The Sharks have managed to slip from dire to worse, winless after 3 games into the new Super 14 season. How has a team laden with Springboks, and serious title contenders the past few years, fallen so far?
The answer lies with one man, and one position — Ruan Pienaar.
It might seem wrong to blame the malaise of a team on one individual, or one position, but I think it’s important to look at the history.
In 2007, the Sharks were beaten finalists, but were head-and-shoulders the best team in the competition – only two moments of madness from Francios Steyn saw them snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
Pienaar was at scrumhalf, with Butch James at flyhalf, but it was Pienaar who commanded the team – he was confident, dynamic, and quite possibly the best scrumhalf in the world … or at least 2nd behind Du Preez.
When Butch James left, the interesting experiment of playing Pienaar at flyhalf began … and that’s where the decline started. Pienaar has steadily lost confidence with each passing week, and the Sharks have missed his spark.
They have become a defensive side, incapable of the superb counter-attacking ability they used to display. The backline has had no impetus for a couple seasons now. Pienaar is unhappy, his confidence in ruins, and he’s a shadow of his former self. The time has come to end the experiment, restore him to his chosen position, and rebuild a shattered career.
Peter De Villiers is right, Ruan Pienaar is the Tiger Woods of rugby – right after he crashed his Navigator and got clubbed by his wife. But in all seriousness, he is as important to the Sharks as Du Preez is to the Springboks and Bulls.
They are ineffective without him, and as good a player as Kockett is, he is more the Rory Sabbatini of rugby – a good scrapper, but lacking true greatness.
Return Pienaar to scrumhalf – it doesn’t even matter who plays flyhalf (as long as its not John Smit looking to extend his career… but that’s a different story) – and the Sharks will rise again.
Better to be the second best scrumhalf in the world, than a mediocre flyhalf.
Recommend this story.
The Turkey 10
The Turkey 10 teams have now been selected, as Wild Turkey Bourbon's sport sponsorship kicks into the next exciting phase.
Choose which side you're going to support and get in the running to win $2,500!
Simply visit Wild Turkey Australia on Facebook for your chance to win.
Find out more.
The Crowd Says (7) | Page 1 of Comments
Have Your Say
- Explore:
- Ruan Pienaar, Rugby Union, Sharks, Super Rugby
February 27th 2010 @ 5:12am
Viscount Crouchback said | February 27th 2010 @ 5:12am | Report comment
I think the Sharks need considerably more surgery than merely switching Pienaar, though I agree that he looks poor at 10. Do you think Andy Goode is the man to fill in at fly-half? The Sharks need to ditch Smit and buy a proper tight-head. He’s lived off his Captain Marvel credentials for too long and it doesn’t surprise me that he and Bismarck are apparently at daggers drawn.
February 27th 2010 @ 5:59am
Lee said | February 27th 2010 @ 5:59am | Report comment
When goode came on last night, the backline looked like it had something. I’d say pienaar, goode, Jacobs and someone other than Murray, he messed up every chance they had last night
February 27th 2010 @ 7:32am
Keith said | February 27th 2010 @ 7:32am | Report comment
I thought de Villiers said that Earl Rose was the Tiger Woods of rugby…
Yeah, agree with what you’re saying. Pienaar never really looked comfortable last night. It didn’t help that he was playing behind a defeated pack. Still, he’s only got himself to blame for some of his boneheaded kicking.
I agree that Goode made an impact last night, pity for the Sharks it was a negative one. That binning hurt the team badly. Haven’t seen much of Goode’s play in the North, but he looked pretty average last night.
The reason the Sharks’ backline looked like it had some life when he came on was because by that stage the team had decided to play kitchen sink rugby.
February 27th 2010 @ 10:25am
van der Merwe said | February 27th 2010 @ 10:25am | Report comment
“They are ineffective without him…”
It’s the other way around, actually.
“Better to be the second best scrumhalf in the world, than a mediocre flyhalf.”
“mediocre”, how kind.
March 1st 2010 @ 7:41pm
brad said | March 1st 2010 @ 7:41pm | Report comment
the reason he has been shunted to flyhalf is because he is not the best scrumhalf at the sharks. Kockett is the 1st choice scrumhalf and he is the primary goal kicker as well. What compounds the problem for pienaar is that he is a very different player to Kockett and so the sharks can not alternate them effectively and have thus chosen Kockett and given a lifeline to Pienaar as flyhalf. I will trust Jhon Plumtree on this one and agree that Kockett is the better scrumhalf and Pienaar the better Utility back.
March 1st 2010 @ 7:54pm
Sam said | March 1st 2010 @ 7:54pm | Report comment
They were pretty average against the Crusaders. Why are they trying to play Smit at prop? I know du Plessis is a great hooker, but pick one or the other, can’t have it both ways. They seem to be stacked with great players, but without Dick Muir as coach they have really gone backwards. Don’t know if Pienaar should get all the blame. Goode was crap, basically destroyed any chance of the Crusaders not getting a bonus point (thank-you very much). But all in all the team struggled to get over the advantage line, and that must be a big concern.
March 4th 2010 @ 4:23am
Wavell Wakefield said | March 4th 2010 @ 4:23am | Report comment
I didn’t see the whole game, Sam, why was Goode crap? What he do to single handed ruin the bonus point chance?