Chiefs vs Highlanders
-
<p>It couldn't be used against players jumping for the high ball because they'd be in the air when they catch it. Dixon was on the ground when he tried to catch the ball and jump afterwards.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I disagree that he carried on with the tackle but you could argue Ngatai carrying on with the tackle (if you think he did) was actually to put Dixon in a safer position. If he'd somehow pulled out earlier, Dixon most likely would have landed on his head. I wouldn't classify that as better than landing on your side.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Samurai Jack" data-cid="577828" data-time="1462618427">
<div>
<p>Nah, Ngatai carried on with the tackle and made it worse. Yellow right decision. All your arguments could be used against all players going up for the high ball. <em>But he jumped into it ref. </em></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>But that is exactly what many of us have been saying. The way this is being ruled is stupid in situations where it is the actions of the jumping player giving the other one no time to pull out or react differently.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>As for saying that Ngatai carried on with it. Stop watching the slo=mo and watch real time. He had no time to do untying and was flummoxed as to what happened. he had absolutely no clue.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Nepia" data-cid="577784" data-time="1462612655"><p>
Wow, bitchy - you sure you're not Shark? ;)<br><br></p></blockquote>
<br>
It's from the same poster who would have you believe that Rennie deserves little credit for two titles and it was Smith who was coaching the Chiefs.<br><br>
Of course he has been quiet as the Chiefs have gone seven straight and have topped the conference. All with an extremely ropey tight five at times.<br><br>
Then one loss and the same old invective comes out.<br><br>
Just petty really. -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="hurricane" data-cid="577825" data-time="1462616751">
<div>
<p>Points out of ten for the AB contenders in the match. This is my opinion only, you are free to disagree</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Sopoanga 7 - solid did nothing wrong. Did nothing particularly right</p>
<p>Cruden 7 - see comment for Sopoanga</p>
<p>Smith 8 - better kicking game than Webber. Good option taking</p>
<p>Webber 7 - does he even have a box kick. I am sure he does. Can't remember it tonight. Some sexy passes.</p>
<p>Naholo 10 out of 10</p>
<p>Ben Smith 5 - I thought he didn't look AB material. Simple knock on in the red zone and lacked the zip he had last year. Needs to get back into the AB camp to start drinking Grant Fox's power shakes at 7:30am.</p>
<p>Mckenzie - 7 - Outplayed Ben Smith but took some bad options at times and failed to get away the crucial last pass. He came into first receiver very nicely a number of times and directed traffic. Brave effort under the high ball but would have wanted to have been even better. Some stupid kicks with the ball in hand at times instead of taking the tackle and recycling. </p>
<p>Ngatai 8 - Very strong game his yellow card notwithstanding.</p>
<p>James Lowe 6. Typical James Lowe game. Did some good things. Did some average things. Overall was an asset. Good try assist.</p>
<p>BBR - 10. Stood out in the Chiefs pack.</p>
<p>Elliot Dixon - 6. Did nothing right or wrong all night. Loses 1 point for jumping into a tackle and nearly killing himself.</p>
<p>Sam Cane 4. Where was he at the breakdown. Not his best effort in the 7 jumper this year. Usually he kills it. Not tonight.</p>
<p>Fekitoa 6 - did nothing right or wrong. Passing mark.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Sopoaga 8 easily outplayed Cruden 6</p> -
<p>Pretend Ngatai is Pocock</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Charlie grabbed a bloke who was contesting a kick (loose possession). Charlie assumed Dixon would catch the ball but Dixon didn't even lay a hand on the ball</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Charlie got it wrong - didn't mean to but he got it wrong. That's life. That's rugby</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The ramifications of Charlie getting it wrong were rather spectacular. Spectacular in 2016 = red cards (that's really what the debate should be about)</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Slo mo, super speed, uncordination, intent ...whatever. The FACT (don't misinterpret that word, it's pretty clear in definition) is that Charlie took out a player who didn't have the ball</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The referee had a MINIMUM of yellow card on his mind. He even mentioned that Charlie meant no harm. That's life</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Denying any of the above is irrational</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Crucial" data-cid="577830" data-time="1462620035">
<div>
<p>But that is exactly what many of us have been saying. The way this is being ruled is stupid in situations where it is the actions of the jumping player giving the other one no time to pull out or react differently.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>As for saying that Ngatai carried on with it. Stop watching the slo=mo and watch real time. He had no time to do untying and was flummoxed as to what happened. he had absolutely no clue.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>He lifted him and did not put him down safely. I thought a red card but was glad it was only yellow</p> -
Howfur badly haes Naholo bin missed by th' highlanders ?<br><br>...and ah cannae hulp wondering how come Ryan Tongia hasn't filled in in Naholo's absence...baffling fur he averages at least a huv a go a gam sae if ah hud yin quaistion fur joseph that wid be it..<br><br>For th' Chiefs luckily thay cuid afford a loss gaun intae th' gam wi' th' luxury o' a nine point advantage ower th' landers...albeit reduced tae five now...<br>Sadly tae mony dropped baws th' nicht by th' Chiefs...but ah dae loue th' wey thay keep attacking tae th' bitter end..
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="taniwharugby" data-cid="577718" data-time="1462610062">
<div>
<p>well I expect Ngatai thought a player of Dixons quality would have caught it...<strong>or do we have to stand back and wait to see now?</strong></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>From a kick? Are you asking does a tackler have to wait and see if someone fields a kick before tackling them?</p>
<p> </p>
<p>What a stupid question</p> -
Highlanders halves owned Chiefs halves. Chiefs could have badly used TKB tonight but dont think it would have changed the result.<br><br>
Aaron Smith was the best player on the field. His kicking was pinpoint and was brilliant around the field. Naholo was excellent for first game back - please stay healthy.<br><br>
Sopoaga clearly outplayed Cruden. Still not convinced Cruden has the same spark in his running as he did pre-ACL injury - I known it often takes an extra year to get the full recovery effect - if at all.<br><br>
I dont think Weber did himself many favours - quick pass but very one dimensional and didnt mix it up.<br><br>
For the Chiefs was impressed with Retallick, Ngatai and to a lesser extent Cane - he worked hard but like was mentioned didn't have much breakdown effect.<br><br>
Christie is a good player but I think Landers are better off with Pryor at 7. -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Gunner" data-cid="577769" data-time="1462612093">
<div>
<p>Are my eyes playing tricks on me?<br><br>
L Whitelock with a nice little run followed by a good offload....<br><br>
Nup, can't be, I'm going to <strong>Specsavers </strong>on Monday.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>That where all the bloody refs need to go</p> -
<p>From the replay it seems to me that Dixon clearly lands on his shoulder which means it should have been a red.</p>
<p> </p>
<p style="text-align:justify;font-family:'Open Sans', sans-serif;font-size:13px;color:rgb(51,51,51);"><span style="margin:0px;"><strong>Challenging players in the air - Law 10.4(i)</strong></span></p>
<ul><li>Play on – Fair challenge with both players in a realistic position to catch the ball. Even if the player(s) land(s) dangerously, play on</li>
<li>Penalty only – Fair challenge with wrong timing - No pulling down</li>
<li>Yellow card – Not a fair challenge, there is no contest and the player is pulled down landing on his back or side</li>
<li>Red card – Not a fair challenge, there is no contest and the player lands on his head, neck or shoulder</li>
</ul><p>A red card would of course show the bullshit of the law and its interpretations. I think Ngatai gets cited unless they review it and say it was a fair challenge.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Don Frye" data-cid="577831" data-time="1462620476"><p>
It's from the same poster who would have you believe that Rennie deserves little credit for two titles and it was Smith who was coaching the Chiefs.<br><br>
Of course he has been quiet as the Chiefs have gone seven straight and have topped the conference. All with an extremely ropey tight five at times.<br><br>
Then one loss and the same old invective comes out.<br><br>
Just petty really.</p></blockquote> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Siam" data-cid="577839" data-time="1462623859"><p>From a kick? Are you asking does a tackler have to wait and see if someone fields a kick before tackling them?<br>
<br>
What a stupid question</p></blockquote>
<br>
God you are ignorant -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="hydro11" data-cid="577936" data-time="1462645073">
<div>
<p>From the replay it seems to me that Dixon clearly lands on his shoulder which means it should have been a red.</p>
<p> </p>
<p style="text-align:justify;font-family:'Open Sans', sans-serif;font-size:13px;color:rgb(51,51,51);"><span style="margin:0px;"><strong>Challenging players in the air - Law 10.4(i)</strong></span></p>
<ul><li>Play on – Fair challenge with both players in a realistic position to catch the ball. Even if the player(s) land(s) dangerously, play on</li>
<li>Penalty only – Fair challenge with wrong timing - No pulling down</li>
<li>Yellow card – Not a fair challenge, there is no contest and the player is pulled down landing on his back or side</li>
<li>Red card – Not a fair challenge, there is no contest and the player lands on his head, neck or shoulder</li>
</ul><p>A red card would of course show the bullshit of the law and its interpretations. I think Ngatai gets cited unless they review it and say it was a fair challenge.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>The thing is that he wasn't challenging a player in the air for the ball. He went in low for a tackle and the guy jumped. There wasn't anything he could have done, really. If that becomes a card, what is to stop a player from jumping into every tackle situation to get another player sent off? There is the risk of serious injury, but still still doesn't happen too often, and I think some people might be willing to take that risk if the game was important enough (e.g. RWC final).</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="bobily" data-cid="577944" data-time="1462652020">
<div>
<p>The thing is that he wasn't challenging a player in the air for the ball. He went in low for a tackle and the guy jumped. There wasn't anything he could have done, really.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>His big mistake was making the tackle low and then standing and driving up. If he'd tackled him low and gone to ground there's no problem. I don't think there's any real issue about tackling the man in the air. The problem is, he's taken Dixon way above the horizontal and has certainly not returned him safely to earth (JFK). It's all happened in a split second, but Charlie can't have been completely unaware that he's got Dixon's ankles on his shoulder.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Given the recent rulings on Emery, Nadolo and Zas, it won't surprise me to see Charlie cited and missing 2-4 weeks including the game for Te Aroha Cobras this Saturday that Dave's already given him a written advice that he's definitely playing in and to practice his tacking technique. :)</p>
<p> </p>
<p>In hindsight I shouldn't be so surprised at this result. At full strength the Highlanders have got an absolutely shit hot set of backs - on paper they're even better than the Chiefs. If they get parity in the forwards, they're very, very hard to beat. Crusaders will need to smash them up front or we will get a toweling this coming week. </p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Chris B." data-cid="577960" data-time="1462664205"><p>
Given the recent rulings on Emery, Nadolo and Zas, it won't surprise me to see Charlie cited and missing 2-4 weeks including the game for Te Aroha Cobras this Saturday that Dave's already given him a written advice that he's definitely playing in and to practice his tacking technique. :)<br><br></p></blockquote>
<br>
Outrageous! They should close that loophole at once
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Chris B." data-cid="577960" data-time="1462664205">
<div>
<p>His big mistake was <u><strong>making the tackle low and then standing and driving up</strong></u>. If he'd tackled him low and gone to ground there's no problem. I don't think there's any real issue about tackling the man in the air. The problem is, he's taken Dixon way above the horizontal and has certainly not returned him safely to earth (JFK). It's all happened in a split second, but Charlie can't have been completely unaware that he's got Dixon's ankles on his shoulder.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Nailed it.</p> -
<p>although oddly, had he NOT stood up, Dixon would unlikely have had the momentum to flip right over and probably woulda landed on his head....</p>
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="taniwharugby" data-cid="577964" data-time="1462664955">
<div>
<p>although oddly, had he NOT stood up, Dixon would unlikely have had the momentum to flip right over and probably woulda landed on his head....</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>A possibly correct, but irrelevant, point. :)</p>
<p> </p>
<p>People get hurt in legal tackles every day.</p>
