Warm Up Match 3: Crusaders v British & Irish Lions (Christchurch)

[McTallshort]

- 13 mins

- 4 mins

Cheers Tigs

 

[Ground We Won]

Some pretty laughable player ratings here: http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/super-rugby/93552782/lions-tour-how-the-crusaders-and-lions-rated

was this written by a posters on here? http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/...-find-a-new-villain-in-referee-mathieu-raynal

That's nothing compared to the absolute crap your media writes mate.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

That's nothing compared to the absolute crap your media writes mate.

 

[Groundhog]

Dang he actually rated the team that lost higher man for man. How to these potatoes get journalist gigs.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

That's nothing compared to the absolute crap your media writes mate.

Your's depict Gatland as a clown, our's depict his as a tub of butter and personally I'd rather smear a little Warren over my toast than have him as entertainment for any future child of mine's birthday party!

 

[Ground We Won]

Your's depict Gatland as a clown, our's depict his as a tub of butter and personally I'd rather smear a little Warren over my toast than have him as entertainment for any future child of mine's birthday party!

That's all pretty harmless compared to the Sun.

Then you've got Stephen Jones.

 

[galumay]

....I'm not convinced.....

Nice to read a post actually challenging my point of view about the game without resorting to personal attacks or simple contradiction. The sort of level of discussion one would hope to see in a forum, but one that is all too rare!

The only point I would defend is that I was clear the Saders couldnt use the poor reffing as an excuse, I agree he wasnt awful, just not great!

The rest of the points are just slight points of difference in how we saw the game, and that is fine - its not a competition to be won, its a chance for expression of views and then self reflection based on responses.

Nicely done TJB.

 

[SelimNiai]

A better performance, though it would have been hard to do worse than the game midweek. Players and combinations are beginning to slide into place and the squad are all fit, swear by now in 2013 we'd had half a new squad called up by now.

Defensively a big effort, can't think of many missed tackles made. The forwards put a big shift in in most areas, lineout, scrum and popping up in the loose to good effect so Farrell Snr and Borthwick can ben happy with their areas. Howley in attack though, yikes. It's fine between in the first 3/4s of the pitch, once we get in the 22 it goes to pot, lack of clinical finishing, lack of ideas. The unnecessary floated pass Farrell threw that meant North had to stop and almost parry back into play summed it up.

Still, I'm happier than I thought I'd be pre game, on to Tuesday then

 

[ratsapprentice]

100% agree on that.

An I.

 

[Maverick1987]

Some pretty laughable player ratings here: http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/super-rugby/93552782/lions-tour-how-the-crusaders-and-lions-rated

was this written by a posters on here? http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/...-find-a-new-villain-in-referee-mathieu-raynal

Haha I've never read so much crap in my life ! Imagine the uproar if we manage to do the unthinkable and beat the ABs . The referee is gonna need a private security firm

 

[Nubiwan]

Lets face it, if the Lions are to get any joy out of the All Blacks, then this was the blue print of how it will come to pass. Low scoring, solid defensive work, commendable scrambling defence, and one or two decisions from the man with the whistle here and there. If the game ever opens up, against any of their opposition, then you can kiss it good bye. Having watched the Crusaders several times this year, I was always thinking, even a 20 point lead wont be enough, but you have to credit the Lions holding this side to just 3 points. They might have bent, but never buckled.

Whitelock bemoaned his side's errors for the defeat, and while it is a valid point, he rather refused to credit the Lion's pressure in any way. Kept going on about his own teams handling errors, which were unusually plentiful, it mist be said. In the end there are two sides on the park, and the Lions probably more prodigious in defence. more clinical with set pieces, and simply better positional kicking in general. The Lions defending something the Crusaders will not have witnessed in their unbeaten Super Rugby run.

Similarly AWJ was quick to praise his side's effort and commitment, in the face of adversity, but skirted the fact that the Crusaders Scrum was dominant, only to admit it was the ABs front 5 they were up against.

As far as my meagre opinion, the Crusaders scrum became dominant as the match progressed. In fairness to the Lions front row, they seemed more prominent with ball in hand than their counterparts. I don't recall Franks on the ball as much as Vunipola for example. However, scrum stability is something the Lions will rather rely on in the test, and they looked shaky at best. Lions Line outs, bar one, were impeccable. Crusaders, uncharacteristically sloppy at times. I thought the Crusaders guilty of collapsing several Lions line-out drives, but admit my understanding of the laws in this area, is shady at best. Some decent rumbles from the line-out nonetheless. Not easy to get 8 players on the same page in a short time with regard lineout drive.

Lions also did reasonably well to manage having to shift Farrell out to centre and bring in Sexton (who has been average until today). I thought Watson did well on kick returns, if the final ball was sometimes iffy. Something the NZ teams are well better at. Lions had 2-3 golden opportunities to cross the line, only for a bad pass, or knock on to ruin the moment. In the hands of their opposition today, those chances would not go begging. That is the difference between NZ and Northern Hem rugby.

My personal opinion on the ref was that he helped the Lions out of jail (gaol LOL) a few times with how he interpreted the "laws". Still, I thought he missed some things the Crusaders did at times as well. To say he never had an impact would be - erm biased. He was OK, but both sides had to make do with his game.

In the end, the Lions gave the Crusaders a lesson in stout defending that they will not have come up against in Super Rugby, and it just about made the difference. The Lions simply had to get a decent performance today against the best provincial side in the land, and they gave it. The actual result was not as important as the performance, and it was solid today, against the best Super Rugby side, few expected them to beat, after their first two outings..

 

[Maverick1987]

Watson was very impressive at FB . Hopefully Eddie was watching .....

 

[ianw16]

Well, I'm not sure that we learned a lot from that game, tbh. Except that it is 80 minutes of my life that I'll never get back again. Can't remember the last tryless game I saw. We know the Lions are pretty limited behind the scrum, and will rely on box kicks (Murray was excellent), and rush 'D'. They will kick their goals. The pack will be strong, and probably the most likely source for tries, assuming they get 5m lineouts. However, when you stick Retallick, Kaino, Cane and Read onto the Cru front row, plus Whitelock (Coles would be a bonus), will there be much in it up front either way? Not enough to stop the game hinging on what happens behind the pack, in my view.
They could argue that the backs will only get better, but that is now 3 games and 4 hours of rugby, resulting in 2 tries. One a driving effort from a lineout. I still cannot see the Lions scoring enough points to win a test match.
I'm sure that Shag and his cohorts know precisely what is coming, and I doubt that the rush 'D' will last long. If they can't figure out how to beat that with the talent available, then they shouldn't be coaching at this level.
As for the Cru; looked clueless without Crotty, who is obviously the brains of their backline. They looked disjointed with Havili at 12. Dagg looked no great shakes at 15. Any chance of Mo'unga making a surprise appearance in the test series have likely been quashed.
In short, as long as the ABs have close to their best pack available, the series will come down to who scores the most tries. The physicality of Kaino, Retallick and Cane will be important.

 

[Goodey]

Well it's their homeland too, even if their ancestors did illegally settle and colonize it 200+ years ago. One thing I really like about NZ is that Maori/native culture is wholeheartedly embraced by the non-indigenous population. Compared to places like the US and Australia where indigenous culture is very much a fringe concept.

Though that said I do think it's kinda pointless for club games, but if they want to do the Haka then go for it doesn't really bother me. I just wonder if the players ever get sick of seeing it (as in the RC and whatnot too).

Pretty much agree with this. I think doing it twice a week does take something away from it as an event.

 

[Sorp111]

A Watson for Lions FB? Noticeable improvement in attack from the back when he came on.

 

[Goodey]

Dang he actually rated the team that lost higher man for man. How to these potatoes get journalist gigs.

They get gigs because they're very very good at getting people to link their articles onto thread like this for the monocle-popping.

 

[Truth]

In french, the "on" pronoun is often used instead of "nous", and vice versa. While the meaning of "qu'est-ce qu'on fait" would be "what's next?" because "on" is a neutral, more often than not people would use "qu'est-ce que nous faisons?" which litterally means "what do we do?". The improper use of the "nous" pronoun may have rubbed off on his english... you're seeing too much into it

Im just stating the truth as to what he said. I never insinuated anything other than a ref referring to a team as 'we' which is not normally used by refs and can easily be misinterpreted.

Like I said, Im just stating the facts. You might be the one looking too much into what Im saying.

 

[smartcooky]

was this written by a posters on here? http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/...-find-a-new-villain-in-referee-mathieu-raynal

Well, this is the truth...

"Five minutes from halftime he allowed Lions captain Alun Wyn Jones to pull down a promising Crusaders maul near their line. At the least it was a penalty. It wasn't far off being a yellow card. Raynal ignored it."

as is this...

"Owen Farrell had a chance to advance the lead to 12-3 three minutes into the second half. Thirty seconds earlier there should have been a penalty to the Crusaders when a Lions forward illegally kicked the ball through."

and this...

"Liam Williams knocked the ball forward three metres, in a move that went close to being a try for Anthony Watson, and it took the television match official to point that out to Raynal".

So I don't see what you are complaining about.

As for his scrum adjudication, that was just a joke. He was utterly clueless as to what was going on... he was guessing, and most of the time, he was guessing wrong. The first scrum PK he awarded was against the Crusaders for pushing early, but it was clearly obvious to anyone with even a rudimentary knowledge of scrummaging that Furlong was pulling his side of the scrum backwards. Later, he PKs the Crusaders scrum for wheeling, but the Lions front row came up before the wheel starts. Even a grassroots whistler refereeing Old Fartonians v Dagenham 4ths knows that if the opposing front row goes up before the wheel, then the wheeling team was pushing forward first so the wheel is legal.

This is basic stuff; scrum refereeing 101. A referee at this level should not be getting such elementary things wrong.

 

[Goodey]

A Watson for Lions FB? Noticeable improvement in attack from the back when he came on.

He showed he had the kicking game to cope with the position and would be a weapon running from deep. Very interesting. I would do it if we can't get a performance doing the same from Hogg.

Gatland will almost certainly select Halfpenny under the same circumstances.

 

[Nubiwan]

Well, I'm not sure that we learned a lot from that game, tbh. Except that it is 80 minutes of my life that I'll never get back again. Can't remember the last tryless game I saw. We know the Lions are pretty limited behind the scrum, and will rely on box kicks (Murray was excellent), and rush 'D'. They will kick their goals. The pack will be strong, and probably the most likely source for tries, assuming they get 5m lineouts. However, when you stick Retallick, Kaino, Cane and Read onto the Cru front row, plus Whitelock (Coles would be a bonus), will there be much in it up front either way? Not enough to stop the game hinging on what happens behind the pack, in my view.
They could argue that the backs will only get better, but that is now 3 games and 4 hours of rugby, resulting in 2 tries. One a driving effort from a lineout. I still cannot see the Lions scoring enough points to win a test match.
I'm sure that Shag and his cohorts know precisely what is coming, and I doubt that the rush 'D' will last long. If they can't figure out how to beat that with the talent available, then they shouldn't be coaching at this level.
As for the Cru; looked clueless without Crotty, who is obviously the brains of their backline. They looked disjointed with Havili at 12. Dagg looked no great shakes at 15. Any chance of Mo'unga making a surprise appearance in the test series have likely been quashed.
In short, as long as the ABs have close to their best pack available, the series will come down to who scores the most tries. The physicality of Kaino, Retallick and Cane will be important.

Right now, as a Lions fan I have to agree with this. The Lions need to be finishing off the 2-3 chances they made themselves today to stand any chance of overhauling the ABs. If they can keep it tight and low scoring, then that is possibly their best chance when all is said and done. Not sure I agree with hours of my life wasted watching the game. I was pretty absorbed. If you need 8 tries to make you happy, then there is always 7's. Some times, the game becomes one of attrition, defence and control. The Lions clearly understand they don't want to be in an expansive rugby spectacle, and expect to come out on top. Not going to ever happen. Dullsville thuggery, controlling tempo, accurate kicking, mammoth defending is the MO of any side wanting to overturn the All Blacks from north of the equator. Finishing chances will also help. If we had polled this forum before the match ass to how many expected the Lions to keep the Crusaders to 3 points, then I expect the answer would have been nil.