Beeno1
Status: Rugby Legend
Posts: 2638 RE: SHARKS versus chiefiies
August 04, 2012, 11:38:57
The chiefs are a bunch of twits and beat a sharsk side running on empty. Sharks had about 20 minutes of good play but went downhill thereafter.
As I said saSUE logics would dictate that oz would ahve backed this system
A win in these circumstances doesnt mean that much. Always remember to that you never met the Stormers at full strength!
sorry bro, but SARU was very pro behind the format saying that travel during the regular season was something that had to be addressed and ARU was only to happy as well, knowing the bennifits to their team. NZRU was the only one who didnt like it and wanted a everyone play everyone once format.
also SARU was directly responsible for wanting the leader of every conference to be given automatic top 3 billing on the combined conference, tony johnson mentioned it in his articel and bobby skinstadt also made reference to it, saying in hindsight SARU might not have agreed to it.
and do u really think the stormers could beat the chiefs??? chiefs beat sharks in durban and twice in total for 2012. stormers couldnt beat the sharks in durban, in fact, the stormers only beat the sharks once this year, despite having three cracks at them, stormers were easily the weakest team in the semi and without a doubt the most boring team ever who couldnt play attacking rugby to save their lives.
BTW last year the chiefs who were the NZ conference wooden spooners with a very weak team devoid of star players like this years team, still managed to beat the stormers.
only in ur world do the stormers topping the conference mean anything, but then in ur world that is really all u have, :P
go the sharks, best SA team by miles, and
GO THE CHIEFS, 2012 SPXV CHAMPIONS!!!