Bulls rock Thread

only the semi's and final ..... read the whole article, it's not at all about the Bulls 'winning anywhere' but how much money is gonna be lost for one and how many season / suite ticket holders are gonna be up in arms.
 
Mephisto_Helix said:
only the semi's and final ..... read the whole article, it's not at all about the Bulls 'winning anywhere' but how much money is gonna be lost for one and how many season / suite ticket holders are gonna be up in arms.
Click to expand...

Finals and semi's are not included in season ticket holders "tickets" iirc.

Also I am sure money will be payed out to the BBRU for having to relocate for the finals and semis. Well I hope so :o
 
It's the next 3 matches though -
could be a financial headache for the Bulls in particular who have to host three crowd-pulling matches against the Lions, Sharks and log-leaders Crusaders over the next three weekends.
Click to expand...
- so 5 (potential) matches are being lost to the Bulls. And in my view: Bulls at Loftus = 99% unbeatable .... Bulls away from Loftus = 80% unbeatable so it's a huge thing for them to have so many matches potentially yanked from home no?
 
It is not Loftus that makes them unbeatable, it is the highveld and if they paly anywhere in the highveld they will still be as strong as when they play at Loftus
 
Bakkies to start, Russouw moving to the bench.
Fourie to start again.
Hougaard to start on wing as Akona is out for the rest of the season with a broken leg.
JL Potgieter to start on inside centre, Olivier to move to outside centre.
Stegman in for Khuun (rotation policy).
 
This weekend has some tough games. Cannot wait to watch the Stormers & Saders!
 
What an awesome weekend for sport. Bulls, Stormers & Chelsea!

And as for the Bulls, they just keep coming & coming & coming!!! :D
 
Well done to the stormers for killing the crusaders and strengtening both our pisitions at the top :)

Well done bulls, one more point and we are almost 100% sure of place in the semis. One more victory and we are almost sure of a home semi :D

Good to see the bulls not lose focus. Good game by Potgieter(flanker) although he should really get a freaking hair cut he looks like a bit of an aussie. Well done to JL Potgieter on a great outing in the position of inside inside centre.

The one try we scored was because Olivier learned to pass! With this new weapon added to his aresenal he will surely now rule the universe....

Zane actually impressed me in the way he joined the atacking lines and the way he still did the "normal" full back duties.
 
Devill said:
Good game by Potgieter(flanker) although he should really get a freaking hair cut
...
The one try we scored was because Olivier learned to pass!
Click to expand...

Wynand and Dewald are taking guitar lessons together and have already been asked up to play with Prime Circle. Wynand fancies himself as quite the rocker and his old China Dewald is coming along for a heavy metal ride. I think they have even started a band this year. Haircuts are not on the menu for the moment...
 
GreGorGy said:
Wynand and Dewald are taking guitar lessons together and have already been asked up to play with Prime Circle. Wynand fancies himself as quite the rocker and his old China Dewald is coming along for a heavy metal ride. I think they have even started a band this year. Haircuts are not on the menu for the moment...
Click to expand...

Uncool man ...uncool and not groovy at all :p
 
Just want to hear, what was the consensus on the final try... I personally think that it should have gone to the TMO, doesn't matter if the end call was correct but a game and season changing try like that needs to be a 100% accurate call...

To me it seems like the ball hit the Bulls players face and went forward? Wouldn't that make it a knock on or offside by Hougard?
 
SlyFly said:
Just want to hear, what was the consensus on the final try... I personally think that it should have gone to the TMO, doesn't matter if the end call was correct but a game and season changing try like that needs to be a 100% accurate call...

To me it seems like the ball hit the Bulls players face and went forward? Wouldn't that make it a knock on or offside by Hougard?
Click to expand...

Agreed on TMO.

However, on replay the linesman's observtion is correct that "it went backwards off the Crusaders' player (hand)"...however, it is still a forward pass because the ball was already passed in a forward direction when it left the passer's hand to when it hit the hand of Crusader.

No different to a player losing bll forward, it hits an opposing player and the player who lost ball regathers. Once it hit the other player, its the same as hiiting ground. So even if this pass was regathered by the passer of ball after it hit Crusaders' hand...still forward/knock on whatever.

Very poor decision, because if Stormers win both remaining games Bulls could have finished as low as third.
 
So, the Bulls will be playing at Orlando Stadium on 22 May. Are people excited? I think that it will be a great day in SA rugby. I just hope that the Blue Bulls Comapny get the logistics right. Metrorail trains from Pretoria to Soweto would seem best, with maybe a park and ride from Nasrec. Rea Vaya also goes to Orlando Stadium, so it can work, it's just about getting the plan set and informing everyone.
 
OzzieCapie said:
Agreed on TMO.

However, on replay the linesman's observtion is correct that "it went backwards off the Crusaders' player (hand)"...however, it is still a forward pass because the ball was already passed in a forward direction when it left the passer's hand to when it hit the hand of Crusader.

No different to a player losing bll forward, it hits an opposing player and the player who lost ball regathers. Once it hit the other player, its the same as hiiting ground. So even if this pass was regathered by the passer of ball after it hit Crusaders' hand...still forward/knock on whatever.

Very poor decision, because if Stormers win both remaining games Bulls could have finished as low as third.
Click to expand...

I was under the impression that they are only allowed to use the TMO for decisions at the goal line?
 
SlyFly said:
Just want to hear, what was the consensus on the final try... I personally think that it should have gone to the TMO, doesn't matter if the end call was correct but a game and season changing try like that needs to be a 100% accurate call...

To me it seems like the ball hit the Bulls players face and went forward? Wouldn't that make it a knock on or offside by Hougard?
Click to expand...

I agree TMO should ahve made the call but the correct call was made.

OzzieCapie said:
Agreed on TMO.

However, on replay the linesman's observtion is correct that "it went backwards off the Crusaders' player (hand)"...however, it is still a forward pass because the ball was already passed in a forward direction when it left the passer's hand to when it hit the hand of Crusader.

Very poor decision, because if Stormers win both remaining games Bulls could have finished as low as third.
Click to expand...

:erm: No.

Have a look http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6hYXtwc_L4

Start it at 3:35. The bulls player clearly passes when Hougaard is still behind him. Also the crusaders player is behind him! How the hell do call that a forward pass?

Ps why is no one asking why McCaw did not get a Yellow card for deliberately knocking down the ball from fourie's hands while on the ground?
 
Devill said:
:erm: No.

Have a look http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6hYXtwc_L4

Start it at 3:35. The bulls player clearly passes when Hougaard is still behind him. Also the crusaders player is behind him! How the hell do call that a forward pass?
Click to expand...

That is not the best footage ( I have seen it from other angles too) though it still doesn't support your view.

Hougaard is behind him, yes. The Crusader is ahead of him (if you manage to see a straighter angled shot), so he tries to pass the ball 'around' the crusader. Freeze it at 3:41/42 then you can see where ball is going out of hand...forward. It then hits the hand of Crusader and actually bounces back against head of guy who passed it (not sure you can see that on this footage)...it has to bounce back because the head of passer is behind the Crusader's hand. It then bounces to Hougaard who by now is ahead of both the passer and the Crusader.

There are actually three things wrong with view of linesman:

The ball goes out of hand in forward direction...the hands are pointing forward, whatever happens after that means its still forward.
It bounces back against head of Bulls passer. Has to bounce back (towards Bulls goal line) because of where the head is in relation to hand. So double knock on, i.e. forward out of hand, followed by Crusader knock on.
It bounces towards Crusader goal line from head of Bulls passer to Hougaard ahead of the bulls passer...offside.

At best a scrum for first infringement, at worst a penalty for offside, in any view it ws incorrectly interpreted.
 
OzzieCapie said:
That is not the best footage ( I have seen it from other angles too) though it still doesn't support your view.

Hougaard is behind him, yes. The Crusader is ahead of him (if you manage to see a straighter angled shot), so he tries to pass the ball 'around' the crusader. Freeze it at 3:41/42 then you can see where ball is going out of hand...forward. It then hits the hand of Crusader and actually bounces back against head of guy who passed it (not sure you can see that on this footage)...it has to bounce back because the head of passer is behind the Crusader's hand. It then bounces to Hougaard who by now is ahead of both the passer and the Crusader.

There are actually three things wrong with view of linesman:

The ball goes out of hand in forward direction...the hands are pointing forward, whatever happens after that means its still forward.
It bounces back against head of Bulls passer. Has to bounce back (towards Bulls goal line) because of where the head is in relation to hand. So double knock on, i.e. forward out of hand, followed by Crusader knock on.
It bounces towards Crusader goal line from head of Bulls passer to Hougaard ahead of the bulls passer...offside.

At best a scrum for first infringement, at worst a penalty for offside, in any view it ws incorrectly interpreted.
Click to expand...

Picture one: http://mybroadband.co.za/photos/showphoto.php/photo/15935/title/yes-the-guy-behind-the/cat/all
Picture two: http://mybroadband.co.za/photos/showphoto.php/photo/15937/title/bulls-vs-crusaders-2/cat/all (Look kids on this one you can see he is actually now passing the ball.....)

In picture two you can clearly see hougaard is still behind the man passing (maku). NO offside.

Now how do you pass forward if you pass it against the opposing players hand that is clearly not infront of you?
 
Devill said:
Picture one: http://mybroadband.co.za/photos/showphoto.php/photo/15935/title/yes-the-guy-behind-the/cat/all
Picture two: http://mybroadband.co.za/photos/showphoto.php/photo/15937/title/bulls-vs-crusaders-2/cat/all (Look kids on this one you can see he is actually now passing the ball.....)

In picture two you can clearly see hougaard is still behind the man passing (maku). NO offside.

Now how do you pass forward if you pass it against the opposing players hand that is clearly not infront of you?
Click to expand...

;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X