Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

Highlanders bolster forward pack for Blues while ex-NZ U20 first five gets debut

(Photo by Dianne Manson/Getty Images)

The Highlanders have made three changes to their starting side, all up front in the forward pack, as they prepare to face the Blues in Melbourne in Super round.

ADVERTISEMENT

Bolstering the tight five is All Black prop Ethan de Groot and veteran Jermaine Ainsley, who start alongside Henry Bell up front. Last week’s try-scoring tighthead Saula Ma’u and Dan Lienert-Brown move to the bench.

In the second row, Max Hicks has been named to start with Pari Pari Parkinson while Fabian Holland moves to the bench as lock cover.

Video Spacer
Video Spacer

The back row of Sean Withy, Billy Harmon and Hugh Renton remains unchanged with bench cover from Nikora Broughton.

Unsurprisingly, there are no changes to last week’s backline that lit up Forsyth Barr with a scintillating performance.

Folau Fakatava partners Rhys Patchell in the halves, Sam Gilbert continues his move to No 12 alongside ex-Blues centre Tanielu Tele’a, while the back three is Jona Nareki, Jacob Ratumaitavuki-Kneepkens and Timoci Tavatavanawai.

Replacing Cam Miller on the bench is last year’s New Zealand U20 first five-eighth Ajay Faleafaga who will deputise for Welsh international Patchell.

ADVERTISEMENT

“I’m pleased with the strides the team has made, but there’s always room for growth. We’re aiming to build on our performance from round one and meet the challenge in Melbourne,” head coach Clarke Dermody said.

Highlanders team to play Blues

1. Ethan de Groot
2. Henry Bell
3. Jermaine Ainsley
4. Pari Pari Parkinson
5. Max Hicks
6. Sean Withy
7. Billy Harmon (C)
8. Hugh Renton
9. Folau Fakatava
10. Rhys Patchell
11. Jona Nareki
12. Sam Gilbert (VC)
13. Tanielu Tele’a
14. Timoci Tavatavanawai
15. Jacob Ratumaitavuki-Kneepkens

Reserves

16. Ricky Jackson
17. Daniel Lienert-Brown
18. Saula Ma’u
19. Fabian Holland
20. Nikora Broughton
21. Nathan Hastie
22. Ajay Faleafaga*
23. Jonah Lowe

*Super Rugby Pacific debut

ADVERTISEMENT

Boks Office | Episode 37 | Six Nations Round 4 Review

Cape Town | Leg 2 | Day 2 | HSBC Challenger Series 2025 | Full Day Replay

Gloucester-Hartpury vs Bristol Bears | PWR 2024/25 | Full Match Replay

Boks Office | Episode 36 | Six Nations Round 3 Review

Why did Scotland's Finn Russell take the crucial kick from the wrong place? | Whistle Watch

England A vs Ireland A | Full Match Replay

Kubota Spears vs Shizuoka BlueRevs | JRLO 2024/2025 | Full Match Replay

Watch now: Lomu - The Lost Tapes

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

P
Poorfour 47 minutes ago
Antoine Dupont undergoes surgery on injured knee ahead of long absence

So “it wasn’t foul play because it wasn’t foul play” is - to you - not only an acceptable answer but the only possible answer?


I would hope that the definition of foul play is clear enough that they can say “that wasn’t foul play - even though it resulted in a serious injury - because although player A did not wrap with the right arm, he entered the ruck through the gate and from a legal angle at a legal height, and was supporting his own weight until player B entered the ruck behind him and pushed him onto player C’s leg” or “that wasn’t foul play although players D and E picked player F out of a ruck, tipped him upside down and dropped him on his shoulder because reasons.”


Referees sometimes offer a clear explanation, especially when in discussion with the TMO, but they don’t always, especially for incidents that aren’t reviewed on field. It’s also a recognised flaw in the bunker system that there isn’t an explanation of the card decisions - I’d personally prefer the bunker to prepare a short package of the best angles and play back to the ref their reasoning, with the ref having the final say, like an enhanced TMO. It would cost a few more seconds, but would help the crowd to understand.


Greater clarity carries with it risks - not least that if the subsequent feedback is at odds with the ref’s decision they run the risk of harassment on social media - but rugby is really struggling to show that it can manage these decisions consistently, and offering a clear explanation after the fact would help to ensure better consistency in officiating in future.

9 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING Ex-England star's hat-trick helps Force to Super win over Fijian Drua Ex-England star's hat-trick helps Force to Super win over Fijian Drua
Search