News24

Bismarck to lead Sharks in PE

2012-02-14 16:43

Durban - Sharks coach John Plumtree has selected 24 players to travel to Port Elizabeth on Friday for their final hit-out against the Southern Kings, giving some indication of the team to play the Bulls in week one of the Super Rugby tournament.

According to Sharks website editor, Michael Marnewick, Plumtree has expressed the opinion in earlier conversations that the team that lines up against the Kings would strongly resemble the team that plays the Bulls the following week, but whether that is going to be the case 100% remains to be seen.

With campaign leader Keegan Daniel playing off the bench this week (an unlikely scenario for the Bulls game), hooker Bismarck du Plessis will captain the side on Friday night, with brother Jannie beside him, back from honeymoon after getting married the week before.

With the injury to Beast Mtawarira, Dale Chadwick will most likely carry a big lead at loosehead prop and he completes the front row.

Steven Sykes and Anton Bresler represent a bristling, bruising second row while Jacques Botes, Marcell Coetzee and Ryan Kankowski present mobility, athleticism and power.

Frederic Michalak will again partner Patrick Lambie as the half-back pair look to build on a good outing together last week, while Tim Whitehead and JP Pietersen will seek to set the midfield alight.

Teams:

Kings: TBA

Sharks: 15. Riaan Viljoen 14. Odwa Ndungane 13. JP Pietersen 12. Tim Whitehead 11. Lwazi Mvovo 10. Patrick Lambie 9. Frederic Michalak 8. Ryan Kankowski 7. Marcell Coetzee 6. Jacques Botes 5. Anton Bresler 4. Steven Sykes 3. Jannie du Plessis 2. Bismarck du Plessis (captain) 1. Dale Chadwick

Subsitutes: 16. Craig Burden 17. Julian Redelinghuys 18. Wiehahn Herbst 19. Pieter-Steph du Toit 20. Ross Skeate 21. Keegan Daniel 22. Charl McLeod 23. Meyer Bosman 24. Paul Jordaan

Sport24

Comments
  • gavin.simpson.0 - 2012-02-14 17:26

    Much deserved Bismark..... Less than two weeks away 8) Go Sharks!

  • Bob - 2012-02-14 17:32

    So many options - all looking great.

  • Priester - 2012-02-14 18:05

    Any news on Alberts?

  • Marius - 2012-02-14 20:48

    At a quick count, 5 players in this Sharks team actually comes from the Eastern Cape originally, which just goes to prove that the Eastern Cape breeds the talent only to be poached by the bigger provinces. If the Kings can leep this talent at home by being able to offer them competitive salaries and a chance of playing Super Rugby , then soon they could also be a rugby force. It is all about being able to attract major sponsors, something which is only possible if the sponsors get the exposure of their team playing Super Rugby.

      Remo - 2012-02-14 20:53

      @Maaifoedie... see the kings b team showed the LIONS what rugby is all about, you are a joke as is the super kings. 88-0 is the final score and do not come with excuses this is what's going to happen every game the sk are going to play.

      gavin.simpson.0 - 2012-02-15 07:07

      Marius... just look at the history of EP. Tehy have always been a 'filler' team. Yes it's sad they cannot compete at the top level (i.e. the CC), but when the Sharks got their chance in the big league they took it and won the damned thing, a few times. EP failed in that department. And now just to throw them in Super Rugby just because of politics? Tis dof I say..... As for players moving to other unions... well... as an example... would the England Cricket team ever have got to number 1 in the world if it wasn't for the number of South African born players in the team? Again... politics gone wrong. Who still works in the town they were born in? So why should sportsmen be restricted to their home unions? It's an invalid argument IMHO.

      Marius - 2012-02-15 08:21

      @gavin. In rugby today, money is everything. He who has the most money can buy the best team. I am the first to admit that since the EP management was drastically changed in 1994 after EP actually finished 3rd on the Currie Cup A section log in 1993, there has been a huge mismanagement of funds and a union who had 7 million in the bank in 1994, which was a huge amount in those days, got reduced within 5 years to 6 million in the red. I am not a Cheeky Watson fan at all, but since he and Anile Pamba, both of them astute businessmen, has taken over, there has been a huge improvement in the union, both on the field and in the union's finances. EP also never had a decent stadium to host test matches in to boost their revenue. I can still remember when the last time that the French toured here, Durban and PE were awarded the 2 tests. Both unions had to pay the same amount in guarantees to SARU, but because the Sharks could fit in 25 000 more spectators at Kings Park than EP could at the old Boet Erasmus stadium, the Sharks made an 11 million profit in their test, compared to EP's 1.5 million. The infrastructure and management is now in place to attract major sponsors, but the condition from the sponsors before giving a single cent, will always be to be assured of TV exposure and only Super Rugby participation can give them that.

      Saffa - 2012-02-15 08:57

      @Marius: The saddest of all....EP were originally included in the Sharks Super rugby franchise, yet they sold that stake back to the Sharks.......one wonders what could have been.

      Wynand - 2012-02-15 09:14

      Marius, you can't even beat Boland. Are they also to rich for you guys to beat them?

      Marius - 2012-02-15 09:54

      At Saffa. Yes, selling their stake back to the Sharks was probably the biggest blunder that the incompetent and corrupt management they had at the time made and one that put EP rugby back at least 10 years. You, being a WP supporter, should be warned though . The current make-up and expertise of your union's management, is almost identical to the one that bankrupted EP rugby. You guys better get rid of them as soon as possible or your rugby will follow the same route as EP within 3 years.

      Marius - 2012-02-15 10:17

      What everyone here commenting against SARU's decision about the Kings participation next year seem to forget, or probably doesn't even know, is that the whole Kings saga and Super Rugby has been around since 2005 when a decision was made by all 14 unions that an EC franchise should be include in Super Rugby. This was ratified in a Cape High Court case when SARU did not deliver on it's decision. The court ruling gave SARU a few years to accommodate the EC franchise. But that period has now expired and when the Rebels and not the Kings were given the 15th spot by SANZAR, although the Kings business plan and player base was far superior to what the Rebels could bring to the table, let's face it, the Rebels can't even fill their team with Australians, let alone players from the Melbourne area, and now SARU is sitting with a huge problem. That is facing a contempt of court lawsuit and also having to pay the Kings a huge amount for loss of earnings since 2007. Just taking all the unions in Super Rugby's annual 40 million plus share of the TV rights money, you are already looking at a payout in excess of 200 million to the Kings. So there is a lot more to this than what meets the eye

      gavin.simpson.0 - 2012-02-15 11:13

      Marius, to a degree you are right about the financial issues, but the fact remains EP were around for many years, with the odd super quality players, but as a team playing to too many empty seats at Boet Erasmus they could just not compete. Rugby is a professional sport, so the better teams will buy the better players... always. The Sharks, as an example, are a success as they are a good team.. . they make the money.... the circle gets bigger. But still it's all based on when they first won the CC. For the EC team to get to Sharks/Bulls level they will have to be able to prove first to their fans they can be a competitive team year in and year out. Like Bafana don't deserve to play in CAF finals, the EC does not yet deserve a place in Super rugby. It's one thing to wish it. Natal couldn't even win the payoffs for first division rugby yet a few years later they were winning the CC year after year... it's all about hunger. The EC seems to prefer using the courts to play. That is not right. Rugby is played on grass, not in a courthouse. The EC administrators don't seem to have rugby at heart, and by that I mean rugby as a whole, not just EC rugby. You say things are sorted these days financially. So then get the players.... win the leagues... get the promotions.... and play for the chance to play super rugby.... but it must start with the CC. You don't even have to win, just at least compete. That way EC rugby will win a bit of respect instead of being the laughing it is.

  • pages:
  • 1