Blues 2024
-
When Will Jordan was out for the season he was replaced by Welsh international Fullback Johnny McNichol. Zarn Sullivan is out for the season so why should Barrett not be able to replace him. What is the difference other than the Calendar? Are we saying that the Blues should be penalized by playing out the season with a depleted squad? Maybe if the Blues were in our usual 11th place no one would care if Barrett was in the squad or not.
-
@Daffy-Jaffy I think season ending injuries are full replacement rather than a short term one if someone is due back, even if late in the season.
I dont think him playing any games should be relevant, he is still contracted to NZR isnt he?
-
@Canes4life said in Blues 2024:
@KiwiMurph said in Blues 2024:
@Canes4life said in Blues 2024:
Quite poor from the Blues for even considering it tbh. Just my opinion though.
I don't agree with your comment here
Zarn is injured. Perofeta is named to play but hasn't played since injury. Cashmore is injured.
I don't want Beauden to return to play this season for the Blues but I understand Blues enquiring. Afoa played for Crusaders last year late.
I’ve got no problem him playing in the round robin as injury cover but he should have no right to play in the playoffs, would be a complete joke.
Thanks. I tend to agree.
I think it's moot anyway as was mentioned earlier the chances of approval for playoffs are extremely thin.
-
I thought if you had multiple injuries that was part of the purpose of the wider training group? Shouldn’t the blues be promoting from there before putting Beauden straight back into the full squad? He was the one who went to Japan at the end day.
When James Lowe got injured at the Highlanders they promoted Hurley from the wider training squad. That’s how it should be handled. If the blues wider training squad players are injured then I can understand the choice.
If he’s cleared to play and also play finals it would just open a huge can of worms that could be easily avoided if it was made clear you promote from your wider squad…
I’m sure we all feel different about it but that’s just my opinion anyway. As you were…
-
And the 32-year-old openside flanker confirmed as soon as he returned from Japan, where he played the 2024 season on sabbatical, he would be training with the Chiefs as “a practice body” over the latter stages of their Super Rugby Pacific campaign to get himself back up to full fitness.
-
@Bovidae said in Blues 2024:
Cane is training with the Chiefs, so...
If there was a season ending injury to a Chiefs loosie I would like to see Cane added to their squad. It would be strange if they had to call in someone else
I wonder what the intent of the regulation was? I doubt they were thinking about sabbatical players when it was written
-
@Duluth said in Blues 2024:
@Bovidae said in Blues 2024:
Cane is training with the Chiefs, so...
If there was a season ending injury to a Chiefs loosie I would like to see Cane added to their squad. It would be strange if they had to call in someone else
I wonder what the intent of the regulation was? I doubt they were thinking about sabbatical players when it was written
Personally, I think players on sabbatical should be included in the squad and available on return.
or
Not available under any circumstance.
-
@gt12 said in Blues 2024:
Personally, I think players on sabbatical should be included in the squad and available on return.
A squad with one man less would punish teams with a sabbatical player. But only marginally, it would just mean you go to players outside your squad a bit quicker
Or perhaps you could do what the Crusaders did and carry an extra player until Taylor returned (I have no issue with the Taylor situation, it's just an example of the leeway given to sabbatical players)
@gt12 said in Blues 2024:
Not available under any circumstance.
Lets say the Chiefs lost a couple of loosies for the rest of the season this weekend. Cane has been under NZR contract all year, is training with the Chiefs and is available for All Black selection. I don't see the logic of preventing him joining as an injury replacement? I see some logic in preventing 'ring-ins' late in the season but I don't see how Cane could be considered that. I don't see how that is good for NZ rugby or the competition
-
-
@gt12 said in Blues 2024:
I’d prefer he and others be eligible.
Same
Going back to the Taylor situation.. yes it’s slightly different because it was a non playing sabbatical. However expectations were set at the beginning. Everyone knew one player was on a temp contract, and everyone knew he’d return late in the competition so no one cared
That seems like the correct method in future.
-
It is not an NZR Rule it is a SANZAAR rule, as it is their competition. And the rules are set, if you don't play before 1 April in the comp you can't play the finals - unless special circumstances. Like the Tahs, having lost 395 props, they would be allowed to bring someone else in if they were in the finals. I doubt the Blues are in the same boat with 1st fives/fullbacks. If another goes down, they might, but they have a couple and that's enough.
I don't have a problem with anyone coming in at any time. If a team thinks that bringing Dupont in for the finals is going to improve their team, I really doubt it. A full on ringer would be a problem in most cases, unless (like Cane, Beaudy) they have already spent significant time with the team -
If they have a contract with NZR, then they should be eligible to play.
Is someone who injures themselves in pre-season but comes right in time for a final eligible to play finals?
-
@taniwharugby said in Blues 2024:
Is someone who injures themselves in pre-season but comes right in time for a final eligible to play finals?
Yes
This restriction is only for offshore players ( @machpants missed that in his summary ). So the Blues could call up loads of people to replace Sullivan. The Crusaders couldn't use Afoa in the finals last year because he'd just returned to NZ
That's why I questioned what the intent of this rule is
I presume the Blues are questioning if sabbatical players are really offshore players given they were always under NZR contract. I'm sure they probably are but it is worth clarifying.
-
@Duluth yeah for my mind, if they are contracted to NZR, then it is all moot, they are eligible for NZ teams.
Although comp rules may see it differently, as an aside, @Machpants mentions SANZAR, is it still SANZAR given there is no SA in there now?
-
@taniwharugby said in Blues 2024:
@Duluth yeah for my mind, if they are contracted to NZR, then it is all moot, they are eligible for NZ teams.
Although comp rules may see it differently, as an aside, @Machpants mentions SANZAR, is it still SANZAR given there is no SA in there now?
Good point, I guess the new unit in Sydney would be responsible, but since it is barely started I don't think they've changed any rules since SANZAAR
-
@Canes4life said in Blues 2024:
I would laugh so hard if the Blues pushed to get him into the 23 and then he F’d it up for them in the final. He’s cracked under pressure a lot in recent years, so you’re more than welcome to him.
@Canes4life said in Blues 2024:
I’ve got no problem him playing in the round robin as injury cover but he should have no right to play in the playoffs, would be a complete joke.
Sort it out mate.
-
