Up the Guts
Steve Williams (59)
No arms
R3 - Reds vs. Crusaders - Suncorp
- Thread starter TSR
- Start date
Up the Guts
Steve Williams (59)
Isn’t it only a penalty or something if you have 15 on. Not a huge fan of the rule and would rather see 15 on 15 but you’ve got to play to them as they exist.
Dctarget
Tim Horan (67)
Aha I was being deadly sarcastic. I couldn't give a shit if they had used all their eight subs, let 15 play 15.
Up the Guts
Steve Williams (59)
They had 15 on when they should have had 14. Maybe for a minute.
Strewthcobber
Simon Poidevin (60)
They were playing with 15 when they should have had 14. A replacement came on after they'd made all of their interchanges.
Crusaaders thought it was an HIA replacement but refs didn't
Crusaaders thought it was an HIA replacement but refs didn't
dru
David Wilson (68)
I donn't like to get down on refs, but I have to admit that I found some of the scrum penalties and advantages baffling.
Strewthcobber
Simon Poidevin (60)
Hard to believe the score line to be honest. Crusaders did it easy from almost minute 1, missing 4 All Blacks.
Reds really didn't threaten much at all. 9/10 axis and their kicking is a massive issue - by the end they were going the 2017 "give it to Kerevi" option for exiting the 22. Hard to see the progress. Hopefully against lesser opposition and with our young 13 back it's more clear
Reds really didn't threaten much at all. 9/10 axis and their kicking is a massive issue - by the end they were going the 2017 "give it to Kerevi" option for exiting the 22. Hard to see the progress. Hopefully against lesser opposition and with our young 13 back it's more clear
TSR
Andrew Slack (58)
I thought it as more a case of Kerevi putting himself in the slot and demanding the ball. There were a few times there that he took the ball at first receiver trying to take the team forward. It’s not a tactic that’s sustainable, but I thought it showed the kind of leadership that I’d like to see.
There was a lot to be disappointed about - but I do think if they gave up that much ball last year, they would have given up 50.
But yeah - would like to stop trying to get positives out of a loss.
Simon.
Bob Loudon (25)
I think the Reds actually did pretty well to only lose that by 10. The Crusaders did take their foot off the gas a bit, but with those sort of handling errors, Petaia out early, a ref firmly on the side of the Crusaders and fairly harsh yellow, the Reds of a couple of years ago could have folded and lost that by 40. But they didn't give up and they held up the team that's probably going to win the championship again at a canter, even with a few of their stars out.
I thought the humidity might affect the Crusaders but it only seemed to affect the Reds. Terrible handling skills and terrible tactical kicking, again. It's been a recurring issue with Aussie teams for the last few years, and still nobody seems to be able to fix it.
I thought the humidity might affect the Crusaders but it only seemed to affect the Reds. Terrible handling skills and terrible tactical kicking, again. It's been a recurring issue with Aussie teams for the last few years, and still nobody seems to be able to fix it.
Up the Guts
Steve Williams (59)
Agree with TSR, I think Kerevi just wanted to do everything in the last 10 but aside from that there wasn’t a lot of playmaking. The Reds game plan seems to be a Fijian like hard running one where they rely on inside balls and offloading in contact. It doesn’t work nearly as well when you’re not dominating physically and can become predictable. The lack of a plan B and the poor kicking options are cause for concern.