Sharks vs Ospreys . . .

And that's it.

Scrappy and crappy but the Vissies win it

Hooker is my MOTM...

High ball takes, plenty of defence, a try, counter rucking...

Ethan Hooker named Man of the Match. Not a bad call.

While I watch Masuku place the ball I'll agree that the Sharks was scrappy. They are way under performing but have enough brute force to get the job done.

Yep Hooker is MOTM

You get the feeling Hooker will be fine at test level while someone like Juju will be gobbled up.

Pakie. I think they just have so much individual talent that they manage to win despite being badly coached.

‘Sia Kolisi their inspiring number 8’….there he is Plum. Hooker the MOM…Esterhozen is such a huge unit. Hooker sounds like a smart young man ….a bit of brains doesn’t hurt.

Yeah, Hooker looks like he was born for test rugby.

He just does all the right things.

Thanks for the company boys

Nice interviews from both Ethan Hooker and Jac Morgan. Joel asked Jac about his British Lions selection and he was very humble, saying what a great honour it is.

fgh

Thanks Draad i saw the link to late, next time….Blob thanks for the highlights.

Hooker is performing well but is wasted out on the wing. He is a strong direct runner and a solid defender.

Great for the midfield…

We all know and see that AE needs to start more, let’s hope Erasmus see it to.

Uncle Mike won’t like his try and will find something wrong:)

JJ is very quiet lately, it’s like he isn’t even playing??

I read the usual shit on here - JJ has no top speed - bwhaaaahaaa

Not quite what Stransky had to say about his break

Hooker is solid - nothing special about him - looks for work

JJ with that little break showed way more class than Hooker - the lad glides

But the Sharks play a crap kicking game - they fail to use their outside backs - Fassi, Mapimpi, Hooker and JJ never see much line ball

The wings feed off high balls - it’s boring crap

Jenkins should have won man of the match

But Dave….the experts gave it to Hooker. Please respect the guys who know their rugby. JJ had pretty much a nothing match apart from dropping the ball and nearly conceding a try. Let’s not make the JJ Englebrecht mistake all over again.

Trust you to be stupid enough to highlight a dropped ball - take it you were having a nap when he made that break?

Hooker did nothing of note and that’s a fact.

Jenkins was the best player for the Sharks

I watched the game to see how players like Esterhuizen performed. First of all as toi Esterhuizen he did nothing positive in the first 33 minutes of the match other than a few carries where he was tackled before getting to the gain line and cause problems when he twice passed the ball badly to players outside of him,

At minute 33 the Ospreys made a mistake and Estehuizen picked up the lose ball and with the defense in disarray he scored a try. That was followed during the first half of the match he made no other contribution that had a positive impact and the ball did not reach the outside backs at all becaise it was either kicked away aimlessly by Masuku or faied to get past Esterhuizen. Other than with the try he did one great zero as inside center,

So Plumtree saw that Masuku was shit at flyhalf and Eserhuizen was jeopardising any attacking backline play so he remembered what White did in one match in 2014 - he moved Esterhuizen to play at blindside loosie in an effort to get the backline operational in attacks. It did not contribute to anything in the latter position as well and in the end he was replaced altogether, In the 7 position the Sharks were penalized twice for poor scrumming and that was especially on the side where Esterhuizen was scrumming - so he did nothing in adding to the scrumming either, .

I refrained from making comments at halftime because in fact the Sharks was disappointing against the bottom of the log Ospreys, In many ways a disapponing game made worse by another injury to Etzebeth, Masuku put on the worst display I have seen in the URC from any SA flyhalf this season. Despite the bonus point win against the worst team in the series this year the Sharks in general put up a poor show,

The other disappointment in the match was Fassi at full back - he was indeed disappointing under high blls and his kicking out of hand as disappoining to say te elast, Hope he improves after his injury. He as one player I regaded as the number 1 full back choice in tests this year - he was as bad as Gelant was in the Roundd 15 match. Hope he improves or in that absence would play Kriel or Hooker at full back.

On the whole I am in agreement with Dave - Jenkins should have been the MOM and not Hooker, But then in the land of the blind cockeye is king.

I always believed that Esterhuizen had a 50 -;50 chance to be selected as test number 12, yesterdays perormance make it a zero chance of Esterhuizen being in the Springbok squad this year - since in the number 7 position he failed as well.

,

. .

Ah yes the break….he gets the ball in an overlap situation and a would be tackler peels off to the outside. Accelerating he makes about 25 meters without beating a tackle, eventually beats the fullbacks tackle and is brought down from behind by replacement flanker Harri Deaves.

Stransky completely misses that the flanker actually caught him from behind and goes on about him having some pace.

Then I woke up from my nap. But before that, among other things I saw Hooker counter rucking for turnovers and crash tackling an Osprey right on the corner flag.

He was named man of the match by the science. He was a strong contributor, personally I would have given it to Esterhozen for his superb try.

Mozart

Ester huien was shit during the match and that is a fact confirmed by his move to the number 7 position in the seond half depite the try from broken play scored by him.

, , .

Esterhozen not only beat the first tackle every time he got the ball, he defended resolutely and …..this is the part you never get…..was the clear leader of the backline and the player who was keeping them focused.

Mozart

When did that ahppen - he got tackled before he reached the gain line every time by rthe first defender,

Just explain to us - if EsterhuIen was as good as you explain him o be why was he removed from the center position - where eh was jeopardiin g backline lay to play in the number 7 position in the secoind half of the match. Dont tell me you dd not see that happening.

‘As Esterhuizen’s switch to flank signifies, Etzebeth’s wasn’t the only Sharks injury, with his replacement Emmanuel Tshituka, who came on as a flank so that his brother Vincent could move into the second row alongside Jason Jenkins, being forced off later in the game. The Sharks were severely disrupted and that needs to be taken into account after a game where they got their anticipated comfortable win but still never quite gave the impression they were fully hitting their straps.’

Just explain to us - if EsterhuIen was as good as you explain him o be why was he removed from the center position

Put in simpler terms for the Maaikster - the Sharks had run out of forward replacements. Who would you rather pack down at flank - Juju or Esterhuizen?

Hooker did nothing of note?

Dave, you didn't watch the game. Just admit it.

Off the top of my head;

He collected two high balls from Masuku, netting roughly 80m of ground between the two occasions.

He initiated two counter rucks that resulted in penalties for the Sharks.

He scored a try that was reward the for diligence and that dog in him that never lies down.

With 4-5 minutes left in the game, and the Sharks clearly winning it, he chased a kick almost the full length of the field, for no reasons at all, putting pressure on the receiver...winning yet another penalty.

That's my guy. I see it like this. Moments of brilliance need to happen very frequently in order to outdo 80 minutes of straight-up warrior.

Then there was his rock solid defence - stopping the Ospreys hooker in his tracks down the touch line and close to the Sharks try line.

He was there perpetually, like genie, every time the Sharks broke out.

And he did all of this from the wing....FROM WING FFS!

Dave, he was the most influential player on the field over 80 minutes...easily.

Juju was absent. He was good defensively but one gets the feeling he is a reactive player. Perhaps he'll grow more into the professional game and make better opportunistic reads etc, but we've had an entire season of him now and the evidence for his "greatness" remains scant. Had I wanted to be mean I could say he is a school bully that is realising he's not that strong in the grown up world. But I think he's better than that. However, he's miles away from the insane faith you're putting in him, calling him a future great. Again, on last night's evidence, he has acceleration but gets to his top speed very quickly...and then lacks top speed. I'm telling you Dave, it's a problem.

I'd love to know if anybody that watched the game last night, didn't feel like they would want Hooker in their corner for the Boks.

I can tell you right now, Dave...between me, Moz. Draad, Pakie and Rooi...we are all on the same page as far as Hooker and being a Bok goes.

Don't believe me? Ask them.

Bok Coach Dave to the press explaining his selection of Juju:

"He glides. And Stransky says he has gas."

"Hooker did nothing of note and that’s a fact."

LOL!!!!!

Dont forget Henco van Wyk….A combo of Hooker 12 and Henco 13 sounds good….. Or Esterhuisen at 12 with Hooker at 13….

Uncle Mike is not a happy chappie….and Esterhuisen keeps on rubbing it in with great performances!

Now that AE,s switch to flanker was explained, he has slinked off very quietly for meditation :)

Nooit, he's babelaas, been awol celebrating Russia's 80 year olde WW2 victory.

"Hooker did nothing of note and that’s a fact."

DDA can go learn from Hooker about chasing play.

Hooker si a player suitable on the wing - as a 12 he si not physical enough and even worse than Esterhuizen. He may be tried at 12 against the Barbarians and the weaker teams the Springboks will play against in July - but I pesonmally think that Willemse will be the inside center in those matches, In any event Hooker was not used regularly by the Sharks this year at 12 and played at wing . Chasing players playing at wing is normal at center not so. Hooker has no test experience and I would like to see him playing on test level before deciding on him as a test player, I think he is potentially a good player n franchise level - but many players are good on that level and not so on test level.

By the way I expected a personal attack on me about my comments on Esterhuizen's performace yesterday and expected you to come up with reasons countering what I said about the issue, .So nothing came - so please confirm you agree with me on that one.

No Mike, nobody agrees with you about Esterhuizen.

So I confirm nothing other than Andre went to flank because there were juries in the forwards. It had othing to do with how he was playing.

Rhis week alone you accused AE of messing up a promising attack against England, you were wrong - se the video we posted. Then you also said he was moved to flank last night because he was playing badly...also completely wrong - also literally anybody and they'll tell you.

You are spreading that BS you like talking about.

It’s not that you expected attacks Oom, it’s that you solicited attacks.

Some stats from the game:

Jac Morgan was immense. 17 tackles, 3 turnovers.

Ethan Hooker matches him at 3 turnovers, while James Venter had most Sharks tackles with 8.

Juju Malema made the most meters at 47 and also beat the most defenders, 6.

Sharks completely dominated territory/possession with 69% / 61%. They beat 35 defenders and only had to make 67 tackles against Ospreys 166. Both teams had poor tackle success, Sharks 71% and Ospreys 77%.

It’s one thing being pathetically childish and spending your life attacking our young players but when you resort to lies about certain passages of play then what’s the point of debating rugby

So we have Moffie telling me JJ beat no defenders on his break but worse than that he showed no pace and was caught by a flank - all fucking pathetic childish lies

First off he beats Kasende the wing with a lovely in out speeds through the gap and steps into the cover defence by the reserve player

Those are the facts and Stransky is spot on with his oh boy Julius has some serious pace - he does off the mark, it’s a huge strength of his. There are going to be many opportunities he will exploit over his career with that explosive pace off the mark. You can’t beat explosive pace off the mark to exploit a bit of space

What I also enjoyed witnessing with JJ was his strength - he put in a few good dominant hits

It was not a game for the outside backs but JJ and Hooker did what they could with little ball

Oh so JJ had the most metres gained and most defenders beating - all 6 of them - yeah he is really shit!!!!

Jenkins was the best player on the day, followed by Hooker, Esterhuizen and Vincent Tsituka

This spreading BS supreme on Esthuizen and is really impossible to believe. If Esterhuizen was any good at center and the backline operasational - why not move the replacement backline player to 7 whre he would have been better than Esterhuzen who did f-all at 7, When Esterhuizen was replaced becuse he was useless at 7 his replacment was betteer than Esterhuizen in the last ten minutes of the game..

So let me sua,roze - in the first 33 minutes of the game Esterhuizen did zero positive n the match - he tried to run wih the bal tewice and was tackledd behind the gain line by an opposing player, Mozart claimed Esterhusizen carried the ball 35 meters - which in fac a nearer to 10 meters than to 35 meters and wa aught from behind be a loosie. Amazing since acocording the oher village idiots he ahs such tremendous pace,

Pakie

The problem is that Estehuizen in that Pom Game tried a t his medocre base rn around he baclk pf the the springbok wing and ended up at his pace being isolated totally without any Sprigbok there to protect the ball - if he was tackled legally the the English would have taken the ball at te breakdown with ease because none of the Sringboks expected him to be as idiotic in carrying the ball as he was. If he kept the attack going in the end the English team would probably have been forced into conmceeding a penalty - but the dimwit went stupid and destroye any chance of the Springboks winning the match.

I am still sure he reason why Estrhuizen did not make the Sprngbok WC squad in 2019 was because of that idiotic move, He is als known or not scoring tries in tests he played for the Spring bok because of lack of reading te flow of the game and nver was where the action really was.

I will lay a R100 bet with you Pakie and that is that Esterhuizen will not play for the Springboks in any tests this year,

I'm sure ou Maaik is just joking. Who wouldn't rate the great Andre Esterhuizen?

Can't wait to see him in the green and gold again!

JJ was tackled from behind by a flank ….and I never said he broke no tackles. Read it again. If you need help, let me know Dave. By the way where did you get the stats?

For ease of reference here’s what I wrote…every word true:

Ah yes the break….he gets the ball in an overlap situation and a would be tackler peels off to the outside. Accelerating he makes about 25 meters without beating a tackle, eventually beats the fullbacks tackle and is brought down from behind by replacement flanker Harri Deaves.

Stats here. Pretty basic but at least it's something. Can dig down into match highlights or tournament numbers.

Yes he stepped to the right after beating Kasende , he effectively stepped into the cover defence coming from his right, he was engaged with those on his left.

He had little to work with - but it was a nice step to beat the defender and then accelerated quickly (hence Stransky’s call) past before meeting defenders on his left and the cover that he stepped into on the right

Pakie quoted the stats - I just repeated them