Match Highlights - Crusaders cruise past Sharks to book Hurricanes semi-final
Defending Super Rugby champions the Crusaders booked a mouth-watering semi-final clash with the Hurricanes as they eased to a 40-10 victory over the Sharks.
A mismatch always looked on the cards in Saturday's contest between a team that finished top of the overall standings and the Sharks, who snuck into the final play-off spot on points difference.
And so it proved as the Crusaders pulled clear in the second half to move within a win of a second successive final.
The hosts ran in five tries to ensure they will welcome the Hurricanes to Christchurch next week for what promises to be an enticing meeting between the competition's last two champions.
Bryn Hall and David Havili crossed in the first half for Crusaders, while Richie Mo'unga added two penalties, although Jacobus van Wyk's try gave the Sharks hope.
Continue reading below...
But Matt Todd went over for the Crusaders' third shortly after the second-half restart, before Mo'unga and Robert du Preez traded penalties, and the last line of the Sharks defence was consistently challenged as the game threatened to turn into a rout.
The visitors could not withstand the stream of Crusaders attacks, however, and Braydon Ennor and Peter Samu rounded things off for the holders, for whom a greater test lies in wait next week.
Latest Comments
Agreed. Borthwick will have to write a new excuse book soon .
I have looked at the two world cup final teams from 2003 and 2020.
2003 team scored 187 tries between them in 389 caps
2020 team scored 113 tries between them in 473 caps. As you can see a huge disparity in scoring rate. Only Johnny May with 36 tries in 78 caps scored a higher amount of tries. Elliot Daly comes close but the rest are frankly very poor.
Farrell and Ford scored a pathetic 20 tries between them in a combined 210 caps.
There again , the 2003 team did have Wilko and Greenwood etc whereas 2020 team had Ford and Farrell .
So much people saying that Fords strength is of bringing others into the game .
Really. The figures totally disprove that notion .
It has been mentioned elsewhere that we have accepted mediocrity far too often and the figures would indicate that players are or have been picked far too often without performing .
Not disputing that NZ are ahead of Eng. Also not saying Eng are unlucky (though clearly the tone of the article is not that the ABs were unlucky but that they 'should have' won). Your team are looking great and are on the up. I just felt that Pundits have argued Eng 'should have' won the first test against the ABs, when it's more nuanced than that, and very fine margins determine results that Eng didn't get right. Same applies, therefore, to NZ and other nations. Ben Smith though doesn't seem to see it that way. To be clear: I'm not saying I agree with the 'should haves', but more that I take issue with the phrasing.
Good to see your respect for other nations is so strong! Proper rugby fan you are!!!
Go to comments