[2016 Super Rugby] Highlanders vs. Chiefs (Round 17) 16/07/2016

[TRF_heineken]

Venue: Forsyth Barr Stadium
Time: 09:35 CAT (SA, GMT+2)​

 

[ianw16]

HT: Landers 5 (T: Naholo) Chiefs 7 (T: Pulu, C: MacKenzie)

 

[TheOvalBall]

My word, what an incredible try from the Highlanders.

 

[smartcooky]

That'll just about do it!! 25-15 to the Landers with 6 left on the clock

 

[ianw16]

Highlanders 25-15 with 5 to play. Looking good for the Canes to be no. 1 in NZ conf.

- - - Updated - - -

Landers win. So the NZ conf. finishes as Canes 53, Landers 52, Chiefs 51, Crusaders 50. Wouldn't have predicted that. Ridiculously close.

- - - Updated - - -

Stormers about to get a dose of reality, as they play a NZ team (Chiefs) for the first time this season, in the QF. Can't see past a Chiefs win.

 

[smartcooky]

Highlanders 25-15 with 5 to play. Looking good for the Canes to be no. 1 in NZ conf.

- - - Updated - - -

Landers win. So the NZ conf. finishes as Canes 53, Landers 52, Chiefs 51, Crusaders 50. Wouldn't have predicted that. Ridiculously close.

- - - Updated - - -

Stormers about to get a dose of reality, as they play a NZ team (Chiefs) for the first time this season, in the QF. Can't see past a Chiefs win.

Mate, all four teams 11 wins, four losses with bonus points making the difference. Also ridiculously close was the for/against, +133 to +170. that's 37 points over 15 games.....2½ points per game!!

 

[ianw16]

Mate, all four teams 11 wins, four losses with bonus points making the difference. Also ridiculously close was the for/against, +133 to +170. that's 37 points over 15 games.....2½ points per game!!

Indeedy. I think we'll see both the Highlanders and the Chiefs in the semis, despite away QFs. I imagine the Canes and Crusaders are praying for a Jags win later on, with no bonus point for the Lions. I'm sure the Canes would hammer the Sharks at home, and I imagine the Crusaders probably have a better chance of beating the Lions away than the Canes away, despite the travelling.

 

[JohnKA]

Mate, all four teams 11 wins, four losses with bonus points making the difference. Also ridiculously close was the for/against, +133 to +170. that's 37 points over 15 games.....2½ points per game!!

Maybe the Canes can go all the way this year they have been looking very good but so have all the NZ sides , all deserve to be the SR champion ,wish the bloody Sharks can start playing like these sides

 

[sigesige00]

There was a Chiefs supporter wearing half-1st/half-2nd jersey. Could you tell me how to get it by mail order?

 

[Bruce_ma gooshvili]

That is a ridiculously close and competitive NZ conference. If one team had been even just slightly better than the others over the season they'd have locked up the No.1 seed. But they've all dragged each other down a bit in the standings. Makes the playoffs more interesting for a neutral like me.

 

[austingtir]

I think the Canes are third best out of the five NZ teams (totally ignoring the score board).... For me either the Chiefs or Highlanders are more likely to make the finals... guess maybe both but then im biased. The Canes getting a home run to the final makes a big difference but it didnt matter last year. IF the HL can get past the Brumbies id rate them to knock the Canes over again.

The Chiefs have been amazing the last few weeks they have a very good balance in their team and have no problem with bending the rules to win. Their forward pack in particular has shocked me over the last few weeks. Its almost like they are on something if you ask me the difference compared to before the june internationals is crazy.

Highlanders are playing the Brumbies.... pretty scary for a HL supporter to watch that one. HL couldnt of drawn a worse team than that imo.

 

[smartcooky]

Having had a chance to think about this, IMO this was the game of the round. It had a real "test match" feel about it and the intensity and quality of the game was right up there with an All Black test match.

One thing that did rather annoy me though was that this match was billed as having been a "sellout" but it wasn't.

A stadium is sold out when it is full to its capacity. Forsyth-Barr Stadium has the ability to have seating behind the in-goal at the eastern end of the ground, giving it a capacity of almost 31,000, but there was no seating there on Saturday night and the crowd was only 22,500, so IMO, that was not a sold out stadium.

 

[Nubiwan]

Bit of a bone to pick on two issues. Want to clarify that I consider myself a neutral and, if anything, tend to favour the highlanders in many matches. Also the cheifs, having played in both places in a distant past.

first bone, the penalty / sin bin for the illegal clean out on smith. I get it. It's slightly dangerous, and the ref has to stamp it out, but it occurred to me that smith was dithering around offside, and got what he deserved. We've all been onth receiving end of that type of thing, and if you hang around trying to kick a ball loose on the wrong side of a ruck, then your are open game. Penalty at best, lest we want the lads to become a bunch of card waving zealots as in football. Young Aaron Smith was waving his card as soon as it happened. Yeah I get the infraction, but the ref could have used a bit of common rugby sense for me.

second bone - the TMO decision for the knock on leading to the try. Let me put it this way, that knock on happens anywhere else on the field, and it's just a knock on decision missed by the ref, as it has been for a 100 years. We don't call for a TMO. Glenn Jackson's first reaction was knock on. Only on seeing a replay on a screen does he get the chance to call for TMO. Unfair in my opinion. On their ensuing possession, as irony would have it, Mckenzie ran down the right flank and clearly threw the ball back and it came off a highlander. Touch judge awarded a line out to the cheifs. Jackson said (incorrectly IMHO) that it was knocked on. Pretty sure it was questioned by the Chiefs, but we didn't see any TMO.

my point in both instances is that there needs to become consideration for the spirit of the game at times. Common sense. These might not be great examples, but sometimes TMO can get in the way of a decent match, because it leads to a sin binnring, or simply slows down the proceedings. Not against TMO per say, but think the cheifs can consider themselves hard done by.

otherwise, a bloody great match.

 

[smartcooky]

first bone, the penalty / sin bin for the illegal clean out on smith. I get it. It's slightly dangerous, and the ref has to stamp it out, but it occurred to me that smith was dithering around offside, and got what he deserved. We've all been onth receiving end of that type of thing, and if you hang around trying to kick a ball loose on the wrong side of a ruck, then your are open game. Penalty at best, lest we want the lads to become a bunch of card waving zealots as in football. Young Aaron Smith was waving his card as soon as it happened. Yeah I get the infraction, but the ref could have used a bit of common rugby sense for me.

[TEXTAREA]LAW 16 DEFINITIONS
A ruck is a phase of play where one or more players from each team, who are on their feet, in physical contact, close around the ball on the ground. Open play has ended.
Players are rucking when they are in a ruck and using their feet to try to win or keep possession of the ball, without being guilty of foul play.[/TEXTAREA]

[TEXTAREA]Law 16.2 (d) All players forming, joining or taking part in a ruck must be on their feet.
Sanction: Penalty kick[/TEXTAREA]
I'm not convinced that Ben Smith was offside. He was on his feet, in the ruck and I thought he was bound in by at least one opponent, so that makes him entitled to be where he was. However, offside or not, no player deserves to be turned upside down and dropped on his head/shoulders. Sure, the player was entitled to clean him out, but he was not entitled to tip him over. There are other ways to legally clean out or remove an opponent. What the Chiefs player did was illegal, unnecessary and dangerous. Any worse and it could easily have been a red card he was given.

second bone - the TMO decision for the knock on leading to the try. Let me put it this way, that knock on happens anywhere else on the field, and it's just a knock on decision missed by the ref, as it has been for a 100 years. We don't call for a TMO. Glenn Jackson's first reaction was knock on. Only on seeing a replay on a screen does he get the chance to call for TMO. Unfair in my opinion. On their ensuing possession, as irony would have it, Mckenzie ran down the right flank and clearly threw the ball back and it came off a highlander. Touch judge awarded a line out to the cheifs. Jackson said (incorrectly IMHO) that it was knocked on. Pretty sure it was questioned by the Chiefs, but we didn't see any TMO.

my point in both instances is that there needs to become consideration for the spirit of the game at times. Common sense. These might not be great examples, but sometimes TMO can get in the way of a decent match, because it leads to a sin binning, or simply slows down the proceedings. Not against TMO per say, but think the cheifs can consider themselves hard done by.

otherwise, a bloody great match.

I'm assuming you are talking about the Lima Sopoaga try? If so, the ball was knocked out by the Chiefs tackler, and it didn't go forwards from the Highlander's player.

In any case, a suspect play in the lead up to a try is always going to be referred to TMO while it won't be be at any other time or place unless its foul play. This is why the TMO is there in the first place.

We cannot refer everything to the TMO. The only time the TMO can be called is

1. If there is a possible knock-on, forward-throw, ball-carrier or ball in touch or infringement in the lead up to a try, and no more than two phases prior to the try being scored.

2. At any time to check on foul player and/or to identify the offending players.

The Referee can refer to the TMO.
Either of his two Assistant Referees may recommend a TMO referral.
The TMO himself may instigate a referral using the "Check, check" protocol.

 

[Larksea]

close game, closer than a 10 point margin suggests.

The game really just came down to a couple of moments. The silly sanders card and the botched Lowe Try. As much Seta's fault for passing early he really needed to draw a man or two, very unlike lowe to have dropped that he has been in such good touch.

the Tom Sanders cleanout changed the game but it was deserved. Silly from Sanders, hes Ben Smith had come right around the side of the ruck and was offside sanders should have smashed him and not lifted. I think the highlanders scored 10 points in that 10 min - it defined the game.

The Sopoaga try. Thats only a try when there is a TMO to call on. And could/should be ruled a loose carry, its not like the ball was striped clean. The chiefs player literally just tapped the ball with his fingers and it came out.

That said the highlanders did look slightly the better team, bit more intensity and they finished their chances better. Chiefs had a number of massive drives/breaks and really just failed to capitalise and get points. The first half in particular they really should have scored a couple more trys and had a bigger advantage at half time.

From an all black selection point of view because to be honest I really consider myself an All Black supporter above all.

You would have to say that Sopoaga has outplayed Cruden in both the Chiefs vs. Highlanders games this year. IMO current form at 10 is without a doubt Barrett, Sopoaga, Cruden.
Ben Smith had a huge game, he was literally everywhere and had a huge amount of intensity. McKenzie has been the form 15 of the NZ conference and arguably the whole competition but Smith made a statement.
For the Chiefs Sam Cane was absolutely huge, he had a massive game. While you could say both forward packs had big game across the board Cane still stood out.
But the big mover may be Bird, he had a massive game and he must be in contention for that 4th lock position. AB selectors have continued to select Romano on loyalty but it must be close to Birds on form who had a late start to the season due to injury but has been in fantastic form.
And finally Faddes, you would think if charlie Ngatai is still out of contention then Faddes has to be coming into the calculations seriously.

Despite the horrendous injury list, the brutal finals intensity game against the highlanders and the Travel its really on the chiefs shoulders to go over to South Africa and put the Stormers to the sword.

The Stormers have basically been gifted a home quarter final by the draw and IMO they don't deserve it.

I don't see the Chiefs winning the ***le this year. Their injury list is too horrific its a miracle they are 11-4 and would have been #1 under the old bonus points system. Its too much to ask them to go to SA and likely come back to NZ again and win back to back and somehow have enough left to win a final.

But I really want to see them blow the stormers away. I think most in NZ want to see that happen...

 

[Kiwiwomble]

Bit of a bone to pick on two issues. Want to clarify that I consider myself a neutral and, if anything, tend to favour the highlanders in many matches. Also the cheifs, having played in both places in a distant past.

first bone, the penalty / sin bin for the illegal clean out on smith. I get it. It's slightly dangerous, and the ref has to stamp it out, but it occurred to me that smith was dithering around offside, and got what he deserved. We've all been onth receiving end of that type of thing, and if you hang around trying to kick a ball loose on the wrong side of a ruck, then your are open game. Penalty at best, lest we want the lads to become a bunch of card waving zealots as in football. Young Aaron Smith was waving his card as soon as it happened. Yeah I get the infraction, but the ref could have used a bit of common rugby sense for me.

not going to touch that one :huh:

second bone - the TMO decision for the knock on leading to the try. Let me put it this way, that knock on happens anywhere else on the field, and it's just a knock on decision missed by the ref, as it has been for a 100 years. We don't call for a TMO. Glenn Jackson's first reaction was knock on. Only on seeing a replay on a screen does he get the chance to call for TMO. Unfair in my opinion. On their ensuing possession, as irony would have it, Mckenzie ran down the right flank and clearly threw the ball back and it came off a highlander. Touch judge awarded a line out to the cheifs. Jackson said (incorrectly IMHO) that it was knocked on. Pretty sure it was questioned by the Chiefs, but we didn't see any TMO.

but it didn't go forward....people seem to be confusing this game with a school yard game of touch...we're not playing "drop ball" here. Whether it got tapped out or he lost control (it was tapped out) is beside the point...it went back and the landers kept possession

 

[Nubiwan]

not going to touch that one :huh:



but it didn't go forward....people seem to be confusing this game with a school yard game of touch...we're not playing "drop ball" here. Whether it got tapped out or he lost control (it was tapped out) is beside the point...it went back and the landers kept possession

I just thought the sin bin incident could have sufficed as a penalty for foul play. Smith was being a *** and deffo offside.

The knock on was originally called a knock on by the ref. Not by me. He was ready to set a scrum. No one would have cared less. Least of all the Highlanders, it appeared. Ref then sees a replay on the jumbotron and says oh dear, TMO time.

I get it the right decisions were made, but sometimes, even with TMO, decisions we would normally not even question, are called back. The sin bim was the weakest of all, and had Smith not been offside in the first place, he wouldn't have been kicked on his arse....

I am simply a neutral wants to see 15 v 15 as much as possible. The head roll tackles need to be outlawed, but that case was one of the flimsiest. The fact smith was bowled over the ruck he just entered from the side also helped him land on his shoulder. Still foul play, but soft IMHO.

 

[Nubiwan]

I just thought the sin bin incident could have sufficed as a penalty for foul play. Smith was being a *** and deffo offside.

The knock on was originally called a knock on by the ref. Not by me. He was ready to set a scrum. No one would have cared less. Least of all the Highlanders, it appeared. Ref then sees a replay on the jumbotron and says oh dear, TMO time.

I get it the right decisions were made, but sometimes, even with TMO, decisions we would normally not even question, are called back. The sin bim was the weakest of all, and had Smith not been offside in the first place, he wouldn't have been kicked on his arse....

I am simply a neutral wants to see 15 v 15 as much as possible. The head roll tackles need to be outlawed, but that case was one of the flimsiest. The fact smith was bowled over the ruck he just entered from the side also helped him land on his shoulder. Still foul play, but soft IMHO.

Getting too deep into this, I know, but if the ref simply said to smith don't be offside next time, then many would have said fair play. As it turns out, a guy committing an infraction (Smith) is basically rewarded. If smith walks in the side of a ruck on his own goal line, preventing a try scoring, the he gets binned. On the half way, it's ignored.

again, it was a great game, and I am rather just picking on two incidents that swayed the outcome in favour of the highlanders, when they might have been treated differently. Say it again, I generally have favoured the Otago side as I have a good mate who I played with from there, so it's nothing to do with any bias. Just a love of the open game.

- - - Updated - - -

close game, closer than a 10 point margin suggests.

The game really just came down to a couple of moments. The silly sanders card and the botched Lowe Try. As much Seta's fault for passing early he really needed to draw a man or two, very unlike lowe to have dropped that he has been in such good touch.

the Tom Sanders cleanout changed the game but it was deserved. Silly from Sanders, hes Ben Smith had come right around the side of the ruck and was offside sanders should have smashed him and not lifted. I think the highlanders scored 10 points in that 10 min - it defined the game.

The Sopoaga try. Thats only a try when there is a TMO to call on. And could/should be ruled a loose carry, its not like the ball was striped clean. The chiefs player literally just tapped the ball with his fingers and it came out.

That said the highlanders did look slightly the better team, bit more intensity and they finished their chances better. Chiefs had a number of massive drives/breaks and really just failed to capitalise and get points. The first half in particular they really should have scored a couple more trys and had a bigger advantage at half time.

From an all black selection point of view because to be honest I really consider myself an All Black supporter above all.

You would have to say that Sopoaga has outplayed Cruden in both the Chiefs vs. Highlanders games this year. IMO current form at 10 is without a doubt Barrett, Sopoaga, Cruden.
Ben Smith had a huge game, he was literally everywhere and had a huge amount of intensity. McKenzie has been the form 15 of the NZ conference and arguably the whole competition but Smith made a statement.
For the Chiefs Sam Cane was absolutely huge, he had a massive game. While you could say both forward packs had big game across the board Cane still stood out.
But the big mover may be Bird, he had a massive game and he must be in contention for that 4th lock position. AB selectors have continued to select Romano on loyalty but it must be close to Birds on form who had a late start to the season due to injury but has been in fantastic form.
And finally Faddes, you would think if charlie Ngatai is still out of contention then Faddes has to be coming into the calculations seriously.

Despite the horrendous injury list, the brutal finals intensity game against the highlanders and the Travel its really on the chiefs shoulders to go over to South Africa and put the Stormers to the sword.

The Stormers have basically been gifted a home quarter final by the draw and IMO they don't deserve it.

I don't see the Chiefs winning the ***le this year. Their injury list is too horrific its a miracle they are 11-4 and would have been #1 under the old bonus points system. Its too much to ask them to go to SA and likely come back to NZ again and win back to back and somehow have enough left to win a final.

But I really want to see them blow the stormers away. I think most in NZ want to see that happen...

faddes got some jets in open play, i know that. Highlanders were at odds to score past the cheifs for about an hour, until the binning. Don't need to get into that. Wasn't much penetration from either side backs for the first hour. Chiefs backs hardly had a sniff in fairness. Bird was excellent, as was Cane. Shame both teams made to travel a distance to play a q final. Makes it interesting for the neutral, all the same.

 

[austingtir]

Yep I reckon Faddes has erased all doubt about him maybe just being lucky. He's clearly a class player and seems capable of playing just about anywhere in the backline. If Hansen isnt at the least taking a look at him somethings wrong.

Sam Cane was a standout... but really he had to start finding form....


And for the people complaining about the Ben Smith offside.... I reckon its pretty common knowledge when your the best rugby player in the world bar none you sometimes tend to get those calls.
Just like Richie really.

Iv been saying it for years Ben Smith should of won every world player of the year since 2010. LOL Waits for the rustled jimmies on that one....

 

[smartcooky]

The Sopoaga try. Thats only a try when there is a TMO to call on. And could/should be ruled a loose carry, its not like the ball was striped clean. The chiefs player literally just tapped the ball with his fingers and it came out.

Larksea, the Law has changed in regard to this in the wake of the controversy over the non awarding of the try in the Lions v Blues match in 2014

[TEXTAREA]LAW 12: DEFINITION: KNOCK-ON
A knock-on occurs when a player loses possession of the ball and it goes forward,
or when a player hits the ball forward with the hand or arm, or when the ball hits
the hand or arm and goes forward, and the ball touches the ground or another
player before the original player can catch it.
'Forward' means towards the opposing team's dead ball line.
If a player in tackling an opponent makes contact with the ball and the ball goes
forward from the ball carrier's hands, that is a knock-on.
If a player rips the ball or deliberately knocks the ball from an opponent's hands
and the ball goes forward from the ball carrier's hands, that is not a knock-on.[/TEXTAREA]
The parts in Red have been added this year.

They make it clear that there is a difference between the ball being stripped and the ball being knocked out in the course of a tackle. More importantly as it applies to this case, the first addition makes it clear that it is only a knock-on if the ball goes forward from the ball carrier's hands. In this case, the ball clearly went backwards from the Highlanders player so there was no knock on from the Highlanders, and the TMO and Glen Jackson were correct to award the try.