Find TRF at:
I can't believe how quiet this section is. I know all eyes are on the World cup which is just around the corner but this years ITM cup has been a fest of awesome footy. It's made for much better viewing than super rugby in my view and though there have not been many All Blacks in the cup the starts that everyone should be turning on for are the Great New Zealand under 20's stars that are swelling the ranks this season. The comp has been so tight with little in it at the end with Canterbury and Waikato sitting top of the pack both on 33 points but just behind them were impressive challenges from Taranaki and the Bays plus Cruden and his Turbos have put on a show this year too. As for the final, hate to say I told you so but right back at the begining I picked mooloo to do well even though most wrote them off. Auckland were suposed to dominate this cup and Waikato were picked to be either mid to lower order in the picking stakes but it's been the other way around. Going to be an epic final, waikato should be odds on to win after beating canterbury away this year but it's not that simple. Canterbury are a strong side with a good mix, it will be a close battle I think.
http://i120.photobucket.com/albums/o.../kakahitsm.jpg "The laughing bear, drives a motorcycle" - Israel Dagg, Sep - 2011 Cometh the hour, cometh the Don!
What time is the final there in NZ? I assume its on Saturday.
I'm annoyed that I only started really following ITM cup last week, but that Waikato/Auckland game was a cracker! Can't wait for the final, gonna be some great footy played
Soccer is a gentleman's game played by barbarians. Rugby is a barbarian's game played by gentlemen...and South Africans in BO'D we trust
When Steve Donald has played till the 80th minute, Waikato hasn't lost a match I'm picking Waikato to win it, unless Donald is ruled out/gets injured.
so true about don he is the key for waikato. The way he took the game in that last 30min or so and got Waikato going forward and ran in two trys. Not just in attack but he's been very strong on defence for a 10. Donald, Barlow and Leonard have been stellar for Waikato and if messam has another big game I find it hard to see Waikato not winning it. But canterbury have some strong players too. Nasi Manu has been very good, Robbie Fruen will be a handful without Kahui to look after him like he did in the last game, Crotty has been good too and Tom Taylor looks like a class act - maybe even future all black material.
I don't even rate Donald but agree he is pretty crucial for the mooloos. Look at what happened against the turbos when he wasn't there, a 50 point whipping. Can I just once again point out the flaws in this years competition.. Manawatu beat the team that finished 1st, and 3rd in the 'top' division, yet might not even be able to compete in the that division next year if they lose a final.. joke.
Originally Posted by donmcdazzle I don't even rate Donald but agree he is pretty crucial for the mooloos. Look at what happened against the turbos when he wasn't there, a 50 point whipping. Can I just once again point out the flaws in this years competition.. Manawatu beat the team that finished 1st, and 3rd in the 'top' division, yet might not even be able to compete in the that division next year if they lose a final.. joke. But were poor last year and suffered accordingly... Also, hoping Canterbury win this one or else the mooloo fan I know will be insufferable (even if they are from BOP...)
Hoping the Mooloos can take it, still feel gutted about last year.
Apple is the hair of my motor Yeah, pimped and ready to roll
Reckon with Messam's motivation, Donald's experience and Kerr-Barlow's form, we can do it :P Gonna be a sweet game whoever wins though, both teams from last year's final always means it's gonna be great. C'mon Mooloos!!
Originally Posted by Helmy But were poor last year and suffered accordingly... Also, hoping Canterbury win this one or else the mooloo fan I know will be insufferable (even if they are from BOP...) Well Wellington were poor this year and haven't suffered at all so that logic doesn't wash.
Originally Posted by donmcdazzle Well Wellington were poor this year and haven't suffered at all so that logic doesn't wash. No, because the situation is different this year and Wellington have been poor, but not as poor Southland. If Manawatu beat Hawke's Bay they will be rewarded for the same reason as they were dropped down a level this year. It's not so much as a joke as giving teams in the both divisions something else to strive for other than winning the competition: achieving promotion or avoiding relegation. Similarly, I don't see much difference in each division, other than finals (which probably mean a difference in payout for the teams as well). As Taranaki are sitting pretty with the Shield atm I couldn't really care less who wins out of Waikato and Canterbury (other than winding up a few mooloos I know), but I can't speak for the rest of NZ over what they care more about. Teams should be rightfully be judged season by season... The only flaw in the system I think is the first placed team should go straight up rather than playing a final to do so, but that doesn't equal $$$, which is the reason the NZRU had to change to this format in the first place. Given the fact they were considering booting certain teams out completely, including Manawatu, I'd say they've actually benefited greatly from this format and have shown that by a vast improvement that meant they thrashed Waikato at home.
Originally Posted by Helmy No, because the situation is different this year and Wellington have been poor, but not as poor Southland. If Manawatu beat Hawke's Bay they will be rewarded for the same reason as they were dropped down a level this year. It's not so much as a joke as giving teams in the both divisions something else to strive for other than winning the competition: achieving promotion or avoiding relegation. Similarly, I don't see much difference in each division, other than finals (which probably mean a difference in payout for the teams as well). As Taranaki are sitting pretty with the Shield atm I couldn't really care less who wins out of Waikato and Canterbury (other than winding up a few mooloos I know), but I can't speak for the rest of NZ over what they care more about. Teams should be rightfully be judged season by season... The only flaw in the system I think is the first placed team should go straight up rather than playing a final to do so, but that doesn't equal $$$, which is the reason the NZRU had to change to this format in the first place. Given the fact they were considering booting certain teams out completely, including Manawatu, I'd say they've actually benefited greatly from this format and have shown that by a vast improvement that meant they thrashed Waikato at home. That's my whole point though, with this format you don't really get judged season by season. Manawatu and Hawkes Bay are both much better sides than Wellington this year, however, Wellington are guaranteed to play in the top next year, only one of Manawatu or Hawkes Bay will which to me doesn't make sense. That's the way it is though my complaining isn;t going to change much unfortunately.
Yeah but you never know how a team is going to perform, and you can't keep chopping and changing every season.
Been at little disappointing so far, Canterbury leading 6-3 late in the first half
Refereeing has been poor mind. 9-3 H/T
Follow TRF on Twitter and Facebook
Originally Posted by TRF_Cymro Refereeing has been poor mind. 9-3 H/T Agreed, and I thought the 2007 RWC final was bad, but no points so far in the second half, both teams playing laterally, but then when somone does straighten the line on attack, they gain some ground but yet on the next attack they go back to the lateral movements again, getting fustrating. Yay, a penalty at last 12-3 Canterbury
[trolling mode]Booooo, Where is the running rugby? Were are those magnificent tries? Boooo, boring rugby, boooo!!!![/trolling mode]
Originally Posted by LordHope Agreed, and I thought the 2007 RWC final was bad, but no points so far in the second half, both teams playing laterally, but then when somone does straighten the line on attack, they gain some ground but yet on the next attack they go back to the lateral movements again, getting fustrating. Yay, a penalty at last 12-3 Canterbury Both teams were afraid to give the ball a throw about the park and went into their shell pretty quickly. Canterbury were the better team as Waikato just made constant handling errors.
just like last year, bad luck.
Ok game - both teams defended well, but their attack was far too lateral. Canterbury deserved the win though, as they were definitely the better team on the night.
frustrating game, gutted Waikato didn't win but it was a final and they didn't really play finals rugby. Canterbury never looked like scoring a try but they converted field position into points and had better dicapline. Waikato looked more likely to score but made mistakes the few chances they created and in the 2nd half they were just plain starved of the ball. Donald in particular looked strong but he hardly touched the ball in the 2nd half as the canterbury forwards swallowed the ball and won the last penalty to seal the game. Sivivatu was pretty poor when he came on. I think if they were going to play him he should have started. It was a very hard game and for the first half in particular was very fast with long periods of play. First ever national final without a try.
I'm sure I could probably do a better job refereeing than this referee did... He didn't even seem to know the rules at times. One thing that really frustrates me as both a supporter of Waikato and of rugby is when teams hold the ball at the back of a breakdown, and just leave it sitting there to eat up time (which teams do at the end of the game). Once the ball is available, a team should have to play it within five or so seconds, or they should get free kicked for wasting time. It's ridiculous, and is poor sportsmanship to just hold the ball there, as there is literally nothing the opposition can do. It's something that really needs to be eliminated from the game.
Last edited by Invictus; 05-09-11 at 04:05 AM.
Originally Posted by Invictus One thing that really frustrates me as both a supporter of Waikato and of rugby is when teams hold the ball at the back of a breakdown, and just leave it sitting there to eat up time (which teams do at the end of the game). Once the ball is available, a team should have to play it within or so seconds, or they should get free kicked for wasting time. It's ridiculous, and is poor sportsmanship to just hold the ball there, as there is literally nothing the opposition can do. It's something that really needs to be eliminated from the game. 100% Boring as hell, especially the last 2-3 minutes of a game, when teams do that I actually hope they stuff up and lose.
the interesting thing is that if a team has the ball sitting in the back of a ruck like that their is nothing in the rules to say they have to play it at all as far as I know. If a team wanted to they could hold it at the back forever. I'm still very concerned for the game of rugby while negative slow rugby wins over teams that want to play fast rugby, use the ball and speed up the game. The new rule interpretations that game in seem to mean nothing now. Early on they gave the attacking team the time and protection from oposition trying to slow the ball down but over time it's pretty much gone back to they way it used to be to the point where the advantage has swung back to the defending team at breakdowns. In many cases players are being allowed to be on the wrong side and tackles are not releasing the tackled player and giving them time to play the ball. Another thing I'm seeing a lot is players being penalised for "not releasing" in situations where an oposition player has got their hands on the ball yes but the tackled player isn't actually holding the ball. Like the defender isn't actually trying to get the ball, all they do is get their hands on it to win the penalty.
Originally Posted by Larksea the interesting thing is that if a team has the ball sitting in the back of a ruck like that their is nothing in the rules to say they have to play it at all as far as I know. If a team wanted to they could hold it at the back forever. I'm still very concerned for the game of rugby while negative slow rugby wins over teams that want to play fast rugby, use the ball and speed up the game. The new rule interpretations that game in seem to mean nothing now. Early on they gave the attacking team the time and protection from oposition trying to slow the ball down but over time it's pretty much gone back to they way it used to be to the point where the advantage has swung back to the defending team at breakdowns. In many cases players are being allowed to be on the wrong side and tackles are not releasing the tackled player and giving them time to play the ball. Another thing I'm seeing a lot is players being penalised for "not releasing" in situations where an oposition player has got their hands on the ball yes but the tackled player isn't actually holding the ball. Like the defender isn't actually trying to get the ball, all they do is get their hands on it to win the penalty. I think you're right, though I know of occasions where a team has been penalised for simply 'wasting time' and it really comes down to referee's discretion.
Originally Posted by Larksea frustrating game, gutted Waikato didn't win but it was a final and they didn't really play finals rugby. Canterbury never looked like scoring a try but they converted field position into points and had better dicapline. Waikato looked more likely to score but made mistakes the few chances they created and in the 2nd half they were just plain starved of the ball. Donald in particular looked strong but he hardly touched the ball in the 2nd half as the canterbury forwards swallowed the ball and won the last penalty to seal the game. Sivivatu was pretty poor when he came on. I think if they were going to play him he should have started. It was a very hard game and for the first half in particular was very fast with long periods of play. First ever national final without a try. I thought Donald had poor game. He did look dangerous at times when he took the ball to the line, but he continuously lost the ball - often when trying to force passes that weren't on (I counted 4 times he lost the ball, plus one forward pass by Donald). I agree Sivivatu looked poor - he just didn't seem to have any energy, and was consistently driven back whenever he got the ball. I'm a bit worried that he may well do 'Rupeni Caucau' when he goes to France and put on 20 kg - he was certainly carrying some weight at the start of the Super Rugby season. Incidentally I hope Romana Graham gets suspended for his head-butt on Sean Maitland during the match (I think the hearing is tonight). He is a bit of a thug really, and he also got away with a blatant shoulder charge in the game.
Originally Posted by darwin_23 I thought Donald had poor game. He did look dangerous at times when he took the ball to the line, but he continuously lost the ball - often when trying to force passes that weren't on (I counted 4 times he lost the ball, plus one forward pass by Donald). I agree Sivivatu looked poor - he just didn't seem to have any energy, and was consistently driven back whenever he got the ball. I'm a bit worried that he may well do 'Rupeni Caucau' when he goes to France and put on 20 kg - he was certainly carrying some weight at the start of the Super Rugby season. Incidentally I hope Romana Graham gets suspended for his head-butt on Sean Maitland during the match (I think the hearing is tonight). He is a bit of a thug really, and he also got away with a blatant shoulder charge in the game. Larksea was always going to plug Donald regardless of his performance.
