ages in a number of losing runs. I remember Ali Williams totally losing his rag against one ref such was the way that they were being judged as if they could do no right. The ref was judging them very differently to the dominant side.
This happens a lot at the moment with momentum periods. Penalties are coming in batches against one side as they get judged more and more on a fine line each one. That penalty against Weber stealing the ball at the back of the scrum was one. He kept ahead of the flanker until the ball came out but the ref's immediate thought was that he was wrong (and he may have been by a toe) rather than that the Saders had had a bad scrum and lost control, leaving the ball open for a steal.I'm not sure I get where you are coming from. The Chiefs' losing run shows that they are a substandard Super Rugby team, just as the Blues were. The Weber penalty at the scrum was marginal (the call came from the AR, BTW). The Chiefs were given marginal penalties too (like Jacobson's turnover when he was on his knees). There is another confirmation bias which is people remember decisions more against the team who lost.
The TMO got one big call wrong last night and that is disappointing. The Chiefs were reemed in the scrum, dreadful defensively and had poor discipline. I'm sure it is theoretically possible but it is hard to see the Chief beating that Crusaders team, if they played them 10 more times. As Stargazer has pointed out, the Chiefs should probably have had another man in the bin at some point. They conceded a lot of penalties (especially if you count the advantages).
You can't disregard one big call just because of the likelihood of one team winning. That one big call happened when the game was close and it caused a 14 point advantage (including the try with a player in the bin) to the eventual winners.
Crusaders still would have won they took all their big guns off with 30 minuntes to go and cruised home.
Because the refs had won it for them by then.
-
@pakman said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@chris said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@nepia said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@hydro11 said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@crucial said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
Upshot is that it shows how hard it can be to break a losing run when subconcious decision making and confirmation bias by refs is added into the general malaise. Blues copped it for ages in a number of losing runs. I remember Ali Williams totally losing his rag against one ref such was the way that they were being judged as if they could do no right. The ref was judging them very differently to the dominant side.
This happens a lot at the moment with momentum periods. Penalties are coming in batches against one side as they get judged more and more on a fine line each one. That penalty against Weber stealing the ball at the back of the scrum was one. He kept ahead of the flanker until the ball came out but the ref's immediate thought was that he was wrong (and he may have been by a toe) rather than that the Saders had had a bad scrum and lost control, leaving the ball open for a steal.I'm not sure I get where you are coming from. The Chiefs' losing run shows that they are a substandard Super Rugby team, just as the Blues were. The Weber penalty at the scrum was marginal (the call came from the AR, BTW). The Chiefs were given marginal penalties too (like Jacobson's turnover when he was on his knees). There is another confirmation bias which is people remember decisions more against the team who lost.
The TMO got one big call wrong last night and that is disappointing. The Chiefs were reemed in the scrum, dreadful defensively and had poor discipline. I'm sure it is theoretically possible but it is hard to see the Chief beating that Crusaders team, if they played them 10 more times. As Stargazer has pointed out, the Chiefs should probably have had another man in the bin at some point. They conceded a lot of penalties (especially if you count the advantages).
You can't disregard one big call just because of the likelihood of one team winning. That one big call happened when the game was close and it caused a 14 point advantage (including the try with a player in the bin) to the eventual winners.
Crusaders still would have won they took all their big guns off with 30 minuntes to go and cruised home.
Because the refs had won it for them by then.
Yeah of course as always get better stop whinging about losing fix it.Soft as
-
@chris said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@pakman said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@chris said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@nepia said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@hydro11 said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@crucial said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
Upshot is that it shows how hard it can be to break a losing run when subconcious decision making and confirmation bias by refs is added into the general malaise. Blues copped it for ages in a number of losing runs. I remember Ali Williams totally losing his rag against one ref such was the way that they were being judged as if they could do no right. The ref was judging them very differently to the dominant side.
This happens a lot at the moment with momentum periods. Penalties are coming in batches against one side as they get judged more and more on a fine line each one. That penalty against Weber stealing the ball at the back of the scrum was one. He kept ahead of the flanker until the ball came out but the ref's immediate thought was that he was wrong (and he may have been by a toe) rather than that the Saders had had a bad scrum and lost control, leaving the ball open for a steal.I'm not sure I get where you are coming from. The Chiefs' losing run shows that they are a substandard Super Rugby team, just as the Blues were. The Weber penalty at the scrum was marginal (the call came from the AR, BTW). The Chiefs were given marginal penalties too (like Jacobson's turnover when he was on his knees). There is another confirmation bias which is people remember decisions more against the team who lost.
The TMO got one big call wrong last night and that is disappointing. The Chiefs were reemed in the scrum, dreadful defensively and had poor discipline. I'm sure it is theoretically possible but it is hard to see the Chief beating that Crusaders team, if they played them 10 more times. As Stargazer has pointed out, the Chiefs should probably have had another man in the bin at some point. They conceded a lot of penalties (especially if you count the advantages).
You can't disregard one big call just because of the likelihood of one team winning. That one big call happened when the game was close and it caused a 14 point advantage (including the try with a player in the bin) to the eventual winners.
Crusaders still would have won they took all their big guns off with 30 minuntes to go and cruised home.
Because the refs had won it for them by then.
Yeah of course as always get better stop whinging about losing fix it.Soft as
Yeah that response doesn't work when you're talking to neutrals eh. Weak as
-
@crazy-horse said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
Yeah I would like to talk about the game too.
From a Sader's perspective it was good to see Douglas pull his weight after falling off a cliff last year. I thought he ran on to the ball well and stood up in the lineout.
Havili played played ok at 12 but it didn't feel like the midfield really gelled. Goodhue was quiet, maybe the ball just didn't go his way?
Yeah definitely Douglas' best game for a couple of years. Had the added baggage of being the "big bopper" in the loosies too, even though he's not exactly a monster, so hopefully he's turned a corner cos he was pretty handy in his first season.
I thought Havili also played one of his best games at 12 at this level, so definitely worth persisting with as he's not exactly accustomed to 12. Goodhue was ordinary and just seems to be struggling to keep up almost, but again I guess he's trying to get used to centre.
-
@bones said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
Goodhue was ordinary and just seems to be struggling to keep up almost, but again I guess he's trying to get used to centre.
He and ALB have been very slow to get going this year, but they're both much better players than that.
-
@tim said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@bones said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
Goodhue was ordinary and just seems to be struggling to keep up almost, but again I guess he's trying to get used to centre.
He and ALB have been very slow to get going this year, but they're both much better players than that.
Yeah hopefully they get consistent time in one position. Although if Tupaea is at 12 and continues like yesterday I wouldn't hold out much hope for ALB.
-
-
@bones said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@chris said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@pakman said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@chris said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@nepia said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@hydro11 said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@crucial said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
Upshot is that it shows how hard it can be to break a losing run when subconcious decision making and confirmation bias by refs is added into the general malaise. Blues copped it for ages in a number of losing runs. I remember Ali Williams totally losing his rag against one ref such was the way that they were being judged as if they could do no right. The ref was judging them very differently to the dominant side.
This happens a lot at the moment with momentum periods. Penalties are coming in batches against one side as they get judged more and more on a fine line each one. That penalty against Weber stealing the ball at the back of the scrum was one. He kept ahead of the flanker until the ball came out but the ref's immediate thought was that he was wrong (and he may have been by a toe) rather than that the Saders had had a bad scrum and lost control, leaving the ball open for a steal.I'm not sure I get where you are coming from. The Chiefs' losing run shows that they are a substandard Super Rugby team, just as the Blues were. The Weber penalty at the scrum was marginal (the call came from the AR, BTW). The Chiefs were given marginal penalties too (like Jacobson's turnover when he was on his knees). There is another confirmation bias which is people remember decisions more against the team who lost.
The TMO got one big call wrong last night and that is disappointing. The Chiefs were reemed in the scrum, dreadful defensively and had poor discipline. I'm sure it is theoretically possible but it is hard to see the Chief beating that Crusaders team, if they played them 10 more times. As Stargazer has pointed out, the Chiefs should probably have had another man in the bin at some point. They conceded a lot of penalties (especially if you count the advantages).
You can't disregard one big call just because of the likelihood of one team winning. That one big call happened when the game was close and it caused a 14 point advantage (including the try with a player in the bin) to the eventual winners.
Crusaders still would have won they took all their big guns off with 30 minuntes to go and cruised home.
Because the refs had won it for them by then.
Yeah of course as always get better stop whinging about losing fix it.Soft as
Yeah that response doesn't work when you're talking to neutrals eh. Weak as
I don’t care if it works it’s just more high pitch whinging
I just laugh at all the responses keep on winning keep on bitching and your response is piss weak
I don’t give a fat rats arse what you dribble on about champ -
@chris said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@bones said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@chris said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@pakman said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@chris said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@nepia said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@hydro11 said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@crucial said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
Upshot is that it shows how hard it can be to break a losing run when subconcious decision making and confirmation bias by refs is added into the general malaise. Blues copped it for ages in a number of losing runs. I remember Ali Williams totally losing his rag against one ref such was the way that they were being judged as if they could do no right. The ref was judging them very differently to the dominant side.
This happens a lot at the moment with momentum periods. Penalties are coming in batches against one side as they get judged more and more on a fine line each one. That penalty against Weber stealing the ball at the back of the scrum was one. He kept ahead of the flanker until the ball came out but the ref's immediate thought was that he was wrong (and he may have been by a toe) rather than that the Saders had had a bad scrum and lost control, leaving the ball open for a steal.I'm not sure I get where you are coming from. The Chiefs' losing run shows that they are a substandard Super Rugby team, just as the Blues were. The Weber penalty at the scrum was marginal (the call came from the AR, BTW). The Chiefs were given marginal penalties too (like Jacobson's turnover when he was on his knees). There is another confirmation bias which is people remember decisions more against the team who lost.
The TMO got one big call wrong last night and that is disappointing. The Chiefs were reemed in the scrum, dreadful defensively and had poor discipline. I'm sure it is theoretically possible but it is hard to see the Chief beating that Crusaders team, if they played them 10 more times. As Stargazer has pointed out, the Chiefs should probably have had another man in the bin at some point. They conceded a lot of penalties (especially if you count the advantages).
You can't disregard one big call just because of the likelihood of one team winning. That one big call happened when the game was close and it caused a 14 point advantage (including the try with a player in the bin) to the eventual winners.
Crusaders still would have won they took all their big guns off with 30 minuntes to go and cruised home.
Because the refs had won it for them by then.
Yeah of course as always get better stop whinging about losing fix it.Soft as
Yeah that response doesn't work when you're talking to neutrals eh. Weak as
I don’t care if it works it’s just more high pitch whinging
I just laugh at all the responses keep on winning keep on bitching and your response is piss weak
I don’t give a fat rats arse what you dribble on about champSo much sass for someone who doesn't care, cool.
You seem really well suited to posting on a forum, "champ".
-
@bones said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@chris said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@bones said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@chris said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@pakman said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@chris said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@nepia said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@hydro11 said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
@crucial said in Crusaders v Chiefs:
Upshot is that it shows how hard it can be to break a losing run when subconcious decision making and confirmation bias by refs is added into the general malaise. Blues copped it for ages in a number of losing runs. I remember Ali Williams totally losing his rag against one ref such was the way that they were being judged as if they could do no right. The ref was judging them very differently to the dominant side.
This happens a lot at the moment with momentum periods. Penalties are coming in batches against one side as they get judged more and more on a fine line each one. That penalty against Weber stealing the ball at the back of the scrum was one. He kept ahead of the flanker until the ball came out but the ref's immediate thought was that he was wrong (and he may have been by a toe) rather than that the Saders had had a bad scrum and lost control, leaving the ball open for a steal.I'm not sure I get where you are coming from. The Chiefs' losing run shows that they are a substandard Super Rugby team, just as the Blues were. The Weber penalty at the scrum was marginal (the call came from the AR, BTW). The Chiefs were given marginal penalties too (like Jacobson's turnover when he was on his knees). There is another confirmation bias which is people remember decisions more against the team who lost.
The TMO got one big call wrong last night and that is disappointing. The Chiefs were reemed in the scrum, dreadful defensively and had poor discipline. I'm sure it is theoretically possible but it is hard to see the Chief beating that Crusaders team, if they played them 10 more times. As Stargazer has pointed out, the Chiefs should probably have had another man in the bin at some point. They conceded a lot of penalties (especially if you count the advantages).
You can't disregard one big call just because of the likelihood of one team winning. That one big call happened when the game was close and it caused a 14 point advantage (including the try with a player in the bin) to the eventual winners.
Crusaders still would have won they took all their big guns off with 30 minuntes to go and cruised home.
Because the refs had won it for them by then.
Yeah of course as always get better stop whinging about losing fix it.Soft as
Yeah that response doesn't work when you're talking to neutrals eh. Weak as
I don’t care if it works it’s just more high pitch whinging
I just laugh at all the responses keep on winning keep on bitching and your response is piss weak
I don’t give a fat rats arse what you dribble on about champSo much sass for someone who doesn't care, cool.
You seem really well suited to posting on a forum, "champ".
Thats pretty Lame champ got anything better
-
One thing that hasn't been mentioned ( I think) is how brutal Christie's defense is. Wow! He hurt himself though.
