2014 Super Rugby: Crusaders vs Sharks (Round 14)

William18 · May 17, 2014

austingtir said:
IMO its bullcrap to even attempt to blame Slade for that performance. No doubt in my mind thats how this side is being coached they have got to be getting it drilled into them to play like that.

Maybe. However, they didn't kick so much last week and when they did they were far more accurate. I don't know what Blackadder said at half time and he should have encouraged them to put the other side under pressure and to break them down.

TRF_heineken · May 17, 2014

sanzar said:
Credit it where it's due. But seriously... something about these Sharks that just seems to turn every match into the Rugby equivalent of a 0-0 soccer match ending in a penalty shoot-out. Every game with them is like pulling teeth. F@#$ing most negative footy in the comp.

Call it what you want, but they play to win. That's after all the purpose of the game.

Jake White is a clever coach and sees ways to beat opposing teams. We might not like the style, but it brings results.

RoosTah · May 17, 2014

heineken said:
Call it what you want, but they play to win. That's after all the purpose of the game.

Jake White is a clever coach and sees ways to beat opposing teams. We might not like the style, but it brings results.

Australia is just a vastly more competitive sports market, so you guys will just never get that it's not all about winning here. All you have over there is soccer to compete with Rugby, so you can play the most boring 10 man-kick-and-clap stuff and people will eat it up all the same. Here, they'll switch to a game of League.

Darwin · May 17, 2014

sanzar said:
Australia is just a vastly more competitive sports market, so you guys will just never get that it's not all about winning here. All you have over there is soccer to compete with Rugby, so you can play the most boring 10 man-kick-and-clap stuff and people will eat it up all the same. Here, they'll switch to a game of League.

Of course Rugby Union isn't all about winning in Australia. If it was it would be a rather depressing place

TRF_heineken · May 17, 2014

sanzar said:
Australia is just a vastly more competitive sports market, so you guys will just never get that it's not all about winning here. All you have over there is soccer to compete with Rugby, so you can play the most boring 10 man-kick-and-clap stuff and people will eat it up all the same. Here, they'll switch to a game of League.

Yeah right. Play that stupid card. Your name could easily have been Conrad Smith.

You seem to forget that we play cricket, hockey, swimming and athletics too, to name a few...

Stop derailing the thread and stick to the topic at hand.

RoosTah · May 17, 2014

Darwin said:
Of course Rugby Union isn't all about winning in Australia. If it was it would be a rather depressing place

Brumbies are winning, but they're still copping plenty for their negativity. Someone said in one of the papers that we may as well "get rid of them because we have enough AFL teams as it is". So that's what you're up against.

RoosTah · May 17, 2014

heineken said:
Yeah right. Play that stupid card. Your name could easily have been Conrad Smith.

You seem to forget that we play cricket, hockey, swimming and athletics too, to name a few...

Stop derailing the thread and stick to the topic at hand.

You're the one that pulled out the tired old "win is a win" BS. I'm just pointing out that in a capitalist entertainment market, a win isn't just a win anymore.

austingtir · May 17, 2014

Its pretty obvious both sides contributed to the spectacle that wasnt......

TRF_heineken · May 17, 2014

sanzar said:
You're the one that pulled out the tired old "win is a win" BS. I'm just pointing out that in a capitalist entertainment market, a win isn't just a win anymore.

I only said that because you cursed the Sharks for playing negative rugby.

Don't start something and then play the blame game.

In a competitive market, winning is everything. Last 2 seasons there was even relegation involved. Get off your high chair.

RoosTah · May 17, 2014

heineken said:
I only said that because you cursed the Sharks for playing negative rugby.

Don't start something and then play the blame game.

In a competitive market, winning is everything. Last 2 seasons there was even relegation involved. Get off your high chair.

We're talking about different markets. Yours is a very narrow one that's a reflection of the vacuum in sporting entertainment competition that allows rugby to do what it wants. Very different.

So yes, I bagged the sharks for negativity because they play a soccer imitation of rugby that uses the feet more than the hands. It may win some times, but it's still boring as bat-$#!t

Darwin · May 17, 2014

austingtir said:
Its pretty obvious both sides contributed to the spectacle that wasnt......

Yep I agree entirely. The Crusaders played just as 'negatively' as the Sharks.....

TRF_heineken · May 17, 2014

sanzar said:
We're talking about different markets. Yours is a very narrow one that's a reflection of the vacuum in sporting entertainment competition that allows rugby to do what it wants. Very different.

So yes, I bagged the sharks for negativity because they play a soccer imitation of rugby that uses the feet more than the hands. It may win some times, but it's still boring as bay-*****

Yet they scored more tries than the Crusaders...

RoosTah · May 17, 2014

heineken said:
Yet they scored more tries than the Crusaders...

Yep. But there was very little creative created. A soft and bizarre 'hit-up' try at the end was pure Sharks - no imagination and just bash it forward.

TRF_heineken · May 17, 2014

sanzar said:
Yep. But there was very little creative created. A soft and bizarre 'hit-up' try at the end was pure Sharks - no imagination and just bash it forward.

It's called traditional South African Rugby!!

nzlizard · May 17, 2014

At the end of the day if that was the Sharks game plan and thew Crusaders fell into it then the Sherks deserved the win.

Barring the sending of which was dumb and he is gone for a few weeks, the Sharks defended the hell out of the Crusaders and took there opportunities better. Not pretty to watch but gives them a great result for the tour.

The Crusaders needed not get sucked in and just play a running game, with a numbers advantage the Sharks should have been out on there feet at the end but they weren't, as the Crusaders lacked the ability to finish or adjust a game plan to try and score.

RoosTah · May 17, 2014

heineken said:
It's called traditional South African Rugby!!

Well... English and South African, to be accurate

TRF_heineken · May 17, 2014

sanzar said:
Well... English and South African, to be accurate

So get used to it. Australian playing style is not the be-all and end-all of Rugby.

RoosTah · May 17, 2014

heineken said:
So get used to it. Australian playing style is not the be-all and end-all of Rugby.

Used to it? Mate, I'm well used to it. So used to it in fact, that I'm sick to death of it.

William18 · May 17, 2014

The Sharks kicked 28% of the time; the Crusaders kicked 15% of the time. I think it clear which side played more negatively. The Sharks are generally negative but to criticise them for it today is stupid. They were down a man. They had to be negative.

Anyway, the Chiefs are just one point behind the Sharks having lost 1 more game (actually two but the two draws compensate). The Sharks could very well have to travel to Hamilton to play a team far more ruthless than the Crusaders as their reward for not being attacking enough. Anyway, I actually enjoyed the game tonight. It may not have been pretty but I don't look for that in a game. I believe the best style is simply the one that works for you given your resources. That's actually one of the most interesting things about rugby - when two teams take each other on with different styles. I don't think you see that in a lot of other sports. I suppose soccer is a good example. Mourinho has copped plenty in the past couple of weeks yet he took 12 points from 4 games against the two sides that finished above him. I think Chelsea's season showed that a defensive style often works in the big games but then Chelsea had some 1-0 losses and 0-0 draws against West ham, Villa, Norwich and Crystal Palace. The two attacking teams lost the head to battles but eventually won out by thrashing those teams 4-0.

Jaguares · May 17, 2014

A very important away win for Sharks

sanzar said:
We're talking about different markets. Yours is a very narrow one that's a reflection of the vacuum in sporting entertainment competition that allows rugby to do what it wants. Very different.

So yes, I bagged the sharks for negativity because they play a soccer imitation of rugby that uses the feet more than the hands. It may win some times, but it's still boring as bat-$#!t

Is it the characteristic of Jake White teams, right?

2014 Super Rugby: Crusaders vs Sharks (Round 14)

First XV

RIP #J9

First XV

AKA Dingo_Darwin

RIP #J9

First XV

First XV

First XV

RIP #J9

First XV

AKA Dingo_Darwin

RIP #J9

First XV

RIP #J9

Bench Player

First XV

RIP #J9

First XV

First XV

International

Similar threads