Chiefs v Crusaders (Suva)
-
-
@Crucial said in Chiefs v Crusaders (Suva):
Crotty concussed. Back to the AB midfield discussions?
Concussion makes me very nervous. Crotty is our rock in the midfield, I can't think of a suitable replacement.
-
Terrible decision, if Harris had not been knocked off his stride he would have got close.
-
@hydro11 said in Chiefs v Crusaders (Suva):
Probably the right decision but Franks brought the referee into that and it could have gone the other way.
Franks did enough to stop the Chiefs player from attempting a diving tackle. Whether he would have made it or not is beside the point (Meg) - clear obstruction.
-
@No-Quarter said in Chiefs v Crusaders (Suva):
@Crucial said in Chiefs v Crusaders (Suva):
Crotty concussed. Back to the AB midfield discussions?
Concussion makes me very nervous. Crotty is our rock in the midfield, I can't think of a suitable replacement.
I think it makes a strong case for ALB. He is the next best decision maker
-
@Crucial said in Chiefs v Crusaders (Suva):
@No-Quarter said in Chiefs v Crusaders (Suva):
@Crucial said in Chiefs v Crusaders (Suva):
Crotty concussed. Back to the AB midfield discussions?
Concussion makes me very nervous. Crotty is our rock in the midfield, I can't think of a suitable replacement.
I think it makes a strong case for ALB. He is the next best decision maker
I had Crotty-ALB inked in!
SBW is the next cab off the rank given his experience, but he doesn't have the oroganisational skills that Crotty has. He would be a massive loss.
-
@No-Quarter said in Chiefs v Crusaders (Suva):
@hydro11 said in Chiefs v Crusaders (Suva):
Probably the right decision but Franks brought the referee into that and it could have gone the other way.
Franks did enough to stop the Chiefs player from attempting a diving tackle. Whether he would have made it or not is beside the point (Meg) - clear obstruction.
Whether he would have made the tackle or not is hugely relevant. Otherwise you could give penalties for obstruction on the other side of the field.
-
@No-Quarter ALB
-
@hydro11 said in Chiefs v Crusaders (Suva):
@No-Quarter said in Chiefs v Crusaders (Suva):
@hydro11 said in Chiefs v Crusaders (Suva):
Probably the right decision but Franks brought the referee into that and it could have gone the other way.
Franks did enough to stop the Chiefs player from attempting a diving tackle. Whether he would have made it or not is beside the point (Meg) - clear obstruction.
Whether he would have made the tackle or not is hugely relevant. Otherwise you could give penalties for obstruction on the other side of the field.
He was clearly in a position to attempt a tackle, that's all that matters.
-
@hydro11 said in Chiefs v Crusaders (Suva):
@No-Quarter said in Chiefs v Crusaders (Suva):
@hydro11 said in Chiefs v Crusaders (Suva):
Probably the right decision but Franks brought the referee into that and it could have gone the other way.
Franks did enough to stop the Chiefs player from attempting a diving tackle. Whether he would have made it or not is beside the point (Meg) - clear obstruction.
Whether he would have made the tackle or not is hugely relevant. Otherwise you could give penalties for obstruction on the other side of the field.
No. Wether he can get to a position to attempt a tackle is the relevant test.
-
-
@Tim said in Chiefs v Crusaders (Suva):
Dumb from Franks. That would cost a try with the Lions refs.
Most refs I would argue.
-
@hydro11 said in Chiefs v Crusaders (Suva):
@No-Quarter said in Chiefs v Crusaders (Suva):
@hydro11 said in Chiefs v Crusaders (Suva):
Probably the right decision but Franks brought the referee into that and it could have gone the other way.
Franks did enough to stop the Chiefs player from attempting a diving tackle. Whether he would have made it or not is beside the point (Meg) - clear obstruction.
Whether he would have made the tackle or not is hugely relevant. Otherwise you could give penalties for obstruction on the other side of the field.
Not really. 'In close vicinity' should be enough otherwise you are guessing entirely what may have happened.
There's only one reason Franks did what he did and that was to impede a potential tackler. Do that in the red zone as a defender against an attacker and you would possibly see yellow. -
@No-Quarter said in Chiefs v Crusaders (Suva):
@hydro11 said in Chiefs v Crusaders (Suva):
@No-Quarter said in Chiefs v Crusaders (Suva):
@hydro11 said in Chiefs v Crusaders (Suva):
Probably the right decision but Franks brought the referee into that and it could have gone the other way.
Franks did enough to stop the Chiefs player from attempting a diving tackle. Whether he would have made it or not is beside the point (Meg) - clear obstruction.
Whether he would have made the tackle or not is hugely relevant. Otherwise you could give penalties for obstruction on the other side of the field.
He was clearly in a position to attempt a tackle, that's all that matters.
If that was a chiefs try and the decision went against us I would be livid. I truly think that was a fair try.
-
@No-Quarter said in Chiefs v Crusaders (Suva):
@Crucial said in Chiefs v Crusaders (Suva):
@No-Quarter said in Chiefs v Crusaders (Suva):
@Crucial said in Chiefs v Crusaders (Suva):
Crotty concussed. Back to the AB midfield discussions?
Concussion makes me very nervous. Crotty is our rock in the midfield, I can't think of a suitable replacement.
I think it makes a strong case for ALB. He is the next best decision maker
I had Crotty-ALB inked in!
SBW is the next cab off the rank given his experience, but he doesn't have the oroganisational skills that Crotty has. He would be a massive loss.
I'm thinking ALB to 12. Fekitoa is experienced enough and his form is picking up for 13
-
@Tim said in Chiefs v Crusaders (Suva):
Dumb from Franks. That would cost a try with the Lions refs.
If it was Ben Franks, that would be a yellow
