Griquas edge Kings
13 Feb 2013
Griquas got the win but Southern Kings Director of Rugby Alan Solomons got questions answered in his team’s final Super Rugby pre-season outing.
Griquas scored late to win 30-27 and Solomons told Keo.co.za on the balance of performance the right team got the winning result.
‘Pre-season matches are about more than the result but every player and team wants a winning one,’ he said. ‘We did not get enough ball to enforce our way of play and all credit to the effort of Griquas. They dominated the lineout and denied us a platform. It is hard to play any game without ball from set piece and if the boys didn’t know that they certainly will now.’
The Kings historic Super Rugby debut is Solomons’ focus and he said bigger than the result in Port Elizabeth was that captain Luke Watson and lock Steven Sykes got through the match in what was their first appearance after lengthy injury lay-offs.
‘We gained from those objectives in that the players returning from injury got the necessary hit out, but in any sport the objective is to win. That we did not get and we did not deserve a winning result. There has never been any illusion about the challenge in Super Rugby proper but we will be in a position to field a match squad close to full strength. That wasn’t looking possible a few weeks ago.
‘It is a credit to our medical and conditioning staff and to the desire of the players.’
Solomons said he was thankful for the commitment of Griquas and how important the match would be in the mental preparation for the historic season opener in a week.
‘Griquas approached it like it was a Super Rugby match and it was the physical and mental preparation you can’t replicate at training. We’ve got lots to work with in the next week. But take nothing away from Griquas. They came here to win and they did so.’
The Kings play the Force in Port Elizabeth to start their Super Rugby history.
By Mark Keohane
807 Comments
Pages: « 1 … 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 » Show All
14 Feb 2013, 23:11 pm
@I am a stormer-695: Province fans should actually not talk about their 2012 CC win. If it’s weren’t for those to “rugstekers” Taute and Jantjies you would have still been without that koppie.
14 Feb 2013, 23:11 pm
@Tuna-693:
The police have confirmed that Oscar Pistorius is no longer a flight risk.
So they didn’t take his passport away.
Just his legs.
14 Feb 2013, 23:11 pm
@Peter Mkata-698: Peter, I hope your family enjoy it. Nice to have new fans brought into the game.
I think when the whistel blows for kick off I will soften my stance on the Kings and wish every SA team well (except perhaps the Stormers
)
14 Feb 2013, 23:13 pm
@Robzim-694: oh, you are talking about wp?
i was talking superrugby bud, same as the rest of the convo but if the cc makes you feel better then well done i say
@victoriabok-697:
@Peter Mkata-698: have you ever been to kings park?
family place bud, i guarantee you would have happily taken your wife and youngster there again and again without “nasty eyes or hostility” if you had experienced it.
anyways, like i say, i want to fly down for the kings sharks game.
and paaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaartyyyyyyyyyyyy!
14 Feb 2013, 23:13 pm
@Tuna-701:
It’s guys like you that make my day.
Check this out china.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HPWD6CoxdE&feature=player_detailpage
14 Feb 2013, 23:15 pm
@I am a stormer-702: Dude…. sorry to be a downer. I usually enjoy a good joke or two. Imagine the father of that girl reading all these jokes and what he must be thinking. Just a thought.
14 Feb 2013, 23:15 pm
ok guys, i am out.
have a good evening all of you.
snoekskiet wake the f uk up ok?
14 Feb 2013, 23:20 pm
@I am a stormer-705: Don’t really give a hoot. Funny that the CC have some value now that the WP has won it huh? Last year the CC was just a a piece of tin according to some of you.
Enjoy it….. it’s back in the Bulls cabinet in 2014 (and worthless again)
14 Feb 2013, 23:21 pm
@Tuna-706:
It’s dark humour. Live with it. Oscar has a lot of explaining to do. There will be some very awkward questions for him to answer.
Of course, my thoughts and prayers are with Reeva’s family.
And Oscar’s family are in need of support too.
14 Feb 2013, 23:24 pm
@I am a stormer-709: More like tasteless, but I’m not gunning for you. Just saying. Night all. I’m out.
14 Feb 2013, 23:27 pm
@Tuna-710:
Mate, it has gone viral. Worldwide. Get a grip.
14 Feb 2013, 23:29 pm
@I am a stormer-711: Oh ok… so it’s ok when because it’s viral? Ahh *** it….. why bother.
14 Feb 2013, 23:29 pm
@I am a stormer-711: why are you so touchy tonight?
14 Feb 2013, 23:45 pm
@The Rangerman-704:
Unfortunately not. But I know it is a great stadium and excellent atmosphere. Been told by acquaintances and read on this site from your postings.LOL.
Been to Newlands which is also great. Ellis Park and Loftus too.
14 Feb 2013, 23:49 pm
@polaris-662:
here is the accurate result of who finished how
@skopdiekan-655:
Since 98 when SR went to new SR format after SA went the franchise route and not the provincial route
Both teams contested semi 5 times Sharks converting to final 3 times Stormers once
1998 S12
3rd Sharks 36 pts
9th Stormers 18 pts
1999 S12
2nd Stormers 36 pts
7th Sharks 25 pts
2000 S12
5th Stormers 31 pts
12th Sharks 9 pts
2001 S12
2nd Sharks 38 pts
7th Stormers 26 pts
2002 S12
7th Stormers 27 pts
10th Sharks 20 pts
2003 S12
9th Stormers 23 pts
11th Sharks 17 pts
2004 S12
3rd Stormers 33 pts
7th Sharks 28 pts
2005 S12
9th Stormers 18 pts
12th Sharks 11 pts
2006 S14
5th Sharks 38 pts
11 Stormers 23 pts
2007 S14
1st Sharks 45 pts
10th Stormers 27 pts
2008 S14
3rd Sharks 42 pts
5th Stormers 41 pts
2009 S14
6th Sharks 38 pts
10th Stormers 27 pts
2010 S14
2nd Stormers 44 pts
9th Sharks 33 pts
2011 S15
2nd Stormers 63 pts
6th Sharks 57 pts
2012 S15
1st Stormers 66 pts
5th Sharks 59 pts
Stormers finished above Sharks 8 times
Sharks finished above Stormers 6 times
Who is the most consistent finisher and who has the better overall win / loss ratio against all teams between the two?
Answer = Stormers over Sharks
14 Feb 2013, 23:51 pm
@ShaunB-703:
Lovely to here. Who knows you probably end supporting KingS!!! LOL
14 Feb 2013, 23:54 pm
I see no reason to exclude 1996 and 1997.
1996 S12
4th Sharks (finalists and runners up)
11th WP
1997 S12
4th Sharks (semi finalists)
WP Did not qualify
Sharks by far more consistent in terms of reaching semi finals and finals.
Stormers a rather average mid table team, usually.
15 Feb 2013, 00:00 am
Sharks have made 1 quarterfinal, 7 semifinals and 4 finals.
That’s 8 years of Super rugby in which they have made a play off game, in 17 years of Super rugby (47% conversion).
Stormers have made 5 semifinals and 1 final.
That’s 5 years of Super rugby in which the Stormers have made a play off game, in 16 years of Super rugby (31% conversion).
So those are the FACTS. Clearly the Sharks are the more consistent team in terms of reaching play off games.
15 Feb 2013, 00:03 am
The Stormers have lost 3 home semifinals.
15 Feb 2013, 00:06 am
Sharks have played in 12 play off games, exactly DOUBLE the 6 played by the Stormers.
Another FACT to prove the Sharks are more consistent in reaching the business end of the competition.
15 Feb 2013, 00:07 am
It was not Stormers in 1996 and 1997 it was WP same as the CC team hence they were not included in 97 as result of finishing 5th in CC and relegated for SR
That is why http://www.lassen.co.nz do not recognize 96 and 97 as part of Stormers stats because they didn’t exist as Stormers but as WP
Hence Lassen Stats show Sharks vs Stormers as played 18 won 9 lost 9 each
there are no stats for WP vs Natal or WP vs Sharks or Natal vs Stormers
15 Feb 2013, 00:09 am
@skopdiekan-721: ho ho ho actually Lassen DOES include stats for 1996 and 1997.
Check this page for the Stormers record: http://www.lassen.co.nz/s14det.php?teamnum=11#hrh
Liar.
15 Feb 2013, 00:10 am
And here is the Sharks record on Lassen: http://www.lassen.co.nz/s14det.php?teamnum=10#hrh
Again, it shows 1996 and 1997.
Liar.
15 Feb 2013, 00:16 am
Stormers finished above Sharks 8 times and Sharks finished above Stormers 6 times in the 14 years they competed on equal footing in SR 98-2012
Stormers have a better overall win loss ratio by approx 2% overall
Sharks played – 195
Wins - 99 – 50.8%
Losses – 91 – 46.7%
Draws - 5 - 2.6%
Stormers Played - 191
Wins - 101 - 52.9%
Losses - 86 – 45.0%
Draws - 4 - 2.1%
15 Feb 2013, 00:16 am
And anyway, who says Lassen is the final arbiter of what is or isn’t included? (notwithstanding the fact that the links posted CLEARLY show Lassen records the 1996 and 1997 S12 years).
S12 is S12 and the records count all the same. Do you deny that the Blues won 2 super 12 rugby trophies in 1996 and 1997 too?
15 Feb 2013, 00:17 am
Lassen includes stats for Sharks in 96 and 97 but not for Stormers because Stormers did not exist in 96 and 97
15 Feb 2013, 00:19 am
@skopdiekan-724: “competed on an equal footing”
Explain this please.
I can understand you may have a hang up about 1997. If WP were too kak to qualify then that vis their problem. In any event this has a neutral effect on their stats.
But to say the teams “were not on an equal footing” in S12 in 1996 and 1997 is just bollocks.
15 Feb 2013, 00:21 am
@skopdiekan-726: click the link fool and see for yourself that Lassen shows WP there in 1996.
Of course they were not there in 1997 – THEY DID NOT QUALIFY FOR THE COMPETITION, Stop perpetuating a fallacy.
Thank you for accepting that Lassen includes the Sharks/Natal’s record in 1996 and 1997.
15 Feb 2013, 00:29 am
WP 1996 S12 record
Finished 11th out of 12
Played 11, won 3, lost 7, draw 1
WP 1997 S12 record
Did not qualify
Natal 1996 S12 record
Finished 4th, won away semifinal, lost away final
Runners up
Played 13, won 7, lost 6
Natal 1997 S12 record
Finished 4th, lost away semifinal
Played 12, won 5, lost 5, draw 2
15 Feb 2013, 00:47 am
Here’s another stat to show Stormers are consistently better than Sharks between 1998 – 2012 when they competed as equal status franchises head to head
if you take the 15 years Stormers vs Sharks
and you add all the positions they finished
Sharks = 99 position places over 15 years = average finishing position = 6.6
Stormers = 92 position places over 15 years = average finishing position = 6.13
Sharks total finish points over 15 years = 496
average over 15 seasons = 33.07
Stormers total finish points over 15 years = 503
average over 15 seasons = 33.53
Net result over 15 seasons 1998-2012 Stormers finished consistently better with lower position place and higher net point scored.
15 Feb 2013, 00:53 am
@skopdiekan-730:
Another lie.
Lassen shows both the Stormers and Sharks’ average table position for all years.
Guess what?
Sharks – 6.29
Stormers – 6.44
It’s all there on Lassen (the site you place so much stock in) easily checked and verified by anyone.
Liar.
15 Feb 2013, 00:54 am
Over 15 seasons 98-2012
Stormers finished half a place higher on the ladder overall with a net 7 point advantage overall
15 Feb 2013, 00:55 am
How were Natal and WP “not on an equal footing” in 1996 or 1997?
Stretching your analysis to the point of downright lies.
It sucks to have to twist and manipulate stats to try to position yourself better in an unwinnable argument, ne?
15 Feb 2013, 00:56 am
OK I am out.
Get a life snoekie.
15 Feb 2013, 01:01 am
They’re calculating
15 seasons for Stormers, 1 season for WP,
and 17 seasons for Sharks
My calculations are based on 15 seasons each 1998-2012
15 Feb 2013, 01:06 am
actually Lassen stats over 15 seasons Stormers and 1 season WP
vs 15 seasons Sharks and 2 seasons Natal
hence the accurate head to head analysis is Stormers vs Sharks 1998 – 2012
15 Feb 2013, 01:13 am
@skopdiekan-715: I can only wonder why you think the season ends with the preliminary round. It cannot be related to fact, any advantage Stormers have gained usually flies out of the window come knockout stage?
Look, no matter how you twist it, Bulls are the most successful SA team with 3 trophies, followed by the Sharks with 4 finals. You certainly can say Sharks scr*wed all of them, that’s true, but Stormers did not even last that long bar once when got similar fate.
15 Feb 2013, 01:14 am
Over the 15 seasons 98 – 2012
Stormers finished higher than Sharks 9 times against 6 times by Sharks
add the 1 year Stormers did not compete = Sharks +1
add 96 Natal ahead of WP = Natal +1
net result over 17 seasons
Stormers finished higher 9 times – Natal + Sharks 8 times
Stormers still consistently better finisher overall.
15 Feb 2013, 01:20 am
@polaris-737:
I’m comparing consistency and overall performance
Crusaders are highest consistent performer
followed by Blues then
Brumbies
Stormers
Waratahs
Hurricanes
Sharks
Reds
Chiefs
Bulls
Highlanders
Force
Cheetahs
Lions
Rebels
That is how the consistency stats over the duration of the competition pan out.
15 Feb 2013, 01:27 am
@skopdiekan-739: Then include ALL games, playoffs including, and you’ll get TRUE measure of consistency.
15 Feb 2013, 01:30 am
@skopdiekan-738:
Ok. How about this. In easy to understand English.
Point 1:
Stormers finished 1st on the log last year. The Sharks finished 5th. So according to your method of calculation the Stormers “are more consistent” in that year because they finished higher on the log. However, the Sharks beat the Stormers in the semifinal.
Arguably no team had a season to crow about but surely as the Sharks made the final and the Stormers did not the Sharks did “better”?
Point 2:
The Stormers may well have ended higher on the log 9 times to 8 (haven’t checked this to verify – you are prone to produce false information). But the Sharks have played in double the amount of play off games 12 to 6. This means that when the Sharks have finished higher than the Stormers they have finished high, in the play off places, whilst the Stormers average finishing position is generally out of the play off places. Stormers have only reached the play offs in 31% of all Super rugby campaigns. Sharks do it roughly 1 in every 2 campaigns. That is the real difference in “consistency”.
I don’t expect you to understand all of this btw (or care to).
@skopdiekan-739: how can a team who only made the play offs in 31% of all years be the 4th most “consistent” team when a team that makes the play offs in 47% of all years is only 7th “most consistent” according to you? He he he methinks you sucked that one right out from where the sun don’t shine.
Just how are you defining “consistency”?
Conclusion:
Ha ha snoekie now you are really straining the imagination in your idiotic and unwinnable quest to prove something which cannot be proven.
Over and out.
15 Feb 2013, 01:35 am
In ranking order there can be no dispute that the SA teams are ranked as follows based on their respective records of winning the trophy and reaching play offs:
1. Bulls
2. Sharks
3. Stormers
4. Cats
15 Feb 2013, 01:42 am
check Lassens consistency rating
go to each franchise and check how each franchise performed overall against all other comers
Crusaders finish top, Blues 2nd, Brumbies 3rd,
then Stormers, Waratahs, Hurricanes, Sharks, Reds, Chiefs, Bulls
In that order.. that is how the overall average consistency ratings pan out.. like it or not.
15 Feb 2013, 01:47 am
Stormers have reached play offs 5 times and Sharks have reached play offs 5 times.
Sharks converted to final 3 times Stormers only once
(apart from 96 when Natal and WP were represented and not Stormers and Sharks)
15 Feb 2013, 02:14 am
@Liewe Luiperd-741: Last year Stormers finished season better than trophy winners Chiefs, if we believe Skop.
15 Feb 2013, 02:35 am
@polaris-745: yeah it kind of makes a mockery of his argument
He has never been one to put forward a rational argument though
15 Feb 2013, 02:45 am
@skopdiekan-744: another lie.
Sharks have reached the “play offs” 8 times, not 5 as you suggest.
1 quarter final play off:
2011
7 semifinals:
1996
1997
1998
2001
2007
2008
2012
Contrary to what you say, the Sharks have made 4 finals, not 3:
1996
2001
2007
2012
Roughly a final once every 4 years.
The Stormers have made 5 semifinals:
1999
2004
2010
2011
2012
The Stormers have made only 1 final:
2010
8 play offs plays 5
4 finals plays 1
Total 12 play off games plays 6
Jeezuz snoekie you have a bit of a thing with being untruthful, huh?
15 Feb 2013, 07:07 am
@Liewe Luiperd-742:
no, the correct ranking of SA super teams by titles and playoffs reached should be:
1. Bulls – 3 titles – 3 times losing semi finalist.
2. Lions (Transvaal) – 1 title.
3. Sharks – 4 times runner up, 3 times losing semi finalist.
4. Stormers – 1 times runner up, 4 times losing semi finalist.
5. Cats – 2 times losing semi finalist.
6. Cheetahs – 0 playoffs reached.
7. Kings – 0 playoffs reached.
and there is even argument to be made for the following order of ranking which wouldmake the lions even more so the 2nd most successful SA super team:
1. Bulls – 3 titles – 3 times losing semi finalist.
2. Lions (Transvaal) / Cats – 1 title, 2 times losing semi finalist.
3. Sharks – 4 times runner up, 3 times losing semi finalist.
4. Stormers – 1 times runner up, 4 times losing semi finalist.
5. Cheetahs – 0 playoffs reached.
6. Kings – 0 playoffs reached.
15 Feb 2013, 07:12 am
@skopdiekan-744:
72% of the Stormers’ victories since 2010 season achieved under SA referees!
Something to cheer about I guess?
15 Feb 2013, 07:13 am
@Hondo-749:
Super Rugby victories that is
Pages: « 1 … 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 » Show All
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.