@canefan said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:

@Stargazer said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:

@Yeetyaah said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:

Didn't they change it so any game after the QFs go down to table points to host? So the Canes have more points than the Jaguares, if they both win, won't the Canes host the final?

Nope, this is from the SANZAAR website:

View image

Jaguares and Brumbies are both ranked higher than the Hurricanes, despite the Canes having more competition points, because they are conference winners.

It will be a great day when this scam of a system is gone

Fucken aye. It's professional sports way of giving people medals just for competing.

@Stargazer Yeah I know they're ranked higher. For some reason I thought they had changed this to higher points after the QFs. My apologies.

@canefan Yeah, and the funny thing is, is that this stupid arrangement was agreed upon to keep the South Africans happy. They never thought of the possibility that the non-South African team in their conference could finish on top!

@canefan said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:

@Stargazer said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:

@Yeetyaah said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:

Didn't they change it so any game after the QFs go down to table points to host? So the Canes have more points than the Jaguares, if they both win, won't the Canes host the final?

Nope, this is from the SANZAAR website:

View image

Jaguares and Brumbies are both ranked higher than the Hurricanes, despite the Canes having more competition points, because they are conference winners.

It will be a great day when this scam of a system is gone

Is the

just used as an example or is it set in concrete? I ask simply because using that if the Hurricanes win the they should be host as they are thye winner of Semi Final 1.

@Higgins https://super.rugby/superrugby/news/2019-super-rugby-semi-finalists-confirmed/

@Canes4life said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:

The winner of this game will win the title IMO.

There's a feeling amongst Brumbies supporters that if the Canes manage to win their semi-final, they'll have already played their final.

@antipodean the Brumbies will be a walk in the park if they get by the Crusaders.

@Canes4life said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:

The old saying where "forwards win you matches and backs dictate by how much" will most likely determine this scoreline.

It's a stupid saying.

The Crusaders had a magnificent forward pack through the Blackadder years yet didn't win titles because their backs couldn't capitalise on the ball they were given.

Meanwhile the Chiefs won titles without the best forward pack in the competition. As did the Hurricanes the year they won.

If forwards are everything, how come Kiwi sides keep beating South African sides?

@Chester-Draws said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:

@Canes4life said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:

The old saying where "forwards win you matches and backs dictate by how much" will most likely determine this scoreline.

If forwards are everything, how come Kiwi sides keep beating South African sides?

Because biggest isn't necessarily best? Even forwards need skills.

@Chester-Draws said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:

@Canes4life said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:

The old saying where "forwards win you matches and backs dictate by how much" will most likely determine this scoreline.

It's a stupid saying.

The Crusaders had a magnificent forward pack through the Blackadder years yet didn't win titles because their backs couldn't capitalise on the ball they were given.

Meanwhile the Chiefs won titles without the best forward pack in the competition. As did the Hurricanes the year they won.

If forwards are everything, how come Kiwi sides keep beating South African sides?

Dunno about that, I think the chiefs forward pack actually had the wood over us in the couple of years they won the title.

@Chester-Draws I'd also argue the Canes pack weren't half bad either with the likes of Uhila & Fatialofa coming in to bolster a pack that already included Goodes, Coles, Vito, Shields and Savea.

@Chester-Draws The game plan under Blackadder was flawed and easy to shutdown it was too predictable plus he failed to motivate the AB's like Razor does.That's why we never won titles under him.We had no 2nd or 3rd options under pressure.We would have failed to win titles with the whole AB squad under Blackadder.

@Chris said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:

@Chester-Draws The game plan under Blackadder was flawed and easy to shutdown it was too predictable plus he failed to motivate the AB's like Razor does.That's why we never won titles under him.We had no 2nd or 3rd options under pressure.We would have failed to win titles with the whole AB squad under Blackadder.

This is true. Blackadder would be way to unco to breakdance after games too.

@SammyC said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:

@Chester-Draws said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:

@Canes4life said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:

The old saying where "forwards win you matches and backs dictate by how much" will most likely determine this scoreline.

It's a stupid saying.

The Crusaders had a magnificent forward pack through the Blackadder years yet didn't win titles because their backs couldn't capitalise on the ball they were given.

Meanwhile the Chiefs won titles without the best forward pack in the competition. As did the Hurricanes the year they won.

If forwards are everything, how come Kiwi sides keep beating South African sides?

Dunno about that, I think the chiefs forward pack actually had the wood over us in the couple of years they won the title.

Yeah, that was a strong pack. Blackadder didn’t seem to let his pack meet them with the same aggression which was weird and it seemed to put them off their game a bit.

Was helped by being half a Magpies pack.

@Nepia There was a "don't react to any provocation" policy under Blackadder which the Chiefs (and the Canes) sensibly exploited. It used to drive me mad.

@Nepia said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:

@SammyC said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:

@Chester-Draws said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:

@Canes4life said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:

The old saying where "forwards win you matches and backs dictate by how much" will most likely determine this scoreline.

It's a stupid saying.

The Crusaders had a magnificent forward pack through the Blackadder years yet didn't win titles because their backs couldn't capitalise on the ball they were given.

Meanwhile the Chiefs won titles without the best forward pack in the competition. As did the Hurricanes the year they won.

If forwards are everything, how come Kiwi sides keep beating South African sides?

Dunno about that, I think the chiefs forward pack actually had the wood over us in the couple of years they won the title.

Yeah, that was a strong pack. Blackadder didn’t seem to let his pack meet them with the same aggression which was weird and it seemed to put them off their game a bit.

Was helped by being half a Magpies pack.

I think on paper the crusaders forward pack was stronger, but on the pitch those chiefs forward packs had our number. That was probably a combination of their aggression and good game planning by Rennie.

@Wally said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:

@Nepia There was a "don't react to any provocation" policy under Blackadder which the Chiefs (and the Canes) sensibly exploited. It used to drive me mad.

That didn’t go too well for the 1999 ABs

@Chris said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:

@Chester-Draws The game plan under Blackadder was flawed and easy to shutdown it was too predictable plus he failed to motivate the AB's like Razor does.That's why we never won titles under him.We had no 2nd or 3rd options under pressure.We would have failed to win titles with the whole AB squad under Blackadder.

But Todd was a good steady hand on the tiller.
As honest as the day is long.
A toiler.
A team man.
A hard man.
A farmer.
And most of all a proud Cantabrian.

Under Blackadder we did commit less to the breakdown.

There were some quality sides that defeated us during those years (except the Waratahs team, thanks Joubert...) but poor tactics and selections will be a hallmark of the Blackadder era.

I will say that he did some very good stuff as well. He did get the team up during the earthquake period. He help develop a few young players into ABs.

@Frank Great but a game plan of not committing enough numbers to the breakdown and going from side to side to go around teams or force the players to come in to defend to go wide ,Does not work when the opposition use a drift defence and commit numbers to the breakdown.Game plan Fuked. no alternative gameplans just keep sticking to the one that is not working.Todd was a great bloke honest player but that doesn't always equate to a great tactical Brain.