QF - North Harbour v Auckland
-
@Tim said in QF - North Harbour v Auckland:
@KiwiMurph very harsh penalty. Collapsing the maul?
Pugh clearly collapsed.
-
What a year Stephenson is having.
-
@Tim said in QF - North Harbour v Auckland:
Auckland with a massive gap on the wing. Even a man down, that is their weird defensive pattern in action.
Yeah RTS was defending in the centres inside Trainor weird set up.
-
@Tim a number of teams defend narrow like that, Northland included, does my head in as I can't see what the point is, especially in situations like that.
-
@KiwiMurph Collapsed maul is almost unknown from a tackle situation. Teams do it deliberately and get a scrum.
-
@Tim said in QF - North Harbour v Auckland:
@Bones super quick, and would normally just be a scrum to harbour for a collapsed maul?
I'm all for refs penalising guys on both sides for collapsing the maul. But consistency is key. You can bet there'll be a maul where the team in control collapses it but he won't penalise them.
-
It's not very often one player takes out two players in one move.
Hodgman is having a shocker with his discipline.
-
@Bones was one earlier
-
I find it an absolute joke Auckland can have Ioane and RTS but Wellington can’t have Coles for 30-20 minutes I’m pretty sure Ioane has more game time then Coles.
-
Who's Auckland 5? Cracking tackle on harbour 8 just before Gatland's try.
-
@mikey07 said in QF - North Harbour v Auckland:
I find it an absolute joke Auckland can have Ioane and RTS but Wellington can’t have Coles for 30-20 minutes I’m pretty sure Ioane has more game time then Coles.
Stop whining bro. Boohoo we can't have a backup hooker for our hooker who's in fantastic form.
-
@Bones said in QF - North Harbour v Auckland:
What a year Stephenson is having.
Although he started the game like he had a few distractions (in his head).
-
@mikey07 it makes you wonder if the player and/or the RPA have a bit of say too.
I agree, there would seem no reason for some of those unavailable to be so, but they are...
-
@Bovidae said in QF - North Harbour v Auckland:
@Bones said in QF - North Harbour v Auckland:
What a year Stephenson is having.
Although he started the game like he had a few distractions (in his head).
I missed the start. So I believe now he only plays well if I'm watching.
I'll set up a GoFundMe for chiefs fans to donate in order for me to watch all their games.
-
@Bones Yeah as funny as it sounds, having ABs back to play in this comp isn't necessarily a benefit. Most of them are only there for a bit of gametime and aren't usually up to speed with tithe team patterns etc.
-
Hope there is some better rugby in the 2nd half. Two teams playing poorly under pressure.
-
@Tim NH look more threatening on attack imo.
-
@taniwharugby The only thing I can possibly think of is Coles age and his workload which sounds ridiculous but I honestly can’t think of another reason why he couldn’t play.
-
@African-Monkey Ofa has slotted in well in our, er, patterns...but otherwise agree, isn't always a good thing, can be disruptive to the team
-
Gatland off
-
So isolated there.
-
Stevenson to 1st five?
-
@Chris HIA?
-
Haha 3rd NH kick go hit the post.
-
That’s a YC all day
-
Harbour finishing the season strong. Auckland look like a rabble.
-
@mikey07 said in QF - North Harbour v Auckland:
@Bones Only because we don’t really have any back up after O’Reilly
Best player in the team
-
@taniwharugby said in QF - North Harbour v Auckland:
@Chris HIA?
Must be,or something nastier after that knee.
-
Card there. Direct contact?
-
@Chris should really have gone straightaway then if he was fine the halftime break woulda been his time off?
-
That could be a red for RTS
-
RTS maybe in trouble here
-
Lol so how will this be ruled?
-
Doesn't look great, but not sure it is rc worthy
-
Harsh
-
How did Dalzell escape a card there?
-
I don't agree with the wording of some of the calls around not being in a position to contest...bollocks he isn't, if he wasn't, the contact wouldn't have happened
Post 104 of 219