2013 Super Rugby Final - CHIEFS v BRUMBIES

[nomis]

Thought the Brumbies were going to win it against all the odds there for a bit. But Chiefs deserved the win. Well done to them. Thought the Brumbies were a bit stronger in the scrum. But the Chiefs were better at breaking the line, and that was the difference in the end.

 

[Rassie]

They do that everywhere, especially after the NRL GF, where they also boo the prime minister and any other political figures on stage.

Yes I know they do it. Australia did it first in the Super 6 and Super 10. But you know SA always catching up to everything then f ing it up then getting it right finally. Thats us.
We just did not expect the Kiwi teams suddenly having 5 NZ trails squads against some provinces with 1 or two Springboks!

 

[Brumby Runner]

Yes I know they do it. Australia did it first in the Super 6 and Super 10. But you know SA always catching up to everything then f ing it up then getting it right finally. Thats us.
We just did not expect the Kiwi teams suddenly having 5 NZ trails squads against some provinces with 1 or two Springboks!

Rassie - really what is the chip on your shoulder that appears on each and every thread, no matter what the subject?

 

[Rassie]

Rassie - really what is the chip on your shoulder that appears on each and every thread, no matter what the subject?

The chip? I am not following you. Wasn't a rant but more of a joke. And a club side means totally different to us than in Europe or maybe in Australia. Club is a amateur side here. Province is a specific region and a franchise is a couple of provinces thrown together.

And as a SA supporter it was quite funny looking back as we enter a Super 12 with the high hopes of teams doing well like the previous year in the Super 10. Suddenly to smashed into oblivion.

NZ have a Provincial competition and so do we. We were expecting sides with their NPC roster. The franchise concept was still unknown to us.

 

[Tordah]

Had Messam been penalised for interfering with the halfback when he tackled Nic White before he had the ball in his hands, in front of the posts, the Brumbies might have kicked on to a win.

he went straight through the middle fo the ruck, it was just a cleanout, doesn't matter if it's the halfback you're cleaning out or a prop. Unfortunately, few refs seem to realise it, though. Barnes carded McCabe against Argentina for it in last years TRC. Bullshit call, that.

Also, I believe the replay showed he even had hands on the ball, so wouldn't have mattered anyways.

Great fight Brumbies, the way they hassled TKB hopefully showed the AB selectors he is not test-quality.
Were it not for the travelling, it might very well have been a different ball game. But that's why you win games during the regular season...

Aki & Pulu stepped things up big time when they came on! Looking forward to seeing Afeaki in black more often now, he's a damn good prop. Shame about losing Toby Smith, considering the lack of depth at loosehead.

Proud of the Chiefs!

 

[Zander]

Let's cut the shit. Proved right, winning cross-continents is impossible. Brumbies would've won with an extra week. The only advantage you should get from finishing top is a home final.

 

[Sully]

Don't think the Brumbies slowed down at all. It was more the Chiefs change tactics and the Brumbies didn't or couldn't adjust.

Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

[Moono75]

Great game by the Brumbies....should of could of won. At some stage I just want to pound those kiwi douche bags into the fucking turf. Super rugby, Bledisloe Cup....the time has come. I have Kiwi family but I am over it. Fire up Wallabies and pound those f..kers!

 

[FrankLind]

Let's cut the shit. Proved right, winning cross-continents is impossible. Brumbies would've won with an extra week. The only advantage you should get from finishing top is a home final.

They should have finished top, then perhaps it would have been the Chiefs doing the travelling.

 

[cyclopath]

he went straight through the middle fo the ruck, it was just a cleanout, doesn't matter if it's the halfback you're cleaning out or a prop. Unfortunately, few refs seem to realise it, though. Barnes carded McCabe against Argentina for it in last years TRC. Bullshit call, that.

Also, I believe the replay showed he even had hands on the ball, so wouldn't have mattered anyways.

Great fight Brumbies, the way they hassled TKB hopefully showed the AB selectors he is not test-quality.
Were it not for the travelling, it might very well have been a different ball game. But that's why you win games during the regular season.

Aki & Pulu stepped things up big time when they came on! Looking forward to seeing Afeaki in black more often now, he's a damn good prop. Shame about losing Toby Smith, considering the lack of depth at loosehead.

Proud of the Chiefs!

Yeah, I reckon that turnover was just fine. But isn't there a rule about taking out the half-back, or whoever is deemed to be that? Not relevant here, White had hands on it so fair play to come through, but I don't think the half can be cleaned out like any other player.
Where's a ref when you need one?

 

[RedsHappy]

Real 'mistake' by the Brums in this campaign was surely the still-inexplicable loss to the Force. Like last year v the Blues: inconsistency when the price is highest late in the season.

That set them up for the inevitable fatigue factors that showed up tonight in the final 20 minutes of play. And the huge loss of home advantage.

Having said all that, the Brumbies' brand of 2013 rugby excellence was exceptional: this team is a massive credit to themselves, their coaches, and the great talent available in Australian rugby.

 

[Tordah]

Yeah, I reckon that turnover was just fine. But isn't there a rule about taking out the half-back, or whoever is deemed to be that? Not relevant here, White had hands on it so fair play to come through, but I don't think the half can be cleaned out like any other player.
Where's a ref when you need one?

I'm no ref, but as far as I know, you can clean out anyone in a ruck when you came through the middle. I believe the halfback rule is meant to protect players from interfering with the halfback for example when he is digging for the ball at a ruck. Like, when there's a proper ruck, players from both teams bound over the ball, and player from defending team can not touch the halfback unless they clean out the attacking player at the ruck first. I don't know, though, as I've seen it penalised the way you descirbe it every now and then. But Joubert seems to see it the way I do, too. He explained the ruling to Horwill in a Reds game from a few weeks back.

If you were not allowed to clean out the halfback, you wouldn't need any protection at every 2nd ruck or so, just have the halfback be there first and he would be able to do as he'd like. Or am I missing something?

Also, you can bet your house that had McCabe cleaned out some prop, who might have been acting halfback at that ruck, he wouldn't have been penalised. The number on the jersey surely made the difference. Then again, Barnes is not exactly my favourite ref, so...

 

[Brumby Runner]

The chip? I am not following you. Wasn't a rant but more of a joke. And a club side means totally different to us than in Europe or maybe in Australia. Club is a amateur side here. Province is a specific region and a franchise is a couple of provinces thrown together.

And as a SA supporter it was quite funny looking back as we enter a Super 12 with the high hopes of teams doing well like the previous year in the Super 10. Suddenly to smashed into oblivion.

NZ have a Provincial competition and so do we. We were expecting sides with their NPC roster. The franchise concept was still unknown to us.

I wasn't having a chip at your rant or joke per se, but the fact that this thread is about the Brumbies/Chiefs final and you are going on again about all sorts of issues relating the the Saffas' entry into the Super comp. I might say also, that you have completely lost me with the thread of your argument.

And, as I said, you seem to want to turn every thread into a discussion of the Saffa teams and how the Super comp is somehow designed to hinder them.

 

[cyclopath]

I'm no ref, but as far as I know, you can clean out anyone in a ruck when you came through the middle. I believe the halfback rule is meant to protect players from interfering with the halfback for example when he is digging for the ball at a ruck. Like, when there's a proper ruck, players from both teams bound over the ball, and player from defending team can not touch the halfback unless they clean out the attacking player at the ruck first. I don't know, though, as I've seen it penalised the way you descirbe it every now and then. But Joubert seems to see it the way I do, too. He explained the ruling to Horwill in a Reds game from a few weeks back.

If you were not allowed to clean out the halfback, you wouldn't need any protection at every 2nd ruck or so, just have the halfback be there first and he would be able to do as he'd like. Or am I missing something?

No, you could come through and contest the ball on the ground, thereby preventing the half picking it up. As I said, I'm not sure, so hope someone with accurate knowledge can tell me.

 

[Bruwheresmycar]

You can't tackle a player without the ball. Hence why you can't tackle the half until the ball leaves the ruck . (When he picks it up)

This doesn't mean the defenders can't contest at a tackle situation. If the half has no support in front of him, then he will get smashed off the ball.

I don't know what incident anyone is referring to. The brumbies were the ones getting turnovers .from jouberts right field interpretation tonight though .

 

[Shiggins]

Brumbies deserved the win. Hold your head high brumbies fans. I thought both the chiefs try's were no try's. the one the half back started he didn't let go of the ball and got up and ran that started the try. And the scrum in the other one was screwed surely by the chiefs. The brumbies wouldn't Of done that surely?

Rumbles well done and shame you didn't get the rub of the green. Great game to watch.

 

[Dam0]

I'm no ref, but as far as I know, you can clean out anyone in a ruck when you came through the middle. I believe the halfback rule is meant to protect players from interfering with the halfback for example when he is digging for the ball at a ruck. Like, when there's a proper ruck, players from both teams bound over the ball, and player from defending team can not touch the halfback unless they clean out the attacking player at the ruck first. I don't know, though, as I've seen it penalised the way you descirbe it every now and then. But Joubert seems to see it the way I do, too. He explained the ruling to Horwill in a Reds game from a few weeks back.

If you were not allowed to clean out the halfback, you wouldn't need any protection at every 2nd ruck or so, just have the halfback be there first and he would be able to do as he'd like. Or am I missing something?

Also, you can bet your house that had McCabe cleaned out some prop, who might have been acting halfback at that ruck, he wouldn't have been penalised. The number on the jersey surely made the difference. Then again, Barnes is not exactly my favourite ref, so.

You can't tackle a player without the ball. You can however;

a) Play a player near the ball at a tackle (before a ruck has formed)
b) Join a ruck and so play any player who is part of a ruck (after a ruck is formed)

What you cannot do, is once a ruck has formed, play a player who is not joined to the ruck. That is simply tackling a player without the ball.

It does get a bit complex and hard to read at speed, but essentially where there is a ruck, a player who is not part of the ruck and waiting to play the ball may not be touched until he has the ball. Of course a player may drive through the ruck and play the ball with his feet. If he is playing at the ball, incidental contact with any acting halfback will largely be ignored.


The correctness of Barnes decision from the game against Argentina hinged on whether a ruck had formed, or whether it was still a tackle. At the time I tended to think that Barnes was correct to award the PK, but it was a harsh YC because it really was just a case of bad timing.

 

[Shiggins]

I will say. Joubert did a ok job. Big game and he didn't go bad. Great ref. the things I saw are opinions on things we sometimes will never know.

 

[Pusser]

I thought his interpretation of that clean out was ok and consistent with the laws (there is no specific law protecting the half back that I can find). However I think he was calling the ball out in the scrum early when it was trapped by the No 8. This was disadvantageous to the Brumbies I thought.

I also thing the refs ought to refresh themselves on the issue of loitering - it would certainly help tip the balance in the Bledisloe.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Avatar change time.

Ponies did us proud. Belting game of footy.