vanmartin

Back to the drawing board?


Written by Martin van Niekerk (vanmartin)

Posted in :Bulls, Original Content, Sharks, Super Rugby on 24 Mar 2014 at 09:27
Tagged with : , , , , , , ,

Sharks players and fans alike hate losing to the Bulls. Losing at Loftus borders on offending something in our basic makeup. A bonus point win at home against the Bulls is expected and proves we’re a decent side but a win at the fortress seems required before we can claim that we’re better than the Bulls.

I’ll be the first to admit that I’m guilty of this thinking and will probably remain so for a while yet. I don’t make the point to condemn the mindset but rather to provide context. As a supporter it’s always a challenge to look at the state of affairs objectively but after a loss to the Bulls at Loftus one needs a day or three to come to really come to terms with it.

Let me start by making my intentions clear. I’m not interested in providing excuses but would rather try to bring some perspective to Saturday’s game in the interest of sparking some healthy debate. Is it back to the drawing board for Jake and his charges or is it time for fine-tuning?

A common complaint I’ve come across is that the Sharks seem one-dimensional for large parts of their games. I offer the following counterpoint: at home the Durban humidity limited the Sharks options on attack. We saw many a promising opposition movement go a begging due to the conditions. The Reds probably still suffer from the nightmares. I maintain that the Sharks played the conditions better and thus came away with four wins and two bonus points in four games. They were the team that capitalised on most of their opportunities when points were on and thus they came away with the win. Employing only certain patterns of play to get those points may be more savvy than lack of imagination at this time of the year in Durban.

I had the privilege of attending the press conference after Saturday’s game and though Jake wasn’t very chatty his comments were enlightening. A lot of plays were planned to run off Pat in this game. Based on this remark we can summise that the Sharks felt that conditions finally allowed for some more variety in their style of play.

Losing your halfback pair so early in the game is catastrophic in that case. We have decent backup in both positions but lack of playing time, confidence and inexperience makes firing on all cylinders a tough proposition at Loftus. Not even mentioning the mental knock the team takes when seeing their generals leave the field. Is it so surprising that the team, subconsciously perhaps, revert to entrusting play to their go-to forwards and players like Frans Steyn?

There are a number of objections that can (and should) be raised to the above points, including substitutions and rotation. Let’s however debate these while trying to maintain at least some perspective.


77 Comments

  • Just heard on Ballz radio that Lambie and Reinach are out for 6 weeks.

  • Comment 1, posted at 24.03.14 09:31:31 by catfish Reply
    Author
    catfish
     
  • All true, but I was very concerned that the team wasn’t able to adapt during the game. At some stage somebody has to realise that the one-off runners were being murdered, that they kicked better than us. Sweil was obvious not expected to play 75 min but why did Frans not move to 10 sooner when they realised the plan wasn’t working.

    My biggest gripe is that we didn’t adapt mid game when we saw the plan wasn’t working. I wonder what was said half time.

    And while I’m busy, Jake White needs to shut his trap prior to games. Do the talking on the field please.

  • Comment 2, posted at 24.03.14 09:34:28 by Pokkel Reply
    Friend of SharksworldCompetition Winner Author
     
  • Your quite the scribe, Mr. Vanmartin!

  • Comment 3, posted at 24.03.14 09:38:46 by Culling Song Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
    Culling Song
     
  • 6 weeks isn’t bad. Hard luck to the two lads. Wishing you both a speedy recovery. Need to entrust Fred with the flyhalf position. Fred has certain qualities we can definitely use, also has a good boot, pass and rugby brain. Back up scrumhalf for McLeod?

  • Comment 4, posted at 24.03.14 09:39:34 by GreatSharksays Reply

     
  • @catfish (Comment 1) : At least the team can prepare during this coming week accordingly.

    Time for Fred-Z to get his chance at the top, sadly McLeod only ever plays well when pushed for position…Ungerer is probably still a bit green for SR.

    Our forwards were really hammered by the bulls’. It was painful to watch our strongmen being man-handled like little kittens.

    Frans Steyn (to a lesser extent) and especially Bismarck, seem to get completely side-tracked by their ability to make big-hits on the opposition, and end up forgetting that there’s a game to be won.

    This weekend I’d like to see our backup front row starting (will never happen, but it’s my wishlist), and Terror ahead of butter fingers Kanko (how many times did he run the exact same line into that monster flank 🙄 ).

  • Comment 5, posted at 24.03.14 09:40:22 by FireTheLooser Reply

     
  • @catfish (Comment 1) : Oh Shite! Not good at all.

  • Comment 6, posted at 24.03.14 09:41:15 by Caratacus Reply

    Caratacus
     
  • @Pokkel (Comment 2) : His mouth keeps us supporters honest. 😈

  • Comment 7, posted at 24.03.14 09:42:00 by FireTheLooser Reply

     
  • So a lot of players would have run off Lambie, but couldn’t run off Swiel? What a load of bullshit.

    Either everyone knows and can play the game plan or you’re doing something wrong. There’s no point in playing a certain way with players a, b and c on the park and having to change everything when x, y and z is on.

  • Comment 8, posted at 24.03.14 09:44:22 by rhineshark Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Spirit of Rugby
     
  • We took a risk with the bench, and when Lambie and Reinach was off so early our game plan exploded. We were out kicked as well. I think we went into the game with at least two game plans, but both backfired pretty spectacularly. We got monstered up front and our kicking game was poor. It’s pretty stupid to play for territory and then never challenge at the line outs. I would have loved to see our attack concentrating more on the flyhalf channel in stead of close to the ruck.

    It had to happen that we have a bad game, and I’m pretty glad it happened in SA and not overseas. I hope Fred gets a start against the waratahs.

  • Comment 9, posted at 24.03.14 09:45:49 by PTAShark Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
    Dragnipur
     
  • My first bitch was at SS. Suddenly I see Tim Swiel on the field and no mention of substitution. Then I see McCleod on the field and no sign of Cobus Reinach anywhere. A lot of the game appeared to be filmed from a satellite somewhere over the South Atlantic. But yes, the second choice front row did better it seemed to me, something i noted in the last game. Bismarck was quiet at Captain, not sure why, usually he’s vocal.I dont see what harm it would do to start the bench front row, they can always be subbed if it’s not working. The Du Plessis brothers and Beast need some time off even if its on the bench.

  • Comment 10, posted at 24.03.14 09:47:01 by Caratacus Reply

    Caratacus
     
  • I hope we learn the following from the game:

    1) Jake needs to exercise more discretion in terms of his public utterances before the game

    2) We’re not as good (yet) as we are made out to be by certain sectors of the media and fans. Now is the time to ignore the hype and knuckle down

    3) Losing your 9 & 10 within the first 10 minutes, while an unlikely occurrence, can happen, and as suchrour substitutes need to be adequately managed and prepared for stepping into the breach

    4) Bismarck still has some way to go before being the finished article as captain

    5) We need a backup plan in the event of not gaining physical ascendancy

    6) Losing this game is not a train smash. How we respond is what will define our season

  • Comment 11, posted at 24.03.14 09:49:52 by Culling Song Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
    Culling Song
     
  • very disapointed. it was a hard match to watch and to me it looked like the boys lacked intensity especially the forwards! it looked like they didn’t want any part of the bulls and than most disapointing was bissie. this captain thing is not working out for him yet. i am hoping its just form and he will find his mojo sooner or later but i am starting to think maybe its the caiptancy that is waying him down 😐

  • Comment 12, posted at 24.03.14 09:50:28 by Poisy Reply
    Author
    Poisy
     
  • @catfish (Comment 1) : That seems to be in line with Jake’s ‘guesstimates’ on Saturday evening. Don’t know if Ballz based their comments on Jake’s own or whether someone inside the Sharks camp has confirmed Jake’s speculations. Guess we’ll have to wait for official confirmation.

    @Pokkel (Comment 2) : Valid points. I too was hoping that the team would back their running game a little more but kudos to the Sharks for at least staying in the game until the dying seconds.

    I have to admit that I was also a little puzzled with Swiel being thrown into the deep end immediately instead of shifting Frans to flyhalf instead. Can kick myself for not thinking to ask Jake about it but I was more concerned with our injuries at the time. Perhaps it’s a case of Jake simply rating Swiel enough to back him from the start? These gambles sometime pay dividends and makes the coach look like a genius and on other occasions they backfire.

  • Comment 13, posted at 24.03.14 09:50:33 by vanmartin Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
    vanmartin
     
  • @rhineshark (Comment 8) : Just because you know the recipe, doesn’t mean you’re going to be able to execute it in your first senior rugby game + first super rugby game + vs. a very hostile bulls team.

    Swiel has never been exposed to anything like this, and you expect him to just seamlessly resume service as though nothing happened?

    JW was bamboozled by Lambie’s injury, and he really never planned for this, as Swiel was probably fb cover.

    He threw the boy in the deep end, and the rest of the team ended up spending more time protecting him than playing the game.

  • Comment 14, posted at 24.03.14 09:52:35 by FireTheLooser Reply

     
  • @rhineshark (Comment 8) : I think that’s the ideal but there’s enough evidence to prove that it hardly ever works out like that. If that were the case JLP’s inclusion in the Bull’s team should not have made the impact it did. Players have varied skill sets and confidence plays a huge role. I suspect the occasion may have been a little big for Swiel even if he knew and understood all the prepared moves.

    EDIT: ^ What FireTheLooser said ^

  • Comment 15, posted at 24.03.14 09:55:10 by vanmartin Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
    vanmartin
     
  • @Culling Song (Comment 3) : Huge compliment coming from you. Thank you!

  • Comment 16, posted at 24.03.14 09:55:49 by vanmartin Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
    vanmartin
     
  • First off…Saturday was like stepping into a time machine and watching John Plumtree’s Sharks sides 👿

    1. Don’t catch the ball standing still and then try to generate momentum. It doesn’t work! Players should be running onto the ball at speed in order to knock the opposition backwards.

    2. Don’t kick EVERYTHNG away!! We should be holding onto the ball and running at the opposition. The Blues and Cheetahs showed that counter-attack can be effective. We need to become the Sharks of last year’s Currie Cup who entertained and dazzled with skill, flair and confidence.

    3. We need a breakdown specialist! Deon Stegmann murdered us at the rucks and , surprisingly, so did Jacques du Plessis. I was very impressed by his efforts and workrate as a fetcher!!

    4. Last but not least, DON’T KICK EVERYTHING AWAY!!!!

    This is a minor setback and I’d rather lose now and away from home than in the final so take it on the chin guys and let’s bounce back. A loss is only acceptable if we take the lessons from it.

  • Comment 17, posted at 24.03.14 10:15:03 by ChrisS Reply
    Author
    ChrisS
     
  • Ouens relax! WE are still going to make it!

  • Comment 18, posted at 24.03.14 10:15:37 by R Hayward Reply

     
  • As I said last week we are building a team and it takes time. I think many people are overreacting. We are still top of the log!

    Better to get a wake up call now than later in the finals or semi finals.

    I spoke to somebody who was in Bloem for the free state VC game. He mentioned that Jaco van Tonder, Fred, Wors, and Hewitt played very well. I trust we will get a match report today.

    In the context of the above a few comments about our loss:

    1. Jake White should stop shooting his opinions off about other teams and players. There is egg is all over his face.

    2. Where is the team spirit and passion we showed in the Currie Cup ?

    3. Bismarck is the best in the world and will get his form back. Willem Alberts and Frans Steyn has been great in all the games.

    4. Feel sorry for Pat and Jaco. Heard Fred kicked a very good penalty in the 78 minute to win the VC game. He showed us in the CC he has everything. Big mistake from Jake to choose Swiel. Very concerned with a back up scrumhalf !

    5. Locks ??? Bressler poorly the last two games. Lewies will get there in time. Brain dead Ettienne Jake’s boy Oosthuizen, sitting next to a maul playing the ball with his hands. Penalty in front of the posts. This guy is a serious liability. Wake up Jake! Play Lewies with Hewitt and put Bressler on the bench as he can cover both 4 and 5.

    All that being said the season is ahead of us and let us keep the faith. Go Sharks !!!!!!!!

  • Comment 19, posted at 24.03.14 10:17:14 by Observer Reply

    Observer
     
  • @FireTheLooser (Comment 14) : That’s just poor planning then. Everyone knows that an injury can occur at any time to any player.

    Champion teams don’t seem to have this problem. Carter (the most influential flyhalf ever to play the game) gets injured and his understudy just slots in fluently. Why?

  • Comment 20, posted at 24.03.14 10:29:27 by rhineshark Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Spirit of Rugby
     
  • @rhineshark (Comment 20) : Can’t agree with your example, the Crusaders seem to be missing Carter’s composure at the moment. I still maintain there are very few like-for-like replacements in a squad.

  • Comment 21, posted at 24.03.14 10:31:50 by vanmartin Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
    vanmartin
     
  • @vanmartin (Comment 15) : Then don’t play players, who can’t fit into the plan.

    Why is Swiel there over Zeilinga, who has plenty of experience of the Sharks game plan? Why is Sithole playing 13 and not JPP, who is a bloody good 13 and has S15 experience in that position?

    Why are we playing a mindless bash-it-up game with a gamebreaking 8thman like Kanko? We all saw how that turned out.

    I just don’t see ANY difference between this Sharks side and the Sharks sides of the past 6 years.

  • Comment 22, posted at 24.03.14 10:36:20 by rhineshark Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Spirit of Rugby
     
  • @rhineshark (Comment 20) : Only 6 places on the bench to cover 15. Some time every coach is going to get caught with their pants around their ankles with an unexpected injury.

  • Comment 23, posted at 24.03.14 10:38:53 by PTAShark Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
    Dragnipur
     
  • @vanmartin (Comment 21) : The Crusaders are struggling, because their forwards are crap.

  • Comment 24, posted at 24.03.14 10:39:09 by rhineshark Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Spirit of Rugby
     
  • Losing to the Bulls at Loftus after losing our halfbacks by only 4 points is not really a concern imho.

  • Comment 25, posted at 24.03.14 10:40:11 by Son Of Mayhem Reply
    Competition WinnerCompetition WinnerCompetition Winner
    JarsonX
     
  • @PTAShark (Comment 23) : Sure, if you’re forced to play a wing at flyhalf – not if you’re replacing like for like.

  • Comment 26, posted at 24.03.14 10:41:49 by rhineshark Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Spirit of Rugby
     
  • @rhineshark (Comment 22) : @Son Of Mayhem (Comment 25) : We played brain-dead rugby which didn’t utilise any of our strengths and we still only lost by 4 points.

    We have the potential to beat all opponents but we aren’t yet playing as a team. It’s more like a bunch of talented individuals who show rare moments of cohesion before drifting off back to sleep.

  • Comment 27, posted at 24.03.14 10:43:57 by ChrisS Reply
    Author
    ChrisS
     
  • @ChrisS (Comment 27) : The problem is that we’ve seen this all before. Every year as a Sharks supporter is a Déjà vu year.

  • Comment 28, posted at 24.03.14 10:46:00 by rhineshark Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Spirit of Rugby
     
  • Honestly don’t think either team had a good day. Tactical kicking wasn’t not that good by both, and breakdowns too. TBtw, we turned over more ball than the Bulls.

    Losing the halfback pair so soon was such a huge setback. The synergy between Charl and Tim was just not there. Can’t blame either as they’ve not played together before.
    This allowed the bulls to focus their defence elsewhere. I.e Marcell. Yet we still came so close to snatching the win.

    My main disappointment was the lack of grit by the front row. I’ve got no doubt they will bring their A game to the Waratahs though. Sometimes you need to lose to bring a side back down to earth.

  • Comment 29, posted at 24.03.14 10:47:10 by gregkaos Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
    gregkaos
     
  • @rhineshark (Comment 22) : I’d once again disagree with you. The Bulls main woes came from playing players early in the season who don’t fit their game plan. I think they’d find themselves in serious trouble if they were to lose JLP. Same goes for the Lions with Boshoff or the Reds with Cooper/Genia.

    I’m not sure why Swiel got the nod ahead of Zeilinga but were I to guess I’d venture it was simple rotation to give Fred some game-time and keep him fresh. Sithole is proving a good pick at 13 so why move JPP away from his best position? I offer an opinion on why our game-plan seemed one dimensional in the article itself. Boils down to the loss of key players in key positions.

    @rhineshark (Comment 24) : Remember that I’m not offering a analysis on why the Crusaders are struggling, I’m simply stating that I think they’re missing Carter’s composure. His command of the game serves as a reassurance to both the Crusaders and the All Blacks. Both teams (much to our frustration) have won many a game with their forwards on the back foot.

  • Comment 30, posted at 24.03.14 11:16:12 by vanmartin Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
    vanmartin
     
  • @rhineshark (Comment 28) : We were so good in the Currie Cup but maybe Jake’s style of coaching is very different to Brendan Venter’s.

  • Comment 31, posted at 24.03.14 11:25:54 by ChrisS Reply
    Author
    ChrisS
     
  • O gees! We lose one game 🙄

    I’d like to see all the whiners come back and apologize when we smash the tahs this week.

    The Bulls played a better game. Every team will and in fact have already lost this season. In fact every team will probably lose at least 3 or 4 games this season.

    Please try not to react like this for every loss.

    What I’ll be really interested in seeing is how we come back against the Tahs, we have a tendency to lose a couple after that first lost. Now if that trend continues here, then I’ll start to complain.

  • Comment 32, posted at 24.03.14 11:41:22 by Letgo Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
    Letgo
     
  • O and by the way. The Currie Cup is not nearly as competitive as SR. To make comparisons between the two makes no sense.

  • Comment 33, posted at 24.03.14 11:43:18 by Letgo Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
    Letgo
     
  • I Just cant understand why we tried to beat the Bulls at their own game, on their own turf, they are just better at is than us. Dont understand the tactic to kick and chase all night.

    Also I’m not convinced by Jake’s rotation policy. It should be clearer who the 2nd choice flyhalf is (Steyn, Swiel or Zeilinga), same with 1st centre (Esterhuizen or Williams). These guys should then be groomed and backed in these roles.

  • Comment 34, posted at 24.03.14 11:44:10 by stevovo Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    stevovo
     
  • I can understand losing Lambie and having the rookie at 10 can mess up any back line play.

    However one-off runners from a standing start should be banned from all game plans IMO – it is simply a stupid tactic.

    Then rather use the Bulls favourite – I have forgotten the technical term now – the 1 player with the ball, closely followed by 1-2 forwards to set up the next ruck.

  • Comment 35, posted at 24.03.14 12:10:28 by Bokhoring Reply
    Administrator
    Bokhoring
     
  • @Bokhoring (Comment 35) : mini pods

  • Comment 36, posted at 24.03.14 12:11:58 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylan
     
  • @Letgo (Comment 32) : I agree it is not a train smash – rather loose with a bonus point to the Bulls than getting a hiding from the Tahs.

    Hopefully the team got shaken out of their hubris, and get the inevitable first lost out of the system. I was honestly getting worried about everyone and his dog blowing smoke up the team and Jake’s behinds.

    SA teams rarely do well as the favourites.

  • Comment 37, posted at 24.03.14 12:14:06 by Bokhoring Reply
    Administrator
    Bokhoring
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 36) : that is the one – thanks

  • Comment 38, posted at 24.03.14 12:14:41 by Bokhoring Reply
    Administrator
    Bokhoring
     
  • @Observer (Comment 19) : just remember who was captain in cc keegan , after really thinking after the game and calmed down bissie is no captain look how the team played when he was of and stein took over different team he is no leader

  • Comment 39, posted at 24.03.14 12:34:53 by sharks4eve2013 Reply

    sharks4eve2013
     
  • Knowing someone behind the scenes, I have it on good authority that the plan was to run the Bulls ragged. Such a pity we didn’t get to see that plan unfold, although I suspect that it probably wouldn’t have as we completely lost the physical battle up front! Your backup flyhalf should know all the plays though surely? Personally I’m very concerned about Bismarck’s lack of impact on the drive and at the breakdown, he literally is making no ground at all, and seems hesitant and indecisive. I wonder if he is carrying an injury OR is he concerned about leading with his elbow maybe…

  • Comment 40, posted at 24.03.14 12:40:55 by neilster Reply

     
  • @Letgo (Comment 33) : i think observer was train to talk about the passion and i saw none on Saturday look at jlp when he got the penalty at the ruck when we were holding on that was the difference between them and us they wanted it and we just pitched

  • Comment 41, posted at 24.03.14 12:42:30 by sharks4eve2013 Reply

    sharks4eve2013
     
  • @Letgo (Comment 32) : As one of the “whiners” it has more to do with how we lose – not the actual loss.

    We didn’t show any structure with ball in hand, either kicked away good possession (again!) or held it in the tackle (and got turned over), our tight five was nowhere, and there was no leadership.

    If you’re happy with that fine, but I’ll whine till the cows come home until I see something better.

    We all knew the real test would be at Loftus on a beautiful day and a dry field after all the excuses about the humidity stifling our supposed creative game plan. Well, nothing changed. We might as well have played during a monsoon downpour.

  • Comment 42, posted at 24.03.14 12:45:22 by rhineshark Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Spirit of Rugby
     
  • @neilster (Comment 40) : You’re shitting me! 😯

  • Comment 43, posted at 24.03.14 12:46:22 by rhineshark Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Spirit of Rugby
     
  • @rhineshark (Comment 42) : It’s the attitude that really got to me and the lack of imagination. I’d rather lose a game by 4 points knowing that we were good on attack and that the guys played their hearts out than lose the way we did on Saturday.

  • Comment 44, posted at 24.03.14 13:00:20 by ChrisS Reply
    Author
    ChrisS
     
  • @rhineshark (Comment 43) : :mrgreen: 😆

  • Comment 45, posted at 24.03.14 13:01:33 by ChrisS Reply
    Author
    ChrisS
     
  • I’m going to try a slightly different tack regarding Swiel and flyhalf play that hopefully more clearly illustrates my point. What if McLeod and Swiel knew all the plays the Sharks were planning to run? What if they just couldn’t execute the plays for whatever reason (lack of experience, confidence, space, time playing together etc…)? Does this excuse the loss? Nope. Does it help to explain the one dimensional attack? Yes.

    *I honestly can’t imagine Swiel not knowing the plays. If the Sharks were planning an expensive game as many have suggested it would also make sense to bring Swiel in at flyhalf and keep Steyn at 12 (as Steyn would not have practiced the flyhalve’s plays).

  • Comment 46, posted at 24.03.14 13:10:25 by vanmartin Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
    vanmartin
     
  • @vanmartin (Comment 46) : Quite possibly Swiel did know them, but it also didn’t help that we kept dropping the ball when we tried to run it, which you could see re-energized the Bulls defense each time and game them belief. I’d be very tempted to have Steyn at 10 and bring back Whitehead at 12, now that we are without Lambie…

  • Comment 47, posted at 24.03.14 13:20:34 by neilster Reply

     
  • @neilster (Comment 47) : whitehead’s injured again

  • Comment 48, posted at 24.03.14 13:29:58 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylan
     
  • @neilster (Comment 47) : The spilt balls were frustrating to watch. Lack of focus is a concern.

  • Comment 49, posted at 24.03.14 13:30:54 by vanmartin Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
    vanmartin
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 48) : Oh really, jeepers makes it difficult for us to promote this oke when he keeps getting injured!

  • Comment 50, posted at 24.03.14 13:33:12 by neilster Reply

     
  • @robdylan (Comment 48) : Poor guy just cannot catch a break.

  • Comment 51, posted at 24.03.14 13:33:12 by vanmartin Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
    vanmartin
     
  • My main gripe about losing on Saturday is, as I think Rob or another writer opined elsewhere, not in the loss itself but in the manner of losing. JW is essentially correct to point out that the Bulls are a one dimensional team. They have one thing going for them and that is PHYSICALITY. To be out-muscled by them, therefore, is hardly a crime and isn’t going to make front page news headlines anywhere. To try and beat them at their own one-dimensional game is suicidal and brain-dead strategy, however. In other words, my problem is with the STRATEGY that the Sharks employed. It has been argued that this was influenced to a large degree by the on-field injuries to the starting halfbacks. I don’t buy that. The kick everything and use single forwards to get across the gain line approach has to evolve if the team hopes to nurture their championship aspirations this season.

  • Comment 52, posted at 24.03.14 14:05:58 by Greg Reply

    Greg
     
  • @neilster (Comment 50) : well, he’s going to the Kings if he ever manages to get fit again, so we’ll let them pick up his medical bills for a few years

  • Comment 53, posted at 24.03.14 14:31:51 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylan
     
  • Not our best game, but Lambie and Reinach are key to our play (as are all 9’s and 10’s really).

    Hopefully we pick ourselves up and come back strong.

    Biggest issue I see is that we will be forced to revert to conservative tactics until our first-choice half-backs are back.

    To all the doom-mongers; please be aware that 10-man rugby is probably on the cards for the next few weeks. 😉

  • Comment 54, posted at 24.03.14 14:31:52 by Big Fish Reply
    Author
    Big Fish
     
  • Come on Guys lets look for the silver lining here . . .

    Based on this performance we can at least look forward to having our complete super 15 squad available to defend our Currie Cup, except for maybe Steyn. . . 😈

  • Comment 55, posted at 24.03.14 14:39:30 by Original Pierre Reply
    Author
    Original Pierre
     
  • No one has mentioned the input of one former Sharks bencher cum-wannabe-first-choice-flyhalf Jacques-Louis Potgieter in the Bulls victory on Saturday. I have to say that I was impressed with the change in JPL – time in France has evidently added dimensions to his kicking game and his ability to take control of the back line. He left the Bulls for Durban because of Morne Steyn, only to find Pat, and subsequently Fred Michalak, blocking his path. With more experience under his belt and obviously settling in again at Loftus, JPL finally looks like a well-rounded No 10 who should serve the Bulls well this season. Good luck to him, I say.

  • Comment 56, posted at 24.03.14 14:40:25 by Shaz Reply
    Author
    Shaz
     
  • For the record, I vastly prefer the way McLeod plays at scrum half. He’s also a much better pairing with Lambie, as the two fire well off each other. He’s now got six weeks to prove worthy of my preference.

  • Comment 57, posted at 24.03.14 14:44:50 by Shaz Reply
    Author
    Shaz
     
  • @Big Fish (Comment 54) : So you’re saying that PL and CR are the only half-backs in the squad capable of moving the ball wide? Quite an indictment if true 😯

  • Comment 58, posted at 24.03.14 14:47:43 by Greg Reply

    Greg
     
  • @Shaz (Comment 56) : It’s true. I’ve mentioned to Rob that JLP could perhaps better execute the Bok game-plan than even Morne Steyn could. At least he offers some adventurous play too. His contributions to the turn-around of the Bulls this season cannot be underestimated.

  • Comment 59, posted at 24.03.14 14:57:09 by vanmartin Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
    vanmartin
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 53) : Reckoned he’d go to Europe, interesting info thanks.

  • Comment 60, posted at 24.03.14 15:08:56 by neilster Reply

     
  • @Greg (Comment 58) : No but perhaps Lambie was the best at it. If just any flyhalf could manage it then we could call up a club player perhaps?

  • Comment 61, posted at 24.03.14 15:13:22 by Talent Reply
    Author
    Talent
     
  • @neilster (Comment 60) : nope, the Kings have signed Tim and Hansie Graaff for Currie Cup, but they haven’t announced it yet, for whatever reason.

  • Comment 62, posted at 24.03.14 15:13:50 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylan
     
  • @Talent (Comment 61) : Or, heaven forbid, trust the guys in the squad already and give FZ and CM some freedom to see what they can do ❗

  • Comment 63, posted at 24.03.14 15:28:03 by Greg Reply

    Greg
     
  • Just putting this out there. Just about everyone seems to agree that the Bulls have been far better since JLP replaced the inexperienced Fouche right?
    So why do we expect to replace Lambie with the inexperienced Tim without major disruption?

  • Comment 64, posted at 24.03.14 15:48:32 by gregkaos Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
    gregkaos
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 53) : Where did you hear that about Tim Whitehead leaving for the Kings?

  • Comment 65, posted at 24.03.14 15:51:40 by ChrisS Reply
    Author
    ChrisS
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 62) : Sorry, just read down and saw the next comment.

  • Comment 66, posted at 24.03.14 15:53:24 by ChrisS Reply
    Author
    ChrisS
     
  • @rhineshark (Comment 42) :

    I don’t think a ball in hand approach would have worked here. In fact I think maybe our gameplan is one of the only things that kept us in the game.

    Jake has always been the coach that said you have to earn going wide. Our forwards weren’t able to do that. Maybe we needed to be a little more creative, but that could have had an even worse result than the one we ended up with. Tossing the ball around when you hardly got over the advantage line usually doesn’t work out so well.

    I don’t like the way our ball suddenly got static and our forwards suddenly had no momentum to try and get over the advatage line, but I thought that was part of what the Bulls did so well. We won’t be caught out like this again.

    I just don’t think that it is as bad as you make it out to be. Not even nearly as bad.

  • Comment 67, posted at 24.03.14 15:58:14 by Letgo Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
    Letgo
     
  • @Letgo (Comment 67) : We should probably have gone for our 2013 cc final game plan.

    Kick behind their defensive line, but in front of their back three.

    We kept kicking the ball too deep, keeping us out of the contest, though they weren’t ever able to launch any really threatening counter attacks.

  • Comment 68, posted at 24.03.14 16:02:26 by FireTheLooser Reply

     
  • @Big Fish (Comment 54) : And that will be different how? 🙁

  • Comment 69, posted at 24.03.14 16:10:38 by rhineshark Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Spirit of Rugby
     
  • @FireTheLooser (Comment 68) :

    I still say we could have won this game, even with this gameplan, had we just not let in that one soft try and maybe held on two one or two dropped balls in good areas, as well as Fransie converting one of those drops, or holding on to the ball and waiting for the penalty to come.

    It wouldn’t have been a brilliant win, but it would have been a lot harder to complain had we come away with the win.

  • Comment 70, posted at 24.03.14 16:13:03 by Letgo Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
    Letgo
     
  • @Letgo (Comment 70) : Yeah we could have, that’s what probably adds to the pain.

    Nothing worse than losing the close ones.

  • Comment 71, posted at 24.03.14 16:22:43 by FireTheLooser Reply

     
  • @Letgo (Comment 67) : To me creative means getting the defense confused by playing with a multi-dimensional attack from any phase.

    Our players don’t have a clue how to do that. Either someone bashes it up or someone kicks it away.

    Our “attack” is a defender’s wet dream.

  • Comment 72, posted at 24.03.14 16:28:35 by rhineshark Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Spirit of Rugby
     
  • I was worried before the game about having both Swiel and Andre on the bench. Both are young and inexperienced, I think it would be better to have Swiel & Heimar and Fred & Andre togeter. Anyway don’t see how the loss of Pat and Cobus negated our all Bok front row and on that point “professor don’t lecture me” Jannie better sort out his binding asap as the refs now picked up that he does not bind correctly and is going to nail him for illegal binding.

  • Comment 73, posted at 24.03.14 17:56:56 by JD Reply
    Friend of SharksworldCompetition Winner Administrator
    JD
     
  • @JD (Comment 73) : If I was Jake I would be tempted to start Adriaanse and Chadwick, and relegate Jannie and Beast to the bench for a bit of rest.

  • Comment 74, posted at 24.03.14 18:11:27 by Bokhoring Reply
    Administrator
    Bokhoring
     
  • @Greg (Comment 58) :
    No, Im saying that any team loses its first-choice halfbacks will resort to more conservative baackline play – both because the players most familiar with the players and plays are unavailable and because they would be wary of losing the second-choice.

    @rhineshark (Comment 69) :
    We will now not know what the next step in the progression was going to be. Jake was pretty clear that their was a progression plan. Until now.

  • Comment 75, posted at 24.03.14 18:33:41 by Big Fish Reply
    Author
    Big Fish
     
  • @Big Fish (Comment 75) : I really want to believe in Jake, especially after his success with the Brumbies last year.

    Maybe I’m just being unrealistic in my expectations. I had visions of us playing this really fast, intelligent game built on forward dominance. Even with our halfback pair out so soon, our forwards should at least have had some kind of plan, which they didn’t.

    Seeing us unable to do so playing in perfect conditions against our biggest enemies is a major disappointment.

    Could be that I was delusional to start with. :mrgreen:

  • Comment 76, posted at 24.03.14 20:27:28 by rhineshark Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Spirit of Rugby
     
  • @rhineshark (Comment 76) : Difference there he was working with Ozzie players who have to play a more intelligent game than SA players due to their smaller pool of rugby players. SA players generally first want to hurt the other team, and then win.

    Also he had one Steven Larkham as his backline coach – Jake seems to have had his best success when he works with an out-of-the-box attack coach like Eddy Jones.

    I think it is going to take a bit longer than with the Brumbies to get where we need to be.

  • Comment 77, posted at 25.03.14 07:57:39 by Bokhoring Reply
    Administrator
    Bokhoring
     

Add Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.