@sammyc any reason to hate on Wellington.

Leon MacDonald was a good #10 in my opinion, except he had a fullback's kick -- too slow, and hence prone to charge downs, and lacking a bit in variety. At the time it made sense to play him though.

Ennor seems to have put on a few kilograms of muscle without losing his speed. He was impressive in his outing against the Sharks.

Still can't understand why the Chiefs never picked this guy up when he was playing for Waikato. He will just get better and better down there.

Not a bad start from young Pari Pari Parkinson : one lineout steal against Sam Whitelock and a good workrate. Hard to say if he was effective at scrum time though.

@stargazer yeah agree on the hype that was bullshit Also thought Dunshea was strong Poihipi was impressive solid on the tackle and made good decisions for a 19 year old Ex NZ Schoolboy hooker Brodie McAlister also looked promising of the bench another 19 year old Crusaders developing some good depth for the future

@taniwharugby said in Crusaders Team v French Barbarians: @chris-b I stopped watching for a bit, what did Macilai do to himself? Couldn't watch the game properly last night with a room full of people, so watched the first half again and saw Macilai tripping over a French foot/leg. That was all that happened, but he seemed to have injured his ankle.

@gt12 I concur. I've always said DMac is way better at FB than as a 10. I can see why Shag may want him at half back also. But there is a world of difference between BB, Mo'unga and daylight - then DMac. If we could get (and keep) Black fit and somehow get JGB's and Perofeta's confidence levels up we would be humming.

@broughie All elbows and knees.

@act-crusader said in Blues vs Crusaders: @majorrage said in Blues vs Crusaders: Talk about retarded. I'm sorry I smashed you in the face, can I have a lighter sentence now. Apologising was irrelevant to anything in 2005, it still is in 2018. What is relevant is if Franks is a good Christian. Depends on the judiciary's point of view I suppose ... he's either Retarded for believing in a fairy in the sky Retarded for being an infidel Worth of sentence reduction and going into credit. Not the best odds.

@stargazer Thanks. I guess that begs the question of why one mid range is 6 weeks and why the other is 4 weeks.

@chris-b said in Rebels v Crusaders: @nepia said in Rebels v Crusaders: Also re: Wessels, I know we're happily shooting the messenger because of when the message arrived, but the Super Rugby draw can be messed up sometimes, and I think supporters of every team have felt that at some stage of the competition. There's no doubt that at some points during the season every team gets a tough turnaround or its byes unevenly spaced, or a series of tough games, but that's a reality of playing a competition across five countries spread around the world. I don't have too much sympathy for Dave, though, because I'd say the Rebels have probably the easiest draw of any team this year, along with the Brumbies. They're playing in the easiest conference, they get two games against the Sunwolves and six against other Australian opposition and they haven't had to go to Argentina. He should take a look at the Jags' schedule, or the Sunwolves, or the Blues. Edit: And the Rebs miss playing the Chiefs and Lions while the Brumbies miss the Blues and the Stormers. I reckon there's a good chance they've got the easiest draw of anyone! Only problem is that they don't get to play themselves. Those would be easy points.

@crucial Did Tony Marsh even start any games? He was a bit of a role player until he made his name overseas.

"The player has received two previous periods of suspension for similar incidents in the preceding 12 months, and the foul play review committee added a further week to the sanction for that aggravating factor."

wow, great pic. Cantabs with some issues during the rainy part. Confused by wet weather rugby. No such problems for the Japanese. Just a routine trudge through the monsooning jungles of Burma for them. It's in their DNA. Speaking of The War, wonder what they made of the prematch Anzac Day observance. As if that sort of ceremony would EVER take place in Japan. "War? War means a-bomb you dropped all over our buttcracks you wankers. Anything before that moment doesnt count because war cannot be lost by victim, we were victim of a-bomb attack, ergo you didnt 'win' because we were the victim, did I mention a-bomb means we were victim of war?"

@pukunui said in Jaguares v Crusaders: Decent win in the end. Looking forward to seeing the injured guys coming back for the saders. Liking what i see from mataele, strong and elusive. Is he NZ eligible? He arrived in NZ in February 2015, so I think he should be eligible. The 3-year residency requirement still applies to him, not the 5-year.

@pukunui Mataele's been impressive this year. He's not the finished article, but once a few more rough edges are knocked off he's going to be very handy. I think Razor is pretty keen on the "two fullbacks and a power winger" configuration, so I think Mataele will have to bide his time and take his Uncle Seta's wing next year. Dagg will come back shortly and probably take over from Bridge - but, George has been going pretty well this year and his speed has been very useful. Also, while I think of it - a shout out to Michael Alaalatoa. He's been playing big minutes at tighthead in pretty much every game - at least 70 at the weekend at altitude. Vital really, because we don't have a credible alternative. You hold your breath with some of his tackling, but he's been a big cog in the wheel while Franks has been away and it's going to be bloody handy to have him and (a well rested) Owen paired for the second half of the season.

If there is anything I have emphasised in my posting here, it is that there is a high degree of uncertainty inherent to biology and medicine. In posting that abstract I wanted to emphasise that there is probably little real knowledge of the etiology and pathology of concussive brain injury. As there is little evidence for evaluating return to play criteria, caution should govern decisions.

@mimic said in Highlanders v Crusaders: @bones said in Highlanders v Crusaders: @crucial but as someone else has raised, bit antiquated that once the conversion is taken the try stands, why is that a thing? Surely as long as the kickoff isn't taken then it's not a problem. Its not a thing. Im sure I remember a player taking a quick conversion but the ref had none of it. I think it comes from a mis-understanding of the bolded piece in the TMO Protocols 2.1... Potential infringement by the team touching the ball down in opposition in-goal 2.1 If, after a team in possession of the ball has touched the ball down in their opponents’ ingoal area (including after a try is awarded and before the conversion is struck), any of the match officials (including the TMO) have a view that there was a potential infringement, within the list of offences (see 2.3) before the ball was carried into in-goal by the team that touched the ball down, they may suggest that the referee refers the matter to the TMO for review. 2.2 The potential infringement must have occurred between the last restart of play (set piece, penalty/free­kick, kick­off or restart) and the touch down but not further back in play than two previous rucks and/or mauls. Somebody, at some point, didn't realise that the word "including" does not mean "exclusively". Either that - or somebody thought that a conversion counts as a penalty/freekick/restart.