SHARKS ratings and looking ahead of Brumbies massacre

Wrong Saffex, Daniel played a lot at 8 last year and did very well hence the reason he was given a shot for the Boks at 8. The problem for Keegan with the Boks was never that he played poorly, the man was never given a chance to settle. Imagine you knew that you were selected because of circumstance and that you were only going to fill in. Why dont they give Keegan a number of consecutive matches for the Boks and let him find his feet at international level?

I maintain that he could have been really good but he did not suit the kick and chase gameplan. He suits the Sharks gameplan. A running gameplan, not this kick and chase rubbish that the Boks do and that we seeing from the Sharks now for some reason. Probably no confidence in the 12 thats why! Must be awful for Lambie to look outside him and see some fat bloke struggling to keep up with the fast back play!

I am not saying Keegan is the best 8 around but he certainly is good enough. If 8's cant be around the 100kg mark, explain Teichmann?

boklogic

I knoe Saffex has a bee in his bonnet abut playing Coetzee at 8.  I really have no problem with Daniel or Coetzee at 8 - but would think that Coetzee  is untried on Super 15 level at 8 - while Daniel is a seasoned player in that position.    My prsonal feeling at this stage is to continue playing Daniel and Coetzee at 8 and 6 respectively.

Where I do have a problem is to have the loosie combination the Sharks had on Saturday.   I would go o far to say thet Kankowski and Daniel should play at 8 - with Kankowski being on the bench.  i would play Du Toit oat 7 until Alberts and Deaysel retiurns.  Thereafter I would switch Du Toit to lock.

The latter may be hyper-active in his first few games for the Sharks - as alleged by Mozart - but that would vanish once he is settled in as a secure selection.   He is young though and very foit - so the hyper-active issue will last longer than many believe and may turn out to be a good thing for the team as a whole.

Mike, I take it you post above was meant to have Daniel and Kanko at 8 and not 9. Hell Mike, Hougaard is poor but you cant resort to these measures just yet ;-)

Saffex is infatuated with size. Hence his comments on centres not being under 95kgs. I listed him some greats of the game that were 90kg's sopping wet. A few kg's doesnt matter when a guy is as driven, as skilled and as motivated as Daniel. He plays well above his weight.

Yeah, Du Toit will calm down..Thats for sure. One or two big hits on him and he will become wiser. Thats how you gain experience. Saffex wants him to keep going as he is. If the man can play 80mins the way he does, well then you are looking at the best player in the world. Fact is, he cant play 80mins at a million miles an hour like he does. He must learn how to reserve his energy whilst still being effective. He may play one or two games like that but his body wont last half a season going like that!

Teichman?? - bloody hell how many years ago was that - the game has moved on significantly size wise since then. Besides, I never rated Gary, average 8 at best. Bob Skinstad was twice the player.

Daniel is not an 8, much like Brussouw and Watson are not 8's. These players are all too small for 8 and a liability at 8 if they play there, particularly come scrum time.

Playing Daniel at 8 is as stupid as the Bulls playing Grant Hattingh at lock, the guy is not physical enough for a lock