A thread to post your picks for the Rd
Rd 5:
Canes by -12
Tahs by 13+
Blues by 13+
Stormers by 12-
Chiefs by 12-
Reds by 12-
Bulls by 12-
Pro2,580 posts
20 Mar 2014, 03:08
#1
20 Mar 2014, 03:08#1
Super rugby picks
Started by 3ku17 REPLIES155 VIEWS· 20 Mar 2014, 03:08
Pro4,671 posts
20 Mar 2014, 10:36
#2
20 Mar 2014, 10:36#2
....have to say i agree with most of yr picks with regards to a win by the Canes, the Tahs and the Blues and the Mighty Chiefs should get their signature bonus point...
Not sure about the Reds beating the Lions...
Got my doubts about the Bulls beating the Sharks...
Can't see the Brumbies at home losing either as my mate Bean Brain's team are looking destined to collect the wooden spoon this year...
... if i'm wrong you can dip me in chocolate and feed me to the lesbians...
Coach57,555 posts
20 Mar 2014, 10:52
#3
20 Mar 2014, 10:52#3
I have done some really funny things about my Foxsport selections this week. I put in Faf de Klerk at scrummie, Kinsey at flyhalf and Potgieter at center.
I have a strange feeling the Brumbies will be done in this week. They really have problems amongst their tight 5 and they may struggle - so I go with Kul here.
Same with the Reds - remember the Sharks played with a handicap last week - Steyn at 12. That is enough to destroy a backline.
The Bu lls have a 45% chance to beat the Sharks.
I have a strange feeling the Brumbies will be done in this week. They really have problems amongst their tight 5 and they may struggle - so I go with Kul here.
Same with the Reds - remember the Sharks played with a handicap last week - Steyn at 12. That is enough to destroy a backline.
The Bu lls have a 45% chance to beat the Sharks.
Coach57,555 posts
20 Mar 2014, 10:52
#4
20 Mar 2014, 10:52#4
I have done some really funny things about my Foxsport selections this week. I put in Faf de Klerk at scrummie, Kinsey at flyhalf and Potgieter at center.
I have a strange feeling the Brumbies will be done in this week. They really have problems amongst their tight 5 and they may struggle - so I go with Kul here.
Same with the Reds - remember the Sharks played with a handicap last week - Steyn at 12. That is enough to destroy a backline.
The Bu lls have a 45% chance to beat the Sharks.
I have a strange feeling the Brumbies will be done in this week. They really have problems amongst their tight 5 and they may struggle - so I go with Kul here.
Same with the Reds - remember the Sharks played with a handicap last week - Steyn at 12. That is enough to destroy a backline.
The Bu lls have a 45% chance to beat the Sharks.
Pro6,277 posts
20 Mar 2014, 14:11
#5
20 Mar 2014, 14:11#5
@mikey,
who is kinsey???
i also recruited potgeiter in my centers and after two bad weeks ive benched tamati ellison, was going to make an out right swap between the two and fre up some cash, but ellison might regain his form and is solid player to have on the bench when transfers have me in a pinch.
dont underestimate the brumbies pack, u said similar things when stormers played the crusaders and chiefs, and stormers pack got owned big time by both teams, lolz.
i dont rate the brumbies pack, but the stormers pack are massively overrated in 2014, and thats with experts saying they have been kak, :oP
the again, stormers starting with a kiwi in their backline is a good start to help counter saffas lack of back play,
who is kinsey???
i also recruited potgeiter in my centers and after two bad weeks ive benched tamati ellison, was going to make an out right swap between the two and fre up some cash, but ellison might regain his form and is solid player to have on the bench when transfers have me in a pinch.
dont underestimate the brumbies pack, u said similar things when stormers played the crusaders and chiefs, and stormers pack got owned big time by both teams, lolz.
i dont rate the brumbies pack, but the stormers pack are massively overrated in 2014, and thats with experts saying they have been kak, :oP
the again, stormers starting with a kiwi in their backline is a good start to help counter saffas lack of back play,
Coach57,555 posts
20 Mar 2014, 15:53
#6
20 Mar 2014, 15:53#6
Sasue
Sorry I am getting it wrong. It is Hickey I am referring to.
Dont get it wrong. The Chiefs line outs were a mess and they did not get anything much out of the scrum either - they were on the back foot at times and the Stormers did not use Malherbe either. The Crusaders were bloody lucky to beat the Stormers and their forwards suffered as well.
So I would not shout and scream too much about how well the Chiefs and Crusaders did up front. They really were below par. The Stormrs beat themselves in both matches - oodles of missed tackles and ball handling errors on their part - more than anything else caused their demise.
Sorry I am getting it wrong. It is Hickey I am referring to.
Dont get it wrong. The Chiefs line outs were a mess and they did not get anything much out of the scrum either - they were on the back foot at times and the Stormers did not use Malherbe either. The Crusaders were bloody lucky to beat the Stormers and their forwards suffered as well.
So I would not shout and scream too much about how well the Chiefs and Crusaders did up front. They really were below par. The Stormrs beat themselves in both matches - oodles of missed tackles and ball handling errors on their part - more than anything else caused their demise.
Pro6,277 posts
20 Mar 2014, 18:48
#7
20 Mar 2014, 18:48#7
@mikey,
the chiefs lineout was a sambles in the match, but like the old saying goes, it aint over til the fat Bok looseforward sings, and the rolling maul lineout try at the end of the game sounded like fran louw singing,
LMFAO,
chiefs were on the backfoot once, but not at times as in more then once, unless u have timestamps to say other wise, but the stormers were a number of times on the back foot.
crusaders won more scrums and tightheads and lineouts then the stormers. and crusaders also missed more tackles.
as stated by many including myself, the crusaders were very lucky to win that match as the stormers were the better team.
what worked in both the chiefs and crusaders favour is that stormers have no idea how to attack with ball in hand.
the vast majority of their trys are from individual players, not anything the team as a whole plan.
and im not making a song and dance about the chiefs and crusaders forward prowess, im making a song and dance about the stormers forwards being very overrated,
the chiefs lineout was a sambles in the match, but like the old saying goes, it aint over til the fat Bok looseforward sings, and the rolling maul lineout try at the end of the game sounded like fran louw singing,
LMFAO,
chiefs were on the backfoot once, but not at times as in more then once, unless u have timestamps to say other wise, but the stormers were a number of times on the back foot.
crusaders won more scrums and tightheads and lineouts then the stormers. and crusaders also missed more tackles.
as stated by many including myself, the crusaders were very lucky to win that match as the stormers were the better team.
what worked in both the chiefs and crusaders favour is that stormers have no idea how to attack with ball in hand.
the vast majority of their trys are from individual players, not anything the team as a whole plan.
and im not making a song and dance about the chiefs and crusaders forward prowess, im making a song and dance about the stormers forwards being very overrated,
Pro2,580 posts
21 Mar 2014, 03:21
#8
21 Mar 2014, 03:21#8
overrated but underrated in the fantasy world
— END OF THREAD —
