Sharks play South African rugby and dominate

Well at least I don't think that we are going to ride to victory on the backs of Liggies, Reinacht, Goosen, the cart horse Jordaan and Taute.....hahaha, talk about smoking something.
The Sharks game plan on Saturday is the traditional Bok game plan well executed.

 This is laughable - this story about traditional rugby is something no ex-Springbok player would ever mention and when they do they will talk about the chancing rugby environment, which requires updating of game plans.  There are tendency in rugby - but that changes with different rugby player coming to the fore and changes of coaches.    
Meyer's contract was not renewed because he base his selections on reputation - not performance and develop a system where winning rugby is impossible. if the Sharks on Saturday emulated what the Springboks did in the WC - they would have lost by 20+ points.   So talking about them playing traditional SA Rugby is just proving that you are a clueless fool.  
I said constantly performance is the norm for selection and when I mentioned players I look at the future performances of players.   I m not like you whop looks at the BS prodced by reputation players - but keep telling us how wonderful they are.  The list of flops you write about is endless - with rare exceptions the list of flops supported by you grew to amazing length.  When they failed the best weapon you used is to keep quiet in the hope that somebody would not have noticed it and if somebody did  try a cover-up blaming everybody else - but the culprit involved.
If I were you I would be the last one to come up with names of players - because with you performance is of no consequence - BS is.  So the list of players you supported, who failed miserably is longer than any list of players I mentioned in the past.  

 No he was not renewed because he wasn't the right flavour.

 He was not the "right flavour" because the ex-Springboks and most of the public saw what damage he was doing to the Springbok team through his reputation selections and absent game plan.   There was no previous Springbok coach where the ex-players in fact started a campaign to get rid of the coach because they saw through his deficiencies.      

Oh I see, there were no Bok players who wanted PdV and Destroyli gone.....get real, he had his turn. And if performance was a guarantee why was Jake not given a second shot? For exactly the same reason HM was never going to get it...not the right flavour.

 What is really very silly is that the Bok tradition prior to isolation was agame where there was no attacking flair. This is utter rubbish. We have always had good abcklines and sometimes great ones!.For some reason and i blame the bulle we wenyt all defensive and kicking our ball away was the game plan. The Sharks reverted to traditional Bok rugby and it will always bring success against nz sides.
It is great to see a better balance coming into our sides.
I do not however think the Stormers have got their pack right. You cant have 3 small guys. Also too many very small back. 
Lions need more clout in the pack and Redlinghuys back pronto. Bulle and Sharks on the right track.

 Beeno
Mozart sees nothing wrong with the Stormers midgets playing in the backline.  And that is where the Stormers main problems are.  De Allende has some way to go to get to what he was last year - and he will.   However, there is nothing that can be done with De Jongh - he is way above his level of competence - and will never be an even half-decent 13 because of his size.  
  

The last two truly great Springbok teams (1997/8 and 1981) both had backlines that were as good if not better than anything the All Blacks or anyone else has ever been able to put up.

1981
Gysie Pienaar, Ray Mordt, Danie Gerber, Wille du Plessis, Gerrie Germishuys, Naas Botha, Divan Serforntein.

1997/8
Andre Joubert/Percy Montgomery, James Small/ Stefan Terblanche, Andre Snyman, Pieter Muller, Pieter Rossouw, Henry Honiball, Joost van der Westhuizen.

 Using the Canes as a benchmark, the Lions offloaded 7 times......the Sharks 17 times. And they were more effective offloads, not last second 50 50s. 
The truth is we have always been decent at offloading....Victor, Schalk, Jean, Vermeulen and Allende in the early 2015 s15. The Lions make offloading and short passing the centerpiece of their game. It worked when they had physical parity and passive defence....against a fast rushing defence it all collapsed.

 Sure Mozart - I accept your comments on off-loading - so why did Meyer according to Vermeulen forbid off-loading by the Springboks in the WC tournament?  Vermeulen himself let the cat out of the bag in comments after the Welsh test.   That is a major reason why there is no comparison with the Rugby played on Saturday and the WC Tournament matches.    There was others as well -  such as in the game on Saturday there was much more extensive usage of the backline than then there was in all the matches combined played in the WC.   The match on Saturday had a comprehensive approach as to playing of the game -  something entirely missing from the Springboks  the WC tournament.         

 World Cup offload stats
Pool play ...Boks offloaded 31 times to opponents 20 times
Knockout play Boks offloaded 7 times to opponents 6 times.

Our dish of the day is crow with a nice hemlock sauce....enjoy.

 You did it respond in what I said above.   So why did Vermeulen publicly stated that Meyer forbid off-loading of Balls in the WC?   Stats don't help the fool in this case - because the instructions to the team was obviously clear and precise.   Eat crow yourself - deviousness will not help.     

 No the stats are very clear, we offloaded more than our opposition. Poof goes your offloading argument...just another hysterical assertion  which implodes when a few facts are assembled.

 You are really talking BS - Vermeulen said after the Welsh match the players were forbidden by Meyer to off-load balls and that is what I referred to.   That was the issue raised - not the issue of the stats,   But that would not interest you and a cover up would have to be found to protect the erstwhile hero of yours and try and cook up stats to prove that the BS dished up by the Springboks could be equated with the g ame of the Sharks on Saturday.    

 Now it's Matfield, before it was Vermeulen.....more thumb sucking. Look dope your argument is we weren't  playing similarly to the Sharks at the WC, because we never offloaded, based on some comment by either Matfield and Vermeulen or hell maybe Mark Andrews.
I'm proving to you we offloaded more than our opposition in both pool and knockout stages. It doesn't matter what Vermeulen  or any other person thinks....factually we offloaded more often than our opponents.
Events not intents you old Mong.

 Sorry - it was Vermeulen who spoke about the off-load issue as mentioned by plum numerous times - Matfield is too dumb to say that type of thing about his friemnd and protector Meyer.  Stupids will always be idiotic lackeys.
If some players did disobey Meyer's orders - like Matfield did in the famous Japan test - it really is a result of defective captaincy in the series.