Super XV wrap: Final pool standings.

First topic message reminder :

So the pool rounds have come to an end and the final dye has been cast.

There were some upsets in the last pool rounds, with the Chiefs controversially going down to the Hurricanes with a last minute "try or no try" decision that would suggest the Chiefs were unlucky not to top the overall log.

The Blues dealt the death blow to Jake White's brave youngsters as they came up with only their 4th win of the season, to allow the door ajar for the Reds to top the Australian conference if they could beat the Waratahs who has been having their worst season since 2007.

Final Log without bye log points.

Spoiler:

Final Conference Log without bye log points.

Spoiler:

So in the first round of play offs the Sharks wil travel to play the Reds and the Bulls will travel to play the Crusaders.

Based on form, I would think the Bulls have little chance of upsetting the Crusaders at home, although it has to be said the Crusaders have shown some vulnerabilities this season. The Bulls have struggled all season to alter their attack against teams that match them physically in the pack.

The Sharks and Reds is harder to call, the Sharks would have had a better chance if Frans Steyn could be there, but due to the fact that he wasn't on the Sharks team roster at the beginning of the season, he is excluded from competing in the knock out rounds.

Stormer will have the week off and wait to see who they meet in the semi finals - Crusaders/Bulls
Chiefs will have the week off and wait to see who they meet in the semi finals - Reds/Sharks.

All to play for now.

I know I have been harping on how I don't like the conference system, but this season proves once again, the guaranteed spot in the play offs has aided the Reds who are in fact 6th on the log, to earn a home quarter final. PErhaps this needs to be revised, is it right to have a home quarter final against a team that is higher ranked than you?

Indeed the Crusaders beat the Bulls pretty decisively on Saturday. Not to tarnish the Crusaders victory, but for the Bulls to play that kind of game plan, they need the right horses pulling the wagon, so to speak. Right now, the Bulls horses are a little long in the tooth, a little tired, weaker than past years, a little scruffy, have a touch of mange, and certainly don't have the right drivers pointing them down the right road.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:I've always appreciated the rhythmic abilities of the Sharks' cheerleaders. The Sharks have always been my favourite team because of their great support. So I wish to get in behind their support.

I presume you mean you support the Sharks and are happy they also have some fine, healthy, wholesome young ladies to cheer them on? All very spiritual, of course.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:I do Mr Fishpaste. Crusaders all the way.

I've always appreciated the rhythmic abilities of the Sharks' cheerleaders. The Sharks have always been my favourite team because of their great support. So I wish to get in behind their support.

Here's hoping the Chiefs win. Would be nice to see them eliminate little England...........

Spoiler:

I never heard Canterbury referred to as Little England. Is that how some people look at them? Or is it because both are so good at Rugby............

Nothing little about the most successful franchise. Going to be a great game. Much like a North vs South AB trial. Will Cruden and SBW be allowed to run havoc like in the 3rd Irish test? Who can get on top in the forwards?

I support the sharks because they have a more attacking style of rugby. Nothing to do with their cheerleaders doc. Don't know where you got that from.

It's been around for at least 10 years. My take is that it started with them being the most English of cities in NZ. No offense meant to yourself of course.

Kia, I'm with you on the benefits of a Sharks home game.....

No offense taken, of course.
If Christchurch wants to be more closely identified with the loving embrace of Mother England, then I am duty bound to help. Caring is sharing, after all.

How strange...Natal (from whence cometh the Sharks) was known for a while as 'The Last British Outpost'.

Well, I look forward to a final between the Last British Outpost and Little England

aaaah, now it all makes sense and all is right with the world! And also no wonder Sharks and Crusaders are so good at Rugby.
No matter who wins, Sharks or Crusaders, a victory for Queen and country. Mother England welcomes all her children home to her loving bosom.

doctor_grey wrote:aaaah, now it all makes sense and all is right with the world! And also no wonder Sharks and Crusaders are so good at Rugby.
No matter who wins, Sharks or Crusaders, a victory for Queen and country. Mother England welcomes all her children home to her loving bosom.

Gotta love your sense of imperialism Doc.

And the humour of course.

humour?

doctor_grey wrote:humour?

Sorry I mean't pride and sincerety.

Only funny thing is England trying to pattern their style of play on that of the Bulls with young Farrell in the Steyn role.

Yeah and we need to get Steyn outta there

Oh, wait. That's really not funny.

But, I think I agree somewhat with Mr. Fishpaste in that I think a Crusaders-Sharks final would be the most entertaining. Before the first round matches Saturday I thought the Sharks are playing the best of the final six teams. Of course, with the normal course of events that would jinx the Sharks. But. let's see. All four remaining teams are quality.

It is a little bit ironic yes, but you're correct it isn't funny.

Funny how you countered what I was saying, and hit it on the nose each time.

Hehe, I am sharp today Doc.

It pains me to say it, but I think the Sharks will beat the Stormers at Newlands next week. They have run into their best form at just the right time. That said Vermeulen may be back, which will strengthen the Stormers pack. it will be one hell of a game in any case. In the other one I fancy the Chiefs to bring it and have too much attacking threat for the Crusaders to keep out.

doctor_grey wrote:Funny how you countered what I was saying, and hit it on the nose each time.

Not really funny, but uncanny?

not uncanny, but weird. Really weird.
But you know the olde expression: Sick minds think alike.

DHLS07,
I think both matches have the potential to be terrific. Good clash of styles with both teams. I think the Sharks are the best of them at this moment in time, but the differences between them are small.

Next weekend will be a lot of fun.

Fun, yes, but also nervous for me as a Stormers fan. The team have come through despite losing a lot of forwards to injury this season, so to fall at this hurdle would be heartbreaking.

Sorry, didn't know Stormers are your team. The thing which has impressed me is how they have continued to grind out win after win. Playing to their strengths and having complete confidence in them. Not losing the plot even once this season. Perhaps its a little hard to compare them to other teams since they play a fairly an unflashy style.

No need to apologies. We need to keep the game tight against the Sharks and we need to be more physical than they. Vermeulen playing would be massive for us, as he is a powerful guy who can stop the Sharks carriers before they get going.

I think you need to find a way to shut down Michelak. He is playing better than he has for years, and is really going well.

The conundrum for SA' chance to win lies with having a home final.

So we would prefer a home final, but the inform team is without a shadow of a doubt the Sharks.

I believe the Crusaders are going to win their semi final, and in finals rugby they have never been defeated at home.

If the Sharks win they will have had to travel from Durban to Australia to SA to NZ to win, that in itself is an almost impossible task.

For the Stormers to win, they don't have to go anywhere, but the biggest concern with the Stormers is they have only once gone pas 28 points in a match this season, both the Chiefs and Crusaders have both gone past that 7 times this season.

So for the Stormers they would have to have a brilliant defesive game.

At home the Stormers can shut both the Crusaders and Chiefs out enough to win the game.

biltongbek wrote:So for the Stormers they would have to have a brilliant defesive game.

True. But they have been brilliant on defense most of the season. Plus if they play Chiefs or Crusaders, those teams will have to travel. Same issue as for Sharks.

Strange, but no matter how much I look at these matches and the possibilities for the finals, I still see different results every time. That's how close these are. I truly believe, however, if Sharks were home throughout as Stormers are, they would be favourites.

Agree doc.

I'm struggling to see anybody beating the Crusaders in these knockout games to be honest. They are just too canny, and McCaw is still the best player on the planet bar none.

Agree that the Crusaders play smart rugby and work out how best to play each opponent, but they are still beatable and are not as good as Crusaders sides of the past. If the Stormers make the final I'd be more worried about facing the Chiefs

ANY team is beatable were it not for the fact the NZ sides knocked each other out instead of having gimmes in there last matches.The Stormers would probably have had to travel to NZ.Read is unlikely to feature so Captain Tackles remains at 8,but he is in the form of his life.Matt Todd at 7 fine with me,George Whitelock a much underated 6.A very solid set piece,an excellent defence,if they go with Maitland and Guildford with Dagg in the back 3.Midfield Adam Whitelock at 13 is getting close to Conrad Smith class,before SBW there was Ryan Crotty.After SBW there was Ryan Crotty,Dan Carter is still the man,and Ellis is very underated.A tight match but I think this will be who keeps the scoreboard ticking.Stormers have relied on defence and Goal kicking ,but the Crusaders are also formidable defenders in depth if any team can go to Cape town and win the Crusaders can as they proved last year.

Think I agree with you there emack. Even though I'm a chiefs supporter, I think NZ's best chance lies with the crusaders. Crusaders monstered the chiefs line out in their previous game, although Clarke was out with flu. Hope the chiefs have worked on the line out for this game.

Article on the chiefs line out below. Also mentions Matfield used to lock himself in a soundproof room watching footage of opponents with sound cranked up to figure out opponents calls.


http://m.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=10821372

Yes the lineout is the Chiefs archilles heel it was so bad earlier. Remember that prior to the last two games Chiefs were forth on both attack AND defences stats and for most of the season had less tries against. No one was anywhere near that.

If they had have beaten the Canes and the Saders in the two very close matches at the end they would be sitting so high on the table it would be dizzy. Having lost them both I think works in their favour in terms of motivation. Forcus remains on the prima donna Crusaders and people arent figuring them in as perhaps they might have.

Plus theres the Smith/ Rennie factor. the two vs Blackadder- who has still yet to win one of these despite the Saders fantastic efforts last 3 years.

Smith knows the saders players just as much as Blackadder and will know their weaknesses, if any, and how to exploit them. I believe the Kerr-Barlow, Cruden, SBW factor will be crucial here, as will goal kicking. But primarily I think Smith will apply an Ireland like second test in your face defence on the Saders who wont get the space they need to score the tries they need.

The front five is I think where the saders will win it looking at the Bulls match but if the Chiefs manage to last on that count theyll have a chance.

Home ground at Hamilton is a small plus but the saders have done it all away in the past- however- NOT in the last 3- fallen off in the offshore matches.

So based on that, this is anyones match.

I have thought about this in depth, and I believe the Sharks will beat the Stormers next weekend.

When you consider that the Sharks have been playing finals rugby since their return after their trip to the Antipodes, they have only had one blip, against the Lions, they are a team high on confidence, a number of players in sublime form and hungry.

I know the odds are stacked against them due to the travelling involved, but the Stormers have struggled to dispatch teams over the last few weeks and although they have some injury concerns, very few of their playerscare in top form.

Yes the injuries dont look good. That would be up there in terms of against the grain and I still think the Stormers will have enough to suffocate them but agree, the Sharks are certainly the better side, and oddly, they match a team we would rather play here at home than a Stormers meeting in SA.

Agree with you on Steyn as usual. He's become the new Smit who was also selected based on either his influence and 'better days' for perhaps a year too long.

Steyn has been consistently poor for the Bulls and for SA against England, offers no options when things turn sour as it did against the saders. The ability to select players and make tough decisions seems to be a poor trait at key times.

Back here we have Dagg saying hes well aware of threat of Ben Smith and Andre Taylor and the knowledge that each time hes given the jersey its for that match only. Yet the current selectors wouldnt dream of dropping him yet.

Yet players like Steyn continue to do the same old thing again and again and are let to get away with it. Its both a player and selector mindset that just shouldnt be tolerated.

Its simple...if he plays bad...drop him. Thats how players learn to shape up or ship out.

Regarding Steyn, I don't know if there are any alternatives at Bulls to challenge there. In SA, though, there are good young options and this November may be the time to try them out.

I am not sure the home match against the Bulls was a great yardstick with which to measure the Crusaders. Clearly a team in need of transition, the currrent Bulls team is not a match for the team of just two years ago. I think the Sharks were much more dominant against the Bulls a few weeks ago than the Crusaders were on Saturday. What does that mean for a match between Chiefs and Crusaders? Not much, not a Shark in sight. And what does that mean for the Stormers - Sharks match? About the same. Every team has flaws.

Using a line that an American sportscaster made into his tag-line:
That's why they play the games.....

I thought the referees were going to be announced today, has anyone seen anything?

Not yet.

doctor_grey wrote:Regarding Steyn, I don't know if there are any alternatives at Bulls to challenge there.

I think it runs deeper than that Doc. The team gameplan is based around a sound Steyn performance and a robust pack which as Biltong agrees falls flat when theyre matched up front. So they have a side that has a winning game- to a certain level, then both go to the pack.

They don't even try alternatives. Meyer had him on the field for the entire 240 minutes of the England series- despite him being mediocre at best.

Players improve their performance when their non selection tells them theyre not up to scratch. Playing Steyn adnauseum regardless of his performance is saying to him..."no worries, maybe you'll get better next time", so he hopes he does- he doesnt go through the soul seaching, stomach churning embarrassment of being dropped and being forced to make career decisons about whether he wants to continue at the top, and more importantly what he needs to do to get there.

Nonu was put through that by missing Ireland. Hes responded and was part of the Blues late revival. Yes they had SBW but this is about the individuals performance- not the team.

In the end, like Smit, the end will come simply after one loss more than the average Joe can stomach, and more often than not that will be either a losing semi like last week, or for the boks against the AB's, and Steyn has not had a good match vs AB's for a considerable length of time.

aucklandlaurie wrote:
I thought the referees were going to be announced today, has anyone seen anything?

Joubert is doing the Chiefs v Crusaders game, and Walsh is in charge of Stormers v Sharks.

Taylor,
Great points. I hadn't thought of in quite that way before. No apparent alternatives to Steyn at Bulls, but then again no one else gets game time. But with the Boks, there are options, and it is puzzling why no one else gets a run. Across SA Rugby there is some fine young talent and proven experienced options.

Getting dropped can work in different ways. Can be incentive to improve. Or sometimes time away is needed simply to reflect without the constant pressure to perform.

I agree the Bulls game plan works only if the forwards are equivalent or superior to the opposition. And it is clear there appears to be no 'Plan B' when this doesn't work. But is this because Steyn can't really do anything else? Or because the coaches won't even try to put in a more attacking game plan? Both? Almost every team from national sides to low level clubs have a secondary game plan for when they need to chase the opposition. From what I have seen watching Super Rugby and the Internationals, the kick, chase, physical game is the only one I recall seeing him play. This is puzzling for me because the back three for Bulls are good attacking options. And the Boks have handy attackers across the all backs from 11-15.

Just read about Bjorn Basson. sounds fairly horrific. only caught the second half. what happened to him?

He went up for a kick and made contact with a Crusaders player whilst they were both going for the ball, I thought at the time it could have been a knee.

Purely accidental though.

ouch!!!

What came first? Bulls success and the way Morné Steyn played or Morné Steyn and the way he played and then Bulls success? It's irrelevant. Either way, Morné Steyn knows how to play only one way. He couldn't ignite even an engine. I hear he has a chauffeur to do the driving. That way he can rest his kicking boot.

The question you have to ask is would Steyn be in the side if he were an average goalkicker? You'd hope the answer would be no.

I dont think either the Chiefs or Crusaders would have any dis/advantage with Joubert reffing in Hamilton, However I cant help but think that Walsh in Capetown would be more to the likeing of the Sharks.

Has there been any news on a JP Peterson citing? He did appear to rake the eyes of Higginbottom inside the opening couple of minutes after bundling the big man into touch (causing a brief scuffle and the Reds 8 to protest to the officials). The camera angle looked damning but the touch judge wasn't far away and gave nothing.

If he's banned that could be a massive blow for the Sharks as he was one of their best players on the day.

it was a slap sam, after he was bullied by higginbotham.

McCaw's shown himself to be a pretty handy number 8. Has anyone noticed anything over the last two weeks that he didn't do so well in that position?

Can Read play 6? Or is he best left at 8 for ABs?