SRA Round 9: Crusaders v Blues
-
@kiwimurph said in SRA Round 9: Crusaders v Blues:
Telea another auto selection.....
Maybe they've got a quota, a minimum penalty quota
-
@mattasaurus said in SRA Round 9: Crusaders v Blues:
Sotutu is the best midfielder the blues have out there.
That was a nice little shift of play in behind the Crusader defender for that last run he made.
-
-
@crucial said in SRA Round 9: Crusaders v Blues:
@kev said in SRA Round 9: Crusaders v Blues:
@crucial said in SRA Round 9: Crusaders v Blues:
@machpants said in SRA Round 9: Crusaders v Blues:
A player must not tackle an opponent who is not in possession of the ball.
Sanction: Penalty
The whole dangerous play section says penalty. Once that penalty is decided you decide if it warrants more.
To me that was a prime example of why tackles without the ball are considered dangerous. Plus the player was injured to the point that they couldn’t continue.
Deserved more than a penalty IMO@crucial said in SRA Round 9: Crusaders v Blues:
@machpants said in SRA Round 9: Crusaders v Blues:
A player must not tackle an opponent who is not in possession of the ball.
Sanction: Penalty
The whole dangerous play section says penalty. Once that penalty is decided you decide if it warrants more.
To me that was a prime example of why tackles without the ball are considered dangerous. Plus the player was injured to the point that they couldn’t continue.
Deserved more than a penalty IMOThe injury was caused by the way he landed not the contact. Penalty only for me. Unlucky though.
Wouldn’t have landed like that if he was ball carrying and expecting a hit though. That’s why it’s dangerous to tackle off the ball.
Understand the point. But actually people land awkwardly all the time. Tackle was fine apart from it being early, which by itself isn’t dangerous. He would have been ok if he hadn’t landed on Richie. So yes to the penalty but the injury was because Richie was on the ground and he landed on him.
-
Story of this half ,
One team taking their chances , one does not know how to..!
On a plus side for the Blues .Young Sam Darry has been a superb pick up in his first year of Super Rugby , this kid at 20 years old has been a genuine success , can only get better .. -
@broughie said in SRA Round 9: Crusaders v Blues:
McDonald must be tearing his hair out. Maybe he should just select players outside of Auckland because their is a funk that can’t be removed. I don’t blame him at all.
He has all the players he requires. Up to him to select and coach. No one else to blame.
-
-
@broughie said in SRA Round 9: Crusaders v Blues:
McDonald must be tearing his hair out. Maybe he should just select players outside of Auckland because their is a funk that can’t be removed. I don’t blame him at all.
You don't blame him? He selects these same guys to start every week.
Definition of insanity comes to mind.
-
@broughie said in SRA Round 9: Crusaders v Blues:
McDonald must be tearing his hair out. Maybe he should just select players outside of Auckland because their is a funk that can’t be removed. I don’t blame him at all.
He has to accept a lot of blame for his terrible selections.
-
@kiwimurph said in SRA Round 9: Crusaders v Blues:
@broughie said in SRA Round 9: Crusaders v Blues:
McDonald must be tearing his hair out. Maybe he should just select players outside of Auckland because their is a funk that can’t be removed. I don’t blame him at all.
You don't blame him? He selects these same guys to start every week.
Definition of insanity comes to mind.
Its been a feature of the Blues to not trust their whole squad. And its a shame that they haven’t developed two or three players who should be getting exposed to rugby at this level.
-
@akan004 said in SRA Round 9: Crusaders v Blues:
@broughie said in SRA Round 9: Crusaders v Blues:
McDonald must be tearing his hair out. Maybe he should just select players outside of Auckland because their is a funk that can’t be removed. I don’t blame him at all.
He has to accept a lot of blame for his terrible selections.
There has been coach after coach that has gone through Auckland without success. When does the blame rest with the players and culture of the area?
-
-
@gt12 said in SRA Round 9: Crusaders v Blues:
@kiwimurph said in SRA Round 9: Crusaders v Blues:
@broughie said in SRA Round 9: Crusaders v Blues:
McDonald must be tearing his hair out. Maybe he should just select players outside of Auckland because their is a funk that can’t be removed. I don’t blame him at all.
You don't blame him? He selects these same guys to start every week.
Definition of insanity comes to mind.
Its been a feature of the Blues to not trust their whole squad. And its a shame that they haven’t developed two or three players who should be getting exposed to rugby at this level.
Yep.
The other huge issue is the Blues game plan on attack all season. It's been predictable and mud all season.
-
@kev said in SRA Round 9: Crusaders v Blues:
@crucial said in SRA Round 9: Crusaders v Blues:
@kev said in SRA Round 9: Crusaders v Blues:
@crucial said in SRA Round 9: Crusaders v Blues:
@machpants said in SRA Round 9: Crusaders v Blues:
A player must not tackle an opponent who is not in possession of the ball.
Sanction: Penalty
The whole dangerous play section says penalty. Once that penalty is decided you decide if it warrants more.
To me that was a prime example of why tackles without the ball are considered dangerous. Plus the player was injured to the point that they couldn’t continue.
Deserved more than a penalty IMO@crucial said in SRA Round 9: Crusaders v Blues:
@machpants said in SRA Round 9: Crusaders v Blues:
A player must not tackle an opponent who is not in possession of the ball.
Sanction: Penalty
The whole dangerous play section says penalty. Once that penalty is decided you decide if it warrants more.
To me that was a prime example of why tackles without the ball are considered dangerous. Plus the player was injured to the point that they couldn’t continue.
Deserved more than a penalty IMOThe injury was caused by the way he landed not the contact. Penalty only for me. Unlucky though.
Wouldn’t have landed like that if he was ball carrying and expecting a hit though. That’s why it’s dangerous to tackle off the ball.
Understand the point. But actually people land awkwardly all the time. Tackle was fine apart from it being early, which by itself isn’t dangerous. He would have been ok if he hadn’t landed on Richie. So yes to the penalty but the injury was because Richie was on the ground and he landed on him.
We will agree to disagree. I just think that any act that is defined in the laws as dangerous and causes injury is worth more than a simple penalty.
-
@kev said in SRA Round 9: Crusaders v Blues:
@akan004 said in SRA Round 9: Crusaders v Blues:
Leicester F has been good at 13.
Should have conceded a try when he ran up and missed Sotutu but strong with his carries.
And has shut down Ioane all the first half .
-
@broughie said in SRA Round 9: Crusaders v Blues:
@akan004 said in SRA Round 9: Crusaders v Blues:
@broughie said in SRA Round 9: Crusaders v Blues:
McDonald must be tearing his hair out. Maybe he should just select players outside of Auckland because their is a funk that can’t be removed. I don’t blame him at all.
He has to accept a lot of blame for his terrible selections.
There has been coach after coach that has gone through Auckland without success. When does the blame rest with the players and culture of the area?
Exactly, the Coaches job to sift through this and find the winning formula. Not easy with Blues as we have seen.
-
What’s this utter bulshit from these x players on sky ..? , the Blues have just got to believe they can still do it ...just make smarter decisions when opportunities arise and everything else takes care of itself ..
