Here’s a head’s up! You’re predictable…

Written by Morné Nortier (Morné)

Posted in :Original Content, Other SA Teams on 11 Apr 2011 at 15:15
Tagged with : , , , ,

I wonder if those who criticised the concept of ‘head’s up rugby’ in the recent past realise that this is exactly what we are seeing from the two top teams in the Super 15?

I also wonder if our local coaches have the ability to coach in any other way than implementing whiteboard sessions or plays from textbooks literally to the on-field environment with no consideration or appreciation for what makes players and effectively a team tick?

Although robots or little programmed drones are difficult to outsmart at first because of the absolute clinical nature they were designed and developed with together with the absolute precision they operate under, it is not impossible – first identify repetitive behaviour which should become obvious or easy after some analysis, and simply force them to react out of this zone.

I have wasted too many inches of column space on both topics in the past to re-visit or rehash what was mentioned before, but watching the Reds and Crusaders absolute clinical decimation of last year’s finalists, I could not help wondering when we as South Africans will figure out what head’s up rugby is actually all about?

The concept unfortunately has forever been tainted as some airy-fairy type of game or playing style in South Africa thanks to the media’s love/hate affair with Springbok coach, Peter de Villiers.

In fact, given how De Villiers himself regressed in this regard one could argue that either he too (like every other South African coach) has lost the plot or conceded defeat to a strong media generated opinion on how we should play the game of rugby in South Africa.

It was the Reds victory over the Stormers however which again made me realise most are missing the plot when the term, ‘head’s up rugby’, is used.

This game was anything but airy-fairy rugby, or running from anywhere, by a team that has ironically enough built up a reputation for doing just that.

Just a couple of weeks ago for instance commentators were amazed by the arrogance of Reds flyhalf, Quade Cooper, who tried an ambitions (for loss of a better word) kick-pass in his own in-goal area to his wing in the game against the Cheetahs.  Then we could also highlight the stupendous no-look or backdoor passes we saw from Cooper and the rest of this team in the last 18 months.

Yet, when the situation called for it, the very same Reds team adopted their game to not only outsmart, but also outmuscle a very dominant and very physical, but limited Stormers side at home.

Reds coach, Ewen McKenzie, in the post match interview mentioned that in the opening minutes they tried to run at the Stormers but having assessed their effectiveness in this regard against the best defensive team in the competition, they adopted to a more territory based approach where the unpredictable and flamboyant Cooper with his halfback partner, Will Genia, completely outclassed the more structured and ‘solid’ opposing half-backs of the Stormers.

Similarly, Stormers coach Allister Coetzee conceded that the Reds managed to take the Stormers out of their ‘structured’ (read limited) defence orientated game giving Cooper time and space where he surprisingly (to Coetzee and the Stormers) employed a far more tactical kicking game than what they anticipated.

Anyone notice the difference in assessments from the two camps or how the one team managed to deal with the challenges faced on the day?

In beautiful conditions for rugby the Reds firstly looked to employ the type of game they love – open running rugby.  Having assessed within the first quarter they aren’t getting anywhere in this approach, they adopted to a more tactically and territorially based game.  In other words, having been taken out of their comfort zone, they quite easily adopted a different strategy – ‘head’s up rugby’ anyone?.

Never did structure, or loss of type of structure (they are used to) apply to the Reds and the type of game they played or ‘like to play’, which in my mind makes an absolute mockery of the popular belief that ‘head’s up rugby’ equals unstructured chaos as popularly portrayed by the media in this country.

The Stormers on the other hand, knowing what to expect from the Reds and the type of game they would employ (running, open rugby) quite easily weathered the early onslaught – but as soon as they were taken out of their comfort zone, they simply had no answers.

Put it in another way, when they were asked to think for themselves and react to what is happening in front of them and not just repeat the drills and plans from the practice ground or whiteboard sessions, they failed spectacularly.

Players got frustrated, which inevitably leads to players losing their shape and discipline, and ultimately, losing the match.

This was quite evident in the uncharacteristic actions of some of the Stormers players which saw them play with 14 men for 20 minutes of the match.

During the game I was quite surprised to see Cooper field downfield kicks from the Stormers, sometimes just after the Stormers manufactured turn-over’s which suggested he was never in his usual play-maker position as flyhalf for a lot of the time – something I have not seen the Reds employ in any other game this year.  But again, this simply illustrates the ability of a team and players to assess what is happening right in front of them, and adopting to that situation.

Although it came at a painful-to-witness price, I could not have hoped for a better example or definition of ‘head’s-up rugby’ as illustrated first-hand by the Reds and Crusaders teams.

As for the Bulls and Stormers (and most South African teams), you boys can keep on believing that a robotic, text-book, practice ground drill-phased approach to rugby union will win you games.  As the Stormers showed on the weekend, you only need to be off your game by 5% or taken out of your comfort zone to get beaten if this is the case – whereas the less-fancied team with a head’s up approach will always have a chance of victory, no matter who they play.


  • TUT 7
    CUT 10
    17 mins

  • Comment 1, posted at 11.04.11 15:22:40 by Ben Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
  • Haha sorry wrong arti.

  • Comment 2, posted at 11.04.11 15:24:01 by Ben Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
  • @Ben (Comment 1) :

    I think you are on the wrong thread..

    @Morne – Insightful article. I learn a lot from your writing. Thank you!

  • Comment 3, posted at 11.04.11 15:24:37 by Richard Ferguson Reply
    Friend of SharksworldCompetition Winner Administrator
    Richard Ferguson
  • Great article Morne. In a situation where the game plan has to be changed, I think that is where a good captain earns his colours.

  • Comment 4, posted at 11.04.11 15:33:27 by Ben Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
  • Hey Morne, I think this is your best article yet. I never understand why teams and like you pointed out particularly South African teams, can’t adapt to what the opposition is producing on the field, when sometimes it’s so clear that the plan they went out onto the field with won’t work on that particular day.

    How can we get this through to our teams, surely our coaches are good enough to see when a plan won’t work. Are we to afraid to adapt, considering the chance that it may backfire completely, or do our coaches just not see the importance of adapting to each situation?

    Btw, this should be the main quality of a captain. If you have a captain on the field who can make that call, don’t let him go, no matter what. South Africa doesn’t have that. Other teams do.

  • Comment 5, posted at 11.04.11 15:34:54 by Letgo Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
  • @Ben (Comment 4) : Exactly! 😀

  • Comment 6, posted at 11.04.11 15:36:26 by Letgo Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
  • Well written article as always Morne. I attended the game and after the first half I was hoping we would do something different (even I could see we needed to try to get in their half and apply pressure)

    And yet for the first 15 minutes of the 2nd half we tried and tried but nothing came off. Instead of staying calm and kicking for possession and at least trying to play the ball in our opponent’s half we resorted to the dreaded kick and chase approach.

    At one stage I thought Aplon would attack from the back like we all know he can but he too started kicking up and unders. When that happened I knew there was no way we would win the game.

    But all credit to the Reds. Their were more focused and it seemed they knew exactly what to do and when to do it.

    Oh and lastly, Pro Logete (sp?) is the worst assistant referee in SA. The amount of abuse he got was testiment to that!! 👿

  • Comment 7, posted at 11.04.11 15:36:47 by wpw Reply
  • @Letgo (Comment 6) : Just beat you to it! 🙂

  • Comment 8, posted at 11.04.11 15:40:40 by Ben Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
  • @Letgo (Comment 5) :
    @Richard Ferguson (Comment 3) : @Ben (Comment 4) :


    I am loathe to blame captains or players in this instance. From my (admittedly limited) experience, this is as a direct result from what happens on the practice fields and how coaches ‘coach’ their players.

    We invariably force them to become drones that can only operate within pre-determined structures.

    Those who cannot be converted, are eventually lost in the system or moves from team to team (journymen) or overseas where their talent is never disputed.

    Mind you their talent is usually never disputed locally either, coaches are imo simply unable to ‘fit’ them into his ‘structures’.

    I am sure we can all name about 10 players off-hand in the last 10 years who has been branded as stupendously talented, but never makes the grade (according to local standards)…

  • Comment 9, posted at 11.04.11 15:42:04 by Morné Reply
  • @Morné (Comment 9) : Agree with you its the coach’s responsibility 1st. He has to give them drills in at least 2 different game plans. Then when they are on the field its the Captain’s choice when to change the game plan.

  • Comment 10, posted at 11.04.11 15:51:40 by Ben Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
  • @Morné (Comment 9) :

    A case in point would be John Smit. Great captain and awesome legend of SA rugby but how many times have we been beaten by teams only to continue with the very same game plan even when it is not working.

    The 0-49 result in Sydney comes to mind. 🙄

  • Comment 11, posted at 11.04.11 15:51:49 by wpw Reply
  • @wpw (Comment 11) : Like Morne said, let’s blame the coach! 🙂

  • Comment 12, posted at 11.04.11 16:15:35 by Ben Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
  • Agreed, I wrote something to this effect last week when I said that the one thing that really worried me after our loss to the Crusaders and Stormers was Plum’s comments. He said that against the Crusaders we were defensively naïve and against the Stormers we were naïve on attack. What this means is that we don’t plan for different situations on the field and adapt our game plan accordingly. Our captains need to be smart enough to change the game plan and adjust patterns during the game.

  • Comment 13, posted at 11.04.11 16:16:14 by GreatSharksays Reply

  • Great article Morne.

    I have joined discussions with you on this before, and share most of your views. One issue though, is that good strategy formulation and good strategy execution are rather separate skills.

    Do you not think that perhaps SA rugby (like Argie rugby) is perhaps built on formulation of simple strategy, but executing at a very high level? This tends to trump teams with great strategies, but poor execution, especially in pressure situations, such as knock-outs, when execution often suffers.

    No doubt, a well-executed, good strategy is the best recipe, but simple strategies (like Bulls rugby) can be even more effective if very well executed by the right personnel. Is this not part of the reason coaches resist moving from traditional SA rugby?

  • Comment 14, posted at 11.04.11 19:06:33 by Big Fish Reply
    Big Fish
  • For the sake of S/R as an entertainment package and SA rugby I hope the Stormers strategy fails. I say SA rugby coz it’s no secret that the highest concentration of our naturally gifted and creative attacking midfielders wear a blue hooped jersey of some sort. Focusing so intensely on defence sometimes leads to what was witnessed on Sat – a team filled with backs that should have been able to carve up the best defensive systems, seemingly playing without a drop of the creative energy required to break the mould when they desperately needed to. However in matches leading up to this Reds game, the same approach secured good away victories at Loftus and Kingspark. The Stormers are determined to build on their successful defensive package of 2010 which saw them concede 9 points per match less than their next best D in the S14. In my books so far in 2011 this strategy has delivered the desired results. Therefore why change? I fear that if the Stormers are too successful this season, other teams may follow suit and soon our entertaining S/Hemisphere package may start to resemble the gloomy rugby seen on the other side of the equator.

  • Comment 15, posted at 11.04.11 22:01:40 by beet Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
  • Good read.

    I think you have it spot on Morne.

    I’ll add that I think our players don’t adapt to the circumstances because they don’t have the tactical know how to go ahead and change the game plan. You should be able to coach that into a player though.

    It reminds me of Rassie with his Flash Cards and Disco Lights though. Was he being authoritarian not trusting his players to make their own decisions or did they not have the ability to think tactically for themselves anyway?

  • Comment 16, posted at 12.04.11 08:58:11 by KSA Shark © Reply

    KSA Shark ©
  • Good arti Morne. It really opens your eyes to the ability of team to not only adapt their play ahead of the game but also during the game. The Reds has those initiative taking players to do so. The question then lies in why the SA teams (and other teams in the S15 as well) not do the same? Is it because we do not have the type of players that allows you to cope with such a change in tactic or is it just because the same style of play is drilled into our players from school level?

  • Comment 17, posted at 12.04.11 09:18:24 by Viking Reply
  • The Sharks are conspicuous by their absence in this article. Come on Morne! Tell us what you think! :mrgreen:

  • Comment 18, posted at 12.04.11 09:25:44 by klempie Reply

  • @Viking (Comment 17) :

    Again, I will bring it down to how the hours are spent on the training pitch…

    Ask yourself…

    How many professional rugby coaches in SA has a mind-coach as part of his backroom staff?

  • Comment 19, posted at 12.04.11 09:26:45 by Morné Reply
  • @klempie (Comment 18) :

    The Sharks had a gentleman in their ranks a while back, Tim Goodenough, most of these players would have worked with or under him…

    It was mentioned in a post above, and I have said this before, I am not sold on Plumtree as a head coach.

    The departure of Tim coincided with Plum taking over the reigns, Rob may confirm this but I am sure of this.

    Also, as the post above pointed out, Plum has this tendency to put the blame on the players – first naivity on attack (Crusaders), then on defence (Stormers).

    He ‘expects’ his players to react better on the field, and I think what he is missing is that they will only do this once they are coached (on the training pitch) to do this…

    That is my honest opinion.

  • Comment 20, posted at 12.04.11 09:30:36 by Morné Reply
  • @Morné (Comment 9) : how many times have we seen a south african team trying to smash it up the middle, or continuously kick ball away – clearly without result. We all too often find ourselves sinking without a clear distinctive well thought out plan B – or as you say an ability to drift between styles of play to have a positive outcome on the scoreboard. We as a rugby nation need to become smarter four attack options will beat one every time, the ability to change your approach, your defensive positional play…

  • Comment 21, posted at 12.04.11 09:31:48 by DarkDestroyer Reply

  • @Morné (Comment 20) : Interesting.

  • Comment 22, posted at 12.04.11 09:31:56 by klempie Reply

  • @Morné (Comment 20) : You are correct. TG left just after Muir left and Plum became coach.

  • Comment 23, posted at 12.04.11 09:33:33 by KSA Shark © Reply

    KSA Shark ©
  • Another issue on this subject is how our coaches are brought through or developed.

    The subject of this article is in essence, the robotic, automatic reactions of our players – but this extends to our coaches to.

    Let me explain.

    Apart from Allister (I might be wrong), all 4 franchise coaches in SA coaching the Lions, Cheetahs, Sharks and Bulls were players turn coaches. Apart from the Bulls, quite recently too.

    Although these coaches are and were exposed to brilliant training or coaching methods and methadologies, they will more often than not coach players the way they have been coached (because in their mind it worked for them, so it will work for everyone else).

    Coaching in the pro-game is as much man-management (the psychological part) as it is designing game-plans or strategies. In fact, given the experts in rugby today, you can have a specialist in your coaching setup to cover every single area! Just this week I read of a guy that was with the Stormers/WP (now Italy) called a contact and collision expert… Apparently he is awesome but that is not the point – point is, technically you can cover all the bases.

    It is in coaching your players how to think, and react, where the challenge of the modern coach lies.

  • Comment 24, posted at 12.04.11 09:36:19 by Morné Reply
  • Many coaches try to mould their assets into one cohesive unit, but it is clear that gamebreakers and playmakers need to have license to trust their instinct and their flair – to bring the best out of x-men is to give them x-men license. Think Jerry Collins, Carlos Spencer, Tana Umaga, Dan Carter, Christian Cullen, Frans Steyn, James O Connor, Quade Cooper etc. These types of players thrive off flair, and respond to being given the responsibility to make something happen.

  • Comment 25, posted at 12.04.11 09:37:58 by DarkDestroyer Reply

  • @DarkDestroyer (Comment 21) :

    I had a chat to a very well-know NZ rugby expert (he is on NZ TV quite often), he told me that the sheer raw talent that South Africa possess is quite amazing, and unlike anything in the world, even NZ.

    I asked him jokingly if that worries him looking at the future of NZ rugby as a power house?

    He said no, because lucky for them, we continually manage to coach the natural talent out of our players!

    I asked him if I can quote him on record, and he said to me, not a bloody chance!! 🙂

  • Comment 26, posted at 12.04.11 09:39:14 by Morné Reply
  • @Morné (Comment 26) : I can absolutely believe that, the guys need technical coaching, gameplan coaching to form part of a strategy, BUT must be given license to break out and call an audible on a specific plan and inject some flair. With a coach who gives his team the blessing to try something different on attack options you will get a very responsive unit – but there is merit in building an arsenal of different attack and defence options to continually dominate the game in 20 minute segments. Drift between territory, posession biased attack through phase play and then switch it up with a blitz like approach where your pivot makes a break with varying attackers on his inside and outside – The Crusaders make it look good, but it is actually a very simple approach; what makes it difficult is knowing that all attackers might feature on this particular attack and you don’t know the angles. Build up your attacking option – its vital!

  • Comment 27, posted at 12.04.11 09:47:50 by DarkDestroyer Reply

  • @DarkDestroyer (Comment 25) :

    Cooper was the most pragmatic, boring flyhalf on Saturday – but I get your point – the ability for him to change between these roles are amazing.

    Certain positions are more important than others depending on which phase of the game you find yourself in. In other words, in different phases or areas of rugby, on attack and defence, there are vital decision makers.

    These guys play a vital role in how the team performs in each areas. of course everything is interlinked, and even these decision-makers will be worthless if not supported by the rest of the team, but that is again the job of the coach, to identify and coach these players and empower them with the skills and abilities required to react better to an ever-changing dynamic which is what rugby is!

    I follow Dewald Potgieter’s column with interest, and follow just about every rugby player I can on twitter.

    Can I tell you what I find most interesting?

    To me they come forward as mentally fragile little cookies who are two steps away from a mental breakdown. Most of them are cynical and paranoid beyond belief.

    Then take yourself back to just last week.

    I read on twitter where Quade Cooper mentioned he just had something to eat, and that he is heading out to a local club to play some touch.

    Next morning, I pick up an article from Sport Illustrated wher Cooper went to Hammies and joined a couple of club players in 6-down touch.

    Now you might have picked up how Rob struggles to get to chat to players to bring you guys interviews – hell you will also note how all of us (including myself) have to tread so lightly and watch what we say or how we criticise in fear of players shutting us out from their little circle.

    And then look at a guy like Cooper – goes out on his own, joins a club in a foreign country, mingles with the players, join them for a game of touch 2 nights before a Super rugby fixture having a good time.

    What mental state do you think a guy like Cooper was in going into the Newlands game on Saturday? And compare that to someone like Grant, or De Jongh or any other Stormers player?

    Quite simply, our players do not need to learn much more on how to catch, pass or kick a ball or tackle – they have been doing that since they were 5 years old. Refining the technical aspects of the game should take no more than 3 hours a week in a team training context (individual skills trainning of course is a different subject).

    We need to coach them how to think rugby.

    Last example I want to give…

    Last night UCT won the Varsity Cup – I am as happy as a pig in shit!

    But cast your mind back to the last 3 league games of the competition.

    They were absolutely smashed at home by Maties and UJ (they were unbeaten up till then).

    Their last league match, which saw them having to fight for a semi-final spot was in Pretoria against Tukkies.

    They won that game, they also then booked a home semi and smashed Shimlas, and of course last night, they travelled to Pretoria for a final against a team that comfortably beat UJ in their semi, and ran out winners with an eventual 10 point margin.

    What happened between the Maties and UJ losses and last night?

    One Doc Sherryl Calder joined the team – the same Doc Calder who has been involved with the top rugby school in SA for a number of years now.

    A scientist, who does not use tackle bags or cones to coach players – yet she has two rugby world cup medals…

    Is she involved with any SA Super Rugby franchise? No.

    We are missing something very obvious…

  • Comment 28, posted at 12.04.11 09:56:03 by Morné Reply
  • @Morné (Comment 26) : That is so true, I still believe that Harry Viljoen had some great ideas about that, with his no kicking policy etc, he just happened to coincide with the wrong batch of players to do it with. They were not the best Springbok side ever to grace the jersey?

  • Comment 29, posted at 12.04.11 10:05:24 by Whindy Reply
    Competition WinnerCompetition Winner
  • @Morné (Comment 28) : As a matter of interest, which schools she involved in. I still think that Habana’s success at the last world cup had a lot to do with her peripheral vision training and he did acknowledge that as well.

  • Comment 30, posted at 12.04.11 10:10:57 by Whindy Reply
    Competition WinnerCompetition Winner
  • @Whindy (Comment 30) :

    Grey Bloem.

  • Comment 31, posted at 12.04.11 10:13:35 by Morné Reply
  • pdv showed that he lacks character, when after the dismal results of 2008 he succumbed to pressure of playing what the was called ‘structured’ rugby. Add on the pressure to win the british & irish lions series, our man became an ardent believer of the ‘kick n chase’ gospel.

    The worst indictment of this non-thinking, non-adapting approach was the match against ireland where the boks had a dominant scrum, parity & even slight dominance of the collisions but kicked and chased even though rob kearney was gobling up all those kicks and counter-attacking – with BoD in tow – with great success. We lost to the irish.

    I forsee the same thing if heyneke meyer is made Bok coach. I’m yet to see any of this adaptability from a team he has coached.

  • Comment 32, posted at 12.04.11 10:20:12 by Megatron Reply

  • @Morné (Comment 19) : I agree with you and it has a lot to do with the mindset of the players. For example: Quade Cooper must be one of the most self confident players out there. Granted his confidence may be mixed with arrogance etc. but that is the type of player you need to make it successful. Someone who is willing to back himself and make things happen. Mix that with a mandate from the coach to be allowed to change things up makes for a leathal combination which we can refer to as the reds current situation. Its working in their favour at the moment.

  • Comment 33, posted at 12.04.11 10:31:02 by Viking Reply
  • @Morné (Comment 31) : Makes sense, Thanks.

  • Comment 34, posted at 12.04.11 10:37:28 by Whindy Reply
    Competition WinnerCompetition Winner
  • @Viking (Comment 33) :

    Which brings me back to the one question?

    Who coaches our players’ minds?

  • Comment 35, posted at 12.04.11 10:39:28 by Morné Reply
  • @Morné (Comment 35) : Its one of those things that made Jake White successful in wining the WC in 07. He employed the mind coaches and the visual perception coaches etc. It gave the players a increased awarenes and edge above the other teams. I now wonder if any of the current coaches took some of those lessons learnt and applied them in the S15, Currie cup etc?

  • Comment 36, posted at 12.04.11 10:46:45 by Viking Reply
  • @Viking (Comment 36) :

    You want the quick answer?


    Some players individually consult these people, Louis Ludik is one of them I know.

  • Comment 37, posted at 12.04.11 10:48:18 by Morné Reply
  • Another one by our mighting Morne 😆

    Great Morne it was really interesting

  • Comment 38, posted at 12.04.11 10:53:37 by chaz Reply

  • @Morné (Comment 28) : It was at Villagers and please don’t mention it again because I’m still kicking myself about missing that game 👿 😥

  • Comment 39, posted at 12.04.11 11:04:55 by Clayton(PJLD) Reply
  • @chaz (Comment 38) :


    @Clayton(PJLD) (Comment 39) :


  • Comment 40, posted at 12.04.11 11:05:48 by Morné Reply
  • @Morné (Comment 28) : Another thing about Dr Calder is that if you follow her on twitter she is practically gagging for a local coaching gig, still follows up with the players she has coached but gets no love from the local franchises.

    She probably worked for UCT for free.

  • Comment 41, posted at 12.04.11 11:06:46 by Clayton(PJLD) Reply
  • @Clayton(PJLD) (Comment 41) :

    Not just that, she is in a different country every other week coaching some pro team in some code!

    Obviously, her stuff is groundbreaking.

  • Comment 42, posted at 12.04.11 11:09:23 by Morné Reply
  • Good article.
    @wpw (Comment 7) :
    I am not a Pro fan, not at all, but at least he called what he saw and was not intimidated by the crowd. It doesnt help being pissed off with him for calling players for tripping and high tackles.

  • Comment 43, posted at 12.04.11 11:12:37 by Salmonoid Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Salmonoid the Subtle
  • @Morné (Comment 28) : We are missing something very obvious indeed. She’s a woman. 😎

  • Comment 44, posted at 12.04.11 12:03:52 by SharonvanWyk Reply
  • @SharonvanWyk (Comment 44) : Just how many of the fairer sex are involved in rugby at a senior, coaching level and not just doing physio or PR? Bet you’ll struggle to fill the fingers on one hand on that score… 😯 😉

  • Comment 45, posted at 12.04.11 12:05:12 by SharonvanWyk Reply
  • @Salmonoid (Comment 43) :

    If I’m not mistaken he didn’t make the call when Fourie tripped the Reds player at the ruck – the referee saw that one.

    I am referring to numerous calls in our half when he missed a few decisions. All I ask for is consistency!!

  • Comment 46, posted at 12.04.11 12:09:15 by wpw Reply
  • @SharonvanWyk (Comment 45) : Let me illustrate further… Supersport is currently looking for its first female rugby presenter… Rather than advertise and appoint a first-class journalist with experience and depth what do they rather do? Turn it into an Idols competition called “Lady Rugga”. Puhleeze… Women in rugby will never be taken seriously by the powers that be. Let alone have a shot at coaching a provincial or national squad! 😆 🙄

  • Comment 47, posted at 12.04.11 12:11:40 by SharonvanWyk Reply
  • @SharonvanWyk (Comment 47) :

    Still say that job is made for Wynand Olivier.

  • Comment 48, posted at 12.04.11 12:34:40 by Morné Reply
  • @Morné (Comment 48) : 😆 😆

  • Comment 49, posted at 12.04.11 12:39:04 by Pokkel Reply
    Friend of SharksworldCompetition Winner Author
  • @Morné (Comment 48) : He tackles and catches like a girl anyway 😉

  • Comment 50, posted at 12.04.11 12:39:32 by Pokkel Reply
    Friend of SharksworldCompetition Winner Author
  • @wpw (Comment 46) : Pro called the Fourie trip. The ref saw the earlier trip by Blaauw (or Harris) while lying on the ground and should have also issued a card but didnt.
    Agree on the consistamcy.

  • Comment 51, posted at 12.04.11 13:29:52 by Salmonoid Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Salmonoid the Subtle
  • @Salmonoid (Comment 51) :

    I actually only saw the trip by Blaauw. 🙄

    Dude, you’re not the most objective blogger when it comes to the Stormers. You HATE us!! 😈 😉

  • Comment 52, posted at 12.04.11 13:35:20 by wpw Reply
  • @Morné (Comment 48) : 😆 Classic. And fully sponsored by Timotei! 😆

  • Comment 53, posted at 12.04.11 14:56:38 by SharonvanWyk Reply
  • @SharonvanWyk (Comment 47) : OOOOOOO – wait for my article on this thing they call lady Rugga! 😉

  • Comment 54, posted at 12.04.11 15:33:27 by Ice Reply
    Competition Winner Ice
  • @Ice (Comment 54) : Oh goodie. Can’t wait. 😛

  • Comment 55, posted at 12.04.11 17:12:43 by SharonvanWyk Reply
  • @Ice (Comment 54) : Very nearly got up onto my soapbox on that one, I tell you. Bloody circus, if you ask me. And how long has it taken Supersport to wake up to the fact that women have an intelligent contribution to make to their little boys-only club? Grrrr. Makes my blood boil, it does! 😈

  • Comment 56, posted at 12.04.11 17:14:54 by SharonvanWyk Reply

Add Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.