Super Rugby: Crusaders - Hurricanes in Christchurch (30/06/2012)

[Amobokoboko]

First upset of the weekend. Great win by the Cannes.

 

[Gena_ZA]

Is the Crusaders even beatable at this stage of the season. If memory serves me right, they are now about to start peaking

Just put myself in line for the Darwin award in 2012

 

[Shovenose]

Looks like a favor to me.

 

[Draggs]

Just put myself in line for the Darwin award in 2012

Mad Highlanders fan?
Hmm... new TRFies category...

 

[Icemn]

Just put myself in line for the Darwin award in 2012

 

[Shovenose]

Don't anyone find the result suspicious looking at that log?

 

[TRF Mr Fish]

No?

Are you suggesting that a team that isn't even guaranteed a play off spot would throw a match to help another team not even guaranteed of getting a playoff match?

 

[Regan]

No?

Are you suggesting that a team that isn't even guaranteed a play off spot would throw a match to help another team not even guaranteed of getting a playoff match?

Plus the Crusaders can't win the NZ conference now after that loss....

Being a die hard Hurricanes supporter, I had that feeling that something special was gonna happen. Glad for the win, certain aspects of our game got exploited by the superior Crusaders' pack but at the end of the day, who cares, we won.

Big game against the Chiefs at the Caketin in 2 weeks time.

 

[smartcooky]

Don't anyone find the result suspicious looking at that log?

Second gunman,
Grassy knoll,
Magic bullet,
Say no more!

 

[Dizzy]

Well, The Canes definitely deserved the win the way they played but I can't help but feel like the Crusaders were ripped off there. The first try should definitely have been disallowed and you could say the same about the other try when Bateman ran around a lazy running Jeremy Thrush. But we'll take the win and the step closer to the play-offs.

 

[William18]

Well, The Canes definitely deserved the win the way they played but I can't help but feel like the Crusaders were ripped off there. The first try should definitely have been disallowed and you could say the same about the other try when Bateman ran around a lazy running Jeremy Thrush. But we'll take the win and the step closer to the play-offs.

No way did we deserve that game. The Crusaders were far better throughout that match for me. They dominated our set piece. We played with a lot of passion but not much more. Looking forward to the Chiefs in two weeks time.

 

[Dizzy]

No way did we deserve that game. The Crusaders were far better throughout that match for me. They dominated our set piece. We played with a lot of passion but not much more. Looking forward to the Chiefs in two weeks time.

Passion is probably the key to winning. If you don't have the passion or the will to keep going, you're bound to fall short. The Hurricanes did well with what we always do well with, which is our backline. We had the better running backline IMO. And players like Lam and Shields were great all round.

 

[Larksea]

good for the canes though the saders were robbed, that Smith try where Savea blocked two defenders on the line smith basically ran right into him (off side) and past the two defenders, looked to me like it was clear obstruction.

because of the call I was hoping the last kick would go over, shame it did not. It would have been a more fitting result.

 

[Dizzy]

good for the canes though the saders were robbed, that Smith try where Savea blocked two defenders on the line smith basically ran right into him (off side) and past the two defenders, looked to me like it was clear obstruction.

because of the call I was hoping the last kick would go over, shame it did not. It would have been a more fitting result.

Yes I agree entirely, but this happened early in the game and the Crusaders had plenty of time to get back at the Canes, problem is, they couldn't. Even the decision to go for the final penalty shot was TOO 50/50 IMO. They knew there was 30 seconds to go, a Crusaders outfit from back in the day would have went for the sideline, won the lineout, drove up the park to concede another penalty then take another shot...

I applaud Bleyandahl for having the confidence to step up and to his credit, the ball only fell short, it had the direction, if only he had taken more steps out[I hate the two step kicks], but it wasn't to be and I reckon the Hurricanes did well to shut down the Crusaders attack.

 

[Larksea]

I don't think it matters when it happened in the game what matters is that it was a bad call worth 7 points to the hurricanes in a result separated by less than 3 points.

Actually both of smiths trys had hints of obstruction in them, one was marginal though there was enough there to say that if it had been called back there was a case to answer. The main one though had no question about it, it was clear text book obstruction and it not being called was a very bad officiating. I simply don't believe Smith would have scored if Savea had not blocked the two defenders in front of him.

Bizarre really mainly because I've seen much less clear examples of obstruction being called in the lead up to a try. When I saw it I didn't think maybe/maybe not. There was not question about it I just expected it to be called not try, penalty.


Not too fussed about the result though because it would be good to see 3 NZ teams in the finals, and for that to happen one of the canes/landers had to win this weekend.

Canes do look like their tight 5 have improved from the start of the season, that may make them a very good side come finals time. Though I thought they were gone after losing Perenara.

 

[Dizzy]

I don't think it matters when it happened in the game what matters is that it was a bad call worth 7 points to the hurricanes in a result separated by less than 3 points.

Actually both of smiths trys had hints of obstruction in them, one was marginal though there was enough there to say that if it had been called back there was a case to answer. The main one though had no question about it, it was clear text book obstruction and it not being called was a very bad officiating. I simply don't believe Smith would have scored if Savea had not blocked the two defenders in front of him.

Bizarre really mainly because I've seen much less clear examples of obstruction being called in the lead up to a try. When I saw it I didn't think maybe/maybe not. There was not question about it I just expected it to be called not try, penalty.


Not too fussed about the result though because it would be good to see 3 NZ teams in the finals, and for that to happen one of the canes/landers had to win this weekend.

Canes do look like their tight 5 have improved from the start of the season, that may make them a very good side come finals time. Though I thought they were gone after losing Perenara.

I see what you're saying Larksea, I really do, but if Savea hadn't impeded, who's to say Smith wouldn't have offloaded to Savea or any other Hurricane and they had scored, 7 pts regardless. Or if he had been brought down, what if the Canes won the quick turnover and got over the line?.. It happened early in the game and although it played a part in the result, it wasn't the definitive moment.

I agree entirely that it was definitely bad officiating, as soon as I found out Lawrence was the ref, I knew there were going to be some controversial calls and that one was pretty much what I had in mind...

My point of it being early in the match though is that, The Crusaders are a quality side who can bounce back and punish teams, they are a quality side who can close out games, oddly enough they couldn't close out this one nor could they punish the Canes.. The match wasn't lost solely on the first obstructed try.

 

[smartcooky]

I see what you're saying Larksea, I really do, but if Savea hadn't impeded, who's to say Smith wouldn't have offloaded to Savea or any other Hurricane and they had scored, 7 pts regardless. Or if he had been brought down, what if the Canes won the quick turnover and got over the line?.. It happened early in the game and although it played a part in the result, it wasn't the definitive moment.

What you are suggesting is pure speculation. Smith could just as easily have tried to offload to Savea, had the ball intercepted and ended up several plays later with a score to the Crusaders at the other end. The ONLY thing that we know for certain is that the try should never have been allowed. It was obstruction, pure and simple, and it happened right under Bryce Lawrence's nose. That is not just bad officiating, its what we term a "Critical Error in Judgement"; when a referee makes an error that directly results in a score. Its the second to worse black mark a referee can have on their assessment...the only thing worse being a "Critical Error in Law".

 

[Dizzy]

What you are suggesting is pure speculation. Smith could just as easily have tried to offload to Savea, had the ball intercepted and ended up several plays later with a score to the Crusaders at the other end. The ONLY thing that we know for certain is that the try should never have been allowed. It was obstruction, pure and simple, and it happened right under Bryce Lawrence's nose. That is not just bad officiating, its what we term a "Critical Error in Judgement"; when a referee makes an error that directly results in a score. Its the second to worse black mark a referee can have on their assessment...the only thing worse being a "Critical Error in Law".

OMG!! Really, you're going to go there??... Judging by the Crusaders performance there is nothing other than the Guildford try that would even suggest they were capable of scoring from one end to the other in numerous plays on that night... What I suggested actually has grounds to stand on based on the way the Hurricanes played all night.
Now what I'm about to suggest is purely based on what I know of Conrad Smith. Neither Tom Taylor nor Zac Guildford would have stopped Conrad Smith from scoring that try not even to save their lives.. The only thing Taylor or Guildford could have done was hang on to Smith as he dived over for the try. Now, the rules do say that is obstruction, and I agree, but do you honestly believe that Lawrences decision [or lack of] not to make a call on it was the reason he scored? NO!, Conrad Smith was going to score that try regardless.

Call it Hurricane bias or whatever you want, But what I'm saying is FACT!.. But I guess we'll never know

 

[nickdnz]

Meh, Bryce Lawrence is useless. I'm just happy that for once his ineptitude helped the team I support rather than hindered it. Obviously it was obstruction, but in fairness the Crusaders were very average. The people who were saying Tom Taylor is the new replacement for Daniel Carter really must be blushing. He's alright, but not exactly creative. Barrett made him look pretty poor, especially when you consider the Saders forwards, set pieces and All Black halfback.

 

[Darwin]

Meh, Bryce Lawrence is useless. I'm just happy that for once his ineptitude helped the team I support rather than hindered it. Obviously it was obstruction, but in fairness the Crusaders were very average. The people who were saying Tom Taylor is the new replacement for Daniel Carter really must be blushing. He's alright, but not exactly creative. Barrett made him look pretty poor, especially when you consider the Saders forwards, set pieces and All Black halfback.

I was thinking exactly the same thing while watching the game. Taylor certainly wasn't poor, but Barrett was in a completely different class. Don't get me wrong, I think Taylor is a good young player. He is a good ball runner, but as you say he struggles to get his backline going at Super Rugby level, and doesn't seem to have the ability to control the game from the 10 jersey. I still think he is far better suited to 12 at this stage - I'm sure a full season of ITM Cup in the 10 jersey would help, but there is no guarantee he will be starting at first-five for Canterbury....

I have to say I was particularily impressed by Brad Shields - his game needs a bit of refining, but he looks every bit a future All Black to me. Some of the work he did cleaning out rucks was phenomenal - I remember several occasions when he hit a ruck and single-handedly drove 2-3 Crusaders players off the ball!