QF1 2012 - Reds vs Sharks

[Mica]

Well yes Mica,the young back up 8for the Crusaders is actually Luke Whitelock the youngest brother.

I knew it - The Crusaders are becoming like the Wales of Super 15 with only a couple of different surnames throughout the entire team

 

[armatt]

Shorks fans last night.

 

[Sandpit Fan]

Was flying while the game was on and got a look at the site after I landed to check the score.

Haven't had time to read through all the pages, but seems like the best team on the night won. Congratulations Sharkies.

Will be a good game this weekend vs the Stormers, if the Sharks turn up like they did last night they may roll them.

 

[RuckinGoodStats]

hey mate, where on earth did you get the reffing stats?!

Sorry for delay get busy leading up to game time. As Mr Timms said I code all the game live (acutally I did 2 games off the tape, so not all live) and tweet interesting stats. Sometimes I send them to the guys who run G&GR and they do some articles with them.

 

[Dan54]

I knew it - The Crusaders are becoming like the Wales of Super 15 with only a couple of different surnames throughout the entire team

Yep Mica and All Blacks are as bad, if you noticed during June tests we had 3 Smiths in the team, and being even more orderly than the Welsh our players are even line up alpabetically, Aaron,Ben and Conrad Smith, all we neeed to do is get David Smith back from France

 

[AngrySeahorse]

True - I guess it also shows the versatility of McCaw.
Do the Crusaders not have a replacement 8 in their squad? Surely there is another Whitelock or Franks hiding somewhere??

Once all four Whitelock bros are playing at the same time they need to seek out any Rugby playing cousins they may have - I would always welcome more

Not often do I agree with a Tahs fan but spot on Simmons does too much watching from an offside position but Timani is a watcher as well but doesn't seem to know where he should be at times looks lost, bring back the old bastards Sharpey and Van!

An old bastard by the name AWH would go alright for mine. I know he's on one side & Simmons is on the other so slightly different jobs if you want to get technical - but comparing the two I'd rate AWH higher. Did not really look closely at AWH until recently - I am definitely a fan.

 

[Jiggles]

He's a great player AS, but Deans likes his forwards to loiter in the backline, so I doubt we will see him in gold.

 

[gel]

Just watching the replay again. Gosh Harris takes bad options, if you took away his kicking I don't know how you can justify his position in the team.

Interesting perspective. I thought he was one of the few reds who played large. Hard straight running and solid positional play... Just about seemed to be in the thick of everything. Also smart in not offloading when he made breaks given mostly he was somewhat isolated after his runs (reds just didn't follow their ball carriers all night... Grrrrrrr) and if he did offload in a night of handling errors and poor backing up would have ended up looking a right twat.

 

[emuarse]

it was really good that the Sharks defence line was never off side. I mean, if they had of been, the ref would have penalised them, wouldn't he?
Wouldn't he?

 

[Blue]

it was really good that the Sharks defence line was never off side. I mean, if they had of been, the ref would have penalised them, wouldn't he?
Wouldn't he?

Much like those Reds forwards taking space behind the ruck, even after getting warned repeatedly. It didn't happen. Thanks goodness for that.

I think we should just agree that Kaplan is way past sell by and all move on.

 

[Braveheart81]

It seemed like Kaplan was getting frustrated with Simmons and other Reds players for loitering from pretty early in the game. I think he showed some leniency towards the Sharks for various infringements because it was a square up rather than penalising the Reds every time a player was loitering offside.

I could be wrong, but I can't help but think that the Reds did themselves no favours with Kaplan. The reality is that Kaplan should have either penalised them for loitering offside and not let the Sharks get away with various infringements to balance the ledger.

 

[Scotty]

You could be wrong. Was there even one penalty for that offense?

You are at least half trolling (as you usually do on threads involving the reds).

 

[Slim 293]

The Reds have definitely acquired a Crusaders like method around the ruck over the past year or so........

There's a lot of loitering offisde, interfering with defenders or clearing out defenders well past the ruck, and players taking detours back on side slowly enough to affect opposition defences.

A few weeks ago they actually ran into their own players a few times during the pick and drives

 

[Braveheart81]

You could be wrong. Was there even one penalty for that offense?

You are at least half trolling (as you usually do on threads involving the reds).

I'm not trying to troll.

I agree that it wasn't penalised, but Simmons was spoken to once or twice. There was one moment when the Reds were about 5-10m out from the line with a penalty advantage and Simmons and another player were loitering offside. I can't remember who it was but someone did a pick and go and got really close to the line but the play was called back for them loitering offside. Whilst it was still a penalty to the Reds, it could have easily been a try.

I definitely think it became a focus for Kaplan.

 

[Ignoto]

The Reds have definitely acquired a Crusaders like method around the ruck over the past year or so....

God forbid if it transfers over to the Wallabies. It'd be a real shame to see our Golden boys slowing down the Darkness ball.

 

[Scotty]

I'm not trying to troll.

I agree that it wasn't penalised, but Simmons was spoken to once or twice. There was one moment when the Reds were about 5-10m out from the line with a penalty advantage and Simmons and another player were loitering offside. I can't remember who it was but someone did a pick and go and got really close to the line but the play was called back for them loitering offside. Whilst it was still a penalty to the Reds, it could have easily been a try.

I definitely think it became a focus for Kaplan.

To suggest that Kaplan used it as a reason not to take his multiple warnings to the sharks further is a bit ridiculous.

Which means you are probably correct.

 

[fatprop]

To suggest that Kaplan used it as a reason not to take his multiple warnings to the sharks further is a bit ridiculous.

Which means you are probably correct.

reason? maybe not, but it highlights his approach

he warned both sides a lot before sanctioning, he always has

I have never liked his approach

 

[TOCC]

quite simply the Reds forwards were outplayed by the Sharks forwards..

Kaplan let a lot of things slide(going both ways) which allowed the game to flow a lot more, probably not to the benefit of the Reds though.

 

[Happy]

Simmons was warned directly by Kaplan in the first half for loitering on the wrong side of the ruck (Kaplan actually said "you've done it twice now. Stop it or I will penalize you"). Then in the second half he warned the Reds captain about Simmons again, but didn't penalize him once.

 

[AusBoyRugby]

quite simply the Reds forwards were outplayed by the Sharks forwards..

Kaplan let a lot of things slide(going both ways) which allowed the game to flow a lot more, probably not to the benefit of the Reds though.

I disagree with this statement. Yes the sharks forwards had an exceptional game but the Reds forwards seemed to evenly match them at all times. I personally believe the ref had bad calls ONLY to the reds and that the sharks were well treated at most times. There were too many mistakes in which the ref made and he should have acknowledged his poor predicament and picked up on that 10 minutes into the game. period.