Geekzone Rugby (Union) Discussion Thread

Forums › Sports › Geekzone Rugby (Union) Discussion Thread

1 | ... | 115 | 116 | 117 | 118 | 119 | 120 | 121 | 122 | 123 | 124 | 125 | ... | 642

557 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1543795 29-Apr-2016 08:13

How do people here know he wasn't injured again? Players play with minor injuries all the time. Forwards routinely fake being OK when they are not OK... with everything from bruises and strains, to concussions.

If he had an injury and chose to play on to try and not let his team down, but by playing on he was letting his team down, should he play on anyway? Is it fair to make him continue to play on when he is not capable?

ludez

903 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1543796 29-Apr-2016 08:15

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/rugby/news/article.cfm?c_id=80&objectid=11630425

ludez

903 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1543800 29-Apr-2016 08:18

blair003: How do people here know he wasn't injured again? Players play with minor injuries all the time. Forwards routinely fake being OK when they are not OK... with everything from bruises and strains, to concussions.

If he had an injury and chose to play on to try and not let his team down, but by playing on he was letting his team down, should he play on anyway? Is it fair to make him continue to play on when he is not capable?

I just linked the video, there is no denying he faked it. What's funny is the trainer cared so much about getting him to go down he didnt tend to the actual injured cruden who had a head clash. Sorry but that is disgraceful

blair003

557 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1543802 29-Apr-2016 08:20

So the other video/article on stuff where he had received treatment earlier... ?

blair003

557 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1543804 29-Apr-2016 08:22

http://i.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/super-rugby/79415549/fuming-chiefs-coach-dave-rennie-defends-scrum-tactics-against-continued-attacks

ludez

903 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1543811 29-Apr-2016 08:29

That just shows him walking off after the faked injury, in the video you can clearly see he is fine. And when the staff come on he is told to go down, instead of tending to cruden who could have had a broken neck for all he knew but they obviously were more concerned about securing that scrum.

I am a cheifs fan by the way

blair003

557 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1543822 29-Apr-2016 08:46

OK. I can't tell if someone has tweaked a muscle by looking at them on TV. Rarely are things so black and white. I watch MMA fights where people get full on punched or kicked to the body, legs or head and don't show signs of any pain or injury. But you'd have to be retarded to think that the strikes have no impact on them. And I think it's absurd to think that you can tell how their body feels by watching them for a few seconds on TV.

I didn't see that prop in that game to know if he showed other signs of injury.. nobody did. But as I originally said, it's pretty common for players to play with injuries.

If he could have played on at e.g 70% healthy, should he have?

GoodSync

GoodSync. Easily back up and sync your files with GoodSync. Simple and secure file backup and synchronisation software will ensure that your files are never lost (affiliate link).

ludez

903 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1543826 29-Apr-2016 08:54

He wasn't injured till the trainer came on the field, he ran straight over to him instead of cruden who was actually injured. Then as soon as he got there was told to go down. So yeah pretty sure we know he wasn't injured

tukapa1

725 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1543836 29-Apr-2016 09:09

Disclaimer - Hurricanes fan in Chiefs territory.

I don't know whether the Chiefs player was injured or not. An observer cannot see all injuries sports people get - not all injuries are able to be seen.

What it looked like to me, regardless of whether the player was legitimately injured or not, was that the Chiefs were not aware they would have to play with 14 players once the golden oldies decision was made. I have only watched the game once but there appeared to be genuine surprise when they were told that and they had a replacement player ready to come on. There was plenty of animated discussion about being down to 14 men.

Any comments post-game from any players or management about knowing they were going down to 14 men would appear to be disingenuous. Subsequently, any comments from people saying "do you think the Chiefs would deliberately risk playing with 14 players for the last five minutes with a one point lead" are moot, because that wasn't what they were expecting at all.

Whichever way you look at it, we have to trust that medical decisions are being made for the right reasons, and player safety is paramount. I am concerned as to why the Chiefs name a prop in their 23 man squad for the game then won't put him on because they say he's not experienced enough. I know they have to have two replacements props in the game day squad, but surely there's an expectation that they would both play if needed.

In any case, the Canes left points on the field through missed kicks and a dropped pass in the final play of the game that could have resulted in a try. They lost the game.

As an aside, the first AB's squad will be interesting around fist five. Barrett possesses a superior running game but his goal kicking is only at 60% for super rugby this year. Cruden is not dynamic at all and his kicking percentage is only 25% for Super rugby this year. Sopoaga's kicking percentage is 77% but he doesn't do much else other than shovel the ball on.

I believe Barrett will be on the bench as he offers far more than the otehr two as a super sub, so let's see who starts. If it's Cruden then who will kick?

ludez

903 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1543843 29-Apr-2016 09:16

IF player safety was paramount to the trainers/medical staff then both would have ran directly over to cruden who suffered a head clash, for all he knew it could have been a broken neck, but no he decided to run straight over to a player who was walking and running fine,standing up fine and who he knew who would have direct impact to that scrum, and likely canes would have either won a penalty or won the ball.So i really can't believe the safety excuse.

Not a dig at you just the cheifs management

networkn

Networkn
32255 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1547689 6-May-2016 15:51

Anywhere I can watch Reds v Crusaders tonight from overseas in reasonable quality?

tukapa1

725 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1547760 6-May-2016 18:31

networkn:

Anywhere I can watch Reds v Crusaders tonight from overseas in reasonable quality?

Free trial of rugbypass.com and if you don't have DNS software a free trial of DNS4me.

networkn

Networkn
32255 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1547831 6-May-2016 21:25

Pleasantly I watched it via SkyGo, and it was damn near flawless, HD for all but 2 minutes all game we think. Sound was flawless. Great win for the Crusaders this season, I am half expecting Chiefs/Crusaders to finish 1 and 2

networkn

Networkn
32255 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1548080 7-May-2016 22:21

Well the Chiefs Highlanders game was a surprise, sort of.. I had the Chiefs edging at home, and they looked in command for about 8 minutes.

I am severely disappointed in NZ Rugby Commentators and players for their comments about the Charlie Ngati Yellow. Suggesting it was harsh was outrageous. For me that was Red all day long and twice on Sundays. It's not anti Chiefs, and not Anti Charlie, but he went in and lifted him. Had that of ended slightly differently, Dixon could be spending the rest of his life feeding through a straw. It appalls me the comments that because he didn't land on his head, it's only yellow. Do they only want to deal with red when someone is potentially crippled? If you want it out of the game, you set the standard lower. Yes I get Dixon didn't seem worried, and I get Ngati seemed genuinely sorry, but for me that matters nought against that action.

I am sure I'll get shouted down here, but that was awful, and so, so dangerous and potentially life changing.

So much is SAID about protecting the players, but it's so inconsistent and it seems they will only take real action when someone dies, or has a broken neck! Really disappointing to me.

Chiefs were their own worst enemies that game, handling errors were bad, decision making was pretty poor. Reffing was also fairly average I thought. Anyone else think Naholos pass for their first try looked forward?

Naholo was on fire tonight! Nice to see him back, though I saw him limping toward the end of the game. I get the overarching impression he keeps rushing his recovery and it doesn't seem to be working well for him. I hope I am wrong.

tukapa1

725 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1548107 7-May-2016 23:13

It's Ngatai.

And he didn't lift him. He went in to make a legitimate tackle, quite low, and Dixon leapt up contacting Ngatai's shoulder and causing himself to go arse over kite.

It was harsh.

No - I don't support the Chiefs but I have played the game, coached the game and managed the game. It is a contact sport. Soon players will be too scared to go into contact.

1 | ... | 115 | 116 | 117 | 118 | 119 | 120 | 121 | 122 | 123 | 124 | 125 | ... | 642