Hurricanes vs Chiefs: Super Rugby quarter-finals live scores, blog

158 Have your say

    LIVE SCORES

    Scores updated each minute. REFRESH NOW

    Hurricanes vs Chiefs

    Super Rugby, 20 July, 2018

    Westpac Stadium
    Fulltime - Hurricanes 32, Chiefs 31
    Hurricanes   Chiefs
    32 FINAL SCORE 31
    4 TRIES 4
    3 CONVERSION KICKS 4
    2 PENALTY GOALS 1
    0 DROP GOALS 0
     
     
    Referee: Glen Jackson
    Touch judges: Nick Briant & Paul Williams
    TMO: Glenn Newman

    The Hurricanes and the Chiefs will go head to head on Friday night to kick off a Super Rugby finals series with a match that is hard to pick.

    Join The Roar for live scores from the match and a live blog of the game at Westpac Stadium, starting from 5:35pm AEST.

    The Hurricanes and the Chiefs have been two of the most impressive seasons of all the sides in the Super Rugby competition, but because of the conference system the Chiefs have been forced to travel.

    These two teams each took 11 wins from the season, and were second only to the Crusaders in terms of overall wins for the year.

    The Hurricanes thanks to two more bonus points than their opponents have reached fourth place on the overall table – moved below conference winners the Waratahs and the Lions, which gives them home advantage in this match.

    They also had a +131 points difference compared to the Chiefs’ +95.

    It’s funny to think that if the Super Rugby table were decided without conferences then all four quarter-finals would be hosted in New Zealand this year – instead, we get to seen an all-Kiwi clash here.

    As such it should be quite a treat to see two of the very strongest sides in the Super Rugby competition going up against each other.

    Whoever makes it through this match is likely set for the toughest test in Super Rugby – a do-or-die clash with the Crusaders in a semi-final next week.

    Of course, it’s possible that the travelling Sharks could upset the ‘Saders tomorrow and provide the winner of this one with an unexpectedly easy path to the final… but no one expects that to happen.

    Join The Roar for live scores from the match and a live blog of the game between the Hurricanes and the Chiefs in the Super Rugby quarter-finals on Friday night at Westpac Stadium, starting from 5:35pm AEST.

    Geoff is a Melbourne-based sports fanatic and writer who started contributing to The Roar in 2012 under the pen name Allanthus. His first book, A World in Union Conflict; The Global Battle For Rugby Supremacy, was released in December 2017 to critical acclaim. For details on the book visit www.geoffparkes.com. Meanwhile, his twin goals of achieving a single figure golf handicap and owning a fast racehorse remain tantalisingly out of reach.

    Rebuild announcement

    Have Your Say



    If not logged in, please enter your name and email before submitting your comment. Please review our comments policy before posting on the Roar.

    The Crowd Says (158)

    The Roar Live Blog: Latest comments displayed at the top of the page | Click here to jump to leave a comment

    • 8:22pm
      double agent said | 8:22pm | ! Report

      Some champagne rugby as you’d expect from these two sides but jeez there was a lot of ordinary stuff. Some very un-kiwi stuff ups throughout.

    • Roar Guru

      1:36pm
      The Neutral View From Sweden said | 1:36pm | ! Report

      Chiefs players and coaches probably wake up today and wonder how did that happen… The Canes was there for the taking, but Chiefs can only blame themselves.

      Laumape’s effort in defense was next level. Go on like that boy and you will be a nailed on starter for the AB’s.

    • Roar Guru

      1:53am
      Matt Porter said | 1:53am | ! Report

      Cracking game. Brilliance, brutal efforts and blunders. It had it all. Huge amount of sting in defence. Especially from Laumape. What a difference a week makes. BB and TJP stepping up as they usually do at business ends and look to have their mojo back for the finals. Gareth Evans immense. Chiefs made it a significant contest. Retallic had off the planet workrate and execution again, Messan and Cane were warriors. Charles Ngatai was Walter Little and Tim Horan. Laser vision for the gap and the fast feet to scuttle through it. I hope there’s a Bunce-like late AB bloom for Ngatai after he gets back from his French sabbatical. If he’s back in 3 years he’ll still only be the age Bunce was when he made his AB debut, the start of a mostly excellent 55-match Test career. DMac unfortunately tonight was more Carlos Spencer 2003 Rugby World Cup than Dan Carter 2005 Lions Tour, which you can’t help but think he’s got the talent to be. Now all the ‘Canes need is for the Sharks to get over the Saders tonight and they have a home semi. Unfortunately for the Canes that’s more of a Tui beer billboard that a realistic chance. At this stage. They’ll be plotting to raid the citadel!

    • Roar Guru

      11:08pm
      Harry Jones said | 11:08pm | ! Report

      Great game, this.

    • 9:43pm
      Jerry said | 9:43pm | ! Report

      Thinking about it, Jackson probably erred in saying ‘on field no try’. He was looking like he was going to award it (as the grounding was clear) and then got worried about the knock on so referred it.

      The potential knock on which Jackson hadn’t seen enough to rule on either was the only element that would rule it out, so it really should have been ‘on field try’. I’m about 50/50 as to whether it was a knock on – it may well have been, but there wasn’t enough evidence to rule it was.

      • Columnist

        7:58am
        Geoff Parkes said | 7:58am | ! Report

        Hi Jerry, you make an interesting point in the match thread below, and I understand where you’re coming from. If the TMO thinks it’s a try, then he’s entitled to lead Jackson in this way and tell him to award the try.

        And perhaps, as you say, Jackson should have sent it upstairs as a ‘try’ not a ‘no try’.

        But that’s not how it happened. Jackson said ‘no try’ and the TMO – instead of saying I do have evidence that it’s a try – actually said something like I don’t have evidence to show that it wasn’t a try.

        So he didn’t answer Jackson’s question, he provided an answer to a different question altogether, and shifted the burden of proof if you like. Very messy.

        And very hard to believe that in a week where SANZAAR says they are going to provide clearer protocols for TMO involvement, that a ref and TMO get this communication so messed up.

        Thankfully, the best team won on the night and it’s not the major issue it could have been.

        • 8:49am
          Jerry said | 8:49am | ! Report

          What Jackson said was ‘On field no try, possible knock on’, so he was asking for advice on the knock on specifically. The TMO then said there’s no clear evidence of a knock on and Jackson then replied that meant it was a try. The TMO didn’t actually recommend the try, he simply advised on the element that Jackson was worried about.

          Jackson had seen the ball grounded and was unsure of the knock on, so if there’s any error there it’s his – he should have said ‘on field try’ as he’d seen the elements required for a try clearly (ball grounded over the line) and was unsure about whether something had happened prior to that.

          • Columnist

            11:05am
            Geoff Parkes said | 11:05am | ! Report

            I don’t have it on tape Jerry, so can’t remember the actual words verbatim, but I think you’re being charitable about the process.

            If they got to the right decision (and for me it was a classic 50/50, I’m happy with try or no-try either way), it was only by accident.

            We’ve been conditioned to understand that if the ref’s decision is an on-field try, the TMO is being asked to prove otherwise. The TMO saying ‘no clear evidence of a knock on’ isn’t that.

            He should have been saying one of, ‘there is no clear evidence that he didn’t knock it on (ie,supporting the on-field no try decision) or ‘there is clear evidence that he didn’t knock on, (ie overturning the on-field decision and asking jackson to change his decision to try)

            It’s only a small distinction, but if the ref is going to make an on-field recommendation before going upstairs, then we need this clarity in the process. Otherwise the refs are better to say that they don’t know, and ask the TMO for a try/no try decision.

            • 11:17am
              Jerry said | 11:17am | ! Report

              Jackson specifically said that the knock on was the element he was concerned about, so a TMO saying there’s no clear evidence of a knock on removes that element as a concern.

              Here’s the problems from my POV.

              1 – Jackson’s initial ruling of on field no try. Given he was satisfied with the grounding (as he didn’t ask for it to be checked and awarded the try immediately after being advised on the knock on) and wasn’t sure on the knock on, that should be an on field try. The question asked should have been ‘is there any reason I can’t award’ with specific reference to a possible knock on.

              2 – They should simply have been more clear on what was being ruled. I realise there’s a difference between ‘there is clear evidence he didn’t knock on’ and ‘there isn’t clear evidence he did knock on’ but in this case the distinction is fairly marginal.

              Regardless of Jackson’s initial ruling and of course my bias as a Canes fan, it seems to me the right decision was made. If 3 angles and multiple slow mo replays can’t provide enough evidence that the ball was knocked on prior to being grounded, the try should be awarded.

              • 3:08pm
                Tycoch22 said | 3:08pm | ! Report

                Glenn Newman was TMO – he is the guy who stuffed up in the England v Wales game. The video replays were inconclusive – on field decision “no try” so it should have stayed that way. If the TMO could clearly see that TJP had the ball throughout then he could overturn, but the video was not that definitive

              • Roar Rookie

                3:59pm
                Kirky said | 3:59pm | ! Report

                Jerry: I have replayed that ”try incident” on Fox many times, last night after the game and this morning and if the ball went forward at all it was by the guy on his left who was a Chiefs Player by his forearm (which would have been a ‘knocked back’ ~ and it appears to be pretty conclusive that Perenara had done the right thing by scoring what was originally judged by the Referee of the day as a TRY, then that Touchie saw it another way clouding the Referees decision so upstairs it went with the correct result forthcoming from same!

                Correct ruling!

              • 6:31pm
                Mapu said | 6:31pm | ! Report

                I do not agree with you on this one😎

              • 6:58pm
                Jerry said | 6:58pm | ! Report

                That’s ok Mapu, I’ll just bask in the quiet glow of my own deluded sense of entitlement.

        • 7:59pm
          Julz said | 7:59pm | ! Report

          Interesting. If you’re been watching all season, the TMO always look for a clear evidence of a knock-on or a clear evidence to not give a try.
          To me that was the right call. No clear evidence of a knock-on. TJ looks like he knocked the ball forward, but if you watch it again very closely, NO CLEAR EVIDENCE that it knocked from his hands. Those 50/50 calls always goes the attacking team.
          Plus the TMO will always have the last call whether the ref calls an on-field try or no-try.

          I’m surprised that this is debated. If you been watching rugby you see those calls every week. No surprises here.

          • 8:56pm
            Tycoch22 said | 8:56pm | ! Report

            On field call “No try”

            Was there a knock-on? Videos inconclusive

            So stick with on-field

            Ref has last call not TMO

            Attacking team does not get benefit of 50:50 calls.

            • 9:40pm
              Julz said | 9:40pm | ! Report

              Well damn, the try was given mate, TMO has the last call there too mate. So you wrong there mate.

              That was the right call.

              • 9:54pm
                Tycoch22 said | 9:54pm | ! Report

                TMO does not have last call. Wrong mate. This why the “Powers-to-Be” are making noises about the TMO process.
                By the way it might have been a legitimate try. I watched the replays and could not tell whether TJP knocked on, but I also could not say he hadn’t. Most people, including the comms, thought it was 50:50.
                Personally I think TMOs should only be used to sort out blunders/obvious stuff – leave judgement calls to the refs

            • 9:51pm
              Jerry said | 9:51pm | ! Report

              Ref did have last call, the TMO only told him there was no clear evidence of a knock on. Jackson awarded the try based on that advice.

    • 9:19pm
      Boomeranga said | 9:19pm | ! Report

      Canes
      Sharks
      Tahs
      Jags

      One from one!

    • 9:08pm
      Rugby Tragic said | 9:08pm | ! Report

      Would have been interesting if Jordie missed that conversion of Lam’s try… not saying Chiefs would have got up as I’m sure Canes defence would have tightened … a 15 point lead with 10 mins to go must of felt pretty comforting …

      • 9:17pm
        Jerry said | 9:17pm | ! Report

        Yeah, that conversion was massive. It basically meant that the last 5 minutes were relatively pressure free.

    • 8:37pm
      Sylvester said | 8:37pm | ! Report

      It’s not a great look having an international first five defending on the wing, and then still badly missing a one-on-one tackle.

      • 8:47pm
        riddler said | 8:47pm | ! Report

        bb went high and non-committal on that one.. lucky his brother was there to clean it up..

      • 8:19pm
        double agent said | 8:19pm | ! Report

        There’s been very few 10s in the history of rugby at any level that have been terrific defenders.

    • 7:41pm
      Mapu said | 7:41pm | ! Report

      Hansen take note.D Mac is a liability

      • 9:57pm
        ethan said | 9:57pm | ! Report

        He’s not as used to the high pressure situations yet. Really thrives in low-mid pressure situations. But needs a bit more experience playing when the heat is really on. I think he’ll step up to the mark in time.

        • 11:52am
          Cliff Bishkek said | 11:52am | ! Report

          Ethan, I do not think he will. Under pressure or in situations where there is the need for the second 5 to step up, he seems to go into his cocoon and is nowhere near as confident in his plays.

          He is good but he seems to go to his highs when the team is well in front in terms of pushing the opposition. He does not seem to be able to run a backline or a team as per BB and D Carter.

          • 5:11pm
            ethan said | 5:11pm | ! Report

            You must remember this is his first full season of SR playing in the 10 jumper. If he was Australian we’d be giddy at the thought of him putting on a WB jumper, at least compared to our other options. BB was not noted for his management skills for many years, but is steadily growing into it. D Mac will improve.

            NZ was spoilt for years by DC and everyone gets judged harshly in comparison, even BB, who is not at that level. It’s true that some guys never get to the point where they shine in high pressure situations, but I wouldn’t be ruling DMac out just yet.

    Explore:
    , , , , ,