Steamers v Counties Manukau
-
Counties Manukau:
1 Pauliasi Manu, 2. Joe Royal, 3. Coree Te Whata -Colley, 4. Ronald Raaymakers, 5. Jimmy Tupou ©, 6. Johnathan Kawau, 7. Fotu Lokotui, 8. Sam Henwood;
9 Augustine Pulu ©, 10. Baden Kerr, 11. Tevita Nabura, 12. Orbyn Leger, 13. Nigel Ah Wong, 14. Albert Nikoro, 15. Tim Nanai-Williams.Reserves:
16 Gafatasi Su'a, 17. Sean Bagshaw, 18. Kalolo Tuiloma, 19. Viliame Rarasea, 20. Viliami Taulani, 21, Liam Daniela, 22. Stephen Donald, 23. Luteru Laulala -
Some interesting match-ups loom... Joe Royal starting, and Donald vs Delany will have to happen off the bench.
-
The Bay of Plenty Steamers:
- Solomona Sakalia (32)
- Liam Polwart (9)
- Jeff Thwaites (15)
- Culum Retallick (108)
- Keepa Mewett (28) – Captain
- Tom Franklin (6)
- Hugh Blake (14)**
- Jesse Parete (14)**
- Richard Judd (5)
- Mike Delany (67) – Vice Captain
- Joe Webber (5)
- Terrence Hepetema (13)
- Lalakai Foketi (24)
- Elijah Nicholas (11)
- Chase Tiatia (20)
Reserves:
16. James O’Reilly (13)
17. Aidan Ross (15)
18. James Lay (4)
19. Troy Callander (17)
20. Matthew Axtens (5)
21. Luke Campbell (10)
22. Matthew Gatland* (0)
23. Isaac Te Aute (15) -
Good to see Parete get another start - he was good v Southland. I wish they would name the injured squad members! How hard is it to do that? I assume Ioane is injured. Also Karpik still injured I suppose. Ardron as well, as Matty Axtens back in the lineup.
Looks like a good Counties team named - they are on a bit of a par with us in terms of (in)consistency.
As a side game - it'll be interesting to see how the Northland v Manawatu game goes... I'm kinda hoping for Northland to get up convincingly to put a bit of space between us and the Poo.
-
Almost an unchanged starting 15 - unheard of!
-
Next four games are very winnable. Hopefully confidence builds after the win against the swede eaters. Never like seeing Callendars' name on the sheet though. Hope Ioane's hand heals by next weekend
-
Might need to record this one. Not getting up at 2 in the morning for a cripple fight.
CM 'should' take this on the strength of their bench in comparison. There is enough versatility there to sub off anyone having a bad day (as long as it is only one or two).
Loose forward is our achilles heel this season. Too much chopping and changing (sometimes through injury/suspension) has meant we haven't been able to get the back row working in combination well enough. Not much depth there either. -
Yes, the reserve selection is odd. As far as I'm aware Axtens and Garland were never in the squad, Both, with respect, are journeymen at best. I would have thought Mua and Simonsson (who were both in the initial squad) would have been selected ahead of them but I'm in the dark regarding injuries and other commitments. You would have to assume that Stowers is injured as well I suppose.
I'm looking forward to a daytime game on The Domain against a premier team. Reading the stats is always fascinating if you like meaningless trivia.The Bay are the best lineout team in the competition and one of the best defensively and as a side note Mike Delany surprisingly got the most tackles against Southland....That guy is worth every cent spent on him.
-
I'm ok with Callender - he is not flash but does a lot of work. We are very 'lock' heavy - with 3 on the field and one as a reserve. I complained a couple of years ago when we were playing flankers at lock all the time! What we gain in the lineout, we lose in the loose. It is all about balance I suppose, but Franklin goes well at number 6 and still gives us muscle in tight.
Good to see Thwaites again - he had a good game v Southland, albeit against weak opposition. In the backline, apart from Delany (best return - ever!), Hepetema is the key man. With go forward ball and Delany's delivery - he seems to have ample time and space.
-
14 all, Counties building into something.
-
Really enjoyed the day. The Strand for lunch and beers, amble down to the ground, good seat on half-way, Mermaid's Mirth on tap (Mount Brewing Company and only a dollar more than Speight's), and a see-saw game with no real pattern. One scrum dominated but it was changed which scrum it was during the game.
We bossed the first 20 minutes based on that dominant scrum, Counties bossed the rest of the half as their scrum started to dominate. 17-14 to us at half time. We started really badly and Counties quickly rattled in 2 tries and looked to be ready to close out the game. Somehow we fought back despite injuries and some players looking pretty buggered. 31-31 and Delany missed a penalty to take the lead. He then got cramp and was hobbling about - only to be given the chance to take the drop goal to win the game with predictable results.
Overall it was a pretty good performance given the circumstances. 3 points could be critical at the end of the season. Counties were always dangerous with their offloading game but made a lot of mistakes.
Oh and I can't believe Pulu only got a talking to for pulling the padding off the post!
-
Yes, a close game between two evenly matched teams but it still felt like a loss. I would like to say that the thing that separated the teams was Delany's off day with the boot but C.M's percentage kicking success was actually lower than ours. For me, I think we had a bad day defensively (at 79% compared with last weeks 95%).....sorry to bore you with the stats but they are a very accurate way of making comparisons. Garland distinguished his few minutes of game time by missing a tackle which utimately resulted in a Counties break out and a try. For the record Blake tackled almost twice as much as any other player.
Like Kiwipie I enjoyed the day. Daytime games at the domain are great
-
@kiwipie said in Steamers v Counties Manukau:
Oh and I can't believe Pulu only got a talking to for pulling the padding off the post!
Initially I couldn't see who the player was from where I was sitting (Pulu certainly has played enough rugby to know better), but I was sure it was worth a yellow card for a professional foul.
-
I was amazed that play was just restarted with a scrum. Counties were allowed to re-organise the defence so they basically got rewarded for that crap.
-
I reckon the ref didn't know what to do - was scared to award a penalty/yellow in case he was shown to be incorrect.
-
Strange game - we should have taken the win - 3 may not be enough at the business end of the season. Scrum was strange as mentioned, but I also thought our lineout underpreformed. Late in the game James O'Reilly was all overthe place. Hugh Blake was immense and stepped up when we had 3 key players lost to injury.
Weber was contained well and Delaney made some poor kicks in general play. It'll be interesting to see the injury list - those 3 games have knocked us around - as it has every other team of course.
-
We're really seeing the best of Blake this season, he's a tackling machine, very impressive. Would have been unfair if his only season with us was last season's law tinkering monstrosity ...
-
@KiwiPie said in Steamers v Counties Manukau:
I reckon the ref didn't know what to do - was scared to award a penalty/yellow in case he was shown to be incorrect.
And who would blame him? What Law did Pulu transgress?
At a stretch you could claim unfair play but it is a bit like yelling at a line out.What it highlights is a law that needs brushing up. Either players should be allowed to defend in front of the post or remove grounding at the base. I favour the second option.
-
I thought what Pulu did was stupid, but it was dealt with fairly by the ref. Sumo and co had a good chuckle about it - fair enough - but that kind of crap is why Pulu is not an All Black. Wasted talent really. Hopefully something positive will come out of it all. As a Bay supporter - we should have done more to win this game and we didn't.
-
Just read the discussion on this at RugbyRefs. Really funny how they are coming up with all sorts of solutions around moving posts and changing field markings yet ignoring the obvious one of removing the ability of grounding the ball against the base.
Wasn't it not that long ago that the law made it possible to just touch any part of the padding and we had silly tries with players tapping the ball halfway up the pad? They tidied that to making it 'ground and pad' but even that is now being used as a tactic. Set up a ruck close to the post and you have a free access to the post. If tries were scored on or over the paint you could remove the issue. -
@crucial is more of an issue in recent times due to the sheer size of the padding which protrude about 6inches or so onto the park, which effectively means there is an arear of maybe ~20inches that is undefendable...although TBF we still don't see huge amounts of tries scored there.
Pulu just highlighted a bit of an issue as the pads are there for safety, so removing them he has created an issue, for which I don't expect they thought would be an issue or consideration to go through a players mind.
-
Max padding size is 300mm protruding . So, if square, the 'undefendable area' is 600mm plus width of post.
-
So 300mm is 11 inches short of the line.
-
@taniwharugby said in Steamers v Counties Manukau:
So 300mm is 11 inches short of the line.
Not sure what you mean by this but have amended my post to be clearer.
This is what the Laws say
When padding is attached to the goal posts the distance from the goal line to the external edge of the padding must not exceed 300mm.
So with the post on the line the depth of the pad can be 300mm max. That would mean that the square type of pad would be 300+300+gap for post wide along the try line. Probably close to say 800mm of target for grounding at the base
