Why can’t we beat the bloody Aussies?

Written by Rob Otto (robdylan)

Posted in :Original Content, Sharks, Super 14 on 16 Mar 2009 at 16:52
Tagged with : , , ,

More accurately, why can the Sharks just not seem to beat the bloody Aussies in Australia? Here’s a shocking statistic… 2007’s good win in Brisbane is the only time so far in the Super 14 era that the Sharks have managed a win on Australian soil.

It’s a statistic that a number of people tried to bring to my attention before this weekend’s game. Back then, though, I lived in the happy land where it wasn’t possible the Reds could beat the Sharks. All of the dire warnings based on statistics and historical precedence rang hollow in my ears – my “head space”, if you will, was not big enough to entertain a Sharks loss. Oh, how I long for those halcyon days…

Well, we all know what happened. The Reds stuffed us. And, in hindsight, it’s hardly bloody surprising that they did, because we just plain seem incapable of winning over there. Apart from 2007’s rare reversal, you have to go back to 2000 for a Sharks win on Aussie soil. We beat the Waratahs 26-19 that year. Going two years further back, we managed to topple the Brumbies in Canberra to the tune of 41-23. In 1996, the best Sharks team in living memory managed two wins in Australia, including a beautiful semi-final victory over a strong Reds team.

That’s it, though… 4 wins over the course of nearly 14 years. Compare that to 14 wins (and a burgled draw) in New Zealand over the same period and it sticks out like a dog’s bollocks. We can’t seem to win in Australia! This is, of course, particularly relevant given that our next game, against the Western Force, wait for it, takes place in that very same country. Up against a tricky foe, without two key players and at the end of a long tour, the last thing we need is the weight of serious historical failure on our backs as well. Well, bad news chaps, but it’s definitely going to be a factor.

Hate to be a profit of doom here, but just bear these numbers on mind when making your picks for this weekend’s game. It’s possible for us to win, but the precedent set over the course of the last 14 years suggests that we won’t.


  • read em and weep, boys… wouldn’t be picking the Sharks on LMS this week 😉

  • Comment 1, posted at 16.03.09 17:08:36 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
  • @robdylan (Comment 1) : you of little faith :mrgreen:
    c’ mon don’t you have a lifeline – a bit of risk 😉

  • Comment 2, posted at 16.03.09 17:15:10 by rekinek Reply
    Competition WinnerCompetition Winner Author
  • No need to pick the Sharks this week, All going according to plan on LMS.

    😛 😉

  • Comment 3, posted at 16.03.09 17:20:11 by KSA Shark © Reply

    KSA Shark ©
  • @KSA Shark © (Comment 3) : especially that cheetahs are not due for a bye yet :mrgreen:

  • Comment 4, posted at 16.03.09 17:24:29 by rekinek Reply
    Competition WinnerCompetition Winner Author
  • @rekinek (Comment 4) :

    They are having a bye NEXT week. And the Lions are playing the hurricanes next week. That is the same Hurricanes that most people can’t pick anymore coz they picked them when they played the Cheetahs. 😉 😀

  • Comment 5, posted at 16.03.09 17:26:47 by KSA Shark © Reply

    KSA Shark ©
  • @KSA Shark © (Comment 5) : oops my lack of knowledge of fixtures – exposed 😳
    last week I deviated from my plan (too scared to pick stormers 😆 and they won 🙄
    so now i need to do some serious thinking 😕

  • Comment 6, posted at 16.03.09 17:30:27 by rekinek Reply
    Competition WinnerCompetition Winner Author
  • @rekinek (Comment 6) :

    Should be some interesting picks next week. 😆

  • Comment 7, posted at 16.03.09 17:46:01 by KSA Shark © Reply

    KSA Shark ©
  • @KSA Shark © (Comment 7) : yipa. 🙄
    guys – need to run.
    thanx for the platform for ventilating my weekend stresses :mrgreen:
    feel bit better.

  • Comment 8, posted at 16.03.09 17:57:56 by rekinek Reply
    Competition WinnerCompetition Winner Author
  • @KSA Shark © (Comment 7) : Doubt it, i am sure 90% of the people will be backing 1 team, similar to the last two weeks.

  • Comment 9, posted at 16.03.09 18:23:16 by flop Reply

  • Its the famous laid back attitude. AUS is deadly for laid back types. Too many opportunities to be, well er… laid back.

    Didn’t they visit a theme-park last year?

  • Comment 10, posted at 16.03.09 18:30:11 by fyndraai Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
  • @fyndraai (Comment 10) : I think you may just be spot on…

  • Comment 11, posted at 16.03.09 18:38:32 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
  • Rob- 😯 Did you say ” it’s POSSIBLE for us to win” ?

    Wes will be on your case on Monday should we lose…you arrogant person…


  • Comment 12, posted at 16.03.09 19:14:44 by blackshark Reply

    blackshark - I'm back!
  • To all us Shark supporters!!!.
    I would have to say that saturday’s performance against the
    reds was absolutely PATHETIC!!! TO SAY THE LEAST!!!!.

    I wish that they could send the supporters an sms to let them
    know that they dont have to wake up in the morning to waste
    their time watching crap rugby!.

    I am fed up with excuses when you have a hugely talented side
    on the field,why didin’t he rather give guys like Riaan Swanepoel
    and a few others a chance who actually wanted to play.

    To all the Sharks players: I hope you are enjoying riding super-tubes
    and go-karts at the lovely resort you are staying,thanks you for making me watch pathetic rugby with a moerse babbelas!!!.

  • Comment 13, posted at 16.03.09 19:36:39 by The Shark Reply

    The Shark
  • @blackshark (Comment 12) :
    Well if Villie is correct and the problem is the arrogant Shark supporters, then unfortunately there is no fix and the team is screwed.

  • Comment 14, posted at 16.03.09 20:34:05 by fyndraai Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
  • @blackshark (Comment 12) : We are talking about LMS here, please don’t interfere ❗

  • Comment 15, posted at 16.03.09 21:50:59 by Rahul Reply

  • A mitigating factor for Poor Sharks performances could also be Poor refereeing. No excuses the Sharks were bad on Saturday, but so were the Ref/Linesman. Week In and Week Out we are seeing bad decisions being made, why aren’t these fellows performance appraised, maybe if this happened repeat performances would be cut down ❗ I understand that they make decisions in a split second, but if they were shown were they made mistakes they then can correct that. Why in Dirty Play can’t the ref ask for the TV ref decision, I wonder how well the Reds would have performed without a scrumhalf (dirty Player)has been sited.

  • Comment 16, posted at 16.03.09 22:45:02 by Dynamite Reply

  • @fyndraai (Comment 14) : I’m not saying that we are arrogant supporters. However last week a number of Sharks fans were coming up with ridiculous statements like we were going to whip the Reds as if it was a formality. Some people were even suggesting we would be so far ahead at half time that we could bring on the replacements in the 2nd half.

    I’m certain that the defeat will have had the desired effect and as supporters we won’t get over confident in a hurry again.

    But more importantly, I’m pretty sure the players won’t be so complacent again!

  • Comment 17, posted at 16.03.09 23:22:14 by Villie Reply
    Competition Winner
  • @Villie (Comment 17) : I hope we’re not confusing pre-game speculative talk…where we all generally hope for the best…with premature boasting.

    Saying…”I really hope the boys will be able to dominate the game early and allow our bench to have more time on the field”…is not quite the same as ” We’ll roll them over in the first half and bring on the bench with 30 minutes left to finish them off”.

    I don’t know if you’re talking about this blog or fans in general …but I seem to recall a lot of confident folks around here ( and rightly so)…but I don’t quite remember anyone going into the “overconfident” zone.

    We can involve karma and all the other energies but the fact is the game was lost because The Sharks played below their potential and the Reds on the other hand improved on their recent performances.

    @Rahul (Comment 15) : 👿

  • Comment 18, posted at 17.03.09 08:16:04 by blackshark Reply

    blackshark - I'm back!
  • i see on supersport monty dumond is going over as replacement for ruan, i dont know about u guys but im really worried!!!!

  • Comment 19, posted at 17.03.09 08:26:13 by willa Reply

  • @blackshark (Comment 18) : :mrgreen: sorry, couldnt resist :mrgreen:

  • Comment 20, posted at 17.03.09 08:44:30 by Rahul Reply

  • @willa (Comment 19) : They also said he is just cover. So will only be on the bench. 9, 10, 12, 13 is almost set to be Rory, Steyn @ 10 (oh no), Jacobs and Swanepoel… I gather Jacobs will play inside. 2 things I ask from Plum:

    Let Stephan clear inside our own 22 (don’t give it to Steyn) and tell Steyn to pass. He is getting more and more like Wynand Olivier who has glue on his hands and runs into anything. Get Steyn distributing and it should be all good.

    One good thing about Steyn at 10 is he will be defending against Giteau.

  • Comment 21, posted at 17.03.09 08:54:52 by deanoelsch Reply

  • @willa (Comment 19) :

    I think we’re all worried Willa – but we just have to wait for the next game to see how badly Ruan’s absence is going to affect us.

    Just keep the fingers away from the panic button.

  • Comment 22, posted at 17.03.09 08:55:09 by blackshark Reply

    blackshark - I'm back!
  • @Rahul (Comment 20) :
    it’s all a conspiracy, I tell you… 😛

  • Comment 23, posted at 17.03.09 08:56:26 by blackshark Reply

    blackshark - I'm back!
  • @blackshark (Comment 22) : I havent sen Monty playing, but surely the team wont fall apart because of a few injuries? do we not have any depth?

  • Comment 24, posted at 17.03.09 09:00:58 by Rahul Reply

  • I personally think Steyn CAN be successful at 10. Maybe this is the ideal opportunity for him to prove he IS indeed good enough to play there.


  • Comment 25, posted at 17.03.09 09:01:19 by wpw Reply
  • @wpw (Comment 25) : You’re joking ❓ 🙄

  • Comment 26, posted at 17.03.09 09:13:37 by Charlie Reply

  • It’s the Aussie accents… interferes with normal human thought.

  • Comment 27, posted at 17.03.09 09:39:34 by Dive Pass Reply

    Dive Pass
  • @Dive Pass (Comment 27) : you theeenk sa?

  • Comment 28, posted at 17.03.09 10:06:14 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
  • @robdylan (Comment 28) :
    But how come the Aussie chicks sound better than the dudes ?

  • Comment 29, posted at 17.03.09 10:20:25 by blackshark Reply

    blackshark - I'm back!
  • @blackshark (Comment 29) : cause their hot

  • Comment 30, posted at 17.03.09 10:44:48 by willa Reply

  • @blackshark (Comment 18) : No problem with being optimistic. I am more optimistic than most…I thought we would win on SAt but was expecting it to be very close.

    My problem was with the people who said that we would win by 20 or 30 and basically suggested that we just had to turn up to win. Like it was a formality. I don’t believe these people had actually watched the Reds this season (or maybe even last). Also the warning signs had been flashing in the previous couple of games (for the Sharks that is)

    Anyway, I don’t want to dwell on this. It’s done and dusted now…so hopefully we will all get a sense of perspective. I already think most people have…you can tell by the cautious comments.

    For the record, it was not only people on this site.

    The game against the Force could go either way. The Force are extremely unpredictable and it also depends on how the Sharks react to the defeat last week.

  • Comment 31, posted at 17.03.09 15:08:51 by Villie Reply
    Competition Winner
  • @wpw (Comment 25) : I agree Wes….it’s not been easy for him shifting between so many positions. His service on Sat wasn’t great…and then he went and spilled one of the better passes Rocket gave him. I’m a little concerned about his tendency to look up at the man chasing, especially in pressure situations but given a stretch of games at 10, I reckon he would be fine. He has all the necessary attributes. Remember how long it took Butch to assert himself as a dominant 10?

  • Comment 32, posted at 17.03.09 15:12:28 by Villie Reply
    Competition Winner
  • @Villie (Comment 32) : from supporters perspective – we can just hope that steyn will have a good game at 10 on sat (that is if plum does not listen :mrgreen: to us and chooses him there).

    whatever we say now – we still want the man to do well whatever number on his back 🙂

  • Comment 33, posted at 17.03.09 15:37:58 by rekinek Reply
    Competition WinnerCompetition Winner Author
  • @rekinek (Comment 33) : Plum WILL play Steyn at 10…there is NO DOUBT in my mind about that. We really do not have another option. Monty will only arrive there today and will therefore cover on the bench!

  • Comment 34, posted at 17.03.09 15:41:13 by Villie Reply
    Competition Winner
  • @Villie (Comment 34) : i know, i know, i know. just not overly excited – wished we had other options.
    at least swanepol will get some game time.

  • Comment 35, posted at 17.03.09 15:48:00 by rekinek Reply
    Competition WinnerCompetition Winner Author
  • Maybe it have something to do with surfing. 😉

    The Stormers had a usefull track record against them in 2008. Havent lost against a single Aussie side.

    Well you lot cant lose against the Farce this weekend. They cant play at home. a More running game may help against that lot.

  • Comment 36, posted at 17.03.09 15:54:49 by PaarlBok Reply

  • @PaarlBok (Comment 36) : are you suggesting that stormers can’t surf :mrgreen:
    right – they ride motorbikes 😉

  • Comment 37, posted at 17.03.09 16:08:33 by rekinek Reply
    Competition WinnerCompetition Winner Author

Add Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.