All Blacks v BI Lions Test #2
-
@Kruse said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #2:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #2:
@reprobate said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #2:
I really didn't think there was fuck all in the vunipola cleanout, he hardly hit him and beauden milked it for all it was worth.
Wtf? Are you blind?
The Vunipola "late charge" - nothing in it, but if I was to cover one eye, I'd ponder whether there was intent without damage.
The Vunipola cleanout - dodgy, and reckless at best. Coming so soon after the late charge... I can imagine a post in the conspiracy thread about it.
(Along the lines of... after the "late charge" - was that a hollywood by Barrett? And if so - was it because Vunipola said something as he failed to take him out? Targetted.)I felt the Lions could be aggrieved about the late charge. But to say that there was nothing in that cleanout and that BB played Hollywood (not you Kruse but Mr farking Magoo) is just plain weird.
-
Christ Gatland, you just coached a team to a win over the abs and you have to go and make it all about you.
-
@Kruse coincidentally on replay right this minute.
BB was our only player there, was roling away from the tackled player and about to get up, he wasnt even touching the tackled player, and MUrray had his hands on the ball (unsighted in
this still below that makes things look much worse)
-
@jegga WTF is Gatland even talking about, when he refers to "personal attacks"?
I've been reading only a little bit of media from both NH and NZ papers, and generally - not too much inflammatory in NZ. But perhaps that's my one-eyed NZ arrogance.
But in the English papers, which cite NZ papers as claiming certain things - I click on the links which one would presume link to those NZ papers... and end up at an opinion piece by the same english paper.
I'm certainly not claiming that NZ papers haven't been dicks - that NZ Herald clown shit is getting might old, and of course Rattue and Reason are just fucking idiots... but if anybody can point to these "personal attacks" - I'd genuinely like to read them. -
@jegga said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #2:
Christ Gatland, you just coached a team to a win over the abs and you have to go and make it all about you.
Yeah galvanized him and his team to send a farking mind message to SBW to get sent off. piston wristed gibbon.
-
@taniwharugby did he actually hit him though? When I saw it I thought he basically skimmed over the top of him, making only pretty light contact. Barrett stayed down as if he had been hit hard, but it didn't look like it to me. I don't think it was clear head contact any more than what you see at heaps of rucks, just more obvious with less players around. Sort of seemed like an 'is a high tackle penalisable if it misses' sort of situation to me.
Unnecessary, clumsy, illegal - probably all of those things, but a clear red card like some are saying? When we haven't had one since 1967? I don't really buy that. -
@reprobate said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #2:
@taniwharugby did he actually hit him though? When I saw it I thought he basically skimmed over the top of him, making only pretty light contact. Barrett stayed down as if he had been hit hard, but it didn't look like it to me. I don't think it was clear head contact any more than what you see at heaps of rucks, just more obvious with less players around. Sort of seemed like an 'is a high tackle penalisable if it misses' sort of situation to me.
Unnecessary, clumsy, illegal - probably all of those things, but a clear red card like some are saying? When we haven't had one since 1967? I don't really buy that.Are we talking about the same incident?
Late charge - he pretty much skimmed his chest, Barrett stayed down for some reason.
Cleanout - nailed him with forearm, Barrett didn't do any hollywood (that I noticed).
Not that I'm sold on the red-card theory, but... -
@jegga said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #2:
Christ Gatland, you just coached a team to a win over the abs and you have to go and make it all about you.
Warren-bawl?
Or maybe a "sook"?
Gatland is like Mourinho and Woodward - in his head, there is always some part of what is going on that is about him.
This sort of grandstanding never happened with Geech in '89, '93. '97 or '09 (or the mid-week part of '05).
At RWC 2019 it will happen with Eddie J but not with Joe Schmidt.
Different folks, different strokes.
Give me Geech and Joe any day.PS Please don't take Joe in 2019 - we want him for the RWC in Ireland 2023!
-
@Kruse said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #2:
@jegga WTF is Gatland even talking about, when he refers to "personal attacks"?
I've been reading only a little bit of media from both NH and NZ papers, and generally - not too much inflammatory in NZ. But perhaps that's my one-eyed NZ arrogance.
But in the English papers, which cite NZ papers as claiming certain things - I click on the links which one would presume link to those NZ papers... and end up at an opinion piece by the same english paper.
I'm certainly not claiming that NZ papers haven't been dicks - that NZ Herald clown shit is getting might old, and of course Rattue and Reason are just fucking idiots... but if anybody can point to these "personal attacks" - I'd genuinely like to read them.It'll be great when a few of these lions retire and we get to see what they really thought of him.
-
I've just watched both press conferences. Gatland's comments were in response to a question from a UK journo, so you need to see the full video for context. I'm sure the NZH clown photo was the catalyst for the question but Gatland is very complimentary to NZ rugby fans.
-
@Megweya said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #2:
@jegga said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #2:
Christ Gatland, you just coached a team to a win over the abs and you have to go and make it all about you.
Warren-bawl?
Or maybe a "sook"?
Gatland is like Mourinho and Woodward - in his head, there is always some part of what is going on that is about him.
This sort of grandstanding never happened with Geech in '89, '93. '97 or '09 (or the mid-week part of '05).
At RWC 2019 it will happen with Eddie J but not with Joe Schmidt.
Different folks, different strokes.
Give me Geech and Joe any day.PS Please don't take Joe in 2019 - we want him for the RWC in Ireland 2023!
Any word of mcGeechan? I reckon Jones would be good to have a beer with , Gatland ? Yeah, nah
-
@Kruse said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #2:
@reprobate said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #2:
@taniwharugby did he actually hit him though? When I saw it I thought he basically skimmed over the top of him, making only pretty light contact. Barrett stayed down as if he had been hit hard, but it didn't look like it to me. I don't think it was clear head contact any more than what you see at heaps of rucks, just more obvious with less players around. Sort of seemed like an 'is a high tackle penalisable if it misses' sort of situation to me.
Unnecessary, clumsy, illegal - probably all of those things, but a clear red card like some are saying? When we haven't had one since 1967? I don't really buy that.Are we talking about the same incident?
Late charge - he pretty much skimmed his chest, Barrett stayed down for some reason.
Cleanout - nailed him with forearm, Barrett didn't do any hollywood (that I noticed).
Not that I'm sold on the red-card theory, but...Incredibly enough it is talking about the cleanout.
-
@reprobate @ ~55:19 if you want to go re-watch it.
Definite contact with BB head by his shoulder, albeit not a solid contact, but totally unnecessary and potentially dangerous.
-
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #2:
@Kruse said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #2:
@reprobate said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #2:
@taniwharugby did he actually hit him though? When I saw it I thought he basically skimmed over the top of him, making only pretty light contact. Barrett stayed down as if he had been hit hard, but it didn't look like it to me. I don't think it was clear head contact any more than what you see at heaps of rucks, just more obvious with less players around. Sort of seemed like an 'is a high tackle penalisable if it misses' sort of situation to me.
Unnecessary, clumsy, illegal - probably all of those things, but a clear red card like some are saying? When we haven't had one since 1967? I don't really buy that.Are we talking about the same incident?
Late charge - he pretty much skimmed his chest, Barrett stayed down for some reason.
Cleanout - nailed him with forearm, Barrett didn't do any hollywood (that I noticed).
Not that I'm sold on the red-card theory, but...Incredibly enough it is talking about the cleanout.
Yeah - it's been mentioned that the cleanout was what is being discussed several times, but I just went and watched a replay of both... and the only way the comments make sense is if perhaps there's some miscommunication.
Edit: actually - the cleanout - from first angle, it does look like MV just skimmed over the top. It's only on the reverse angle you see the forearm (deliberately?) nailing him. -
To change tack on this I think the quality of commentary needs to lift. The world has moved on and our use of technology in real time analysis of the game is not up to it. Instead we have a lot of ex players blowing smoke up each other's .....before, during and after the game. A number of times something is happening on the field and the Commentator is finishing off some ramble. They should have someone who looks at the game and doesn't talk apart from to advise commentators. In that fashion the sideline eye is no where as good as someone looking at the screen or the multiple video feeds they have.
-
I reckon Barrett played Hollywood. I called it at the time. Lying on his back like he had just been knocked senseless. If it was a true head knock, and he had really been hurt like it appeared, surely he would have gone off under concussion protocols. It certainly didn't look like he was claiming he was winded.
-
@Crazy-Horse yep he through his hands up and then lay down. Regardless the cleanout of a player who had cleared the tackle with shoulder to head was incredibly dangerous.
