Brumbies take the gas in one last weekend of Super Rugby drama
By Brett McKay, 17 Jul 2012 Brett McKay is a Roar Expert
104 Have your say
Brumbies' Stephen Moore talks to his teammates. AAP Image/Lukas Coch
Related coverage
When TMO Mike Fraser awarded Hurricanes’ hooker Dane Coles an almost-season-saving try well after the bell in Friday night’s clash with the Chiefs, I had a bad feeling about the rest of the weekend’s results.
In a run to the finals where results had hardly been going according the script (come on, hands up, who honestly had the ‘Canes beating the Crusaders AND the Chiefs in the last three rounds?), this generous decision from Fraser was a guarantee that the final round of the regular season was also going to throw up some doozies.
Quade Cooper banned for one week
Proof of the quality of the conference and final six formats should come with this number: Nine. Only nine points separated first and eighth in 2012. In 2011, nine points separated first and sixth, and twelve separated first and seventh. No wonder it’s felt like the closest run home ever.
Back on Mike Fraser, I still don’t know how he saw the ball grounded, but it’s all academic now. At that point, the Hurricanes had done what they had to do to stay alive, even if it came forty-odd phases (or however many it was) and five minutes after the siren had sounded. The ‘Canes had won, and my tips were heading south again.
Compare the Hurricanes’ desperation with the Brumbies’ fatal hesitation. The Brumbies have played that same play-it-in-their-half gameplan pretty much since Christian Lealiifano went down back in early May, but that gameplan relies on not shanking at least three clearing kicks from inside your own 22, and not putting at least two box kicks out on the full.
The risk against the free-running, nothing-more-to-lose Blues was that all that free ball around halfway would come back to bite hard. And doubly hard, when you miss upwards of fifteen tackles in the first 20 minutes.
What was worse was where the tackles were missed. A defensive line that had let in the third-lowest number of tries all season was suddenly leaking like a waterlogged tissue in midfield. A game the Brumbies had to win started terribly and never recovered.
Anyway, enough about the Brumbies. They took the gas when they could’ve capped off their season perfectly, and instead had to run the gauntlet of other results for the rest of the round. They had their destiny in their hands, and they dropped it like a stone. By early Sunday morning Canberra time, they had paid the ultimate price.
The Hurricanes, on the other hand – as did the Reds – won by just playing as they had all year. Both teams play a high-risk game, but both have reaped big rewards, too. The Hurricanes finished with the most tries scored, and the Reds rocketed to the top of the Australian conference courtesy of a three-week revision of their 2011 gameplan and a decent return to fitness for Quade Cooper.
While the Reds boast a reasonably attractive style, the same can’t necessarily be said of the ‘Canes. This is the side that lost to the Cheetahs in late-March, you’ll recall, after leading 32-11. The best way of describing the Hurricanes methods is simply to say I’m glad they’re not ‘my team’. My mob already provide enough ‘moments’, but even they’ve had nothing on how red-hot and ice-cold the Hurricanes have been this season.
Of course, the ‘Canes have also missed an unlikely shot at finals glory in the end, and like the Brumbies, they too will look back over their season and identify the ‘what if’ moments that might have served them better. No doubt, that Cheetahs game will come up. So will their loss to the Brumbies in Wellington, ironically.
Be that as it may, what we do know about the Brumbies and Hurricanes is that they won’t be underestimated in 2013.
The Reds have emerged as something of a dark horse for 2012, though, with a Qualifying Final at home now providing the perfect platform for a Semi Final berth. They’ve had an up-and-down season, but they’ve still been hard to beat in Brisbane.
The worry about the Crusaders – for opposing teams – is that they got their jolt back into action in mid-May, and they really seem to be hitting their straps the further they go into July. Two losses ‘they had to have’, against the Rebels in Melbourne, and against the Hurricanes a fortnight ago, have forged this team for success. They were brutal against the Force for the first fifty minutes, before holding back the whip to canter home. They will have good reason to be confident on Saturday night.
And so will the Reds, despite losing to the Sharks earlier in the year. Quade Cooper has given them a few sleepless nights after being rubbed out for a week for his lazy tackle on Berrick Barnes.
He’s probably lucky it wasn’t a month ago, though, judging by the caveat applied: “the SANZAR Rules allow consideration be given to the importance of games to be played during the Super Rugby finals series and as such, this has been taken into account as a mitigating circumstance.”
The Bulls and Sharks will have concerns themselves, as they make another trip across the Indian Ocean this week. Both started leisurely against lowly opposition, as seems to have been the case for the South African front-runners since the resumption. Even the Stormers did their best to let the Rebels back in.
Neither the Bulls or Sharks can afford slow starts against the Crusaders and Reds respectively, or they’ll be in a world of trouble against teams that have shown their preference in recent weeks to get out of the blocks quickly. The Sharks are up against it already with Patrick Lambie ruled out, and Frans Steyn ineligible.
I think both teams from the Republic are up against it this weekend, and expect both Qualifying Finals to go with the home sides. Mind you, as the Hurricanes showed, and the Brumbies found out, Super Rugby is still capable of springing more surprises.
Should my predictions run true – no guarantee, on recent form – this will have the first-placed Stormers sitting in wait for the arrival of the Crusaders, and the Reds fancying their chances in another showdown against the rested Chiefs.
And then, who knows once you get to the semi-final stage. Super Rugby’s already thrown up that many late-season curve balls that nothing would surprise me once we get to the last four. It’s just been that sort of season.
Brett McKay is a former non-tackling scrumhalf and not-quite-1st Grade middle order stalwart. A rugby and cricket expert for The Roar since July 2009 (having joined in Sept 2008), Brett has written for Inside Rugby and Cricket Australia, and is also PLAY Canberra's rugby correspondent. He tweets from @BMcSport
Looking to join The Roar team? We're searching for an experienced Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. Yes, this does mean you get to work with the site all day long! If you're a digital media sales star, we want to hear from you. Apply now.

July 17th 2012 @ 1:32am
sportym said | July 17th 2012 @ 1:32am | Report comment
Big call, but I sense a repeat of the 2011 final. Reds v Crusaders.
With the Brumbies out, I’ll be getting my Reds gear out and having a few pints in London over the finals!
If the Reds can beat the Sharks, I think they will roll the chiefs.
July 17th 2012 @ 9:49am
Brett McKay said | July 17th 2012 @ 9:49am | Report comment
Sporty, the Reds come into the Finals with possilby the best momentum of the six sides, and they have to be a chance now to defend their title. It’ll be interesting how they cope without Cooper for a week, but then their best win of the season was with Lucas at 10, so they’l still be well-served..
July 17th 2012 @ 11:30am
Demon Dez said | July 17th 2012 @ 11:30am | Report comment
Don’t get ahead of yourself Sporty…the Reds “will roll the Chiefs” in Hamilton? A chance only… but won’t happen!
July 17th 2012 @ 3:20pm
Brad said | July 17th 2012 @ 3:20pm | Report comment
I can’t see the Chiefs dropping 3 games in a row. They were unlucky in both losses to the Saders and the Canes and they will be in front of a very passionate home crowd….I predict a Chiefs v Saders final, with the Cheifs taking it.
This is coming from a Crusaders fan by the way…
July 17th 2012 @ 3:46pm
Red Kev said | July 17th 2012 @ 3:46pm | Report comment
As much as I would love the Reds to beat the Sharks and then the Chiefs to make the final, I also can’t see it happening. If the Reds got to the semi-final against the Chiefs the boys from Waikato will be out for revenge. Honestly, I just want to see Cooper try and tackle SBW since he’s now defending the 10 channel.
July 17th 2012 @ 3:56am
Mat said | July 17th 2012 @ 3:56am | Report comment
I thought I could cope with the conference system but when I looked at the finals format, I was just thought it was a complete joke. Assuming the Reds and Crusaders win their games and they play each other, the Reds (who are ranked 6th overall on 58 points) will get home game against the Crusaders who finished 3rd overall on points on 61 points.
How is that fair?
Another example of how unjust this conference system is.
Its should be who ever wins by a bigger margin in their qualifying games that gets the right to host.
July 17th 2012 @ 4:15am
The Werewolf said | July 17th 2012 @ 4:15am | Report comment
And then you might have the same situation where a team that finishes on more competition points at the end of the qualifying rounds doesn’t host the final.
July 17th 2012 @ 9:53am
Brett McKay said | July 17th 2012 @ 9:53am | Report comment
Mat, whether it’s fair or unjust matters little – it’s been in place for two years now, and was signed off by all three SANZAR partners. The only tweaking for this year came with the swapping of priority around number of wins and points difference, which came about after all the whinging last years and prior years about teams missing out despite having more wins.
You’ll never keep everyone happy al the time, that’s just life…
July 17th 2012 @ 9:59am
sheek said | July 17th 2012 @ 9:59am | Report comment
Mat,
Life’s not fair either, but we all find a way to cope. Mostly, anyway. Sport merely mimics reality.
And as Brett says, all the teams know the rules. Or at least they ought to know the rules of the competition.
July 17th 2012 @ 10:14am
Jerry said | July 17th 2012 @ 10:14am | Report comment
The system is what it is, but I suspect if the trend continues it might get revisited. Especially if a conference winner finishes 7th overall….
I don’t really have a problem with the conference winner getting a home semi first up, nor automatic qualification, but beyond that I think home advantage should revert to overall points. The idea of the Reds possibly having home advantage over the Bulls or Crusaders in a final is ludicrous, IMO.
July 17th 2012 @ 12:22pm
eagleJack said | July 17th 2012 @ 12:22pm | Report comment
Agree Jerry. No problem at all with the Reds having a home semi for being a conference winner. But I find it hard to fathom that they are on track to get a home final when they just scraped in on 58 points. Surely this will be re-evaluated during the end of season reviews.
July 17th 2012 @ 10:39am
WQ said | July 17th 2012 @ 10:39am | Report comment
I don’t disagree with anything that any of you have said about the rules and everybody understanding the rules before the competition started, etc etc. Before anybody gets excited I am a Reds fan as well!
However any system that allows a Team that effectively finished 7th on the ladder to potentially have home finals against Teams that finished above them is flawed and needs review!
July 17th 2012 @ 5:51pm
Kuruki said | July 17th 2012 @ 5:51pm | Report comment
Yep i agree. We all have to bite the bullet with what happens under the rules this year, but we don’t have to sit quietly and be happy with it to happen again next year. Something needs to be done.
July 17th 2012 @ 5:31am
mania said | July 17th 2012 @ 5:31am | Report comment
for all canes leaps and bounds forward this seasons end result is the same as usual for the canes. hammett has made a huge step forward this season to get to a similar spot canes usually are at this stage of the super season. congrats to hammett but i wonder how different it would’ve been if hammett had been able to get nonu, hore and piri to tow the line?
quades tackle on barnes was stupid. he’s lucky he only got a week but at least he’s been practising his hits
July 17th 2012 @ 6:52am
kingplaymaker said | July 17th 2012 @ 6:52am | Report comment
I should take some credit for predicting the Reds’ rise and Brumbies fall last week having predicted every quarter, semi and final for the RWC, but none of those were difficult.
There doesn’t seem to be an outstanding side this year, as there normally are.
July 17th 2012 @ 8:14am
Brett McKay said | July 17th 2012 @ 8:14am | Report comment
That would seem to reinforce the closeness of the competition, wouldn’t you say KPM? Nine points from 1st to 8th…
July 17th 2012 @ 8:19am
kingplaymaker said | July 17th 2012 @ 8:19am | Report comment
Yes Brett it is pleasingly close which I think is a good sign for this kind of competition, not least because each country has good teams in contention.
July 17th 2012 @ 8:56am
sixo_clock said | July 17th 2012 @ 8:56am | Report comment
I can’t see the Chiefs losing this, they are playing the game that works best for them. Hopefully the TMO’s seeing eye dog will publicly admit to a catastrophic failure of his x-ray vision and retire with grace.
Still in shock over the Brums. Why did they start punting away good possession, who didn’t stop the rot, why so few leg tackles, the list goes on???? Total failure of Rugby when the stakes were apparent. Young team, yes, but to go on for the first quarter with the same effort shows no-one is listening to anyone or those that should did not speak up. Mowen, Moore, Alexander have proven they are no longer Wallaby ready and DIngo will need to look elsewhere. Australian players regularly demonstrate this capacity to think the game is already won and all they have to do is rely on the others to get the job done while saving themselves for the all night celebrations. Though others do this and it can explain the Rebels win over the ‘Saders and near upset over the Bulls it still goes to the heart of Rugby that each game is as hard as any other and will require a similar level of focus, guts and determination. Anything less and failure awaits. Timely lesson for the younger players, perhaps so, but very very hard on their fans.
July 17th 2012 @ 9:47am
Brett McKay said | July 17th 2012 @ 9:47am | Report comment
Sixo, I do like the Chiefs chances too, my only question about them would come if the is in Cape Town. They were unbeaten on their tour earlier in the year, of course, but travel for a single game will surely be a factor..
On the Brumbies, there’s probably any number of reasons why they couldn’t get back into the game, but ultimately I think their inexperience affected their decision-making, and when you’re trying to play catch-up rugby from the 15th minute, things generally aren’t going well…
July 17th 2012 @ 11:29am
Rob from Brumby Country said | July 17th 2012 @ 11:29am | Report comment
“Mowen, Moore, Alexander have proven they are no longer Wallaby ready and DIngo will need to look elsewhere.”
Yeah, maybe he should revisit that sensational Waratahs franchise?
Come off it, six. I might agree with you on Benny A, but you can’t judge Stephen Moore or even Ben Mowen on that last round match. They’ve been outstanding all season, surely we can overlook the occasional off-game? Goodness knows that we’ve been more than willing to tolerate shockers from the likes of Cooper and O’Connor…
July 18th 2012 @ 10:00am
sixo_clock said | July 18th 2012 @ 10:00am | Report comment
That comment was made in the belief that Rugby players determine their own fate on the paddock. That no-one took the responsibility to speak up and get things moving in the right direction quickly, early is imho a crucial difference between test level players and wannabes. The players mentioned were all senior, experienced and should have been ready willing and able to redirect the ship. Of course the problem was set in well before the game, but those players should have been aware of the possibility of the young players switching off and been prepared to stamp it out.
As for visiting the ‘Tahs. Gratuitous nonsense. Dingo did what he could to resurrect those careers from the damage of being in a hapless franchise but if you follow the thread of my comments you will see the overarching concept is one of team players first and talent second if not third. This is a game won or lost in the mind and mental preparedness explains a lot, but it is never an excuse.
July 17th 2012 @ 9:03am
Handles said | July 17th 2012 @ 9:03am | Report comment
I am not normally overly defensive (well, maybe just a little), but I am getting heartily sick of the whining about the conference system. For a start, the teams that get the biggest benefit from the home derbies are the South Africans, who believed they were disadvantaged by the travel before.
For a second, the conference system is designed to save travel money while boosting gate takings and TV ratings. This may have come at the sacrifice of some of the competition integrity, but GROW UP boys, it is a big wide commercial world out there, and that happens.
And for the third point, nobody honestly questions that the Australian conference is the weakest. When you have three conferences, one of them is always going to be the weakest. When you have two countries where rugby is a dominant or nearly dominant sport, and one where it isn’t, then it isn’t rocket science to figure out which one will be the weakest. Then when you take into consideration the fact that the two (three) real rugby hearlands in Australia have been bled dry of talent by the establishment of three (two) new teams over the last ten (five) years, then what you should be doing is congratulating the Reds and before them the Waratahs and Brumbies for remaining or being competitive.
Does anybody doubt that the Reds were the deserving winners last year? If they win last year, after playing several games with their 5th string fly half, then they would be deserving again, in my view. Especially considering the ridiculous suspension of Quade.
Justice 4 Quade …. armbands, anyone?
July 17th 2012 @ 9:56am
Brett McKay said | July 17th 2012 @ 9:56am | Report comment
I’m not sure about the armbands, Handles, I think the wording used in the decision makes it pretty clear Cooper would’ve copped a longer spell if this was earlier in the season. And I know there’s plenty of examples of worse tackles going unpunished – SBW’s coathanger on Friday night being one – but I still think Cooper’s probably lucky to have only got a week..
July 17th 2012 @ 11:29am
Kane said | July 17th 2012 @ 11:29am | Report comment
No wonder the kid doesn’t like tackling, whenever he makes one he gets banned
July 17th 2012 @ 11:32am
mania said | July 17th 2012 @ 11:32am | Report comment
i’m not a cooper fan. i reckon he’s over rated. but i have to say that i like how agressive he’s been since he’s come back from injury. has a lot of energy and its obvious he really wants to be more physical. qc needs a bit of accuracy and channel his new found energy better.
he is trying to tackle and has been more confrontational on d since his return.
July 17th 2012 @ 11:38am
Kane said | July 17th 2012 @ 11:38am | Report comment
I am not a Quade fan either but I must admit despite what many people believe the kid isn’t afraid to tackle he quite often goes into contact. The problem is his technique is something I don’t witness often in schoolboy rugby let alone Super Rugby. One of his many technical flaws is that he advances up to make the tackle then when he’s about a meter from the player he stops and waits for them to make contact. This being so the players just either push him over or run around his flapping arms.
July 17th 2012 @ 11:44am
mania said | July 17th 2012 @ 11:44am | Report comment
agree kane. quades issue def isnt courage, its bad technique.
agree kane, often see qc at the last split sec stop or pause and he’s just setting himself up to be bumped off then.
July 17th 2012 @ 12:04pm
Jutsie said | July 17th 2012 @ 12:04pm | Report comment
Good observation by all of you guys, agree with brett that QC was lucky but there have been worse tackles gone unpunished and agree with the sentiments expressed by kane and mania. I think he also often goes for the ball rip instead of making contact with the shoulder.
July 17th 2012 @ 11:58am
Handles said | July 17th 2012 @ 11:58am | Report comment
Does anybody know how many other high tackles earned a suspension this year? I can’t think of any. So it really gets me angry that a tackle that
(a) made initial contact with the chest
(b) was made front on, by a player who was crouching, (i.e. clearly not intending to strike high) and
(c) was only high becasue Barnes either stumbled or was leading with his head
is viewed as worthy of suspension. It wasn’t even the worst tackle in the second half!
I am going to get those armbands made. Do you think the Sharks will bring them over for me? I understand that South Africa is where they are made.
July 17th 2012 @ 12:05pm
Rusty said | July 17th 2012 @ 12:05pm | Report comment
you can buy a version of them on the Goldie ‘Justice for Laptops’
July 17th 2012 @ 10:12am
Rhino said | July 17th 2012 @ 10:12am | Report comment
Well articulated Handles. Everyone knows the rules of a conference system at beginning of season so no point whingeing about it at end. Not sure that a perfect finals system exists – maybe that’s why Soccer leagues like EPL don’t have them (blecchhh … can’t believe I mentioned soccer!).
Anyway, with a couple of rounds to go every finals contender knew all the various permutations and a few teams (Sharks & Reds) stood up and got the job done while a few others (Brumbies & Highlanders) blew it. That’s sport in all of its glorious forms.
I’ll happily live with “weakest conference” jibes from our kiwi and saffa friends if Reds win the title.
July 17th 2012 @ 10:33am
Drop Kick said | July 17th 2012 @ 10:33am | Report comment
Quade’s suspension wasn’t ridiculous – his “tackle” was.
Why hasn’t McKenzie, apparently Australia’s best coach, taught him to tackle in the last two years? Either he’s a turnstile hidden out the back or when he defends in the line he risks being carded and maiming someone.
July 17th 2012 @ 10:58am
Markus said | July 17th 2012 @ 10:58am | Report comment
While I do not question the Australian conference being the weakest, I definitely question the claim that this somehow results in an unfair advantage over the other conferences.
When you get an average across all 5 teams in each conference, the Australian team comes out looking the weakest.
But the the teams themselves are actually relatively evenly matched, evidenced by the worst team in the conference (Force) having beaten the best team (Reds), the 3rd team (Tahs) and almost beating the second team (Brumbies).
As a result, there is very little advantage gained from any particular team within the conference.
Now compare this to the South African conference. While they clearly have three strong teams in the Stormers, Sharks and Bulls, this strength overshadows the fact that they also have the defensive turnstiles that are the Cheetahs (even when they win they will more often than not have given away 4 tries), and the absolute joke that are the Lions.
In the case of the latter in particular, the top 3 teams in the conference essentially have an all but guaranteed 10 competition points each season.
July 17th 2012 @ 12:50pm
steve.h said | July 17th 2012 @ 12:50pm | Report comment
Yet the sharks lost to the lions, the Stormers couldn’t put four tries past either team (or any team for that matter) and the bulls nearly came unstuck against the lions. If the cheetahs were in the Australian conference they would be third. They should have beaten the Brumbies (even Lyndon Bray agrees) and pushed both the Saders and the Chiefs all the way. Furthermore the Cheetahs gave the Crusaders a bit of a rugby lesson last year which is the reason the Reds got field advantage in the final. All you have to do is look at the the SA teams vs the Australian teams results to see how poor the Australian teams are.
July 17th 2012 @ 3:17pm
Rusty said | July 17th 2012 @ 3:17pm | Report comment
Last time I checked the Cheetahs have beaten the Tahs two years running. They would have clean swept all Australian teams if it wasnt for that unusually hot day in Canberra melting the refs brain.
Against NZ teams, they beat the Canes with a BP, lost to the Saders, Chiefs and Landers all by seven or less. Their biggest hurdle was being in the same conf as the Bulls, Sharks and Stormers.
In the end the log doesnt lie and the Cheetahs proved to be better than 60% of the Australian conf. Easy beats they may have been but in recent years they are on the up playing a flamboyant brand of attractive rugby.
July 17th 2012 @ 10:04am
sheek said | July 17th 2012 @ 10:04am | Report comment
Brett,
Well, I got it so wrong last week. In for a penny, in for a pound, now I’ll have another crack.
REDS v SHARKS.
Remembering a similar final in 1996, when the Sharks blew minor premiers Reds off the park, I’m going for the Sharks again in 2012 to win away from home. (I’m probably doing the Reds a favour by tipping against them).
CRUSADERS v BULLS.
Crusaders really look like the team to beat to me. I’m sure they’ll have the Bulls covered in every department.
July 17th 2012 @ 10:42am
Brett McKay said | July 17th 2012 @ 10:42am | Report comment
Sheek, I finished the weekend 5/7, but started 0 and 2!! Predictions, why do we bother?!?
July 17th 2012 @ 1:32pm
sheek said | July 17th 2012 @ 1:32pm | Report comment
Brett,
I think there were very many of us who began last week 0 & 2…..
July 17th 2012 @ 10:10am
kingplaymaker said | July 17th 2012 @ 10:10am | Report comment
Perhaps a problem the Chiefs might have is Brumbies syndrome, getting overly worried as a finals series is so new to them. On the other hand Wayne Smith is an experienced and obviously successful finals man to have behind the scenes.
However I agree with predictions here. The SA sides should both go out-their gameplan was outdated by the law interpretation changes at the end of 2009.
Regarding the Brumbies, I think that was quite a failing on White’s part.
July 17th 2012 @ 10:40am
Brett McKay said | July 17th 2012 @ 10:40am | Report comment
But how do you figure that KPM? White didn’t deviate from the game plan, White didn’t shank the clearing kicks, and White didn’t miss 13 tackles in the first 15 minutes. Surely this has to be a case of the players taking responsibility, which coincidentally they already have..
July 17th 2012 @ 10:51am
kingplaymaker said | July 17th 2012 @ 10:51am | Report comment
Brett I think that White is a very experienced coach, presumably an expert in man management. This was a knockout match and it was up to him to prepare the players psychologically to perform well and not make a whole lot of mistakes.
I also felt that two players with real penetration, Vaea and Kuridrani (yes I know they both happen to be islanders) were neglected for safer options this year, but could have developed into game changers for just such a match as this. In the end the Brumbies lacked that crucial playing quality but I don’t think White was quite bold enough in finding it, despite many achievements.
Then he was playing the Blues. Granted this team has talent and can pull a performance together, but only if you let them. And the Brumbies did. It shouldn’t have been hard.
July 17th 2012 @ 12:26pm
Brett McKay said | July 17th 2012 @ 12:26pm | Report comment
You’ve said this a lot about Vaea and Kuridrani, but rarely with the acknowledgement that just as they “could have developed into game changers”, they could’ve made no difference at all. And both are equally true.
And that would seem to the be the case with these two, they’ve just not made any difference to the team in the chances they’ve had. Vaea does add penetration, sure, but not nearly as much as Fotu Auelua (and he made few dents to the Blues line), and Kuridrani has been solid if unspectacular whenever he’s came on. You have a similar disdain for Andrew Smith as you do for Conrad (and Ben, for that matter!), but the reality is that Kuridrani hsn’t made the compelling case for a start when he has come on for Smith.
It’s easy to say in hindsight tha tthis player might have made the difference on the day, but that still doesn’t remove the fact that when the ball was kicked off, and the players had to start making decsions and perform actions for the situations in front of them, they couldn’t do it under pressure. White or any other coach can only prepare them up to the point they leave the dressing room. Ater that, it’s up to the players..
July 17th 2012 @ 3:00pm
Red Kev said | July 17th 2012 @ 3:00pm | Report comment
I find it amazing that you trot out “White is a very experienced coach, presumably an expert in man management. This was a knockout match and it was up to him to prepare the players psychologically to perform well and not make a whole lot of mistakes.” yet anytime someone tries to criticise Deans it’s “he is amazing, he just doesn’t have the cattle”. The only conclusion I can draw is fanboi.
July 17th 2012 @ 3:19pm
Rusty said | July 17th 2012 @ 3:19pm | Report comment
zing!!
July 17th 2012 @ 12:53pm
steve.h said | July 17th 2012 @ 12:53pm | Report comment
I’m sorry but neither the Bulls or the Sharks use a predominately kick and chase game. Do you watch any of their games?
July 17th 2012 @ 10:27am
WQ said | July 17th 2012 @ 10:27am | Report comment
Brett,
I mentioned on a post attached to another article that I think the Reds have come as far as they are going to, the Sharks by 9. The end result being 20 points to 11. The Sharks to score 2 converted tries and 2 penalties, the Reds an unconverted try and 2 penalties.
The Crusaders will leave everybody on the field this week and only beat the Bulls by 4. The end result being 23 points to 19. The Crusaders to score 2 converted tries and 3 penalties, the Bulls to score 1 converted try and 4 penalties.
July 17th 2012 @ 10:43am
Brett McKay said | July 17th 2012 @ 10:43am | Report comment
WQ, I can’t really argue with you in my current tipping form, but I’m really not sure about the Sharks without Lambie AND Steyn. They might win without only one, but I think without both is a bridge too far..
July 17th 2012 @ 11:00am
WQ said | July 17th 2012 @ 11:00am | Report comment
Certainly big losses however I don’t believe as big as Horwill and Cooper. I desperately want the Reds to win, QLD Rugby needs to keep the momentum of last years win going and hopefully the money from that type of success will start to flow to the back blocks of the State.
July 17th 2012 @ 12:30pm
Brett McKay said | July 17th 2012 @ 12:30pm | Report comment
WQ, I think they’e copping without Horwill pretty well, actually, and even without Cooper they managed something like 7 or 8 of their 11 wins.
But that’s OK, I know you’re trying to bring your expectations down, so that when/if they win you can be extra jubilant, I do get that..
July 17th 2012 @ 10:18pm
matthew said | July 17th 2012 @ 10:18pm | Report comment
I think those two will be a more significant loss for the Sharks. The rejigged back-line will likely be very uncohesive. FSteyn in particular is a massive loss. Saffa teams have a tremendous record with him at inside centre and he’s by far the best we have. He’s got a great offloading game going of late to go with his size and power so it’s really disappointing he’ll miss out
Not much hope for me for the Sharks, think it will be a dissapointing performance and they’ll be outsmarted by the Reds. Du Plessis,Pietersen,Alberts and Michalak the guys the Reds need to keep an eye on.
July 17th 2012 @ 11:07am
The Other Steve - and All Black fan said | July 17th 2012 @ 11:07am | Report comment
The Reds definitely won against the Waratahs, but how many of their points were gifted by the Tahs making stupid mistakes inside the 22?
At least 12 from my dimming recollection. Probably more if someone wants to go back over the taope.
So lets not get too carried away by the Red’s win on the weekend.
July 17th 2012 @ 1:11pm
jeznez said | July 17th 2012 @ 1:11pm | Report comment
Steve four of the five tries were gifts. It was a lot more than 12 points. Only the Gill try came from sustained pressure that didn’t involve a howling error by the Tahs.
To be fair they capitalised on their oppositions mistakes very well but you’d think they are going to have to be a bit more creative if they want to progress past the Sharks who will not be anywhere near as generous.
July 17th 2012 @ 1:13pm
rl said | July 17th 2012 @ 1:13pm | Report comment
Not getting carried away – but a try is valued the same regardless of whether you created it through a piece of masterful play, or whetherfrom a turnover resulting from consistent pressure, or even if the opposition just gifts you it through a silly error.
I may be slightly paranoid, but I can already sense the groundswell building of yet another “illegitimate” Reds title. Oh dear…
July 17th 2012 @ 8:56pm
Freddles said | July 17th 2012 @ 8:56pm | Report comment
When you are busy scoring gifted tries, it’s hard to find the time to work your way into a try scoring situation.
July 17th 2012 @ 11:48am
Rob from Brumby Country said | July 17th 2012 @ 11:48am | Report comment
I disagree. I see the Reds winning at home to set up a season-defining match against the Chiefs in Hamilton (careful, Reds fans, you may not like the ‘definition’). The Sharks have too far to travel without Lambie. They’ve done well on the road this year, but against a near full-strength Reds side in full flight at Lang Park? Nope.
As for the other match, Crusaders to slaughter the Bulls in a bit of a bolt from the blue and sending shudders through the other finalists. The Stormers will be watching this match with good reason to be worried.
July 17th 2012 @ 11:50am
Rob from Brumby Country said | July 17th 2012 @ 11:50am | Report comment
And while I’m making reckless predictions, I’ll finish with one more: Chiefs vs Crusaders in the final. You heard it… well, probably somewhere else first, but you also heard it here!
July 17th 2012 @ 11:51am
mania said | July 17th 2012 @ 11:51am | Report comment
i didnt think that was possible RFBC. isnt the winner of the saders bulls game to face the chiefs in the semi’s?
July 17th 2012 @ 11:54am
Rob from Brumby Country said | July 17th 2012 @ 11:54am | Report comment
Nope.
July 17th 2012 @ 11:55am
Rob from Brumby Country said | July 17th 2012 @ 11:55am | Report comment
Well, not if the Reds win, anyway… From that particular semi, the results make it either the Reds in Hamilton or the Sharks in Cape Town.
July 17th 2012 @ 1:01pm
steve.h said | July 17th 2012 @ 1:01pm | Report comment
Lambie wasn’t in the team when the Sharks destroyed the bulls and wasn’t on the field when the sharks started taking the Cheetahs to pieces. For the Sharks it all starts and ends upfront, if we win the battle upfront we will win the game. With Front football it will be difficult to stop the sharks backs and loosies.
This to is a near full strength side for the Sharks, last time the teams met both teams had injury problems. Fearless prediction Sharks to win the Super Rugby Comp at Loftus
(You have to dream big sometimes)
July 17th 2012 @ 1:44pm
Brett McKay said | July 17th 2012 @ 1:44pm | Report comment
a 5 v 6 Final Steve?!?
July 17th 2012 @ 1:58pm
steve.h said | July 17th 2012 @ 1:58pm | Report comment
I want revenge for the 2007 final
But I will settle for a win in Hamilton….