Understanding Barritt’s value

Written by Rob Otto (robdylan)

Posted in :In the news, Sharks, Super 14 on 24 Apr 2008 at 08:37

It’s not often that I come across an article that completely sums up everything that I believe and puts my thoughts down in better words than I could myself.

Even more surprising is finding such an article written by Ryan Vrede of, a journalist whose knowledge and style I have often criticised in the past. That said, I have no option but to pay him the greatest compliment that I can; repeating his article here, verbatim. Take a bow, Mr Vrede, for a superb piece of work.

Sharks centre Brad Barritt’s true value will only be realised in his absence.

Despite being pencilled in to face the Waratahs on Saturday, reports suggest that Barritt is unlikely to pass a late fitness test. His critics view this as a blessing in disguise.

Those detractors, in their rhetoric, have tried to convince themselves and others that Barritt is an average player and is surplus to requirements at the Sharks.

They base their views on the fact that one very seldom sees his impact in the same way you would see positive contributions from Frans Steyn, Ryan Kankowski or Keegan Daniel, for example. These are men who are always at the forefront whatever is visibly good about a Sharks performance, whether that be with scything linebreaks, superb ball carries or colossal work at the breakdown.

The flaw in the Barritt argument, however, is that a team of Steyn, Kankowski, or Daniel clones would be one who would lose far more than they’d win given the inconsistent nature of most prodigies. We are quick to praise the visible, but often fail to acknowledge those who make invaluable contributions that are unseen.

In a recent interview with former Bulls head coach Heyneke Meyer, asked about the value of a player like Barritt.

“Those sorts of players are absolutely crucial to any team,” Meyer said. “Barritt has never set the world alight but he is their heartbeat and just never has a bad game.

“I suppose if you’re looking for a player to do something really special for you in matches he won’t be where your thoughts go to first. That said, it’s imperative that you have players that you know will never let you down, the type of guys who are composed no matter how much pressure you are under, and Barritt’s like that.

“I really respect his ability and the role he plays for the Sharks. They build their backline play around him and you’ll notice his absence immediately if he is not there.”

Barritt was substituted in the 52nd minute of the match against the Brumbies. His loss had a patent effect, with the Sharks conceding 17 of the 27 points they did, and losing much of the attacking and defensive structure that made the first 40 minutes arguably the best they’ve had in the tournament.

For the last two seasons Barritt has made all the defensive and attacking calls in the backline. Even when Springbok flyhalf Butch James was with the Sharks, Barritt called the shots, and James was happy to defer, accepting that Barritt has one of the best rugby brains in South Africa and superb vision to complement that intelligence.

“He is absolutely crucial to our cause, losing him would be a massive blow,” Sharks backline coach Grant Bashford said. This explains why they continue to hold onto the hope that he’ll recover in time for the Waratahs.

“From an organisational and structural point of view he is irreplaceable. Brad has come in for a lot of criticism but I think that shows a poor understanding of the game by those critics. All the best teams in world sport have or had players who’ve operated in the shadows, which allow those around them to shine. For us that’s Brad.”

As South Africans our fascination with prodigies is perplexing. We want a 15 Steyns or Ruan Pienaars and look down at those players who don’t possess the game-breaking ability of those players and their ilk. Out of sight equals average for those critics.

Effective combinations, elite coaches will tell you, is crucial to the success of any side. Flyhalf Frederic Michalak excelled in the first half of the Canberra clash and praise for the Frenchman was widespread. Yet nobody acknowledged Barritt’s role in performance. Michalak disappeared in the second half. No coincidence here that Barritt was on the sideline for the vast majority of that time.

With players like Michalak, Ruan Pienaar, Waylon Murray, JP Pietersen and Odwa Ndungane, the Sharks have a plethora of players more that home in the limelight than they are running things backstage. Barritt is the yin to their yang.

Manchester United football legend Sir Bobby Charlton once said: “Great players are those you do the basics right all of the time , not those who do great things some of the time.”

That’s Barritt summed up for you.


  • I thought I was the only one who noticed how the Sharks went to pieces defensively the moment Brad went off.

  • Comment 1, posted at 24.04.08 08:39:27 by robdylan (Sharks Forever!) Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
  • ” Brad has come in for a lot of criticism but I think that shows a poor understanding of the game by those critics ”

    That is my new catch prhase on this site…

  • Comment 2, posted at 24.04.08 08:43:54 by robdylan (Sharks Forever!) Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
  • I will call it “Bashford 3:16″…

  • Comment 3, posted at 24.04.08 08:44:30 by robdylan (Sharks Forever!) Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
  • you know it is funny because he plays very very much like dick did. not too many fireworks but crucial as hell.

  • Comment 4, posted at 24.04.08 08:47:42 by knersboy Reply

  • that thought occurred to me as well.

  • Comment 5, posted at 24.04.08 08:53:50 by robdylan (Sharks Forever!) Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
  • Couldn’t agree more…

  • Comment 6, posted at 24.04.08 08:57:13 by bryce_in_oz Reply

  • Good morning all – are we all agreeing with each other this morning? That’s nice for a change. 😉

  • Comment 7, posted at 24.04.08 08:59:06 by Nessa Reply

  • wait until the Steyn clan shows up.

  • Comment 8, posted at 24.04.08 09:04:18 by robdylan (Sharks Forever!) Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
  • good morning everyone

    how happy rob gets when good is spoken about his love child :mrgreen: 😆

    but in saying that i agree 100 % i have said this for sometime now that i would not take barritt from 12 he is too solid and runs the defensive lines

    its the same as what i say about steyn , even when he played so well last week running off the ball brillilantly and defending well , he takes a lot of flack

    i had a function last evening with vinnige fanie ,pierre spies and hennie le roux , and even they felt steyn was taking blame for everything which is wrong

  • Comment 9, posted at 24.04.08 09:50:28 by sharks_lover Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
  • I saw something on the Sharks website last week about the bestv 12, and Brad and Dick were compared. Similar!

  • Comment 10, posted at 24.04.08 09:52:52 by hellbent Reply

  • maybe that’s where I got the idea, HB 😉

  • Comment 11, posted at 24.04.08 10:05:44 by robdylan (Sharks Forever!) Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
  • Good morning all – are we all agreeing with each other this morning? That’s nice for a change.

    Comment 7 of 11, posted at 24.04.08 08:59:06 by Nessa Edit

    that’s only coz i’m not around. Now that i’m back we can put a stop to all this agreement stuff yuo talk about. 🙂

  • Comment 12, posted at 24.04.08 10:35:39 by KSA Shark © (FJ!ELN!) Reply

    KSA Shark ©
  • I essence i agree with what Ryan Vrede says, BUT let’s see how things go this weekend and then i will either agree that Barrit is indespensable or not.

  • Comment 13, posted at 24.04.08 10:36:52 by KSA Shark © (FJ!ELN!) Reply

    KSA Shark ©
  • fence sitter 😉

  • Comment 14, posted at 24.04.08 10:39:13 by robdylan (Sharks Forever!) Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
  • barritt is not that dissimilar to dick muir in that he was not the flashest, but they setup ppl around them, he’s a good player and meyer is right he rarely has a poor game, his defense is outstanding and he handles the ball well.

    HOWEVER, what the sharks are moaning about is a lack of impetus, Steyn is mad as a hatter (and the crazy pass he through for an intercept last week arguably hasd much to do with the sharks loss), but he does make things happen such is his step and supreme confidence.

  • Comment 15, posted at 24.04.08 10:41:02 by cab Reply

  • BB is an absolute genius on defence. We will miss him there big time.
    Along with Steyn, i think Murray has to step up too. It boggles my mind how a guy with his size and pace would rather play ‘touch rugby’ than burst through the opposition.

  • Comment 16, posted at 24.04.08 10:42:40 by CapeShark Reply
    The Great Couch Shark
  • ok -time to put balls on the table.

    Would the Sharks have won the game on Saturday had Waylon Murray been at 13 instead of Frans?

  • Comment 17, posted at 24.04.08 10:43:30 by robdylan (Sharks Forever!) Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
  • I don’t for a minute argue that Muir was a great player, but how many Caps does he have.

    ONLY 5. Steyn already has more than that. let’s reserve judgement for AFTER this weekend on who is better at 12 Barrit or Steyn.

  • Comment 18, posted at 24.04.08 10:45:23 by KSA Shark © (FJ!ELN!) Reply

    KSA Shark ©
  • No it wouldn’t have mattered, Rob. The sharks lost that game in the forwards, there’s no doubt about that. If you aren’t going to clear rucks, they’re going to clean you.

  • Comment 19, posted at 24.04.08 10:45:49 by CapeShark Reply
    The Great Couch Shark
  • #17

    We’ll find out this weekend. 🙂

  • Comment 20, posted at 24.04.08 10:45:58 by KSA Shark © (FJ!ELN!) Reply

    KSA Shark ©
  • We weren’t being given any leeway to do anything in the rucks whatsoever. Everytime we tried to win the ball back we got a card against us

  • Comment 21, posted at 24.04.08 10:48:51 by robdylan (Sharks Forever!) Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
  • I still think the sharks best backline is with steyn at 12 and murray at 13, Brad is very good, but i think Steyn is a worldclass 12. Epi was a brilliant buy by coaching staff, but then had that brainfart. Daniel and Botes should be competing for opensider or burning it up for a half each, kanko is simply brilliant at 8, but need some power at 7 to move it up and get some go-forward for the backs to play off.

  • Comment 22, posted at 24.04.08 10:49:34 by cab Reply

  • Cliche of the century: it starts with the forwards on saturday.
    If they play it hard and clean and clear the rucks well, we’ll win.
    Steyn and Murray are an interesting combo, they’re both about the same size but Steyn in his heart, believes he’s tough whereas Murray doesn’t trust his phyisicality. Tim Goodenough would offer more of an insight than me, but that’s what i’ve noticed.

  • Comment 23, posted at 24.04.08 10:51:46 by CapeShark Reply
    The Great Couch Shark
  • #21 Rob and others. i know we have discussed this to death but here is a good piece on the weekends cards. Sorry it is so long. I would have put it up as a thread but as i said we have discussed it to death so another thread would have been superflous.

    The Sharks played the Brumbies in Canberra and found the second half, in the words of their captain, a nightmare when they could not see eye to eye with the referee and the referee could not see eye to eye with them.

    Back in South Africa there was an outcry against the referee. Are we starting a second cycle of referee hysteria?

    There was an outcry in South Africa against New Zealand referee Kelvin Deaker when he blew a knock-on that wasn’t and “cost” the Lions the match against the Western Force in Johannesburg. There was an outcry in Australia against South African Willie Roos when the Brumbies lost to the Hurricanes in Canberra. Then there was an outcry in New Zealand against Australian Paul Marks when the Hurricanes and the Sharks drew in Wellington. (There have been others but this forms a neat cycle.) Now we are back South African anger against a New Zealand referee, Bryce Lawrence.

    In the Roos match, Stephen Hoiles of the Brumbies did his side no favours by being rude to the referee. In the Lawrence match, Ryan Kankowski did his side no favours by being rude to the referee.

    It is a silly way to behave. After all real power in a match is in the whistle of the referee. If there is confrontation between player and referee there can be only one short-term winner – the referee. He will say to himself – it’s him or me and it’s not going to be him.

    From there let’s move to some aspects of the management of the game. Good word management, much in refereeing vogue. It saves having to say something positive, like refereeing. In fact is not the use of euphemism making for bad communication where the old Biblical injunction should apply – Let your words be yes for yes and no for no.

    Communication may be at the start of the Canberra problem for the Sharks.

    After 25 minutes of the first half François Steyn went in at the side of a tackle/ruck ?? and was penalised.

    The referee then went to Johann Muller, the Sharks’ captain, and said: “We clearly agreed pre-game about repeated infringements. Your team has given away six infringements when they haven’t had the ball. Now I need you to change that behaviour, please.”

    So we have laws, experimental laws and pre-match agreements. It’s too much.

    Then we have the long-winded euphemism – Now I need you to change that behaviour, please.” It’s not direct enough and in any case if it is misbehavior it should not exist anyway. Would it not be better to say what the referee in Hamilton when he said quite clearly that he was going to move from free kicks to penalties and then to sin-binning.

    Steyn’s infringement here was, in any case, a penalty offence, not an upgrade because of repeated infringement,

    But let’s get to the six infringements which constituted repeated infringement.

    The timetable of offences looks like this:

    1. 1 minute: JP Pietersen of the Sharks was penalised for a high tackle.
    2. 9 minutes: The Brumbies conceded a free kick at a scrum.
    3. 10 minutes: Mitch Chapman of the Brumbies is penalised for being off-side at a scrum.
    4. 12 minutes: The Sharks concede a free kick at a tackle on their own ball.
    5. 13 minutes: The Brumbies are penalised for being off-side at a tackle/ruck.
    6. 14 minutes: The Sharks concede a free kick at a tackle on their own ball when the Brumbies counterrucked.
    7. 19 minutes: The Sharks are penalised for being off-side at scrum. Daniel was penalised when the Sharks won a scrum.
    8. 24 minutes: The Sharks concede a free kick at a tackle on the Brumbies’ ball. Frédéric Michalak is the player singled out. ball.
    9. 25 minutes: The Sharks are penalised because Steyn entered a tackle from the side.

    There are not six infringements in that. The penalty count was two-all before Steyn was penalised. The Sharks infringed just once when “they” had the ball, three times at tackles

    There may be some hyperbole. There may also be an unwanted attitude.

    The whole business of repeated infringements could be addressed. There is not a set number for turning a free-kick offence into a penalty offence. That much is clear from other matches and the differing standards. In fact there is great inconsistency from match to match, which should not be the case with the same level of referee refereeing the same laws at the same level of play.

    The Sharks are not penalised again in the half. The next penalty was the one against Ryan Kankowski which earned him a sin-binning. It is the second penalty of the half for Saia Faingaa of the Brumbies had been penalised for a high tackle on Rory Kockott.

    Ryan Kankowski of the Sharks plays the ball at a tackle ruck. The referee tells him to leave it. Kankowski does not leave it. The referee gives Kankowski a yellow card. Kankowski gives the referee lip. The referee offers him a choice of cards. Kankowski accepts yellow and leaves.

    There is a lot to consider here.

    First, the player would be wise to accept the referee’s command. The referee was specific, calling: “Leave it 8. You’re off your feet.” Saying “Black 8″ may well have been clearer but presumably the player knows that he is wearing an 8.

    Whether Kankowski’s action was worth a yellow card is debatable. After all he came from behind and his feet were on the ground. That he bent down was understandable as he would have had to do so to get the ball.

    Kankowski would have felt that his feet were on the ground and that he was entitled to play. (Is stealing wrong because the Ten Commandments say that it is wrong or do the Ten Commandments say that it is wrong because it is wrong?”) It remains wise to obey the referee.

    The referee had spoken to the Sharks in the first half of the match. We shall discuss that “warning” in the week’s Law Discussion. It came after three free kicks against the Sharks at the tackle and then a penalty. Those were the Sharks’ tackle infringements in the first half. Kankowski’s infringement was the first of the second half.

    Smart talk by the referee is not helpful. “I asked him to leave it. You ask him to leave it.”

    This is followed up by more smart talk when the referee – rightly – pulls Kankowski up for dissent. But again a direct statement would be much better – not a choice of cards but a direct statement that dissent of that nature would end in a red card, a sending off – and march him on ten metres.

    Then there is the business of not supporting his own body weight.

    It may not after all be useful to use language outside of the laws – like truck-‘n-trailer, lazy runner and coming through the gate when the words from the law could be used just as well – obstruction, off-side and not coming from behind.

    The supporting body-weight thing needs consistent application which is far too difficult for players contesting the ball on the ground and needing to bend over players lying on the ground. If it is true that there was an instruction about shins not touching, then it is even stranger as one could go through many tackles to find problems with bodyweight and touching shins.

    There is a great deal of food for thought in this incident.

    Just after Kankowski returns from the sin bin, François Steyn is sent to the sin bin. Again the referee refers to “not supporting his own body weight”, which apparently means not on his feet.

    In the Steyn incident, the Brumbies’ flyhalf Christian Lealiifano runs at Steyn. Steyn and Adrian Jacobs, Jacobs around the lower legs, Steyn around the torso. All three fall to ground, Steyn above Lealiifano. As Steyn falls, prop Salesi Ma’afu drops onto Steyn while centre Adam Ashley-Cooper grabs him a round the ankles. Salesi Ma’afu stays on top of Steyn till the referee blows his whistle.

    The referee says to Steyn: “You are not supporting your own body-weight.” He tells Muller that Steyn is “lying all over him”.

    Ma’afu was lying all over Steyn and not supporting his own body-weight.

    Could Steyn have extricated himself? He may have been able to do a Houdini act but not easily. It certainly looked too hard to be considered “cynical” or deliberate.

    It may, of course, not be true but the impression was that the referee had lost his rag. He may well have done so because of the attitude of the Sharks.

    Somehow in his mental preparation the referee probably does prepare himself to maintain equilibrium regardless of external factors – such as ill-mannered players, unruly crowds and bad weather.

    The lesson for the players is to play to the whistle

  • Comment 24, posted at 24.04.08 10:54:15 by KSA Shark © (FJ!ELN!) Reply

    KSA Shark ©
  • Hey Rob, it’s true that the Ref blew us out of the game. But that’s where Muller should have been more vocal and constantly pointed out the Brumbies dubious maneuvers. As you know, the squeaky wheel eventually gets the grease.

  • Comment 25, posted at 24.04.08 10:55:50 by CapeShark Reply
    The Great Couch Shark
  • BTW, Tim won’t discuss individual players with us here as it would be unprofessional of him to do so and would jeopardise his relationship with the players and his employers.

  • Comment 26, posted at 24.04.08 11:01:43 by robdylan (Sharks Forever!) Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
  • #26

    I would hope he wouldn’t discuss it with us.


  • Comment 27, posted at 24.04.08 11:06:03 by KSA Shark © (FJ!ELN!) Reply

    KSA Shark ©
  • yeah – but if we’re talking about should’ves here, the ref shouldn’t have lost his rag and thrown the law book out of the window. That to me was the biggest sin. Whatever we did or didn’t do in mitigation is kinda beside the point.

    The summary that KSA posted above sums it up. Lawrence was out of his mind to send off both Kankowski and Steyn. Neither card should have been awarded in the first place.

  • Comment 28, posted at 24.04.08 11:06:03 by robdylan (Sharks Forever!) Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
  • KSA, of course. I didn’t for an instant suggest that it isn’t the correct and honourable stance for him to be taking 😉

  • Comment 29, posted at 24.04.08 11:10:28 by robdylan (Sharks Forever!) Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
  • Well the ref thought he shouldn’t be the only one marching around so gave two players marching orders as well.

  • Comment 30, posted at 24.04.08 11:12:13 by KSA Shark © (FJ!ELN!) Reply

    KSA Shark ©
  • KSA, you obviously don’t have THAT much faith in Steyn if you reckon the Sharks will only win by 1 😉

  • Comment 31, posted at 24.04.08 11:14:24 by robdylan (Sharks Forever!) Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
  • One man don’t make a team mate. 😳 😆

  • Comment 32, posted at 24.04.08 11:17:27 by KSA Shark © (FJ!ELN!) Reply

    KSA Shark ©
  • #32
    One man does actually make a team-mate, BUT
    One man does not make the team, mate! 😉

  • Comment 33, posted at 24.04.08 11:21:23 by Cru-El (BABVA) Reply

  • :mrgreen:

    All that verbal with the ladies seems to be helping your vocabulary QUITE a bit. 😉

  • Comment 34, posted at 24.04.08 11:28:09 by KSA Shark © (FJ!ELN!) Reply

    KSA Shark ©
  • Hehehehehe @ #34 🙂

    Hi chaps!
    KSA – thanks for all your help with my questions…really appreciate u taing the time etc. 😀
    I really don’t feel confused anymore & realise that I was interpretting the laws correctly, most of the time 😀

    There is a lot of food for thought…especially in #24 BUT I think maybe the wrong people are reading it….Mr Lawence, for one, should be reading & digesting such articles 🙂

  • Comment 35, posted at 24.04.08 11:46:13 by Me2 Reply

    Me2 aka Mama Shark
  • Mike Greenaway
    April 24 2008 at 08:30AM

    The considerable loss of experience in the form of John Smit, Percy Montgomery, Bob Skinstad, Butch James, Warren Britz and Johan Ackermann was never more keenly felt by the Sharks this season than at the Canberra Stadium on Saturday when, in the words of author Chinua Achebe, “Things Fall Apart”.

    Before the season kicked off, Dick Muir tactfully put the loss of the wise heads thus: “There is a lot of young talent taking their place, so we will always be exciting, but we might not be consistent.”

    He got that right, and never mind inconsistency from game to game, his team managed to fluctuate from one universe to another in 10 minutes.

    The Sharks were verging on the sublime in the second quarter of the match. They were cool, calm and collected as they put together their best rugby of the season, but in the third quarter they deteriorated into an angry rabble.


    The unfortunate reality about a tyrannical referee – and, boy, does that description fit Bryce “I am the 31st man and don’t you forget it” Lawrence – is that you have to grin and bear their egotistical whims and hope that a wider justice system in the world will sort it out somewhere, sometime.

    Captain Johann Muller, poor soul, did his best in the circumstances, but too many of the young hotheads in his team were too far gone to see the light until long after the depressing final whistle.

    The more the players let the ref get under their skin, the more he blew against them until the stage was reached where Lawrence saw only one team on the field, his beady eyes focusing only on white jerseys at the rucks and blind to the players in blue.

    There were external factors playing a role, too. When it comes to being one-eyed, the Canberra mob is rivalled only by the Christchurch crowd, but at least the Cantabrians are muted in the expression of their bias. Not so the Brumbies’ fans. These Australians are really quite odd. When you meet them in the street, nicer folk you couldn’t chance to meet, but put them in a sports stadium and they undergo an ugly transformation.

    There were only about 14 000 of them, but once they got the drift that Lawrence wasn’t digging the Sharks – not long into the second half – they booed the roofs off the stands each time the Sharks got the ball back from a ruck and then heartily cheered Lawrence when he inevitably raised his arm for a penalty to the Brumbies.

    After the match, Muller spoke about a “feeling of powerlessness” as the circumstance of the match spiralled out of his control. Fair enough. It really was not his fault.

    The consolation for the Sharks is that lessons surely have been learned.

    The young bucks have realised that they are not bigger than the referee or the game, and that rugby is about the team, not the individual and his “fits of the vapours” when things don’t go his way.

    Discipline and leadership were the issues on the agenda when a team meeting was held on Monday. The players spoke frankly and openly and guilty parties were suitably chastised.

    In short, the Sharks should never, never have lost to the Brumbies given their 18-7 lead at half-time and the momentum of the game. The encouraging thing is that the team will have grown from the experience.

    And it is truly exciting to imagine what this team will be capable of when experience is added to the unbelievable talent.

  • Comment 36, posted at 24.04.08 13:09:27 by barend Reply

  • It’s VERY true. Dick was EXTREMELY underrated as a player and it was only us regular Sharks season ticket holders that acknowledged his value. Only when he moved to Wee Pee for that single season and completely transformed their backline did the whole country start to notice his playmaking abilities.

    Barritt is very much in the same mould and that is precisely why Dick will always find a place for him in his team. He appreciates and understands the value of this type of player.

  • Comment 37, posted at 24.04.08 14:02:29 by Villie Reply
    Competition Winner
  • What I’d really like to see at the Sharks is some EXPRESS pace on the wings. That is the major asset I feel we lack. Could also do with another mongrel of a lock, a younger version of Ackers!

  • Comment 38, posted at 24.04.08 14:04:19 by Villie Reply
    Competition Winner
  • who is our quickest wing? Mentz?

  • Comment 39, posted at 24.04.08 14:20:20 by robdylan (Sharks Forever!) Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
  • Henno hasn’t actually played at all has he Rob? He was always one of my favourites.

  • Comment 40, posted at 24.04.08 14:22:59 by Nessa Reply

  • Yeah Rob, I would think Henno Mentz is probably quickest.

    JP is deceptively quick but is not what I would call express. Stefan has lost a yard with his advancing years and Odwa has never had serious gas.

  • Comment 41, posted at 24.04.08 14:24:28 by Villie Reply
    Competition Winner
  • the Noble bros were also always very sluggish.

    What about this Wagenstroom chap? Is he quick?

  • Comment 42, posted at 24.04.08 14:33:27 by robdylan (Sharks Forever!) Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
  • Cedric was fast on the wing. 😥

  • Comment 43, posted at 24.04.08 14:36:33 by Nessa Reply

  • henno’s problem is that it doesn’t help being quick if you can’t catch the ball :mrgreen:

  • Comment 44, posted at 24.04.08 14:38:33 by robdylan (Sharks Forever!) Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
  • Craig was also fast on the wing. Suppose he has lost a whole lot of speed now that he has bulked up.

  • Comment 45, posted at 24.04.08 14:40:02 by Nessa Reply

  • yeah – Cedric was like greased lightning.

  • Comment 46, posted at 24.04.08 14:40:24 by robdylan (Sharks Forever!) Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
  • Ness – Craig was never THAT fast… part of the reason he became a hooker in the first place.

  • Comment 47, posted at 24.04.08 14:40:56 by robdylan (Sharks Forever!) Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
  • You think so Rob? I disagree. I think he moved to a position where he would at least get some game time. At the time he was playing wing we had an abundance of players and he wasn’t getting game time at all.

  • Comment 48, posted at 24.04.08 14:42:49 by Nessa Reply

  • now Lwazi Mvovo is apparently a real star in the making.

  • Comment 49, posted at 24.04.08 14:45:32 by robdylan (Sharks Forever!) Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
  • well, he told me that one of the reasons Dick suggested he move was because he was a bit slow to really make it as a top winger.

  • Comment 50, posted at 24.04.08 14:47:53 by robdylan (Sharks Forever!) Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
  • I think Dick was just looking for an excuse to move him. 😉 I happened to think he was very fast for a guy his size.

  • Comment 51, posted at 24.04.08 14:50:10 by Nessa Reply

  • Nessa, I have never seen time trials for the various players so I may be totaly wrong, but I beleive it was Craig Burden himself who said he moved to hooker partly because he felt he didn’t have the true pace of a wing. Think I read that here on Sharksworld 🙂

  • Comment 52, posted at 24.04.08 14:50:13 by yossarian Reply

  • Yoss – that was probably in Rob’s article he wrote on Craig.

  • Comment 53, posted at 24.04.08 14:51:24 by Nessa Reply

  • I would like to know how fast Ruan is compared to JP, Stefan and Ndugane

  • Comment 54, posted at 24.04.08 14:52:12 by yossarian Reply

  • #53 that is what I was alluding to 😉

  • Comment 55, posted at 24.04.08 14:52:57 by yossarian Reply

  • you are correct, yoss… you read it right here 😉

  • Comment 56, posted at 24.04.08 14:56:37 by robdylan (Sharks Forever!) Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
  • I don’t have a problem with Barrit, but I do have a problem with this article. It makes it sound like the Sharks fell apart because we lost Barrit.

    When really it was because we couldn’t get hold of the ball ( forwards where did you go in the 2nd half – Lala land ? ) , or even slow it down at the Brumbies breakdown.

    IMO the aouthor it is idiot.

  • Comment 57, posted at 24.04.08 15:04:43 by yossarian Reply

  • Sorry Yoss – I am a bit slow today. 😳

  • Comment 58, posted at 24.04.08 15:05:14 by Nessa Reply

  • yoss – there’s little doubt that the author is an idiot for the most part… but, apart from the problems in the pack, the usually rock-solid backline defense went to pot when Brad went off.

  • Comment 59, posted at 24.04.08 15:07:21 by robdylan (Sharks Forever!) Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
  • Yes, having 14 players did not help much either 😉

  • Comment 60, posted at 24.04.08 15:09:51 by yossarian Reply

  • hmmmm…..

  • Comment 61, posted at 24.04.08 15:20:35 by robdylan (Sharks Forever!) Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
  • right – I’m off home now. Have a plane to catch.

    See you guys later or tomorrow

  • Comment 62, posted at 24.04.08 15:21:15 by robdylan (Sharks Forever!) Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
  • Cheers Rob – good luck at the airport. 😉

  • Comment 63, posted at 24.04.08 15:26:04 by Nessa Reply

  • Hey Rob
    Any chance of getting some of the 40m, 100m times for the sharks?

    Would make interesting reading.

  • Comment 64, posted at 24.04.08 15:38:00 by beez Reply

  • I can only try.

  • Comment 65, posted at 24.04.08 16:43:13 by robdylan (Sharks Forever!) Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
  • Fallacious reasoning in this article. So Dick was also unsung, but a great creative influence. That doesn’t mean that Brad is too just because he ain’t flashy. Where is illustration of this? If he is merely unobtrusively creative, where are the backline tries? He was great last year, but not so good this year. Lets see how Frans goes before getting all emotional. Butch rated JP and Ruan as only behind Habana and maybe Spies in speed.

  • Comment 66, posted at 24.04.08 23:41:46 by Big Fish Reply
    Big Fish

Add Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.