27-7 up at halftime to end up losing to Connacht

Pathetic really

Esterhuizen was on fire in the first half scoring two power tries

Jordan Hendrikse slotted a 63m penalty not at altitude

Jurenzo Julius continues to look the real deal with the few times he did see the ball

Jenkins and Grobelaar were good at lock

Grobelaar is such a good player such a pity he has never been recognised for higher honours - it’s too late now

He is far far better than Mostert

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,

          .          

No Mike Esterhuizen was damn good in that game especially in the first half

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.

No he was not - the side as a whole were but he never let the side down individually in the second half

He had a good game - was a big threat

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.      

Pakie may I suggest you actually watch the game instead of basing your take on highlights and reports

You are sounding like Moz :)

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.

Pakie you could just tell me to fuck off

Fuck off, Dave.

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

Nice one Strav

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

Disgraceful.

..

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!

Strav we handed you that number 1 ranking thanks to sending a Bok B side to Argentina

We plan to take that spot back in November

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.   ,      

Sorry Mike that is bullshit - Esterhuizen was in no way the reason the Sharks lost

Esterhuizen had a huge first half going a long way to establish the first half lead they had

The team as a whole completely fucked up to let the opposition back in like that - something they did all season last year

It’s pathetic that given the players they have, Plumtree can’t turn them into winners

It did not help having the utterly useless Meyer on as the replacement scrumhalf. He is their 4th choice and it showed

‘ 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.

Draad ............. do you remember Olifant, posted on the older message boards ....... fanatical AB supporter ................... mebbe I'm wrong, but I'm seker he'd a similar occupation . I vaguely remember his pothole stories.

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.

Esterhuisen is really playing well…it’s about time he gets a extended run at 12 for the Boks? DDA can take a break or play of the bench….it’s only fair, I would say.

"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.          

Just get over the one red card already….all professional players make mistakes, but they carry on and do better.

If you like it or not, Esterhuisen is part of the plans as Rassie has mentioned more than once. Esterhuisen is a Great Player… Fact.

" despite all the shit spouted on site his chances to play in further tets for the Springboks is approaching zero rapidly." // There is absolutely zero proof of this Oom Mike??

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.

....….tell him he is lying. That might show a bit of belated integrity.

1...I didn't watch the Sharks match, so I don’t know....given Maaiks dislike for Esterhuizen, he probably believes what he's saying, so he's probably wrong...but there's a difference between being wrong and deliberately lying...belated integrity my arse.

2...and I can't be arsed to get involved in the stupid argument about comparing the tries of the Bokke 11 years ago vs now...I really don't care. I'm too busy to go and fact check and I'm not going to call someone a liar without checking the facts...you're so caught up in the notion of always having to be right, you lose focus of the bigger picture...Maaik might be wrong about the tries the Bokke scored in 2013 and he might even be deliberately lying about it...and that would be sad, but what's even worse is you constantly deriding our Bokke and downplaying their success...and you dare to drag me into this nonsense and question my integrity...take a step back.

"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?"

Sad that you are extremely selective with who you do it to, yes.

"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."

Well... all the proof is on this forum, just look at how many times in the past .....that various different posters have called you out on it...

I'm not saying it to insult you, I am just being honest.... and if my perception of you is incorrect, so be it.... but from I have seen, clearly it is not just my perception.

You have a warped idea of integrity...we are all selective in our responses to different issues and different people have interests in different things...what in particular about my interests and the issues I address on this forum reflects badly on my integrity?

PS...I'm not in the least insulted by your opinion of myself...I'm more curious as to exactly what it is that bothers you.

"You have a warped idea of integrity"

Well according to more than one poster on this forum.... this sounds like you.

"we are all selective in our respo nses to different issues and different people have interests in different things...what in particular about my interests and the issues I address on this forum reflects badly on my integrity?"

Just how very selective you are with only picking certain posters on this forum to question their posts, opinions or intentions, whilst completely disregarding others that you are friends with.  You know that I have mentioned this various times in the past to you, so it's not like it's something new from me.

If I am wrong, who cares, we move on.....but I am still going to post my opinion on it.

"PS...I'm not in the least insulted by your opinion of myself...I'm more curious as to exactly what it is that bothers you"

Great, I would hope not, it was not meant to offend, it was just some honesty.

Just like I am never bothered about what people post on here, neither should you .... none of us really know each other.... so why should it ever offend us.

Especially from a poster who knows fuck all about rugby

Draad knows quite a lot about Rugby Dave

Well the more than just one poster questioning my integrity can build their bridges and get over it...

"integrity

/?n?t??r?ti/

noun

1.

the quality of being honest and having strong moral principles.

"a gentleman of complete integrity"

Similar: honesty, uprightness, probity, rectitude, honour, honourableness, upstandingness, good character, principles, ethics, morals, righteousness, morality, nobility, high-mindedness, right-mindedness, noble-mindedness, virtue, decency, fairness, scrupulousness, sincerity, truthfulness, trustworthiness.

Opposite:

dishonesty

2.

the state of being whole and undivided.

"upholding territorial integrity and national sovereignty"

Mike is obviously extremely biased...and sometimes very wrong.

All fine, but if he's competent enough to opine on US politics and to engage in all the other activities he engages in on here, then it's actually kind of a disservice to allow him to get away with some of his kak talking and not give him some stick.

The day people think I'm too pathetic to handle myself, kindly drag me out back and shoot me.

Respect and pity aren't the same thing.

...Moz and Mike are in similar age brackets. Think on that Draad.

There are ways to disagree without complaining all the time...if you don’t like it, don't read it...I don’t bother with taking him on about Mostert or Esterhuizen...he knows what my views are on them and a few other issues...it serves no purpose to keep harping on about it...and it's not pity, it's empathy...not the same thing either.

 I respect most on here, but that doesn't keep me from disagreeing with anyone...there are enough posters on here highlighting some of Maaiks failings and blind spots, no need for me to ad to that...that doesn't mean I agree with him or back him up when he is wrong.

It’s not failings or blind spots …..it’s dishonesty. Right here on this string. I describe what happened in Connacht’s tries, I provide the time stamps….but he still claims it’s Esterhozen’s faults., Not by examining  my explanations and providing reasons he disagrees….but by just becoming insulting.

You clearly  won’t deal with it, not because he gets flak from others, but because you have a total loyalty to him. 

Who cares. But if you then disagree with others, which do quite frequently, the hypocrisy is rather sickening. 

"It’s not failings or blind spots …..it’s dishonesty. Right here on this string. I describe what happened in Connacht’s tries, I provide the time stamps….but he still claims it’s Esterhozen’s faults., Not by examining  my explanations and providing reasons he disagrees….but by just becoming insulting."

Yes, no reason in his feelings, he made up his mind and he's sticking to his guns...why do you even bother?...and it's not loyalty on my part...I don’t know Mike personally...to tell you the truth, I can't put my finger on it, I just feel no compulsion to take him on when he's clearly wrong on some things...and I don’t know why it bothers you to the extent of questioning my integrity and character...why is it so important to you to prove him wrong?

PS...im intuitive,  I don’t think these things trough...I just go with my gut...

PPS...and it's not only Mike, there's a few others too...absolutely nothing to do with loyalty or friendship.

"...Moz and Mike are in similar age brackets."

Indeed, and it shows. Other than typing skills (where Moffie has a distinct edge), they're almost the same person . . . bashing away at the other day in and day out and calling the other a liar while sticking their tongues out at each other like 5 year olds.

Actually I was thinking you and Mike were the same person. He can’t get the year right when we scored 22 tries, even though it was given to him on a platter. And you can’t remember the string on which I commented on Fassi, even through I put it right on the Board. Went on hilariously denying it was the string I was quoting. Two thick mediocrities….but nice deep dive though, just like Saaiman you also didn’t have the guts to admit you were wrong.