Geekzone Rugby (Union) Discussion Thread

Forums › Sports › Geekzone Rugby (Union) Discussion Thread

1 | ... | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | ... | 640

557 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1277432 5-Apr-2015 12:24

What did you think the 2 missed yellow cards were for?

I thought the first one of them was clearly deserved. The second one shows we probably are playing tiddley winks at this point, but it was silly from the crusader player. The third - the ball was 20 meters away from the penalty spot so they weren't able to take it quickly even had they wanted to, but fair enough I guess if that's how they are going to rule it now.

I personally thought the ref got several ruck and scrum calls wrong in favour of the sharks, especially in the first 20-30 minutes. Ignoring the scrum, there was a clear knock-on that ended up being a penalty to the sharks, and a matt todd turnover which was penalised because the ref said he was "beaten by the ruck" but matt todd (the tackler) was the only crusader there so I don't see how it was a ruck myself.

Wise

Send money globally for less with Wise - one free transfer up to NZ$900 (affiliate link).

networkn

Networkn
32236 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1277434 5-Apr-2015 12:33

blair003: What did you think the 2 missed yellow cards were for?

I thought the first one of them was clearly deserved. The second one shows we probably are playing tiddley winks at this point, but it was silly from the crusader player. The third - the ball was 20 meters away from the penalty spot so they weren't able to take it quickly even had they wanted to, but fair enough I guess if that's how they are going to rule it now.

I personally thought the ref got several ruck and scrum calls wrong in favour of the sharks, especially in the first 20-30 minutes. Ignoring the scrum, there was a clear knock-on that ended up being a penalty to the sharks, and a matt todd turnover which was penalised because the ref said he was "beaten by the ruck" but matt todd (the tackler) was the only crusader there so I don't see how it was a ruck myself.

There was the tackle which I considered was no arms and was late, I would have yellowed that I can't recall the other, but I thought we were very lucky to get away with it. Even if Nandolo hadn't gone to the bin one of the forwards would have for spoiling the ball on Sharks attack so close to the line.

Let's be fair though, 3 yellow cards in 10 minutes meaning we were down to 12 players was pretty unbecoming of any NZ side, let alone the Crusaders. They had no reason to play like that. They had a 40 point advantage and a bonus point try. Stupidity.

As for your points, I agree there were some missed Sharks Penalties and a couple in favour of the Crusaders, but considering we put 50 points on them AT HOME, with 12 men at one stage, is pretty unbelievable. Their Coach looked near tears during his half time interview.

blair003

557 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1277760 6-Apr-2015 11:53

Caught 5 mins of highlight and looking back that second yellow card was definitely worthy of yellow.

The referees words when he red carded the south african for kneeing todd in the head were a bit annoying. "Boys you leave me no option. I'm only reacting to the situation. It's a knee to the head. I don't have any option unfortunately" (shows red card).

The whole thing came across like an apology, as though the referee didn't think it was so bad and would have taken a lesser action had the rule book allowed him to. I personally thought it was quite bad, much worse than bismarks kick to the guys head the previous week, so I would be surprised if he doesn't get a month or so off.

networkn

Networkn
32236 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1277765 6-Apr-2015 12:12

blair003: Caught 5 mins of highlight and looking back that second yellow card was definitely worthy of yellow.

The referees words when he red carded the south african for kneeing todd in the head were a bit annoying. "Boys you leave me no option. I'm only reacting to the situation. It's a knee to the head. I don't have any option unfortunately" (shows red card).

The whole thing came across like an apology, as though the referee didn't think it was so bad and would have taken a lesser action had the rule book allowed him to. I personally thought it was quite bad, much worse than bismarks kick to the guys head the previous week, so I would be surprised if he doesn't get a month or so off.

The South Africans have taken to this dirty play considerably more in the last 18 months. It wasn't a good look a few years back and it's tolerated so much less now. I was pretty unhappy with it and I agree they mentioned no choice which seemed odd (Did it a couple of times). Disagree about the kick vs knee, I am unsure what off field penalty he got got that boot to the face, I think it was 4 weeks which stupid considering the damage you could do.

blair003

557 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1279200 8-Apr-2015 18:55

The knee got 7 weeks Which I think is about right.

I was of the view that there was a lot more malice in the knee whereas the kick from Bismark was more reactive to someone holding onto him (similar to Dane Coles on tour last year).

I don't think they are any dirtier, just get caught on film more and referees are less lenient now.

NZ teams know you have to meet SA teams head on in the contact areas, so we are told to be more agressive. This is what has lead to some of the cards - extra agression gone wrong.

networkn

Networkn
32236 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1280845 10-Apr-2015 23:57

So the Blues finally get a win.

I'd have to say whilst there was some promising actions during that game, I felt if the Brumbies hadn't of taken 67% of a game to get started, the scoreboard would have been embarrasing and they still easily should have lost by giving away a penalty. Nick White had a rare miss at that range, I would have bet $50 on him getting that.

West did make that one good kick from the sideline, but otherwise to me looked nervous and not confident. I think Bowden is a twice as good number 10. I think Kirwan needs to stop messing around with his combinations, but then I didn't think he was the answer to the Blues blues and I have been right so far.

Kaino had a fantastic game. Pocock is a real worry for the world cup, though he hasn't really got the best of Ritchie more than a few isolated times

networkn

Networkn
32236 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1282725 14-Apr-2015 10:19

Wow so we lost Colin Slade, that's a pretty big loss. He would be on form, presently our #1 or #2 choice at 10! I am not as worried by the loss of the likes of Piutau compared.

I am a little disappointed in him for his choice (Slade), but I would be surprised if he was offered anywhere near 700K a year here even as the first choice 10.

LazyDr

262 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1282776 14-Apr-2015 11:24

The problem is, despite his form, the coaches never seem to line him up as number 1 or 2, he's generally always (few exceptions) treated as bench material. They've invested a lot more in Cruden and Barrett. If I was in his position, i'd do the same. A professional rugby career is short compared with most others, so gotta "make hay while the sun shines" as they say.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29712 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1282784 14-Apr-2015 11:33

what happen to slade?

networkn

Networkn
32236 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1282787 14-Apr-2015 11:36

LazyDr: The problem is, despite his form, the coaches never seem to line him up as number 1 or 2, he's generally always (few exceptions) treated as bench material. They've invested a lot more in Cruden and Barrett. If I was in his position, i'd do the same. A professional rugby career is short compared with most others, so gotta "make hay while the sun shines" as they say.

He had a fantastic season with the Crusaders last year, and made a statement on the end of year tour, but there has been no test rugby since. He is showing great form this year too, better than Cruden and Barrett, esp with the boot which is critical in a WC year. My information says he was second choice easily for the WC Squad, and that Cruden will need to significantly improve to even be considered 3rd choice. Given the problems they had last WC for 10's injury wise, a specialist #10 isn't going to be favoured as much. All the other 10's can play at least 2 positions. Cruden would be horrible anywhere but 10 I'd suggest.

networkn

Networkn
32236 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1282788 14-Apr-2015 11:36

joker97: what happen to slade?

Signed a 700K deal to move to France after RWC2015 (Or Super Rugby 2015 if he isn't on the WC Squad).

blair003

557 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1282790 14-Apr-2015 11:37

You guys realise realise slade has hardly been available since the last world cup right? Since then if I'm not mistaken he has broken his jaw twice and his leg once. He may have also been rested with concussion and had a knee issue. He only really started coming back into form fairly recently - perhaps last year?

networkn

Networkn
32236 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1282791 14-Apr-2015 11:39

blair003: You guys realise realise slade has hardly been available since the last world cup right? Since then if I'm not mistaken he has broken his jaw twice and his leg once. He may have also been rested with concussion and had a knee issue. He only really started coming back into form fairly recently - perhaps last year?

He played almost all of the Super Rugby season, and probably saved the Crusaders, with Nandolo. He is having a good season again this year.

There is a reason he just got given 700K :)

blair003

557 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1282796 14-Apr-2015 11:44

networkn:
blair003: You guys realise realise slade has hardly been available since the last world cup right? Since then if I'm not mistaken he has broken his jaw twice and his leg once. He may have also been rested with concussion and had a knee issue. He only really started coming back into form fairly recently - perhaps last year?

He played almost all of the Super Rugby season, and probably saved the Crusaders, with Nandolo. He is having a good season again this year.

There is a reason he just got given 700K :)

I agree - I was really referencing LazyDr's comment that he's mainly been bench material and they have invested more in Barrett/Cruden. Most of the time since the last world cup Slade has been injured or returning from injury, that has certainly put him down in the pecking order. But just because he came right last year, doesn't mean you just drop the incumbents that have done the job for you in the previous few seasons.

LazyDr

262 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1282894 14-Apr-2015 12:54

The current coaching staff do have a history of sticking with incumbents despite Super 15 form, as evidenced last year with the likes of Nonu etc, so would surprise me if they had Slade as number 1 on their list currently..

1 | ... | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | ... | 640