Crusaders fire ominous warning to Stormers in wake of seven-try win over Chiefs

RICHARD KNOWLER

Last updated 14:32, February 25 2018

Damian McKenzie knows that if the Crusaders make a promise, they are loath to break it.

Prior to their 45-23 rout of the Chiefs at AMI Stadium on Saturday night, the Crusaders had enough clues to realise the the odds of winning the Super Rugby opener would be greatly enhanced if they created as much turbulence as possible for opposition first five-eighth McKenzie.

And they stuck to their word, with things largely going to plan as they did a good job of reducing time and space for the All Black who has been switched to first-five from fullback by new Chiefs coach Colin Cooper.

Crusaders coach Scott Robertson was satisfied with the job his men did on McKenzie, who, because he stood flat to challenge the defensive line, had to make quick decisions while men in red and black rushed up from all directions.

"We turned him in a couple of times and put a lot of pressure on that pass, and got up in their face," Crusaders coach Scott Robertson said following his side's bonus-point win.

"I thought both teams, defensively, for a long period of time were great.

"When we got our game plan right, we played them quite narrow and opportunities were wide. Once we got two or three times into it, we looked really good."

Everyone knows what a prodigious talent McKenzie with No 15 on his back, but the transition to first-five, at the behest of the All Blacks selectors, is clearly going to take time.

Some of McKenzie's passes put team-mates into holes - he was responsible for giving Sam Cane the space prior to his long-range try - and within the first minute exposed the Crusaders defensive screen when he set-up what should have been a certain try, had midfielder Johnny Faauli not fumbled a pass.

Other incidents were less memorable. McKenzie's first major error occurred when a flat pass struck the rushing Ryan Crotty, who kicked the ball ahead of Richie Mo'unga to score. In the wake of the penalty try following Lachlan Boshier's high tackle on Crotty in the 71st minute, McKenzie joined his team in panicking and errors resulted in them conceding two late tries.

Studying the Stormers, and their first-five Damian Willemse, is the Crusaders' next priority ahead of their next match against the South Africans in Christchurch on Saturday night.

The Stormers should have drawn with the Waratahs in Sydney, but botched a lineout and conceded a try to flanker Ned Hanigan to lose 34-27 in the final seconds.

The signs are already extremely promising for the Crusaders, the defending champions. Although a couple of early scrums were shaky, with tighthead prop Nepo Laulala earning his side two penalties, and both teams were inaccurate with some lineouts, they finished strongly.

Most pleasing was that when All Blacks front rowers Wyatt Crockett and Codie Taylor were replaced in the second half, the scrum never suffered; to win a 5m defensive scrum in the second half was to be cherished.

The seven-try rout over the Chiefs appeared to surprise Robertson who was concerned his team might get run down in the final quarter.

This wasn't the biggest winning margin against the old foes from Hamilton, the 48-3 victory in 1999 still stands, but it was convincing and captain Sam Whitelock signalled he is still prepared to be bold by spurning two kickable penalties and instead electing for lineout drives.

"I actually thought, going into the game, we might be a bit short of a trot," Robertson admitted. "Going into the last 20 (minutes) if it was close, if it got a bit loose, they might play over the top of us. But it was actually the total opposite. So I was just really impressed with our intent and ability to stay in that tight game."

 - Stuff

instead of talking about the next saders-stormers seems that the article is about Damian McKenzie

still too soon to conclude anything but IMO Mckenzie is not a flyhalf,... he obviously can play there and can cover that position but he's a natural FB (no matter he began at school at flyhalf),.... he need space, yesterday the few things he did right was to counter-attack from behind, from the FB position,.... when he doesn't find space or he's pressured the errors leaking begins,.... loose passes, interceptions, lateral running,....

he struggles to control the game and to mark the tempo of the game, and even though yesterday he was quite decent with his tactical kicking game some question marks remain after his showing with the AB last year,...

he could be a very flashy and flamboyant flyhalf for the chiefs, few teams can shut him down like the saders did yesterday,.... but I think part of his attacking capabilities are wasted there,.... and for the AB, I would just have him as the 4th or 5th fullback after B. Smith, Dagg, J. Barrett and NMS,... one that can cover the 10 `position when it comes to that

one remarkable sentence from the article:

"The signs are already extremely promising for the Crusaders, the defending champions."

yes, they are,...

"A penalty try that never was"

"the Chiefs were undone by a bad ref call re the penalty try and yellow"

did you ever read the rugby laws?

don't need to answer, it's a rethorical question,... so obvious that you never did

and as always, making excuses even before the game is played,......       "I would like to have the worlds best lock Eben back as well as Bongi and Vermaaak. Malherbe on the bench would be an asset",....

cry me a river,.... every team has at least as much injured players,... and in many cases more,...

by the way,.... here you can read some interesting stuff (since you seem unable to read the laws):

Why the referee was right to award a penalty try

with things like:

"All players have been warned in the lead up to the new season about the importance of tackling below the shoulders, and while all the yellow and red card decisions will be debated by critics, the referees appeared to get them right"

"The Boshier/Crotty penalty try incident, described as "ridiculous" on social media, was one of the more clear-cut of the weekend, and while it might have appeared harsh to some, referee Ben O'Keeffe was right on all counts."

ABF

I agree with you - the Stormers will lose by a wide margin.   They have a few good players in their team - but the majority are questionable selections.   Poor wings who cannot defend and a poor loosie combination are factors that will bedevil them in Super Rugby.  

Matter of fact is that the Stormers are likely to be the poorest team in the competition.  

By the way I do not rate the Chiefs at present.   They lost too many players and the new coach has not found his footing yet.   They may end up last on  the NZ conference log.  

However, back to the Stormers - they will lose by a wide margin Saturday.

@Basque

Hormones playing up again? 

I have wee ab ASS on a string Plum!

Well we shall have to see if the Stormers are the worst team in the Competition. It wont be the fist time ou maaaikie gets it hopelessly wrong!!!!!!!!!!!!

Beeno

Looking at the way the Stormers destroyed their own game on Saturday I am fully entitled to mak e the above statement. 

Score flattered Saders a bit I Think. I am sorry that was not a Penalty try. In the process of scoring? Did he trip him? He made a legit tackle. But because they are scrutinizing everything that is even Shoulder and Chest level these days. The Ref have to be consistent. What was he susposed to do as a defender? I def think that was a turning point. Saders deserved to win. But Stormers look alright. So Saders going to have to be on their game. 

the ref was very clear asking to the TMO and then explaining to Cane and Boshler,... the ref said that it was just a penalty for dangerous tackle but had to concede a penalty try and show the yellow because  with the dangerous tackle he impeded a try

and that's because according to Law 8 about Scoring:

8.3. Penalty Try. A penalty try is awarded between the goal posts if foul play by the opposing team prevents a probable try from being scored, or scored in a more advantageous position. A player guilty of this must be cautioned and temporarily suspended or sent off.

and foul play includes according to law 9:

9.13. Dangerous play. A player must not tackle an opponent early, late or dangerously. Dangerous tackling includes, but is not limited to, tackling or attempting to tackle an opponent above the line of the shoulders even if the tackle starts below the line of the shoulders.

"cautioned and temporarily suspended or sent off", means yellow or red,.... so the ref just applied the laws which is what he has to do

and that wasn't a turning point,... in the second half the chiefs were unable to break the saders defense and to get near the opposite 22,.... had to get their pòints through penalties from the middle of the field,.... the saders were linking phase after phase, breaking the chiefs' defense and they got a try ten minutes earlier, that of Crotty was always going to be another try,...

the 2 last intercepted tries were probably too much punishment for the chiefs and the final score didn't reflect what happened on the field,... but saders were winning already that game when the yellow was correctly showed

when SBW was yellow carded against France this last EOYT for slapping the ball "League-style" out from the in-goal area was the same case and a penalty try was also awarded

in that case the foul play was different, Law 9.7b (Unfair Play. Intentionally knock, place, push or throw the ball with arm or hand from the playing area),... but applies the same 8.3 law for preventing a try through foul play,... hence penalty try and yellow to SBW

ABF unquestionably is right, guys...read the rules.

The ref is spot on and all credit to him...also give huge credit to the Saders...an awesom e side...always have been and will continue to be the ones to beat...they set huge standards and are a credit to the game and how it should be played.

The rules are very obviously absurd. When a player ducks down and makes the opponent tackle high there should not be a penalty try. Its a complete travesty!!! This rule must have been made by some dumbass kiwi!  

Ou maaaikie you commented: Matter of fact is that the Stormers are likely to be the poorest team in the competition.   OU MAAAIKIE YOUR ASS ESSMENT THAT THE STORMERS ARE LIKELY TO END BOTTOM OF THE TABLE ARE NOTED OAK. 

"When a player ducks down and makes the opponent tackle high there should not be a penalty try. Its a complete travesty!!! "

No, it's not it is just the rules...and a ref has only that to do...that's integrity....the rule cannot be discretionary, it's clear cut.

Rugby is full of odd and peculiar incidents that can happen but how long is a piece of string??

Beeno, it's just unfortunate...yes I symphazise...but those are rules and where do you draw the line...ducking down to score the try is quite legal whilst high tackling is not...

if someone have still doubts, here the artcle published in Rugby365:

don't know what happened,.... doesn't let me edit the comment

well, the article about both penalty tries conceded (to saders and Lions) is here.

http://www.rugby365.com/laws-referees/law-discussions/83518-law-discussion-two-penalty-tries