-
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Super Rugby play-offs: Reds - Sharks in Brisbane (21/07/2012)
- Thread starter TRF_Ezequiel
- Start date
Amobokoboko
Waikato Junglist
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2008
- Messages
- 4,724
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
Should be a close game anyway.
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2010
- Messages
- 7,385
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
The last time the Sharks won in Brisbane, they went on to play the final. It was 2007 and the Sharks won 16-59 with tries by AJ Venter (2), JP Pietersen (2), Jacques Botes, Bradley Barritt, Waylon Murray, Bismarck du Plessis and Keegan Daniel.
It would be nice to see a repeat of that, but in all fairness I give the Reds a better chance to win, even though they are without Quade.
It would be nice to see a repeat of that, but in all fairness I give the Reds a better chance to win, even though they are without Quade.
Amobokoboko
Waikato Junglist
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2008
- Messages
- 4,724
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
Maybe a stupid question. But why was Schalk Brits allowed to play in the Play offs last year and why Steyn can't?
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2010
- Messages
- 7,385
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
Nope, they used Brits as a dispensation player for a specialist position (hooker). The Sharks have enough fit centers which makes the ruling on Steyn different.
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2010
- Messages
- 7,385
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
Yes, but no. 8 is not a specialist position. Only hooker (2), both props (1 and 3) and the scrum-half are considered specialist positions.
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2010
- Messages
- 2,293
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
"SANZAR CEO Greg Peters confirmed to SuperSport.com that while few changes were expected for the 2012 Super Rugby tournament, there was definitely going to be a change in the player regulations which governed eligibility. There was unhappiness in both Australia and New Zealand earlier this year as the Stormers “exploited†the regulations by flying in Britz, who plays for Saracens in England, to play at flank for them in their semi-final against the Crusaders at Newlands, a game that the Stormers ultimately lost.
And while the Southern Hemisphere's controlling body won’t be making any moves in 2012, it expects some agreement to come to allow Argentinean players to participate in the Super Rugby competition as part of one of the SANZAR country franchises.
Peters said that while Sanzar had allowed Britz to compete, it certainly would be “closing the loophole†ahead of the 2012 competition.
“We won’t be making substansive changes, but there is definitely the situation regarding eligibility that we will look at. We want to change the current loophole in the regulations that enables players to play in the finals series having not contributed in the league stages,†Peters told SuperSport.com.
“What we are looking for is a declaration of a squad of players that will be eligible through the entire season, and if anyone else needs to come in there needs to be injury proof. Apart from that, to play in the finals series, you need to be eligible, playing in the country by a certain date to qualify.â€
Peters said while it had always been left up to the individual countries to nominate players, there now needed to be a better system with dealing with eligibility.
“Teams will now announce a squad of players who will all be eligible throughout the competition, and they can then bring other players in until the cut-off date. After that, players can only be brought in if they have played four games, or as an injury replacement if they are in the country by a certain date.
“The principle is we don’t want to see competition-hopping, we want teams to play through. We don’t want the example of this year’s series when the Stormers exploited that loophole. We say good on them, but now we are closing that one.â€
and http://www.superxv.com/news/super15_rugby_news.asp?id=32849
for the full details
And while the Southern Hemisphere's controlling body won’t be making any moves in 2012, it expects some agreement to come to allow Argentinean players to participate in the Super Rugby competition as part of one of the SANZAR country franchises.
Peters said that while Sanzar had allowed Britz to compete, it certainly would be “closing the loophole†ahead of the 2012 competition.
“We won’t be making substansive changes, but there is definitely the situation regarding eligibility that we will look at. We want to change the current loophole in the regulations that enables players to play in the finals series having not contributed in the league stages,†Peters told SuperSport.com.
“What we are looking for is a declaration of a squad of players that will be eligible through the entire season, and if anyone else needs to come in there needs to be injury proof. Apart from that, to play in the finals series, you need to be eligible, playing in the country by a certain date to qualify.â€
Peters said while it had always been left up to the individual countries to nominate players, there now needed to be a better system with dealing with eligibility.
“Teams will now announce a squad of players who will all be eligible throughout the competition, and they can then bring other players in until the cut-off date. After that, players can only be brought in if they have played four games, or as an injury replacement if they are in the country by a certain date.
“The principle is we don’t want to see competition-hopping, we want teams to play through. We don’t want the example of this year’s series when the Stormers exploited that loophole. We say good on them, but now we are closing that one.â€
and http://www.superxv.com/news/super15_rugby_news.asp?id=32849
for the full details
Darwin
AKA Dingo_Darwin
- Joined
- May 30, 2007
- Messages
- 6,155
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
With Cooper out I see the Sharks as favorites for this match. If the Reds bring Ben Lucas in at 10 I think they still have a chance, but if they move Harris into 10 and bring in Tapuai at 12 (which I think they will) I think they will struggle. This is nothing against Tapuai (who I actually rate as a better player than Lucas), it is just that with Harris at 10 the Reds will struggle to play an expansive game-plan, which I think they must do if they are going to match the Sharks.
I highly doubt they will put harris at 10, lucas at ten everything else will remain the same, not sure who will come onto the bench. Lucas is very solid at FH and will surprise a lot of people I think.
Tough one to pick this game, Reds should be faves but the Sharks forwards will be too much for the Reds I feel.
Quade or no Quade it's the forwards where this will be won and without Horwill I don't see the Reds winning this.
Sharks to take it by 5.
Quade or no Quade it's the forwards where this will be won and without Horwill I don't see the Reds winning this.
Sharks to take it by 5.
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2010
- Messages
- 7,385
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
Super Rugby play-off no. 2
With the final round of the regular season behind us, we have the 6 remaining teams. The 4 teams heading into the play-offs are determined to make it to the semi's. Who has the best chance? What are the stats head-to-head? And what can history tell us about the results coming on Saturday?
The Reds and Sharks are not the most successful teams in the competition, but they are regarded as 2 of the most promising teams. The Reds won the championship last season by beating the Crusaders in the final after topping the log in the regular season. The Sharks, who finished 6th, lost in the play-offs to the same team. What will history say about this match-up? Who has the upper-hand and who is the underdog? Is it really the Sharks drawing the short straw? Let's see and find out.
The match between the Reds and Sharks is a repeat of the first ever play-off match in the competition. Back in 1996, the Sharks, who had amazing talent in captain Gary Teichmann, Andre Joubert, James Small, Ollie le Roux and Mark Andrews, travelled to Brisbane to take on the Reds, who finished top of the log. It was the first and only time these 2 teams met in the play-offs and the match itself was a cracker! With a 25-43 score, the Reds came short and saw the Sharks head towards the final by scoring 5 tries to 3. The Sharks went on to lose in the final to the Blues by an almost similar margin: 45-21 with 6 tries to 2. The Sharks became the first losing finalist and it wouldn't be the last time.
1997 was a disappointing season for the Reds but the Sharks ended 4th again, giving them a play-off match against the Blues. The repeat of the final the previous year turned out to be one of the highest-scoring play-off matches in Super Rugby history. A total of 10 tries overall and a 55-36 final score meant the Sharks were out, again losing to the Auckland-based team. In 1998, the Sharks made the play-offs again and this time they lost to the Crusaders 36-32. When travelling, the Sharks struggle when playing in New Zealand while they beat the Reds in Brisbane. Is that a sign? Or have things changed too much?
The Sharks missed out on 2 play-off series in the following years, but the Reds, with guys like captain Tim Horan, Chris Latham, Jacob Rauluni and John Eales, were in the semi's. Again they topped the log and again they had a semi-final at home. Again they lost. The Crusaders were stronger and eventually went on to win their second ***le, after beating the Sharks the year before to go to their first victory. 2001 was a season where both teams made the play-offs, with the Sharks being victorious, playing the Cats at home. They won 30-12 and a final was waiting the Durban-fans again. The Reds lost a day later to the Brumbies and the Brumbies, lead by George Gregan on the field, went on to win the ***le by beating the Sharks. Again the Sharks lost a final.
After 2001, it was quiet in both Durban and Brisbane for a couple of years. Neither team managed to make it to the top-4. Only in 2007 the Sharks were present again. This time as log-leaders, they went into the play-offs as the big favorites. The Sharks beat the Blues, finally getting revenge for the 1996 final, but the good feeling was lost quickly when the Bulls stole the ***le at the death in the final at Kings Park in Durban. The Sharks-fans were heart-broken, losing yet another final. This time even at home. Will the Sharks ever win the Super Rugby championship?
The Sharks only managed to get the play-offs twice afterwards. In 2008 they lost to the Waratahs, a loss that nobody could argue with, but it would be 3 years before the play-offs would be reached again. In 2011 the Sharks lost the play-off against the Crusaders. After playing the Christchurch team earlier that season at Twickenham, London, the Sharks lost 36-8 in Nelson, the temporary venue used due to the earthquake in Christchurch earlier that year. During the play-offs, the Reds had a week off, being log-leaders. In the semi's the Reds played the Blues. In a game remembered for Rod Davies' hat-trick the Reds cruised to victory and were ready to host their first ever Super Rugby final. In that final they beat the Crusaders 18-13 for their first ever Super Rugby championship.
But what does this mean? Yes, the Reds have won a ***le in their only final played. The Sharks made the final 3 times, losing it as many, still waiting for the silverware. The Reds have played a total of 5 play-off matches of which they won 2 and lost the other 3. This gives them a winning ratio of 40%. The Sharks have more play-off experience as a franchise, having played a total of 10 play-off matches of which they won 3. It gives them a winning ratio of 30%. This is not an important factor when you look at the teams. The Reds team is almost entirely made up of last season's champions and they know what it's like to win. The Sharks team however, has a lot of players who dealt with the loss of 2007. Keegan Daniel, Ryan Kankowski, Bismarck du Plessis, Tendai Mtawarira, Francois Steyn (although not playing), Jacques Botes and JP Pietersen were all present that year. Will it help?
I guess it all depends on the form of the day. The Reds are without the suspended Quade Cooper. The Sharks have to face the challenge knowing that Patrick Lambie (injury) and Francois Steyn (not eligible) are not available.
Will we see a repeat of the 1996 semi-final? Or will the Sharks lose for a 3rd time in a row when playing in Australia for the play-offs? If the Reds win, it will be their first play-off victory against a South African team. We will have to wait and see.
Back to Blog
With the final round of the regular season behind us, we have the 6 remaining teams. The 4 teams heading into the play-offs are determined to make it to the semi's. Who has the best chance? What are the stats head-to-head? And what can history tell us about the results coming on Saturday?
The Reds and Sharks are not the most successful teams in the competition, but they are regarded as 2 of the most promising teams. The Reds won the championship last season by beating the Crusaders in the final after topping the log in the regular season. The Sharks, who finished 6th, lost in the play-offs to the same team. What will history say about this match-up? Who has the upper-hand and who is the underdog? Is it really the Sharks drawing the short straw? Let's see and find out.
The match between the Reds and Sharks is a repeat of the first ever play-off match in the competition. Back in 1996, the Sharks, who had amazing talent in captain Gary Teichmann, Andre Joubert, James Small, Ollie le Roux and Mark Andrews, travelled to Brisbane to take on the Reds, who finished top of the log. It was the first and only time these 2 teams met in the play-offs and the match itself was a cracker! With a 25-43 score, the Reds came short and saw the Sharks head towards the final by scoring 5 tries to 3. The Sharks went on to lose in the final to the Blues by an almost similar margin: 45-21 with 6 tries to 2. The Sharks became the first losing finalist and it wouldn't be the last time.
1997 was a disappointing season for the Reds but the Sharks ended 4th again, giving them a play-off match against the Blues. The repeat of the final the previous year turned out to be one of the highest-scoring play-off matches in Super Rugby history. A total of 10 tries overall and a 55-36 final score meant the Sharks were out, again losing to the Auckland-based team. In 1998, the Sharks made the play-offs again and this time they lost to the Crusaders 36-32. When travelling, the Sharks struggle when playing in New Zealand while they beat the Reds in Brisbane. Is that a sign? Or have things changed too much?
The Sharks missed out on 2 play-off series in the following years, but the Reds, with guys like captain Tim Horan, Chris Latham, Jacob Rauluni and John Eales, were in the semi's. Again they topped the log and again they had a semi-final at home. Again they lost. The Crusaders were stronger and eventually went on to win their second ***le, after beating the Sharks the year before to go to their first victory. 2001 was a season where both teams made the play-offs, with the Sharks being victorious, playing the Cats at home. They won 30-12 and a final was waiting the Durban-fans again. The Reds lost a day later to the Brumbies and the Brumbies, lead by George Gregan on the field, went on to win the ***le by beating the Sharks. Again the Sharks lost a final.
After 2001, it was quiet in both Durban and Brisbane for a couple of years. Neither team managed to make it to the top-4. Only in 2007 the Sharks were present again. This time as log-leaders, they went into the play-offs as the big favorites. The Sharks beat the Blues, finally getting revenge for the 1996 final, but the good feeling was lost quickly when the Bulls stole the ***le at the death in the final at Kings Park in Durban. The Sharks-fans were heart-broken, losing yet another final. This time even at home. Will the Sharks ever win the Super Rugby championship?
The Sharks only managed to get the play-offs twice afterwards. In 2008 they lost to the Waratahs, a loss that nobody could argue with, but it would be 3 years before the play-offs would be reached again. In 2011 the Sharks lost the play-off against the Crusaders. After playing the Christchurch team earlier that season at Twickenham, London, the Sharks lost 36-8 in Nelson, the temporary venue used due to the earthquake in Christchurch earlier that year. During the play-offs, the Reds had a week off, being log-leaders. In the semi's the Reds played the Blues. In a game remembered for Rod Davies' hat-trick the Reds cruised to victory and were ready to host their first ever Super Rugby final. In that final they beat the Crusaders 18-13 for their first ever Super Rugby championship.
But what does this mean? Yes, the Reds have won a ***le in their only final played. The Sharks made the final 3 times, losing it as many, still waiting for the silverware. The Reds have played a total of 5 play-off matches of which they won 2 and lost the other 3. This gives them a winning ratio of 40%. The Sharks have more play-off experience as a franchise, having played a total of 10 play-off matches of which they won 3. It gives them a winning ratio of 30%. This is not an important factor when you look at the teams. The Reds team is almost entirely made up of last season's champions and they know what it's like to win. The Sharks team however, has a lot of players who dealt with the loss of 2007. Keegan Daniel, Ryan Kankowski, Bismarck du Plessis, Tendai Mtawarira, Francois Steyn (although not playing), Jacques Botes and JP Pietersen were all present that year. Will it help?
I guess it all depends on the form of the day. The Reds are without the suspended Quade Cooper. The Sharks have to face the challenge knowing that Patrick Lambie (injury) and Francois Steyn (not eligible) are not available.
Will we see a repeat of the 1996 semi-final? Or will the Sharks lose for a 3rd time in a row when playing in Australia for the play-offs? If the Reds win, it will be their first play-off victory against a South African team. We will have to wait and see.
Back to Blog
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2009
- Messages
- 9,326
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
Good write-up, Eze. Always interesting as I see history as a good indicator almost as much as current form (of which both teams have shown over the last 2 rounds). I'd even go as far as to say these are the two form teams ATM though teams like the Crusaders and Stormers know how to win ugly. I'm tempted to through the Bulls in there but i think their new team still need a season together as they've lost the crunch matches this year IMO.
I just hope the Sharks dominate the Reds up front and contain the backs (a lot depends on how Genia handles the pressure on the day) to go on.
I just hope the Sharks dominate the Reds up front and contain the backs (a lot depends on how Genia handles the pressure on the day) to go on.
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2010
- Messages
- 7,385
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
Thanks! I like to throw a lot of history in these stories. The most work went into the artwork though. Finding the photo's was freakin' difficult haha
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2009
- Messages
- 9,326
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
That was some Reds team back then and Latham is the one Aussie I am a fan of. Reds have been **** from then to now but they've had a great team and this one can still go from good to great. I just think they lack the depth and I can see the Sharks take this one away from home.
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2010
- Messages
- 7,385
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
Super Rugby started in 1996. The competitions before that (Super 10 and Super 6) were amateur competitions without a structured schedule and to top it off, it wasn't a fully club-based competition to start with. Western Samoa and Tonga were part of it.
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2010
- Messages
- 7,385
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
Thanks, but I don't really feel the need to do that. I like writing for TRF, because of the bond I feel with the people here. By writing for TRF, I can just put everything in it for the people here. The only thing that worries me every time I write, is the grammar. English is my second language and that makes me struggle a bit, but I'll get through it every time haha. I really got the motivation again lately to write stuff and will try to keep it up during the remainder of the season.
Although, I have to admit that I am often annoyed by the amateurism of websites like superxv.com. They just copy-paste line-ups which leaves the site without a certain identity and they should put more effort in that.
Although, I have to admit that I am often annoyed by the amateurism of websites like superxv.com. They just copy-paste line-ups which leaves the site without a certain identity and they should put more effort in that.
