Sharks set for slaughter

Sharks set for slaughter

3 Aug 2012

MARK KEOHANE writes the Chiefs will win in Hamilton on Saturday and win easily.

If they don’t it will be the biggest final’s implosion in the history of the competition.

I haven’t read a South African who isn’t backing the Sharks to take the title. It is written in the stars say some. It is meant to be say others. Forget the travel, it isn’t a factor. The Sharks are operating on adrenalin, momentum and a belief they can’t be beaten.

I don’t buy the emotion of it all. I reckon the Chiefs will win by at least 15, which is what the New Zealand bookies have as a handicap on the final.

How different my thinking would be if the Sharks actually had a week to settle, prepared with more conviction than hope and did not have to negotiate the fatigue that comes with travelling overseas three times in three weeks.

The Sharks were brilliant against the Reds. I picked that win. Historically they play well in Brisbane and the Reds were poor this season. I also picked them to beat the Stormers, because I felt they had the physicality to match the Stormers and the Stormers were never going to be a try-scoring threat. But the way the Sharks hit the wall with seven minutes to play was an indicator that they won’t get through 80 minutes in Hamilton on emotion, passion and belief. They will be huffing and puffing by half time and on the hour the reality of the travel will have set in.

The Sharks are as good a side as the Chiefs, but they are not significantly better. To win this competition, playing the final in another country, requires a squad with few weaknesses and for all the heroics of the last three weeks the Sharks are not the complete package. The Chiefs aren’t either but they had the advantage of playing their semi-final last Friday, they have been at home all week and the only thing that can beat them is a spectacular implosion.

I can’t see it happening because under Dave Rennnie and Wayne Smith they play pragmatic, percentages rugby and they are a team whose focus on defence is never at the expense of attack.

Sonny Bill Williams will be influential. He always is against the Sharks and I can’t see French flyhalf Fred Michalak taking too much contact in Hamilton. Michalak has enjoyed his best month of Super Rugby but he has never been one to mix it with the Kiwis and I don’t see that changing on Saturday.

The first 30 minutes will be intense as both teams have individuals who thrive on physicality, but the Chiefs at 9, 10 and 12 will ask more questions in attack from structured play and they will target Michalak defensively.

There will be individual heroics from the Sharks and world class players like Bismarck du Plessis will front the challenge, but science says the Sharks will be running on empty on the hour.

John Plumtree and Grant Bashford are the best South African coaching combination in the tournament and they are up against the most balanced coaching duo in New Zealand. The Sharks, despite finishing out of the top four, have played the best rugby among South African teams and the Chiefs have been the stand out team in the competition.

Why could there not be a fortnight between semi-final and final? Not just for the Sharks but every year.

South African players who have made the trek to New Zealand previously for semi-finals and the odd final have admitted afterwards that they were just making up the numbers. The same applies to those Kiwi or Aussie teams going to the Republic. The exception has always been the Crusaders, but even they took a beating whenever a semi-final meant travelling to Pretoria.

The Sharks, as I keep on getting reminded, have travelled to Australia and beaten the Aussie Conference Champs. They then travelled to Cape Town and beat the South African Conference Champs. It apparently is written somewhere up above that they will travel to New Zealand and beat the New Zealand Conference Champs. Well I haven’t seen the writing and if the Sharks do succeed it will be the greatest play-offs success in the history of the competition.

Home teams win finals in Super Rugby. History shows that and as is often quoted the only thing man can learn from history is that he never learns from history.

It is fantastic how emphatic the support is for the Sharks but I’ve seen it all before. The blind loyalty in the build-up and then the absolute disbelief when they get pumped.

In 2011 when Peter de Villiers took a second team to play the All Blacks I heard similar talk of a win and when the Boks took a 40-7 hammering there was way too much surprise among the supporters.

Be loyal to your team. Be South African in your support but also know that this final is weighted heavily in favour of the hosts – as is every Super Rugby final.


592 Comments

Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 … 12 » Show All

  • 151.poppa69: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 13:48 pm

    this post is for my good boet UFO :D

    10 New ZealandNew Zealand 3 0 2 5
    11 KazakhstanKazakhstan 3 0 0 3
    11 South AfricaSouth Africa 3 0 0 3
    13 JapanJapan 2 6 11 19
    14 NetherlandsNetherlands 2 1 3 6
    15 HungaryHungary 2 1 2 5
    16 UkraineUkraine 2 0 4 6
    17 AustraliaAustralia 1 8 4 13

    just like the rugby, the true order of SH super powers is restored…all is good..

  • 152.gonzo: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 13:48 pm

    @wait for it, wait for it…-139: I thought all this talk about travel was going to stop once RSA had five teams in the comp and again once the conference system started. I don’t think you’ll ever be happy. The southern hemisphere is a big place…best way to deal with it is by coming first

  • 153.rangerman: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 13:48 pm

    @wait for it, wait for it…-139: ja i dont think it will sell bud.

    the simplest scenario is a week off and its only rampant greed and consumerism preventing this imo.

    i never cheer the loss of an opponents star player or wish them any kind of misfortune off the field that gives my team an advantage.

  • 154.Robzim: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 13:49 pm

    @rangerman-126:

    I believe the team who performed consistently better than the other team through the year must receive some or other form of “compensation” and the compensation must be bigger if no 1 plays no 6 in the final than if number 1 plays no 2 for example.

    Therefore if the Stormers had to play the Chiefs in the final the compensation would have been be a “homefield advantage” and one trip across some timesones. The Sharks who finished no 6 deserve more “punishment” and therefore the multiple flights.

    Makes sense to me :)

  • 155.gonzo: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 13:49 pm

    @Hurricane-133: Ahead of the aussies for a while at least…not bad :-)

  • 156.wait for it, wait for it...: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 13:50 pm

    @rangerman-138:
    no, thats not how it works.
    it is the direction of travel which determines it.
    i.e. the sharks travel in an easterly direction from the west
    and the chiefs travel in a westerly direction from the east

    it has to do with the rotation of the earth and the day/night which follows with it.

  • 157.the artist formerly known as gunther: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 13:50 pm

    @Hurricane-150:

    don’t be like that.

    we are all right behind our kiwi cousins in the olympics.

    how do you decide which of your 57 tvs to watch on?

    or do yo put them in the same trailer?

  • 158.Hurricane: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 13:51 pm

    @gonzo-155:
    Yeah. Ozzie going bad. South Africa is doing awesome. They only won 1 medal last games, done really well in this one.

  • 159.Atreides: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 13:52 pm

    @Robzim-120: @Robzim-120: Nope not saying that at all. In the context of the competition all the sides regularly have to travel to play a game, but the travel this time has been unprecedented. No harm would come from an extra week, given it’s a final. So my last remark refers to a situation where one side is palpably hamstrung by fatigue/circadian rhtythm/jetlag/whatever

    WHEN IS THAT ******* LITTLE MIDGET GOING TO SORT HIS SITE OUT? Took me 10 minutes to post this!

  • 160.mshiniwami: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 13:53 pm

    Slaughter I don’t think so

    But Sharks are certainly up against it.

    With rain forecasted for tomorrow it will be to advantage of Sharks who have the superior pack.And have the better kickers even though as well they CAN and will run the ball when need be with a good platform set up.

    SBW vs Jordaan matchup will be crucial.SBW is the primary ball carrier who sets up Chiefs Attacks especially off first phases.Jordaan will have his hands full.

    But

    SBW is also susceptible to defensive lapses especially against quicker explosive outside backs.his lateral movement & reaction on drift D isn’t the best.gives away momentum as he often makes scrag tackles due to his size and arm length he can make the tackle but one can’t get over advantage line.Cheetahs targeted him with Willie Le Roux running that line,Guilford did as well in last round robin game,Ellison well.That why I think Jordaan is being played at 12.but he needs to test that hammy early…

    Cruden is the major dangerman for Chiefs,his effectiveness depends on the pack,who matched up well in tight loose to Saders last week

    Massive game

  • 161.>^..^< katman: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 13:53 pm

    @Hurricane-150: I know for a fact that bungy jumping isn’t an Olympic sport yet, so is it perhaps foozball?

  • 162.the artist formerly known as gunther: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 13:54 pm

    @Robzim-154:

    compensation?

    Is a home final not enough?

    you sound like one of those chicks bleating on about insurance schemes exclusively for women drivers.

  • 163.stormer in a teacup: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 13:54 pm

    @nama1-58: Hilarious.

  • 164.rangerman: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 13:54 pm

    @>^..^< katman-148: :lol: thanks go alviro!

    @Hurricane-150: lol, you sound a bit grumps of late hurri, you even called me stuck up haha.

    @gonzo-152: see its a problem having a proper debate here because they allow any halfwit with a keyboard and access to his neighbours internet to post.

    we are debating a PRINCIPLE that has nothing to do with the sharks game tomorrow as we are all aware that thems the rules.

    the PRINCIPLE could work in favour of a kiwi or aussie team or a saffa team like in 2009.

    did you enjoy the *** whupping the chiefs got vs the bulls then?

    imo it was a one sided blowout and didnt do the comp justice.

    but keep flapping without taking time to consider what we are saying because this year it benefits a kiwi team.

    you will squeal like a girl when its your turn and maybe then we can have a proper convo.

    mate.

  • 165.the artist formerly known as gunther: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 13:55 pm

    that stumping looked quite suspish.

    what happened to the benefit of the doubt?

  • 166.wait for it, wait for it...: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 13:55 pm

    @rangerman-138:
    oh sorry, yes of course i meant to say they go east to west.
    i just type and post stuff
    should read the post through sometimes
    my brain a hint of dyslexability about it most days :grin:

  • 167.Atreides: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 13:55 pm

    @>^..^< katman-123: Just for you katters! http://www.buzzfeed.com/jpmoore/19-photos-that-are-definitely-not-just-of-sexy-wom

  • 168.Hurricane: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 13:57 pm

    @the artist formerly known as gunther-157:
    Gunther to the rescue.
    I am just wondering …do i watch it in 3D? or shall i watch it in my viewing room….i just get so confused.
    But gunther, unlike you my tv has colour, maybe all the acid you have taken in the 60s may help you with your black and white TV

    @>^..^< katman-161:
    Yeah cool.
    Anyway i hear South Africa have got the Shemale olympic sorted, isnt that right pu$$yman

  • 169.>^..^< katman: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 13:57 pm

    @the artist formerly known as gunther-165: The new rule on the matter says that the benefit of the doubt must always go with the home team.*

    *except when the home team is not the Poms.

  • 170.stormer in a teacup: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 13:58 pm

    @gonzo-152: Correct.

  • 171.halfgk: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 13:59 pm

    My point is, you don’t suddenly complain about a format (no matter how flawed) when your team’s back is against the wall. Yes I know people complained before now, but that was about the conference system because the Aussies suck, not about extreme travel. Again, nobody knew beforehand that one team would have to travel so much.

  • 172.rangerman: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 14:00 pm

    @wait for it, wait for it…-156:

    122.wait for it, wait for it…: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 13:34 pm

    @halfgk-109:
    @Atreides-111:
    bear in mind that east – west travel is a lot worse regarding the effects of jetlag.
    if the chiefs were to come to sa (west to east) it would not have been as bad as it is for the sharks going east to west.

    do we really need to go over this or should we just agree that we both know what you were saying?

    @Robzim-154: seriously?

    compensation?

    a handicap maybe?

    maybe if you finish first your opponents should have to float across the ocean on abandoned packing crates?

    no man, get over the heartache, it will only bring you down :lol:

  • 173.Hurricane: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 14:01 pm

    @rangerman-164:
    :-)
    I think you should check out some of the childish posts from your comrades. I think Katman is struggling to get through puberty.

  • 174.gonzo: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 14:01 pm

    @rangerman-164: err, no. When the Chiefs lost to the Bulls it was fair. My team, the Blues lost in QLD last year in the semis and that was fair. Why should a team spend six months dominating a competition only to slip up in a “fair” final at some neutral venue miles away from their home crowd. It works for the world cup, which is a knock out tournament but not for super rugby. Besides, we all get told NZ’s RWCs don’t count as they were at home so you’ll always have some answer/excuse for losing

  • 175.Hurricane: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 14:02 pm

    Keo still cant fix the problem with posting to quickly, I would be embarrassed if i was running a blog and it kept bringing up the same error for over a week now.
    Its a simple fix. lol

  • 176.Robzim: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 14:03 pm

    @the artist formerly known as gunther-162:

    Don’t be like this.
    Your team always get more then home advantage.
    It is called altitude.
    The advantage is 5.248 points per match to the bulls
    I wonder when the IRB is going to address this unfair advantage .

  • 177.The Sharks rugby pedigree is packaged by Mad Eye Productions.: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 14:03 pm

    The travel disadvantage argument: If one starts with a weeks rest for finalists, where does it end? One week off for teams who are missing key players – it’s a disadvantage. One week off for teams who have to play a final at altitude – to even the playing fields. Two weeks off for teams who have more than 8 international players in their ranks (due to player tiredness after the autumn internationals_ – disadvantage. SANZAR must then also be forced to allow teams to contract any players for the playoffs is injury have ravaged their depth – fair :)
    Sadly, the same system that afforded the Sharks the opportunity to feature in the playoffs at ALL (positive) nails the same Sharks for their poor and inconsistent form earlier in the season.
    Get rid of these 3,4,5 and 6 playoffs, and top 4 go through – 2 semis, same ground, same country, same time zone and then final the next week, same place.
    Sorry Sharks, Travel is just a symptom……your inconsistency and poor form earlier in the season is the cause.
    But if you win, you blow the travel theory out of the water, and no team will be able to whinge again – think of that :)

    So to sum up: Teams that:
    have had to travel, are missing players, are ravaged by in juries, have to play at altitude won’t be receiving any favours, as it really is the same for all teams involved.

  • 178.The Sharks rugby pedigree is packaged by Mad Eye Productions.: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 14:04 pm

    @Robzim-176: SNAP :)

  • 179.rangerman: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 14:04 pm

    @wait for it, wait for it…-166: no problem, bygones bud.

    i know you are fairly cleva :lol: @halfgk-171:

    FOR

    FUCKSAKES

    can you not understand that we are debating a ******* PRINCIPLE?????????????????????????????????

    it has NOTHING to do with this year, we are talking about the future buddy.

    p.s. no one is complaining or trying to make excuses ffs, the sharks made their bed, they must lie in it. but if we dont recognise the faults in current systems and try to improve them we would all be in caves gnawing raw meat.

    :lol: i am actually quite amused by your sticking to this point, you sound like a petty beaurocrat to me.

  • 180.>^..^< katman: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 14:06 pm

    @Atreides-167: That’s how I remember the sport.

  • 181.The Sharks rugby pedigree is packaged by Mad Eye Productions.: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 14:06 pm

    @the artist formerly known as gunther-165: It was blatant kak. Sheepish cricketing icons in commentary.

  • 182.Hurricane: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 14:06 pm

    @gonzo-174:
    As you can see gonzo, a few of these muppets are preparing for a Sharks loss.
    Its a win win for the Sharks.
    If the Sharks lose, then its the setups fault.
    If the Sharks win, it will go down as the best win in the history of the tournament.

  • 183.Hurricane: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 14:08 pm

    @Robzim-176:
    lol

  • 184.>^..^< katman: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 14:09 pm

    @Hurricane-173: Why so gwumpy, Huri? It’s Friday night where you are, and you’re having a blast, tearing up the town on a SA rugby fan site.

    Life at the speed of a Hurricane. Fck yeah.

  • 185.rangerman: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 14:09 pm

    @Hurricane-173: buddy, i hope you are not being skullfarked like poops was.

    he has never been the same.

    come back to the light.

    @gonzo-174: so why bother with semis and finals pal?

    seriously.

    you need to think things through before you post ok?

    my time is not endless.

    @The Sharks rugby pedigree is packaged by Mad Eye Productions.-177: sorry, could you bullet point that for us please, it was like taking a walk through the atom.

    my guess is you are disagreeing with a weeks break between the semis and finals based on the stormers washing their cars this weekend.

    its ok, you can just say you hate the sharks and hope they lose and are so tired they cant make the toilet in time.

    a week is not enough time to get over serious trauma :lol:

  • 186.Rage: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 14:10 pm

    177

    very well said..fully agree!

  • 187.wait for it, wait for it...: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 14:11 pm

    @gonzo-152:
    well gosh darn gonzo, dont you see that even if a saffa team came first thereby obliging any kiwi/ozz team to travel to the republic for a semi/final its still easier, in terms of jetlag, for that team to do so and be in with a chance to win it than it is for the sa team to travel to oz/nz and be in with a chance to win it.

  • 188.stormer in a teacup: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 14:11 pm

    @Atreides-167: Nbr. 8 is a pearler.

  • 189.rangerman: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 14:12 pm

    @Atreides-167: thank you thank you thank you.

    those volleyball girls spend a lot of time touching each other.

    it feel so right.@Hurricane-182: not the case at all, the sharks are already heroes buddy.

    no excuses, the rules are the same for everyone.

  • 190.rangerman: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 14:12 pm

    @Rage-186: stormerfan?

    :lol:

  • 191.Hurricane: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 14:13 pm

    @>^..^< katman-184:
    Friday night and i am at home looking after my Kids, like all good parents should do. Why the interest?

  • 192.halfgk: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 14:14 pm

    @rangerman-179: You’re not the only person posting here. Some people are going on about the same thing and not your “principle”. My last post was not even targetted on you.
    Get of your high horse.

  • 193.poppa69: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 14:14 pm

    this needs reposting

    10 New ZealandNew Zealand 3 0 2 5
    11 KazakhstanKazakhstan 3 0 0 3
    11 South AfricaSouth Africa 3 0 0 3
    13 JapanJapan 2 6 11 19
    14 NetherlandsNetherlands 2 1 3 6
    15 HungaryHungary 2 1 2 5
    16 UkraineUkraine 2 0 4 6
    17 AustraliaAustralia 1 8 4 13

  • 194.poppa69: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 14:16 pm

    @rangerman-185: hows that rant you had the other night Ranger, was it directed at your president? was very ummmmmm hostile indeed… love the holier than thou attitude though, bewdiful….quite a bit of angst there mate huh?

  • 195.>^..^< katman: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 14:16 pm

    @Hurricane-191: Don’t mind me – I’m just trying to figure out the complex psychology of why the fck you stick around on a foreign site when 95% of it irritates the sht out of you and the other 5% is only tolerable because it’s in a language you don’t understand. Carry on though, I’ll figure it out sooner or later.

  • 196.Atreides: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 14:17 pm

    @Hurricane-182: Kak man, ranger and i are both debating the principle (which would remain the same whichever teams were involved) and not this specific instance. I’m not even a Sharks fan. Try to keep up.

    @The Sharks rugby pedigree is packaged by Mad Eye Productions.-177: Crikey chick, ever heard of pumctuation? lol

    I think the finals of the compo, as a spectacle, could call for a little more consideration, without going all overboard like you did there.

  • 197.gonzo: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 14:18 pm

    @wait for it, wait for it…-187: ok so if we rotate the finals through the countries, two out of three years it will be in ANZ. So if the Stormers or Bulls or Sharks top the log every year then get knocked out in the quarter/semi final because they had to travel (possibly to play at the home of a lower ranked team) will we hear your applause for the wonderfully fair system?

  • 198.>^..^< katman: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 14:18 pm

    Ah, Poeps is back to his old name. A return to the sauce.

  • 199.The Sharks rugby pedigree is packaged by Mad Eye Productions.: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 14:19 pm

    @rangerman-185: Nah, simply saying, that unless semi finals and finals are played in one stadium, over a 2 week period, there will always be whinging.

    Whether some of you fellows will admit it or not, the system can’t be blamed for certain losses against the Lions, the Hurricanes, the Chiefs etc, so the system shouldn’t be obliged to make up for those losses, by assisting a travelling team.
    When the Saders had half of their city blown away last year, did SANZAR offer to reschedule their match against the Blues, so that the Saders could recover from the trauma? No, the Blues and Saders agreed on taking 2 points each.
    Did SANZAR offer the Saders an additional 8 points because they didn’t have one home game? – No.

    Did the system give a sh y te that the Stormers started last years tournament with a BYE? (originally awarded to the Sharks, but they protested it).

    Was Steyn or Sinclair allowed to take part in playoffs? No.

  • 200.Atreides: Reply to this comment
    3 Aug 2012, 14:20 pm

    @>^..^< katman-198: And the crowds go mild.

    *yawn*

Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 … 12 » Show All

Keo.co.za has always promoted uncensored views, but has never tolerated racist or crass outbursts. Come on guys and girls. If you can't moderate yourselves or each other then I am going to be forced to regulate the posts and enforce a registration process for comments. The choice is yours.

Have your say

You must be logged in to post a comment.