The Bulls are 28-14 ahead at half time (4 converted tries against 2). The Bulls have been all over the Chiefs in virtually every facet of play. If this continue in the second half the Bulls may even won the game, but I think the Bulls may run out of steam - so a Chiefs win by a narrow margin is still suggested.
I suspect the bulle will run out of gas. Lets see how fit the bulle are.
Gelant looking very good. Kriel too. But Bulle squander two scoring chances.
Bulle have lost possession three or four times and its cost them big time. Mitchell will be li vid
Bulle lead by two as Mi tchell goes to bench
Brilliant bulle try but ref questions for obstruction. Absolute nonsense. The ch ef defender has zero chance of of catching the bulle player. Try disallowed by bent ref!!!!!!
Bulle scrumhalf brilliant - very quick and excellent footwork
Mckenzie ducking low and bulle player gets yellow card. What a load of crud!!!! McKenzie ducked into the tackle. More bent down under refereeing making a farce of the game. Disallowing that try also!!!!
Time to watch some decent honest tenni s!!!
Another famous win..
Sorry Beeno that was def a red card. Ducking? IT was late. By a long way. And it was a head shot. He was luckey it was only yellow.
The Chiefs should donate a farm to the crooked TV ref. There was ZERO obstruction leading to the Papier try. And the crook wanted to red-card the Bulls player and the Chiefs should have been carded for taking out De Jager in the air in a five - meter line-out.
This kind of reffing is a huge success for the NZ teams - but the TV monitor is a crook and he should be asham ed of himself.
...notso clever mike there is a thread devoted to yr eyesight problems elsewhere...but personally i think only small people complain about your spelling mistakes...
Brycy
Nothing wrong with my eyesight in this case, There was zero obstruction in this case - gelant was already past the "obstructed" player and there was no way he could have caught him - nioce effort to claim obstruction when he ran purposefully into De Jager and pretend he was obstructed. Not a game the Chiefs should be proud about.
...Epic game from Brodie..South Afrik an locks are big girls blouses in comparison
Congrats to the mighty Chiefs! Commiserations to the hapless bulls. Sounds like the bulls came out all guns blazing but they ran out of ammo. Or was it the refs fault.... again?
....JW, the Chiefs did everything they could to help the Bulls out - gave them a big headstart and plenty of possession...but at the end of the day the Chiefs had too much class, were too fit and had the greater resilience not to mention that never say die attitude... despite us fielding just a slapped together team..
Luke
There was three incidents - all favouring the Chiefs - where the reffing was atrocious - that gave the Chiefs the game on a platter. I am sorry - but I am agaist games eiong donated to teams and poor prejudiced reffing being the deciding factor.
Luke
There was three incidents - all favouring the Chiefs - where the reffing was atrocious - that gave the Chiefs the game on a platter. I am sorry - but I am agaist games eiong donated to teams and poor prejudiced reffing being the deciding factor.
JW please could you have a word with your wee Chiefies and tell them to JUST Win please as 13 point margin is not really a just win or is it??? lol
Well in that context some Saffas are behaving in a manner that you would think the Bulls had won...hahaha.
PS Beeno is not a Bulls fan fortunately otherwise he would have counted it as a win or even a just loss at worst but the poor old Stompies are playing at home so we will be expecting him to cancel his conference and his tennis match....bahahahahahaha,
-Moola
What about the 2 Chief's thugs taking the legs out under De Jager in a line out 5 meters out?. I have not seen that type of thing without at least one player being carded. Highly dangerous that one. That was much more dangerous than the tackle on McKenzie who went down even before the tackle was made - a late tackle nothing more..
Then there was a case where Gelant ran past a Chiefs forward and he had NO chance of tackling him coming from the back. The player then ran into De Jager and put up a Hollywiood performance claiming interference so as to get the try cancelled, That was a try - whether you like it or not, and the Bulls would be in the lead. The decision by the TMO was a farce in that case.
notso clevermike...even Jonathan Kaplan said that should have been a red card....
https://www.sport24.co.za/Rugby/SuperRugby/kaplan-bulls-prop-deserved-red-20180316
...thats the difference between NZ TMO's and South African ones...NZ officials much more reasonable... whereas in South Africa red cards are standard practice for dangerous tackles to the head whether they be intentional or non intentional...
...Have a look at the tackle again here and you'll see the Bulls player is flying at McKenzie with a swinging arm...Red card all day if it had been a Kiwi doing that in SA and you know it ...
On a more serious note...the Bulls did very well in the first half, it's just a pity that most Saffa sides are bad finishers, unlike NZ teams who can turn on the heat towards the end...probably one of the major glaring faults of our rugby in most clashes apart from playing a balanced game virtually flawlessly...bad finishers, probably due to fitness , panic susceptability and heart.
Mozart
I looked at a replay of the "obstruction" and even the NZ commentators said that I think it was Cane following up - was even a fair distance away when he ran into De Jager and claim obstruction. Fact is Gelant waa already past Cane when the incident happen and there was absolutely no chance that Cane would have caught Gelant from behind.Looks like you all missed Pierre Schoeman being tackled next to the ruck while he wasn't part of it either. Basically a tackle ithout the ball. This happened in the lead up to the Chiefs try.
The Lood obstruction and the Schoeman penalty is a 14 point swing.
The ref also missed a huge offside in the final phase when the entire Chiefs backline were offside. He muttered something about offside but let play continue anyway. They scored another try.
lolz moo, you lot whine even more every once in a blue moon you lose.
@ Brycy
When the Boks last beat the ABs because of the incident where Schalk Burger ducked into a tackle, with Lambie then kicking the winning penalty from that...what was your verdict?
Mine was the same as it is today. IT'S total bullShyte!
But here's the idiocy involved with this, and I'll break it down very clearly for everyone.
1) swinging arm
2) headshot
3) response time
1) is an armless tackle allowed? No. You have to use at least one arm in EVERY tackle.
2) at what height would the hit have occurred had DM not slipped/ducked? It would have occurred at a perfect height for a completely legal tackle.
3) Now. When DM began to slip, had the tackler already or was he just about to make the tackle? Yes.
Everybody watches it in slow motion and then declares how very late the hit was. In reality, the hit was less than a second late. After having watched it, a couple of times, the hit was actually around 700ms(7 10ths of a second) late. The average human response time for conscious actions is 400ms. That's just the response. Of course various adjustments based on that response take different times depending on what outcome is required. A sprinter might start slowing down 200 ms after receiving and input to do so, but might take a good few seconds to come to a complete stop. In other words, response time and adjustment time have to be added up.
A player has to follow through with a tackle because he has to cover the dummy scenario. If you have to pull out of the hit every time a guy goes to pass then you'll leak tries. It's not complicated.
Now finally.
When DM slipped/ducked, how much response time did the tackler have to adjust? Again, we start talking milliseconds. Probably in the region of 500ms.
That is, you have less than a second to adjust, when you are already in motion to an event for which you don't know the outcome(IE where the attacker will end up).
To put this in perspective for you.
Human beings, in the top 1%, with the fastest response time ability, are able to respond to a light stimuli and press a button at the quickest 200ms after the stimuli is received.
Note, this involves clearly seeing a light, and then simply using a finger to press a button as quickly as you can after seeing it. No variables, no tiredness, no pressure and no force or momentum involved.
It's a ridiculous rule.
If it was that easy to respond to changes in height then boxing matches would last all of 30 seconds.
Strangely they make room for adjustments times in the rule that jumping into a tackle doesn't give the defender enough time to respond. And what you'll find is that the required response time to adjust is also around the 500 ms mark. IE you can't jump into a tackle to draw a penalty because it's unfair in the defender.
It creates a situation where you are never safe going for a chest high tackle since you are always at risk of being sent off even though you are acting well with in the rules of the game and the thing that is getting you sent off is unavoidable because it's very often humanly impossible to react in time.
The solution. ALWAYS tackle the waist. Even though in reality different types of tackles are 100% vital. Silly, isn't it?
Personally I'm happy that the Bulls had a good first half and it'd have been nice if they won.
As usual though, if the same thing happens to AB or OZ teams I'll also call it BS.
Just like I called BS on the SBW sending off against the B&I Lions. Guys with that amount of muscle mass are not able to make adjustments that quickly unless they know exactly what the outcome will be and can preemptively move into position. That event practically decided the series. Ridiculous.
The refs should be forced to watch these replays, when it comes to determining the lateness of hits, or events that bring response time into question, in real time. Even then they are still at an advantage because they are watching it as opposed to doing it and they know the outcome.
I don't care who the victim is. I'll always disagree with this type of sending off.
Of all the sports I watch Rugby is the one where refs have far and away the most detrimental influence on games, leagues, series and tournaments.
Just in the last five years we can all remember numerous instances where hard working teams were screwed by refs. From France, to the ABs, to Scotland to so many more. And this is with the benefit of a guy watching the game on a tv being able to give the ref advice. Effectively each game is reffed by 4 people. How they hell are so many bad calls made by pros when relative laymen spot infringements so easily.
I don't buy into this "it swings in roundabouts" nonsense.
I'll remain forever cynical about the dubious reffing I witness weekly.
The down under refs area total disgrace to the game always doing whatever they can to win the game for down under sides. Its pathetic to watch hence I eventually turned off. The disallowed try the Sharks scored was a pathetic decision. The yellow even more pathetic.
Great post Plumpie!!!!!!! But we all need to face the fact that the outcome of rugby games are for the majority of cases determi ned by refs - in the case of OZ and NZ by their bent refs!
Sorry to interrupt a good rant boys but the latest news is:
"DISCIPLINARY NEWS: BULLS PROP CONRAAD VAN VUUREN HAS BEEN CITED FOR A DANGEROUS TACKLE DURING HIS SIDE'S SUPER RUGBY MATCH AGAINST THE CHIEFS IN HAMILTON."
JW
I am not really interested in that tackle you and moola rave about - I am really upset by the other two incidents that robbed the Bulls badly of scoring points.
The one was the so-called interference before Papier scored the try under the posts. Gelant rqan past Cane and then was ahead of him - cane eliberately ran into De Jager and then claim interference. Even a fool would realise that there could not be interference since as the NZ TV commentators said there was space between Cane and Gelant and catching a backline player from catching up with him by a relatively slow player is just impossible. The decision to said there was interference is a real farce nd utter BS,
The resultant penalty in fact cost a 14 point turn-around in favour of the Chiefs.
