By two points - a messy game where the Crusaders gave away 12 penalties and got 3 penalty tries. Mo'anga missed all his kicks at goal and the Crusaders won because the Blues missed a penalty and conversion kick in the last 5 minutes of the game. The C rusaders needs to up their game if they want to win the trophy again.
And the Canes barely managed to beat the Tahs at the death....interesting first round thus far.
Seems nz rugby is on the skids? The old crusts have had enough freak/ref wins one would think
Draad
The quality of rugby played in Round 1 of Super Rugby normally reflects poor ball handling and kicking by both sides.
However, the games I have seen thus far was not all that good - bar some real brilliance in the game between the Sunwolves and the Sharks. The opposition was not up to standard.
Th Sharks plays the Blues next week at home and we will then be able to make a real assessment on the Sharks performance potential this year,
You lot wish.
If your teams had an away win first up by 1 point - You would accept it as a good result......................
It is simple - WIN MATCHES - NOTHING MORE.
I think clevermike stated this was a long series.
So what so different about the NZ Teams.
But of course the NZ Teams are judged differently aren't they.
Back to the kitchen Rugby Linda. Get me another beer, the coldest one!
Thats right your brains are in your balls'.
But as your ex misses told me - You don't have any.
RL
Calm down - I was merely making realistic observations = Round 1 is not the norm for the rest of the series, I merely elsewhere said that round 1 is not normalkly refellecting the quality rugby one wants to see in the series.
The Crusaders and Hurricanes are normally slow starters in the series and you must admit there were some iffy results in Round 1. The performances were not good enough and there should be more clarity n the next few rounds.
Crusaders were saved by the ref.
Herr CC with an inkling for ladies wear.
"Linda" is always good for a chuckle.
Based on a long term standard that NZ has set.
All other countries have been very, very poor .
My point is this - If you lot were as fair when assessing NZ as you are with your own countries you may actually get a better understanding of rugby union.
You lot would not have the first clue about NZ Rugby.
You are not even on the same planet as NZ.
And that will again be re-inforced during the World Cup in Japan.
Maybe, maybe not. We'll see how strong your support is then. Maybe you'll jump ship to another team. Once a turncoat always a turncoat.
Thats a pretty pathetic comment.
I have only ever supported three teams.
And to just stop assumptions - The 3 teams are not in the same competitions.
People from my area don't change teams - No need to.
Once a turncoat always a turncoat. - HOW PATHETIC.
The Waratahs game - The Canes will be happy An away win - Their intent was good.
The plan was to win - And they did.
Could rugby Linda be ou rooijackass?
I am nothing you want me to be - The only thing I am interested in is my teams winning.
And I love winding up South Africans.
Many in my country just see South Africans as sniverling _ _ _ _ _ etc etc etc.
So far we have you wound up pretty tight.
Herr Sitzsack, it's a possibility. Sour, repetitive, attention seeking, errant, hyper-emotional, embittered and looking for a fight it can't handle. It very well could be.
No I think one country has the rest of the rugby world wound up pretty tight - That is the only thing that matters.
You guys wouldn't know how to score even if it bit you in the arse - READ FROM THAT WHAT YOU WANT.
Well, the Boks scored 8 tries in 2 tests against New Zealand. Given time of possession, one could determine they were more efficient.
Take from that what you will.
RL
I am not partisan on rugby issues and when I do criticize teams and players I always am objective.
Even though I am a South African - I am rather more v icious in my criticism of SA teams. I do not believe that any team and players are above criticism when so indicated, For instance in the last six months of 2018 the AB's -
* against the Springboks in Wellington;
* was extremely lucky to win in Pretoria;
* was extremely lucky that with a wee bit help from the TV monitor and ref to beat Englamd; and
* lost against Ireland.
Those are signs of problems and it would be dishonest to ignore same. The fact is that it is better to deal with signs off deficiencies and see what can be done to correct same.
My own criticism is mainly directed at SA teams and the fact is that I am omne of their severest critics on site,
Be it as it may - it is early days in the Super Rugby series and I am just writing about the impressions I gained from matches in the first round. As the series goes on we will b able to see which teams improves and which teams do not.
Good to see you standing up for yourself, Wench.
Ignore Auggiewhatever ... he's signed up here under so many different nicknames, that we honestly don't know what to call anymore.
I personally think the name "Poepol" (asshole) suits him well. It has a nice ring to it.
His latest alias is "Badly Burnt Albanian Boy" ...
He's an ignorant twat and rates Morne Steyn as a superior player to Dan Carter. He also told us all that Oupa Mohje (a quota) was better than Richie McCaw ... so let that be a guideline when judging him.
The first week is usually when teams start to find their feet and making a judgement call on them so early is foolish. They'll get better each week ... especially cause places are available in their respective WC squads.
This is going to be a cracker of year for SR.
“I am not partisan on rugby issues and when I do criticize teams and players I always am objective.”
I do recall Mike's attacks on several All Blacks. McCaw was an overrated and slow fatty, who became an old overrated and slow fatty. I wonder what 2CC, *ahem*, "Linda" has to say about that?
