Sharks player ratings v Brumbies

Written by Rob Otto (robdylan)

Posted in :Original Content, Sharks, Super Rugby on 12 May 2014 at 09:31
Tagged with : , ,

It’s hard not to go overboard after a loss, isn’t it? The Sharks were pretty much always going to be up against it in this fixture and there’s a little part of me that grudgingly feels that a bonus-point loss, in a game in which we remained competitive throughout, is by no means the worst result and certainly not as bad as the result I feared we’d get. After the horror show against the Highlanders, this game, at least saw the Sharks committed and resilient on defence, even if attack was again non-existent.

The team performance again hobered somewhere between 5 and 6 out of 10. Let’s rate the individuals.

1. Beast Mtawarira. The pack put in a good display and Beast appeared dominant in the scrum contest to everyone besides the ref. Put in a few carries and made a tackle or two, but far from his best performance. 6/10
2. Bismarck du Plessis. Battled valiantly as always and was strong in the set piece contest until right at the end, when a few poor lineout throws proved costly. Personal discipline slipped a little as the Brumby provocation started to get to him. 6/10
3. Jannie du Plessis. Has an unfortunate tendency to implode at just the wrong times, with the penalty he conceded for an illegal ruck clean – just as the Sharks enjoyed a rare foray into the opposition 22 – a case in point. Scrummed strongly, but again conceded too many penalties at this phase, whether rightly or not. 5/10
4. Willem Alberts. A key man who’s not looking happy or settled at the moment. We know Alberts doesn’t like playing number 4 and based on this sort of performance, it seems silly to keep picking him there. 5/10
5. Stephan Lewies. A very good outing. Ever-present on attack and worked furiously off the ball. Line-outs were flawless while he was on the park and even managed a few crucial steals on Brumby ball. His best all-round performance to date. 7/10
6. Keegan Daniel. In a game-plan that doesn’t encourage any form of playing with the ball, a guy like Keegan becomes a very expensive luxury. Simply put, Marcell Coetzee at 6 fits this pattern like a glove. Keegan Daniel is always going to be a third wheel. 5/10
7. Jean Deysel. A second stand-out performance in succession for a player whose consistency has not always been as good as we’d like. Deysel was a key man for the Sharks and I shudder to think how much worse things might have been had he not been there. 7/10
8. Ryan Kankowski. Very involved in a lot of the play, for very little real impact. It’s quite sad to think just how long it’s been since we actually saw Hoff flying in space the way we used to. 6/10

9. Cobus Reinach. His performance was the ray of blinding light on a day that was otherwise filled with gloom. Reinach, on this sort of form, is a dangerous man indeed, but what was more impressive was the way he kept up with good service despite being prepared to have a go when things looked on. 8/10
10. Francois Steyn. As good as the one halfback was, the other was equally poor. Steyn has always worn the flyhalf role like a particularly ill-fitting suit and on Saturday, his accuracy in execution was just not there – to the Sharks’ detriment. I hope we never go into another key game without a back-up plan at flyhalf. 4/10
11. JP Pietersen. It feels a bit like he’s sleepwalking his way through games at the moment, which simply isn’t good enough for a man of his skill and experience. 5/10
12. Paul Jordaan. Was hardly used all game long – a real waste. 5/10
13. S’bura Sithole. Just like Jordaan, the combination of a kick-based game plan and an off radar for the flyhalf resulted in very little for him to do on attack. Having a player like this on the field, yet not finding ways to get him the ball, is just criminal. 5/10
14. Odwa Ndungane. Once again showed the value of his experience, with a game that was low on errors in the face of constant aerial bombardment from the opposition. 6/10
15. Lwazi Mvovo. Another strong outing at fullback and appeared one of the few who may have made something happen on attack. 7/10

16. Kyle Cooper. Unused, again.
17. Dale Chadwick. Little opportunity to do much other than scrum. 5/10
18. Lourens Adriaanse. Kept his shape at scrum time, but was quiet otherwise. 5/10
19. Ettienne Oosthuizen. Not on long enough to rate.
20. Tera Mtembu. Played out of position at flank, his impact was negligible. 5/10
21. Charl McLeod. A poor performance, marked by slow service an inaccurate execution. 4/10
22. Heimar Williams. Replaced Jordaan on two separate occasions, but had no opportunity to do anything in his 15 minutes on the park. 5/10
23. SP Marais. Another solid outing off the bench. SP surely has to be pushing Pietersen for a position in the starting back 3. 6/10


  • I’m pretty glad I missed this game!

  • Comment 1, posted at 12.05.14 09:42:56 by PTAShark Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
  • @PTAShark (Comment 1) : I arrived home just in time to watch the second half. My PVR is always set to record the game, but it has been the first time I have not bothered to watch the part I have missed later.

  • Comment 2, posted at 12.05.14 09:47:52 by Bokhoring Reply
  • Lewies had that one knock in the second half, but I agree with the rating nonetheless. 🙂

    Also, I only remember the one poor line out from Bissie, but it was very poor. Straight over the line out, no chance of Alberts getting to it and at a time when we really needed a clean ball.

    Oh and Charl if the teams performance is 5/6, should not get anywhere near 4. That was an absolutely horrendous performance. Not only did he continue with his – pass on the right shoulder when the play is moving left and on the left when the play is moving right, but this time he hardly made one clean pass. And I checked. Thi is really disappointing from Charl. His quick and clean service used to be his greatest asset.

    Charl is leaving anyway, the Sharks need to invest in another scrummy or start giving Ungerer some game time.

  • Comment 3, posted at 12.05.14 09:50:45 by Maria Delport Reply

  • Agree with Rob.

    That bonus point is exactly that … and it might be the difference between Dbn and Snor City in the play offs …

  • Comment 4, posted at 12.05.14 09:52:57 by Original Pierre Reply
    Original Pierre
  • The scores seems fair. Should you not also score the coaches for the game plan ?

    We should be ecstatic to still be at the top of the log. 😆

    Jake should restrain himself in the media, he is disliked and surely they misquote him and his statements!

    Lewies is key for the team, I hope he is not injured, after limping off. Players overplayed and we seem to loose critical players frequently.

    When is Fred fit to play ? We desperately need him at 10 !

    Willem a world class seven , playing him 4, lost his impact he normally has. Etienne might not be the answer at 4 ?

    Surely this hopeless continues kicking is not the only game plan ?

    The team needs to build more confidence in themselves and the plan.

    Come on Sharks !

  • Comment 5, posted at 12.05.14 09:57:36 by Observer Reply

  • When the two top teams play, one would usually expect the home team to win. So I’m not too cut up about this loss.

    Both teams played the conditions; the Brumbies just executed beget at times. I haven’t checked the stats, but won’t be surprised if we had more line breaks.

    Reinach was generally good, but I thought some poor decisions on when to kick and pass should bring him down a tad. That said, Mcleod had a howler.

    Disappointing lack of leadership from Frans and JP. Still, looking at the plays being put together despite the ever changing 9-10-12-13 axis, I do feel we are looking to be more positive. Looking forward to having Fred back (much prefer his relative flatness on attack versus Pat).

  • Comment 6, posted at 12.05.14 10:02:58 by Big Fish Reply
    Big Fish
  • @Maria Delport (Comment 3) : Ungerer looked pretty snappy for the short time he was on in the Highlanders game (I think).

  • Comment 7, posted at 12.05.14 10:07:07 by Bokhoring Reply
  • @Big Fish (Comment 6) :

    It’s always a pleasure to read your comments. Under the best of circumstances I find it really hard to be as objective about the Sharks after a loss.

  • Comment 8, posted at 12.05.14 10:08:14 by Letgo Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
  • @Bokhoring (Comment 7) :

    Yeah, I wish Jake was able to make some room for him in the team. In fact, when Fred went home, maybe he would have been a better option than Van Tonder (nothing against Van Tonder, I actually rate the guy, but I don’t think we’ll see him near the match day 23). As far as I know Ungerer also has spent some time at flyhalf – or am I thinking of someone else.

  • Comment 9, posted at 12.05.14 10:10:46 by Letgo Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
  • Although we got the bonus point, which I am pretty stoked about, I still think we do not offer as much on attack as we should be. I remember sometime during the game I wondered if Jordaan or S’bu is playing? They hardly saw any ball! We keep saying, week in and week out, that we must have the fastest backline in the comp, the backline with the most pace, but be fail to use this to our advantage? Also, time and again teams have been able to beat us with the short inside ball. I really hoped we have sorted this out weeks ago, but on Saturday, again, the only try the Brumbies scored was because of the short inside ball. This Saturday it is the Saders.. and we know how they love running with the ball

  • Comment 10, posted at 12.05.14 10:14:33 by Another Nick Reply

    Another Nick
  • @Another Nick (Comment 10) :

    Short inside ball? I remember the pass being made to the outside. Am I wrong. I just remember a well waited pass and defense drifting to far.

    I think it was just a lapse in concentration.

  • Comment 11, posted at 12.05.14 10:20:09 by Letgo Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
  • I just watched the Crusaders game again. Our crappy kicking game is going to cost us dearly. That’s exactly why they hammered the Reds.

    Unfortunately, that seems to be the only game we’re going to play this year.

  • Comment 12, posted at 12.05.14 10:22:48 by rhineshark Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Spirit of Rugby
  • I agree Rob but not with the 9’s. The Great White in fact does have a choice here and Ungerer needs to be backed now as it cannot get worse than what’s presently on show at 9,the other two can only offer what they have shown

  • Comment 13, posted at 12.05.14 10:33:08 by benji Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
  • @benji (Comment 13) : There’s nothing wrong with the 9’s we have, except that they blow hot and cold. When either Charl or Cobus is on song they look like Bok contenders, but when they have an off day they are extra rubbish.

    Maybe they’re reincarnations of long dead French rugby players. Who knows?

  • Comment 14, posted at 12.05.14 10:36:50 by rhineshark Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Spirit of Rugby
  • I have been a passive viewer of this site for months now,today I feel compelled to break my silence and enter the fray.
    Reading the comments here you would swear that the Sharks were the Stormers.Aren’t we on top of the log in week 14,so we had a couple of crap games,who hasn’t.In fact everyone else has had a few more. We took a point off the team second on the log on their home ground.It was a crap game but,both teams were crap,one and two on the log.Two teams who had every thing to lose.If and a huge if Frans had slotted those kicks we would have won.
    Cut the boys some slack,when we are in the bottom half of the log start complaining,until then if you are a true fan get behind the team.We are playing without a 10 ,a 4 ,and a 6,and we came as close to beating the Brumbies on their home ground as anyone has this year.

  • Comment 15, posted at 12.05.14 10:40:16 by The hound Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    The hound
  • @rhineshark (Comment 14) : spot on!

  • Comment 16, posted at 12.05.14 10:44:55 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
  • JW is really starting to get on my nerves.The only problem is we are still top of the log.Why is Peet Marais not playing at 4 and if Oosthuizen is not good enough why is he there.Alberts is being wasted at 4.I have seen many times that when a coach does things that the average rugby supporter don’t understand its because his loosing it a bit.No distribution in the backline and Tim Whitehead is not even in the picture anymore.And this thing of Jake always advertising himself for a better job whenever he is touring with the sharks is a “klap in die gesig” for supporters and players alike!!! 😡

  • Comment 17, posted at 12.05.14 10:45:15 by tigershark Reply

  • @Letgo (Comment 11) : I would say it was a rather costly lapse in concentration. My point is, those swift short balls (whether inside or outside) beats our defenders 8 times out of 10. Which to me is unacceptable. I feel we really could have won this game; it is a shame we didn’t.

  • Comment 18, posted at 12.05.14 10:47:34 by Another Nick Reply

    Another Nick
  • @tigershark (Comment 17) :

    Whitehead, as far as I know, or at least until recently, was injured.

  • Comment 19, posted at 12.05.14 10:48:33 by Letgo Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
  • @rhineshark (Comment 14) : exactly part of my point,amongst other shortcomings they lack consistancy,9 is a key position

  • Comment 20, posted at 12.05.14 10:48:51 by benji Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
  • @The hound (Comment 15) : Nice to meet you!

    The reason we get compared to the Stormers is because our season is panning out exactly the same as the Stormers’ of the last few years. They hung onto the top of the log or thereabouts by playing defensive, low risk rugby. They also failed to score tries.

    The inevitable happened and that’s why some of us are worried.

    The Brumbies had probably their worst game of the year against us (from what I’ve seen of them) in conditions, which suited us far better with our “gameplan”, yet we still couldn’t find a way to beat them.

  • Comment 21, posted at 12.05.14 10:52:04 by rhineshark Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Spirit of Rugby
  • I say give Steyn a rest (bench) and start with Swiel, Jordaan and Sithole. Watch them run! Steyn kicks or long pass everyone out of action.

  • Comment 22, posted at 12.05.14 10:52:53 by Son Of Mayhem Reply
    Competition WinnerCompetition WinnerCompetition Winner
  • @rhineshark (Comment 21) : Exactly why I feel we should have won this game.

  • Comment 23, posted at 12.05.14 10:53:01 by Another Nick Reply

    Another Nick
  • Think we should rest all the top players this weekend and send the reserves on and try and take the Blues game with some fresh legs!Cant see us even getting a loosing bonus point against the saders!

  • Comment 24, posted at 12.05.14 10:53:26 by tigershark Reply

  • @benji (Comment 20) : I agree, but I wouldn’t swop either of them for Ungerer right now.

  • Comment 25, posted at 12.05.14 10:56:40 by rhineshark Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Spirit of Rugby
  • @Another Nick (Comment 18) :
    For 5 six I agree, play Peet and piss off with Oosthuizen. He can go play club rugby, he has got more highlights in his hair than in his rugby career.

    Drop Jp to get a [email protected] wake up call move Sithole out and put Heimar at 12.

    Charge Kanko the price of a ticket for watching rugby and not playing rugby.

    Do not let me even start with the male nurse Jannie. He needs to go and change dirty bed pans and get off a rugby field.

    But again it start at the top with JW. Losing is one thing but a team that looks like they are not interested in winning but rather in not losing the game that’s my frustration.

  • Comment 26, posted at 12.05.14 11:01:36 by Lieplapper Reply

  • To be honest, I am just starting to get really fatigued by whatching a number of poor games in a row.

    Really not enjoying the Sharks game plan at the moment, and yes we are still at the top of the log, but this ‘winning ugly’ plan is not as much fun as I had hoped.

  • Comment 27, posted at 12.05.14 11:04:35 by stevovo Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
  • @tigershark (Comment 24) : Agreed

  • Comment 28, posted at 12.05.14 11:05:16 by Bokhoring Reply
  • @tigershark (Comment 17) : I feel he needs to up the advertising.

  • Comment 29, posted at 12.05.14 11:07:58 by Salmonoid the Subtle Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Salmonoid the Subtle
  • Any news on Marcel and Fred’s injury status?

  • Comment 30, posted at 12.05.14 11:22:24 by Bokhoring Reply
  • After we won in Melbourne Jake had the luxury of less pressure last week. He chose a game plan that gave us the best chance of a win (probably 40% if everything went according to plan). had we executed better (frans missing fewer kicks) we could well have won the game. we were playing against a good team on their home ground. the ridiculous professional foul on their line after 44 minutes didn’t do us any favours.

    besides frans’ comedy of errors in the first half our kicking game worked well and we were mostly in the half. probably due to our forwards being quite dominant. however, in the dreaded 3rd quarter we got stuck in our own 22 and when we kicked it was mostly straight down the field with very little chasing, allowing them to set up a good return kick with chasers putting pressure on our catchers. I think it would have been worth kicking out in that period and moving the play upfield as we were competing pretty well on their lineout.

    anyway, we’re top of the log. if we feel like the world is falling apart imagine how the supporters of the other teams feel. style of play doesn’t get awarded log points (yes i know you get a point for 4 tries). regardless of how you want the sharks to play it’s time to realise that Jake likes to play for territory, kicks penalties, win home games & the odd away game, and is banking on having home finals (where we will play the exact same game plan again). he doesn’t care what happened to the stormers in 2010/11/12.

    I’m starting to feel less confident about us having a home final (and therefore of us winning the trophy), but so what. only 1 team can win the thing, we’re in the running (not many teams can say that), and watching the sharks is still the best 2 hours of my week. Even if JP looks like he’s asleep.

  • Comment 31, posted at 12.05.14 11:26:55 by PostmanPat Reply

  • So I seem to have saved my blood pressure some issues by not watching the game! Kind of caught between “Yay, we were competitive and got a bonus point” and “Damn, but our rugby is nothing to look at and our basic errors are driving me up the wall!” Once again in a super rugby season we’re kind of there and there abouts but we’ve just had such a chance to dominate…and we’re just not. I’m disappointed in that!
    In other news: I’m very chuffed in my pick of Nadolo as captain in the fantasy league last weekend…that paid off handsomely in every league that I’m involved in!! 🙂

  • Comment 32, posted at 12.05.14 11:28:46 by pastorshark Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Administrator
  • Some of you guys should ask yourselves if you would call the players the names you do if they were in front of you now. No glory in being a keyboard cowboy.

    @PostmanPat (Comment 31) :
    @The hound (Comment 15) :
    Nice to get some objective alternative views.

  • Comment 33, posted at 12.05.14 11:32:40 by Big Fish Reply
    Big Fish
  • @Letgo (Comment 8) : I’ll second that. Really enjoy the Big Fish’s comments too.

    @rhineshark (Comment 14) : Well done :mrgreen:

    @The hound (Comment 15) : Welcome to the site!

    @PostmanPat (Comment 31) : You make some good points.

    I still haven’t managed to watch this game yet. I’m hoping to make some time for it tomorrow evening and will more actively join in the analysis and discussions then.

  • Comment 34, posted at 12.05.14 11:47:18 by vanmartin Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
  • @vanmartin (Comment 34) : I wouldnt watch it if I was you 😥 😥 Poor Frans probably had the worst game of his entire career. Backing him to fix it though!

  • Comment 35, posted at 12.05.14 11:51:36 by West Indies Cricket Board Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    West Indies Cricket Board
  • @vanmartin (Comment 34) :

    Watch it. I thought we played well, up until maybe the last 20 to 25 minutes. And excluding Frans’ missed penalties, one miss for touch, as well as 3 flop restarts (poor guy had a shocker).

    Do me a favor, if you do watch it again, try to objectively look at the ref and tell me what you think. There was a few (only one or two) against the Sharks I didn’t agree with and thought he could have been more stern on the Brumbies. He let a lot of stuff go, especially in the set pieces.

  • Comment 36, posted at 12.05.14 11:59:04 by Letgo Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
  • @Letgo (Comment 36) : The ref had a shocker. No doubt. Another ref wouldve given a bunch of yellow cards for infringements in the red zone. And since when is a player allowed to tackle someone in the air and get a penalty? That is summarily a yellow!

  • Comment 37, posted at 12.05.14 12:03:16 by West Indies Cricket Board Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    West Indies Cricket Board
  • @Lieplapper (Comment 26) :

    I don’t agree that the team does not look interested in winning. That’s not a fair comment. Just because we’re struggling to put together good attacking plays does not mean that we don’t want to win.

    Our forwards has been great this whole season and was again on Saturday, it’s just time that the backs catch-up – remembering that since Lambie’s injuries we haven’t had the same backline once, not even once!

  • Comment 38, posted at 12.05.14 12:04:38 by Letgo Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
  • @West Indies Cricket Board (Comment 37) :

    I generally like this ref too, specifically because he’s not so whistle happy, but this time I thought he really should have taken action against blatant professional fouls by the Brumbies – every time we seem to be building on attack.

    I also found it baffling that we put pressure on their scrum throughout the game, their front row would turn to absorb the pressure (illegally), he would let this play go, yet he penalized the Sharks at scrum time, I think 3 times.

    I also don’t like that N.White got away with putting the ball under his hookers feet, actually, more like the prop and the loosie’s feet.

  • Comment 39, posted at 12.05.14 12:08:34 by Letgo Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
  • @Letgo (Comment 39) : I thought Jackson had a poor game. He was nowhere when it came to scrum penalties, regularly failing to reward the dominant scrum.

    Also, the Brumbies got away with murder when stopping the rolling maul and he just did nothing.

  • Comment 40, posted at 12.05.14 12:19:15 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
  • @West Indies Cricket Board (Comment 35) : Have to watch the bad games too to make a meaninful contribution in discussions on here but thanks for the heads up! 😀

    @Letgo (Comment 36) : Much easier for me to remain objective once I know the outcome so I’ll definitely get back to you on that.

  • Comment 41, posted at 12.05.14 12:20:36 by vanmartin Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
  • @robdylan (Comment 40) : That’s been killing the Sharks, the fact that it seems like no ref are willing to reward us for our dominance at the set pieces.

    In the first few weeks we build a lead like that. Set up a few set pieces within strike distance, which with Steyn has been up to 60m, convert the points and when the other team starts to feel out of it, pounce on their vulnerable state of mind.

    To my mind, for sure JW is implementing a kicking game that is boring me to death, but it is the same kicking game that made as look so good in week 1, 2 up to 4 and even the Waratahs game, what’s different is the referees’ reluctance to award penalties to the Sharks for scrum and maul dominance.

    It’s like they’re bored of this style too (a winning style imo) and have decided to be more favorable to teams playing with flair?

    But now I’m just letting the conspiracy theorist in my out. Surely that’s not it, but I can’t help but feel that way.

  • Comment 42, posted at 12.05.14 12:31:17 by Letgo Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
  • The final aspect that would have broken the camel’s back (ie. the final puzzle piece of pressure that would have converted this game into a win for the Sharks), was the missed penalty kicks.

    Were they landed, all aspects of JW’s pressure game plan would have been covered.

    The Brumbies would then have been forced into trying more high risk attacking rugby, which would have played into the Sharks’ defensive and territorial hands.

  • Comment 43, posted at 12.05.14 12:51:25 by FireTheLooser Reply

  • @robdylan (Comment 40) : Spot on

  • Comment 44, posted at 12.05.14 12:55:56 by sharks_lover Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
  • @FireTheLooser (Comment 43) : So if your kicker has an off day or the opposition is disciplined you’re screwed?

    I prefer a more multi-dimensional approach.

  • Comment 45, posted at 12.05.14 12:58:08 by rhineshark Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Spirit of Rugby
  • @rhineshark (Comment 45) : Our kicker did not have an off day, he just never pitched.

    Why do you think the Springboks lost the rwc 2011 qtr. final? Because their whole game plan fell flat due to the ref not giving the penalties…same result as your kicker missing all the kicks on offer.

    It’s all good and well to score tries, but when the opposition team gives away penalties in order to stop your momentum and ultimate try scoring ability, your only means of compiling points would be by landing your penalties.

    Bottom line, you need to land all kicks at goal.

  • Comment 46, posted at 12.05.14 13:34:00 by FireTheLooser Reply

  • @FireTheLooser (Comment 43) : If I recall correctly, the Brumbies missed 3 or 4 kicks themselves. So it’s no use going the “if we landed our penalties” route. We lacked attack, pure and simple. Their kicking game was better than ours, and we didn’t seem to have a plan B. @rhineshark (Comment 45) : Spot on.

  • Comment 47, posted at 12.05.14 13:35:15 by Another Nick Reply

    Another Nick
  • @FireTheLooser (Comment 43) : @rhineshark (Comment 45) :


    Bok rugby to a T…What happens if they are disciplined or we don’t land our kicks – We get hammered!!!

    If we had a more multi-dimensional game we would have Plan B!!!

  • Comment 48, posted at 12.05.14 14:20:33 by pienaar111 Reply

  • @Another Nick (Comment 47) : And plan B would be what?

    And should plan B also fail, then what?

    If you can’t execute plan A, what’s the odds of properly executing plan B, C, E or plan F?

    The Brumbies did not counter our game plan, they just executed a carbon copy of it better than us.

    Had the Brumbies landed their kicks, we would have lost by an even bigger margin, and they would have achieved what the Sharks were trying to achieve.

  • Comment 49, posted at 12.05.14 14:30:55 by FireTheLooser Reply

  • @FireTheLooser (Comment 46) : That’s true, but if the opposition keeps infringing at the breakdowns to stop you scoring tries and you keep missing the shots at goal then stop taking so much contact or kick for position and play from the lineout.

    I know this may not necessarily lead to tries, but it changes what isn’t working, so in my opinion always worth a shot.

  • Comment 50, posted at 12.05.14 14:35:30 by rhineshark Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Spirit of Rugby
  • @rhineshark (Comment 50) : The way we were murdering them in the lineout on their throw-in, I’m not sure why we didn’t kick for touch more.

  • Comment 51, posted at 12.05.14 14:45:08 by FireTheLooser Reply

  • @FireTheLooser (Comment 49) : Plan B would be to keep holding onto the ball perhaps and build a couple of phases. Maybe use the backline a bit more.. I don’t know. It is up to JW to have a plan B, not me. And I refuse to believe that we are unable to adapt should it be obvious that they are beating us at our own game.

  • Comment 52, posted at 12.05.14 14:46:34 by Another Nick Reply

    Another Nick
  • @FireTheLooser (Comment 49) : Forgive what may seem disrespectful but here goes anyway…and I quote Einstein on this one “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result is the sign of an idiot!” (something like that)

    If you can’t execute any of your plans then you are either shit at rugby or you are having a terrible day!

    Say you are unlocking your front door with your keys, but eh keys don’t work for some reason…are you telling me you would continuously keep trying the same keys forever until maybe it eventually works?? Or would you walk around the house and try the keys on the back door/doors??

  • Comment 53, posted at 12.05.14 14:59:42 by pienaar111 Reply

  • @FireTheLooser (Comment 51) : Our own lineout, because I was talking about going for touch from a penalty.

  • Comment 54, posted at 12.05.14 15:00:09 by rhineshark Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Spirit of Rugby
  • @pienaar111 (Comment 53) : It’s the definition of Insanity: “Doing the same thing over and over while expecting a different result.”

    I’m sure I’ve done that key thing before.

  • Comment 55, posted at 12.05.14 15:01:50 by rhineshark Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Spirit of Rugby
  • @pienaar111 (Comment 53) : Well actually if you know that the key you are using are indeed the front doors key, you would be an idiot to try to use that key to open any other door.

  • Comment 56, posted at 12.05.14 15:18:15 by Letgo Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
  • We’ve been doing the same thing for 11 games. We’re top of the log.

  • Comment 57, posted at 12.05.14 15:21:31 by PostmanPat Reply

  • @pienaar111 (Comment 53) : @rhineshark (Comment 55) :

    Also if you are using the key, but dropping it constantly because, let’s say you are drunk, then walking to the back door to try and open it would also making you an idiot, insane … or just drunk. 😉

    It’s not to say the key is not the right key, it might be that the lock is just wedged and you need to wiggle that key, or push/pull the door, until the key works.

    If the key worked once, the key probably isn’t the problem – This exact game plan worked for us. The way we are implementing it and the way the “door/opposition” is acting against the key, just needs a little rethinking of how to implement the key.

    Or maybe we just need to break a window. 🙂

  • Comment 58, posted at 12.05.14 15:24:52 by Letgo Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
  • @PostmanPat (Comment 57) :
    @pienaar111 (Comment 53) : @rhineshark (Comment 55) :

    The thing is that same thing principle only applies if all elements of the equation is static. So if we repeated everything as we did it on Saturday against the same opposition who also repeats everything they did in exactly the same manner, the weather stays the same and the ref makes the same decisions and we still expect a different result, yes, then we are insane.

    Sticking with the same game plan. Not insane. especially, as pointed out, when you are still top of the log after 11 games.

    Not aiming to improve on implementation of that game pan after a loss, pretty idiotic and maybe even insane, but I doubt that Jake or the players ever go into the game, aiming not to convert penalties or make 10 handling errors or miss tackles or kick bad kicks.

    I don’t like the game plan, but I feel if implemented at even just 10% better, the Sharks could beat any team in this competition.

  • Comment 59, posted at 12.05.14 15:32:55 by Letgo Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
  • @Letgo (Comment 59) : I don’t think the game plan is bad as such, as, like we all know, it got us on top of the log. But I think, the key sentence here is: “if executed properly”. On Saturday, we did not execute our game plan properly (Or Brumbies just executed theirs better, or both!) but instead of trying something else, we stuck to the same old same old. Which was terribly annoying and excruciating to witness as you know in your heart this Sharks team is better than this.

  • Comment 60, posted at 12.05.14 15:40:23 by Another Nick Reply

    Another Nick
  • The issue now is will Jake be modest enough to realise his mistakes and make the relevant changes.

    Jakes hubris is sometimes likely to get in the way of his decision making abilities and I reckon his thinking is that if he makes the necessary changes, it will seem to him like he’s admitting his mistakes. Which he hates to do.

    Such a poor game plan and it just looks like the guys aren’t enjoying their rugby at the moment.

  • Comment 61, posted at 12.05.14 15:46:18 by John Galt Reply

    John Galt
  • @John Galt (Comment 61) :

    Well, if we continue losing it will also be hard to hide from the fact that you were wrong.

    I don’t think there’s many people that wants the Sharks to win more than Jake. If he knows what he and the team is doing wrong, they won’t be doing it on Saturday.

  • Comment 62, posted at 12.05.14 15:54:26 by Letgo Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
  • @John Galt (Comment 61) : The sad thing is that this is the exact same look we saw from these players last year and the few years before. They seem tired, unfocused and listless.

  • Comment 63, posted at 12.05.14 15:57:59 by rhineshark Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Spirit of Rugby
  • @rhineshark (Comment 63) :
    They seemed pretty focussed and energised under Brendan Venter.

    That’s why everyone was so excited for this years SR campaign. A new era with a great coach and new board etc etc. The players really seemed up for it then.
    I get the feeling Jake is almost too headmasterish and has taken the some of the fun out of it. The players jumping like rats from a sinking ship is testament to that.

  • Comment 64, posted at 12.05.14 16:15:06 by John Galt Reply

    John Galt
  • @John Galt (Comment 64) : That was the Currie Cup, though. This is a whole different story.

  • Comment 65, posted at 12.05.14 16:28:12 by rhineshark Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Spirit of Rugby
  • I wonder how long it’ll take before the rabid dogs turn on White.

  • Comment 66, posted at 12.05.14 16:28:14 by VinChainSaw Reply
  • @VinChainSaw (Comment 66) :

    Oops, seems i shouldve read the comments first.

    I dont really understand the bile vitriole directed at White. Two months ago he was the Second Coming. Its not like he’s doing anything out of character – this is how he manages his teams.
    He’s giving the Sharks exactly what he was brought in for.

  • Comment 67, posted at 12.05.14 16:29:35 by VinChainSaw Reply
  • So 8 wins out of 11 and already words like hubris, headmasterish, bad game plan, selection issues abound.

    Farking hell – do yourself a favour and go watch some Bok games from 05 and 06 – that is the JW blue print. Kicks and defence win games. That is his game plan. How is anybody surprised?

  • Comment 68, posted at 12.05.14 16:33:06 by VinChainSaw Reply
  • @VinChainSaw (Comment 68) :
    Spot on Vinnie.

    Also, seems to me that the hubris is that of Sharks’ fans themselves – people are carrying on like the Sharks routinely expect to top the log – patently not the case.

    The Sharks need to address a host of issues if they hope to even make the Final – but the reaction of the fans on this site is way off kilter – and it seems only the fans of other teams can see this.

  • Comment 69, posted at 12.05.14 16:56:08 by Big Fish Reply
    Big Fish
  • @VinChainSaw (Comment 68) : I think people are surprised that the Brumbies under Jake played a far more balanced game than we are. Maybe Larkam as backline coach made the difference, but there shouldn’t be any reason why we can’t play more like the Brumbies did last year, considering the quality and speed we have in the backline.

  • Comment 70, posted at 12.05.14 17:16:06 by rhineshark Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Spirit of Rugby
  • There’s not even one Shark in the Rugby365 player of the week. Not even bubbling under. This is terrible.

  • Comment 71, posted at 12.05.14 18:18:23 by GreatSharksays Reply

  • @GreatSharksays (Comment 71) : second week in a row

  • Comment 72, posted at 12.05.14 18:31:02 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
  • @GreatSharksays (Comment 71) : @robdylan (Comment 72) : hard to believe Lewies can’t even make a bubbling under team.

  • Comment 73, posted at 12.05.14 19:14:17 by JD Reply
    Friend of SharksworldCompetition Winner Administrator
  • @JD (Comment 73) : With the shortage of fit number 5 locks I’d be surprised if Lewies isn’t invited to a Springbok training camp.

  • Comment 74, posted at 12.05.14 19:19:02 by vanmartin Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
  • @vanmartin (Comment 74) : yes at the moment there’s not a lot on offer in SA, so I would be really surprised is Lewies did not get a call up to a Bok training group.

  • Comment 75, posted at 12.05.14 19:30:01 by JD Reply
    Friend of SharksworldCompetition Winner Administrator
  • @vanmartin (Comment 74) : @JD (Comment 75) : This early in the evening and you guys are drunk already!?

    No ways will Geenbreineke select Lewies when he can choose between Victor, Flip and Juandre Kruger

  • Comment 76, posted at 12.05.14 19:37:13 by Culling Song Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
    Culling Song
  • @Culling Song (Comment 76) : did not say Lewies will get into test team, but he should make a broader training squad.

  • Comment 77, posted at 12.05.14 20:17:22 by JD Reply
    Friend of SharksworldCompetition Winner Administrator
  • @Culling Song (Comment 76) : If I had to pick a lock combo for the incoming tour I’d be very tempted to play Lewies and Victor. Fuck can’t believe I just said that! !!!

  • Comment 78, posted at 12.05.14 20:23:32 by JD Reply
    Friend of SharksworldCompetition Winner Administrator
  • @Letgo (Comment 42) : But no one from the Sharks is picking that up. Would have thought the message went to Bismarck that he must inform the ref the scrum feed is not straight. Surely if it is our strength we should do our very best to ensure we get a fair change to express ourselves! People are sleeping man. Every scrum feed was not straight and we just took it like a b!tch. To make matters worse is that the captain sees first hand that the scrum feed is not straight. Something is seriously wrong with this team. Clueless. It’s as if no SWOT analysis is done before each game cause there is no way we are not getting more value from our scrum in 80% of the games.

  • Comment 79, posted at 13.05.14 02:09:22 by GreatSharksays Reply

  • @Culling Song (Comment 76) : :D. Wasn’t suggesting a bench spot or selection into the larger squad, only an invite to the training camp. It’s by no means a given but I don’t think it’s out of the question. Lewies is an Eldo boy after all 😉

  • Comment 80, posted at 13.05.14 08:02:45 by vanmartin Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld Author
  • @GreatSharksays (Comment 79) : I agree,one of the most important if not most important tic tac is ref management and this aspect should be hammered home with the players and more so the captain,each ref needs to be analysed for each game just like you analyse the opposition,

  • Comment 81, posted at 13.05.14 09:22:30 by benji Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
  • @benji (Comment 81) : JS was probably one of the best exponenets at ref management

  • Comment 82, posted at 13.05.14 09:26:08 by benji Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
  • @Letgo (Comment 58) : When have the Sharks won trophies playing like this??


    Even in last year’s currie cup final where we certainly did kick a lot…we kicked smartly with good chasers!!! We played the tactical kicking game but still played what was in front of us!!! We still attacked when we saw the opportunity!!!

    @VinChainSaw (Comment 68) : @Big Fish (Comment 69) : Guys there is no avoiding the fact that teams with good defences ONLY and poor attacks win NOTHING!!

    And to deny that we have been poor since the Bulls game is just wrong!!!

  • Comment 83, posted at 13.05.14 10:35:43 by pienaar111 Reply

  • I have never really been a fan of Jackson. I recall how he blew the Sharks out of the game against the Canes in NZ for extremely technical transgressions at rucks, e.g. penalising Chadwick for diving when he lost his footing and fell down behind the ball at a ruck on the Canes try line – no interference with play whatsoever.

  • Comment 84, posted at 13.05.14 11:06:19 by Bokhoring Reply
  • @pienaar111 (Comment 83) :

    Thats not really my point fella!

    I’m not arguing the toss either way in that respect.
    All I’m saying is its incredible how uppity sharks fans are getting and I’m just wondering what they were expecting.
    There was such excitement when White and Smit came on board, with seemignly no thought given to the fact that this is the gameplan they employ.
    Both White and Smit employed this gameplan at test level and Smit further cemented this gameplan while at Saracens.

    Now all of a sudden the gameplan is shit and boring. Yet this is exactly what White intended to do – this is the way to approaches games and coaches teams.
    Yet the strategy has been largely effective, with the Sharks doing better this year than most.

    My take-away from this is that this is what happens when White coaches teams, a point I raised at the time of his appointment and one for which i was shot down by almost everyone on this site.

  • Comment 85, posted at 14.05.14 12:45:23 by VinChainSaw Reply
  • @VinChainSaw (Comment 85) : Then we have no idea what we’re doing, because the Saracens game is light years removed from what we’re producing.

  • Comment 86, posted at 14.05.14 16:16:41 by rhineshark Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Spirit of Rugby
  • @rhineshark (Comment 86) : you can’t compare a game like the Saracens to games in the Super 15. One is testing the team and a win is nice but not crucial, the other is a serious competions where every game is important and winning or losing could impact the jobs of the coaching staff.

  • Comment 87, posted at 14.05.14 18:12:46 by JD Reply
    Friend of SharksworldCompetition Winner Administrator
  • @JD (Comment 87) : I wasn’t talking about our one-off game against what turned out to be their B-team, but about their performance in the Heineken Cup.

    They play a very balanced game and know how to score tries. The ERC is a tough competition, often played in atrocious conditions and yet they manage to run when the situation calls for it and kick when necessary.

    I have no idea why we can’t.

  • Comment 88, posted at 14.05.14 19:28:22 by rhineshark Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Spirit of Rugby
  • @rhineshark (Comment 88) : it all comes down to they way they train.
    1. They play and train in those conditions from early on, so they’re use to playing in it.
    2. From early on SA kids is trained to run into rucking pad, tackle bags, etc and then we’re surprised when they don’t have the vision to run around players when they’re growm up.
    3. I think we train players to follow a to rigid game plan with no place for players with vision.
    In short that’s why we can’t play like they do.

  • Comment 89, posted at 14.05.14 19:54:11 by JD Reply
    Friend of SharksworldCompetition Winner Administrator
  • @JD (Comment 89) : Many of the top performing players are Saffers, though. The conditions are as alien to them as rock-hard dust bowls like Kimberley Stadium are to Welsh players.

  • Comment 90, posted at 14.05.14 20:55:35 by rhineshark Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Spirit of Rugby
  • @rhineshark (Comment 90) : point taken but guess that’s why the clubs contracted them as they had more to offer than what the traditional SA coaches could get out of them.

  • Comment 91, posted at 14.05.14 21:32:28 by JD Reply
    Friend of SharksworldCompetition Winner Administrator

Add Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.