Same old shit from the Sharks

Dave -we also have Esterhuizen knocking on balls which ended up in tries scored against the Sharks.   He was thus partly responsible for the Shark loss as well. 

The backlie players who impressed me were Julies, Hendriks and Hooker,   The Sharks should learn how to use those 3 properly and enliven the Sharks backline. .            

Dave -we also have Esterhuizen knocking on balls which ended up in tries scored against the Sharks

Which tries resulted from Esterhuizen knocks?

Well, Mike?

The Sharks led  by 27-6 when they lost the plot - inclusing two knock-on handnovers of possession to Connacht by Esterhuizen,   You can review the match and you will find the knock-ons and the result thereof.    His one pass was so poor it hit the siide of the boot of the recipient 2 meters away.   The man's ball skilles has never been  of any quality.    He is a match loser not a match winner.

Look at the folowing timeline and you would find it:

 Cnnacht scored 3 tries in 13 minutes,     After every trie Connacht kick in and tha was wee knockons by Esterhuixen buggered up badly when the ball was apassed tohim and one he passed that hit the outside of the boot of the recipient,

          .          

Dave

I was taalking about the second half when he was supershit. 

None of those tries had anything to do with Esterhuizen judging by the highlights as well as the descriptions in match reports. One try was a terrible intercept pass from one of the Sharks replacements it looked like, while the reports describe the other tries as the results of periods of sustained attack by Connacht. If I can get a replay of the game I'll check it, but anything you say with regards to Esterhuizen is highly suspect.

Try it ns n doubt you will try and make out that turnover of possession by Esterhuizen had nthing to do with any Connacht ataks,   Any inside center would score the two Esterhuizen tries - no other center would destroy the game for the Sharks the way he did it.    

Another popular player without merit I would rather not see in the Springbok team again.      

You may Dave, but I guess when I qualify where I got it from it's clear that I haven't seen the whole picture yet so it can be taken with the correct amount of salt, see : )

Still more reliable than listening to Ou Maaik.

Let’s see….Mike has this scrupulous honesty in posting so I’m sure he will support verification of his claims:

Minute 43.15. .Connacht  chip kicks and regathers for an easy try, Esterhozen nowhere near the action..  so nope, can’t verify that one.

Minute 51.05…Connacht lineout 10 metres out.. a simple maul try. So Esterhozen was metres away….nope can’t confirm that one.

Minute 54…‘Esterhozen is such a physical player he just bumps off Prendergast’ says the commentators. The sharks have position and good ball from the Esterhuizen run. But the scrummie throws a wild pass Jennings intercepts and goes all the way. So nope Esterhozen not involved.

Minute 70….Connacht on the Sharks line….heavy mauling. Esterhozen not involved….so nope.

So sadly I have to report no involvement by Esterhozen in any of the Connacht second half tries. That would be zero involvement. Which of course means Mike is either further gone than I thought or is lying through the few remaining teeth he has left,

As a courtesy I leave it up to him to decide which interpretation he prefers.

Fuck off, Dave.

Sharks no match for my boys! Should stick to the Currie Cup and not tango with the big boys! 

..

And Mike takes the deep dive. No wonder our public infrastructure crumbled with dishonest chaps like him in the process and groupies like Draad who would back his ‘ooms ’ to the hilt.

How very dare you call them boys when you have no idea what they identify as, Stav?

Disgraceful

They could identify as boys, girls, trans or carrots, they still woop these sissy Saffa franchises. 

Regards from No.1 ranked rugby nation in the world!

The idiot sector is supreme  -  I wrote about two knock-ons of Esterhuizen that led to turnover of possession of balls  putting Connacht on attack annd ultiamely two tries were scored.   I neer said ot implied immediate rasons - I spoke of handing of ball posession twice is a real negatice and part of te Reason for the Sharks losing the match.  I did not say the tries were mmediatel scord by Connacht and they scored t3 in 19 minutes - that repreent great ball possession by Connacht  and that was the reason fr the loss,   Whether you like it or ot the knock ons happeed and allowed the Connacht team ball possession during a period they won he match.

The Sharks snatched defeat from the jaws of victory - also due to the passig  game and poor handling of balls by Esterhuizen.   ,      

‘ They could identify as boys, girls, trans or carrots, they still woop these sissy Saffa franchises’….incredible disrespect mocking the humble carrot. 

So how did Connacht get in possession for the tries:

43.15 Connacht got the ball after a 25 meter dropout.

51.05 The change of possession came from a knock on by Sharks 14. Which led to a scrum penalty and a maul try

54.00 The try came directly from the Sharks scrumhalf being intercepted

70.00 The try came from a tap penalty after a first try was disallowed. Connacht had field position because one of the replacements hung on conceding a penalty, and because the Sharks botched a subsequent lineout, 

Esterhozen had nothing to do with the tries themselves and nothing to do with the play that gave them possession and/or field position.

It was a flat out lie …trusting that nobody would fact check… classical Saaiman.

Mozart

I am sorry- but ou are talking shit - while you pretend the knock-ons I referred to did not happen.   But then the holy cow Esterhuizen must never be criticized - he is useless - but that must never be pointed out,   But then Erasmus saw what happened and your hero will be out of the Springbok squad next year,

But then the attack on Erasmus were that there was no change in the Springbok game plan  and five weeks ago you refuse to see what was happening and why.   The secod Aussie test was played in a rainstorm and th field was  very wet,   That resulted in curtailing of ball passing and you came up with shit that the Springboks can onl score maul ries - wihout even knowing whata maul ty really is.   

In any event  White is in overall charge of the Bulls - who over the last five weeks lost in the semi-final  of the CC and the past weekend  they squandered  a 27-7 lead and then surrendered - but nobody must ever criticized any team  where White is in control and having ended up wth no game plan at all - same as what Snit said abut the game plan i te 2007 WC final.

"And Mike takes the deep dive. No wonder our public infrastructure crumbled with dishonest chaps like him in the process and groupies like Draad who would back his ‘ooms’ to the hilt."

Actually not...just not perpetually on his case about...everything...and I'm actually building and repairing infrastructure for a living...when last did you drive around on roads in the Western Cape? ....I would wager that the infrastructure isn't lagging that much behind that of the US...especially those portions of the US under pressure from uncontrolled migration similar what the WC experienced over the last 30 years.

Alyphint...yes I remember him. He used to work at the District Roads Engineer's Office in Paarl...basically the old Kaapse Provinsiale Administrasie...the people who wrote the book on highway construction in South Africa...Western Cape Government: Transport Infrastructure Branch is still going strong...actuality a better run outfit than SANRAL, which is also top notch, but there's signs od decline sonce the ANC has over politicized of late...the next ESKOM if we're not carefull.

Deflection….you call out posters you don’t like or agree with all the time. Mike is at the third  level of lying on this string….lying about lying which was lying. And you don’t have the integrity to call him out. As for being perpetually on his case…when, where? Honesty is a powerful thing.

"Deflection….you call out posters you don’t like or agree with all the time"

Yep, sad but very true .... which is why I have brought it up a few times in the past with DB, because at times it is blatantly obvious

 "And you don’t have the integrity to call him out"

That's also the way I see it, because there is just no other way to look at it or explain it.

If you want a total backline disaster in terms of the new strategy devised by Erasmus and Brown  have Esterhuizen at inside center,   He was given one opportinuty in 2024 and buggered up royally and totally by getting red-carded and the Springboks had to play 76 minutes with 14 players on the field.

Why should he get further opportunties when he squandered his latest opportunity and coped a 4 week ban as well.   

Erasmus knows exactly what can be expected from Esterhuizen and despite all the shit spouted on site his chances to play in further tets for the Springboks is approaching zero rapidly.          

That red card was a fat slice of very kak luck.

"Deflection….you call out posters you don’t like or agree with all the time. Mike is at the third  level of lying on this string….lying about lying which was lying. And you don’t have the integrity to call him out. As for being perpetually on his case…when, where? Honesty is a powerful thing."

Deflection se gat...I call out everything I see that I don't agree with, butI skip over a lot of the perpetual bickering BS......who the hell are you to question my integrity for not calling out Mike? ...for keeping quiet in some stupid exchanges, you question my integrity?

...yes, honesty is a powerful thing...go look in the mirror and repeat that.

"Deflection….you call out posters you don’t like or agree with all the time"

Yep, sad but very true .... which is why I have brought it up a few times in the past with DB, because at times it is blatantly obvious."

...wow, it's sad that that I call out posters that I don't like or agree with all the time...wtf, really?...who the hell on here doesn't do that?

" "And you don’t have the integrity to call him out"

That's also the way I see it, because there is just no other way to look at it or explain it."

So I don't have integrity because I don’t call out Mike's ramblings enough for your liking?..."no other way to look at it"...LMAO...grow up man....rich coming from you.

There are two threads at the top of the Board where he is lying through  his teeth…..this one about Esterhozen being culpable in Connacht’s tries and the other one on the number of tries the Boks scored in 2013. You are his biggest defender on here….tell him he is lying. That might show a bit of belated integrity.

I blame it on sleep deprivation.