Chiefs manipulating the rules vs the Hurricanes?

[GoTheNaki]

http://m.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11629950

I'm not being a sourpuss here... I'm still unhappy about Woodward dropping that pass.... But this... This is a little different here...

I did find it odd, and the whole golden oldies when the Hurricanes were destroying the Chiefs in the scrums had me unhappy. But oh dear, that footage looks pretty bad on the Chiefs franchise.

Thoughts?

 

[TRF Mr Fish]

http://m.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11629950

I'm not being a sourpuss here... I'm still unhappy about Woodward dropping that pass.... But this... This is a little different here...

I did find it odd, and the whole golden oldies when the Hurricanes were destroying the Chiefs in the scrums had me unhappy. But oh dear, that footage looks pretty bad on the Chiefs franchise.

Thoughts?

I'm still yet to see anything which indicates any sort of rule manipulation. Plenty of times players will remain standing until trainers arrive on the field.

I can understand the complaints that Fisihoii has played tighthead before - that's a much stronger argument in my opinion. Of course he has never played Super Rugby before and is the Chiefs' third choice loosehead, so to expect him to play tighthead at Super level in his first season is a bit unfair.

 

[Regan]

Very negative. I was at the game. All very suspect (right out in front of the posts so if we had got a scrum penalty we'd nab the 3.

He has played tighthead before so seemed very BS and this adds to it. I'm sorry but I don't care what team it is, that's very negative.

Go Canes!!!

 

[nzlizard]

Not reading anything into it, Chiefs won the game, moving on.

 

[ajwffc]

so to counteract the Hurricanes having a stronger scrum the Chiefs played with a man less that should of given the Hurricanes a bigger advantage.

 

[smartcooky]

so to counteract the Hurricanes having a stronger scrum the Chiefs played with a man less that should of given the Hurricanes a bigger advantage.

With just a couple of minutes to go, its hard to take advantage of that extra man especially when the scrum has been neutered by what can only be regarded as (if this really has happened they way the media are saying) cheating. The 23rd man extra prop with the "man-off rule" was brought in to put a stop to this sort of malarkey.

If this is found to have been manipulated by the Chiefs management, then IMO, it needs to be dealt with harshly (a big fine or the docking of competition points). Also, WR need to review the requirements for substituted/replaced front-row players, I thing four things need to happen.

Firstly It should be compulsory for the team sheets to specify whether a front row player is STE Hooker, STE TH or STE LH, and whether he is specialist or can play more than one position. eg.
1. Smith STE LH
2. Jones STE HK
3. Williams STE TH

16. Parker STE HK
17. Thomas STE LH+TH
18. Roberts STE LH

Secondly, the team manager will submit the team sheets to the match officials 24 hours before the game (bracketed players would be allowed)

Thirdly. The team manage will all submit a precis of the playing history of each FR player (including bracketed players if any) at that level or above showing the number of times each player has played each position in the FR with contested scrums

Lastly. One of the four props (preferably a replacement prop) must be STE to play both sides of the scrum.

This cheating has to stop!

 

[ncurd]

Not the first time this has happened in pro match happened in Bath V Gloucester a few years back. Won't be the last when a team doesn't have parity in the scrum.

 

[TRF_heineken]

We had a discussion about something relevant to this last year when the Springboks played. And @smartcooky gave some good feedback about the props.

In that match (the Springboks one) the referee told the teams that they will have uncontested scrums even though SA was having the upper hand at scrum time. In that match, Trevor Nyakane came on and played tighthead prop, but he was only registered on the player roster as a loosehead. As cooky explained, when the teams hand in the team sheet, they specify with the props on whether they play loosehead or tighthead or both, as it is specialist positions. In that match Nyakane wasn't registered to play tighthead, so the ref had no choice but to call for uncontested scrums.

So even though The Springboks had 8 men in the scrum, with 2 props and a hooker in the front row, they still had to go for uncontested scrums. And I guess the same applies here. The coach and his players have the right to choose what they can play, and if they use it to their advantage, then so be it. I have always been opposed to uncontested scrums, as it does take away the advantage the dominant team in that area has (And it's probably the only facet in Rugby Union where this can happen). There isn't a rule that states that you have to register who is allowed to jump in the lineout, or who can kick at goal.

But I can understand at scrum time, it's a matter of player safety, as someone scrummaging at prop who doesn't have the right technique or training in that position could seriously harm his own health and the others in the scrum.

 

[bazwaz]

This cheating has to stop!

...mate, unless you're are a doctor who specialise in back injuries .. you are just making assumptions and accusations based on **** all...assumptions they say being the mother of all **** ups..
You have no idea what level of treatment he had or discussions that were had between the player and the trainer, trivializing the injury is just dishonest...

 

[TRF_Olyy]

To be fair that is proper sketchy.
It's like Bloodgate's little brother.

 

[nzlizard]

...mate, unless you're are a doctor who specialise in back injuries .. you are just making assumptions and accusations based on **** all...assumptions they say being the mother of all **** ups..
You have no idea what level of treatment he had or discussions that were had between the player and the trainer, trivializing the injury is just dishonest...

Dude don't stress over it.

Lets focus on the Sharks this weekend

 

[austingtir]

Dude don't stress over it.

Lets focus on the Sharks this weekend

Yeah lets focus on how raped the Chiefs scrum is going to get facing a team that molested the Highlanders scrum (after replacements came on) which is arguably the second best in NZ.

 

[Regan]

...mate, unless you're are a doctor who specialise in back injuries .. you are just making assumptions and accusations based on **** all...assumptions they say being the mother of all **** ups..
You have no idea what level of treatment he had or discussions that were had between the player and the trainer, trivializing the injury is just dishonest...

Watch the video, he'd have been better to say it was a leg injury with that limping.

 

[unrated]

Nope dont worry Chiefs fans. Sharks rested their entire front row for the Chiefs game. So i dont think we can take much from the highlanders game.

 

[TRF Mr Fish]

Dave Rennie's not happy about the accusations: http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/...fends-scrum-tactics-against-continued-attacks

Of particular note:

"If they went back to Beauden Barrett's try, which was about four minutes earlier, they'll see footage of our physio tending to Siate," Rennie said.
"He's bent over, he's putting heat into his back and so on. And the footage they show of him running, s**t, he's barely got above a jog, so he's clearly struggling. It's just rubbish."

 

[TRF_heineken]

Dave Rennie's not happy about the accusations: http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/...fends-scrum-tactics-against-continued-attacks

Of particular note:

No offence to Mr. Rennie, but as prop myself who stopped playing because of back injuries, if Siate was struggling as he's saying, then he shouldn't even be in training this week. A back injury isn't something you heal from overnight.

 

[Five Meters Out]

Dude don't stress over it.

Lets focus on the Sharks this weekend

You'll need to be focused, cause I see Siate and his bad back are all OK now and he will prop against the Sharks this weekend. That should be interesting.

 

[nickdnz]

It's a bit messy but I'd give the benefit of the doubt to the Chiefs.

The reality is that the player himself way well have wanted to come off rather than face another scrum. He could have hurt himself in a scrum and didn't want to take the risk of doing more damage. I played in the semi-final of a club competition for two or three minutes with a tore Achilles tendon (from the previous scrum) - it was the final few minutes and had to play till there was a break in play. It was only when a scrum had to be reset, and I couldn't put any weight on my foot - I had to insist to the coaches they replace me. Getting destroyed in a scrum all game could certainly cause a back injury, to the point you don't want to risk playing on.

 

[otapouri]

The hurricanes had 80 minutes to win that game 15 missed points from Barrett and a dropped try 20 plus points and everyone is going on what might have been, sounds like sour grapes to last years finals chokers.

 

[nickdnz]

The hurricanes had 80 minutes to win that game 15 missed points from Barrett and a dropped try 20 plus points and everyone is going on what might have been, sounds like sour grapes to last years finals chokers.

Well, it didn't come from the Hurricanes management or even started by fans did it, the video came from the Herald.

But other than that, yeah, great point..