Sharks kick it away at Kings Park

Despite the home side dominating both the attacking and defending stats, it was Vodacom Bulls skipper Handre Pollard who kicked the winning points in Durban.

In an error-infused, mostly tepid – but tough – derby between the Sharks and Bulls at Kings Park, the visitors eventually eked out a close-fought 19-16 win on Saturday afternoon.

Perhaps fittingly, the game-winning penalty was earned by a 7-man Bulls pack that completely decimated an 8-man Sharks scrum – the visitors having opted to put bulldozer centre Andre Esterhuizen on the flank after both hookers had been red carded. It was the third scrum penalty against the Sharks on the day.

Fittingly, also, as Pollard’s crucial penalty was the difference between the two SA teams. A win that saw the Bulls complete a “derby-double” over their coastal rivals following the win earlier in the month at Loftus Versfeld.

It completed a perfect day off the tee for the Bok pivot, this while Robert du Preez could only manage a 40% kick success rate. Game over for the banana boys!

Dan du Preez and Andre Esterhuizen were the try scorers for the home team while Jesse Kriel dotted down for the Bulls.

With this victory, the Bulls moved to 17 log points, one point behind conference leaders, the Lions. The Sharks are a further two log points adrift.

The match was a typically tough South African derby, with the home team enjoying most of the territory (56%) and possession (53%), especially in the first half.

They also dominated the carry, offload, tackle break, passes made, rucks and maul stats. Yet despite those advantages, the Durbanites still found themselves trailing 3-6 at the break following an exchange of penalties between Du Preez and Pollard.

The home side conceded 15 turnovers to the 9 of the Bulls, and coughed up the ball incessantly via 18 handling errors – five more than the visitors. Throw in the poor kicking off the tee, and one could fairly asses it to be a game that got away from the Sharks, rather than a game won by the Bulls.

A look at the match stats from Kings Park:

Match information:
Points: SHA 16-19 BUL
Tries: SHA 2-1 BUL
Penalty goals: SHA 2-4 BUL
Goal kicking: SHA 40% – 100% BUL
Possession: SHA 53% – 47% BUL
Territory: SHA 56% – 44% BUL
Ball in play: 32 minutes

Attacking stats:
Ball Carries: SHA 108-76 BUL
Metres run: SHA 656-412 BUL
Metres per carry: SHA 6-5.4 BUL
Line breaks: SHA 7-2 BUL
Tackle breaks: SHA 2-1 BUL
Passes: SHA 154-92 BUL
Good Passes: SHA 139-82 BUL
Offloads: SHA 8-6 BUL
Rucks won: SHA 78-57 BUL
Mauls won: SHA 5-4 BUL
Turnovers conceded: SHA 15-9 BUL

Defensive stats:
Tackles made: SHA 101-137 BUL
Tackles missed: SHA 6-11 BUL
Tackle success: SHA 95% – 93% BUL
Dominant tackles: SHA 6-3 BUL
Tackle turnover: SHA 5-1 BUL
Turnovers won: SHA 1-3 BUL

Kicking stats:
Kicks from hand: SHA 20-20 BUL
Metres kicked: SHA 526-588 BUL
Metres per kick: SHA 26.3-29.4 BUL 

Error stats:
Handling errors: SHA 18-13 BUL
Penalties conceded: SHA 8 (3 from scrum) – 11 BUL
Yellow cards: SHA 0-0 BUL
Red cards: SHA 1-1 BUL

First phase stats:
Lineouts won: SHA 11-10 BUL
Lineouts stolen: SHA 0-1 BUL
Scrums won: SHA 6-7 BUL
Scrums lost: SHA 0-1 BUL

- All Out Rugby

Let's chat

  • Barry

    It is amazing how Provincial our rugby is, that even our journalist cant help but show bias in their assessments.

    In this report there is no mention what so ever of the try that was remarkably disallowed by Christie Du Preez. The words remarkable are not mine, but those of Nick Mallett. That was a game changing event and one that would have seen a victory for the home side. Christie Du Preez was also implicated in the earlier fiasco at Newlands against the Lions and last year, also at Newlands, against the Reds. Not withstanding this we see the same clowns sent back year after year and they wonder why support is dwindling!

    Unquestionably Robert Du Preez had a shocking day of it and the Sharks drilling at scrum time is well reported, but I ascribe the loss rather to, once again, poor officiating by the TMO, rather than the final penalty kick by Pollard, “fittingly”, as you put it!

    • Chris

      Are you talking about the ball touching the line TMO decision ?
      I don’t believe it touched, but a couple of frames later you can actually see Pollard put his fingertips on the ball after it bounces with his foot in touch. No one noticed that, but it should have been a lineout Sharks anyway.

      • Barry

        Thanks Chris, interesting to hear. Just the TMO protocol was flawed- the on field decision try, so there needed to be absolutely evidence for the TMO to overule, which there wasn’t. It was always going to be a tight affair- simply no room for incompetent TMO’s. I’ll have a look at the replay on this thanks.

    • SweetAz

      SO what’s your take on the Red cards? By all accounts it should have been one red and one yellow, leaving the Sharks with an already creaking scrum a man down for the final almost 30 minutes. I don’t have a dog in this fight but I think that more than makes up for the disallowed try. No doubt the officiating is poor but it seems to pretty piss-poor all over, even the Stormers suffered from it, at one stage Nanai hit a Stormers player in the face with his elbow right in front of the linesman and ref and all you heard was crickets, mind you, the Stormers backline was still pretty “Ellendig” and I am so gatvol of De Allende’s crappy tackling I wish the guy would get measles or mumps or something that just keeps him out of the game. Never in a million years should a guy his size get handed off the way a 20-year-old did to him.

      • Barry

        See my explanation below yes Red & yellow, but both for Britz! Certainly a red for VDM for responding.

        I think the on field ref was pretty good, but the TMO was again a joke! There were complaints in the Stormers Lions game. The Sharks Stormers game, the Lions Rebels game, the Stormers Hurricanes game and the Blues Stormers game as well. The complaints can’t all be unjustified can they? It is tough having to face a loss, but it sits really uncomfortably when matches are decided by poor officiating!

        • Tony

          Akker came in first with his head full into Britz’s face. That is where it started. Akker was more wrong and dirty!!!

          • Greg Shark

            you also fall for the ‘disinformation’ peddled to paint brits as the victim….. he was as much the aggressor as akker could be, if not more so.

          • Barry

            No Tony, the starting point was Britz slowing up the Sharks Ball illegally in the red zone. Akker had the right to clean him out. He made contact with Britz’ shoulder not his head. Britz responded with a punch. Have a look at the clip on Super Sport.

            The findings of the Judicial commission pretty much support this view!

      • John Comyn

        A bit harsh to single out DA. I thought out of an abysmal bunch he was the best. That’s not to say he was great in anyway. The basic ball skills are shocking. A very basic is to look for the support when passing and yet they continue to throw forward passes in scoring positions. That or they just throw the ball randomly over peoples heads or throw it into touch. I have never seen a side squander scoring opportunities like these guys do.

        • SweetAz

          Fair enough but that handoff was just unforgivable, its like he has no clue how to tackle.,

  • Barry

    Sweet, the problem with the red card issue is that people don’t look at the full passage of events. There is a passage clip on SuperSport. Maybe have a re-look.

    My take on it. Ruck is formed after the throw in. Britz goes off his feet and slows down Sharks ball – look for the red hat and the way he collapses over the players in from if him. He has no right to the ball and it is sinical play in the red zone- sanction yellow card Britz.

    Akker attempts to clean him out, But Britz is lying flat so only options head or shoulder. He makes contact with Britz on the shoulder. Britz counters with a left hook making contact with Akker’s right cheek – sanction red card Britz.

    The problem from here is that Akker responds and might I say gives Britz a good hiding – sanction red.

    Whilst appreciating that it happened quickly, none of the match officials bothered to understand the nature of the problem and what caused the encounter in the first instance!

    • SweetAz

      LOL, its tough to see these things with one eye only. My take is Brits goes off his feet,- REFEREE decides what it should be but anything other than penalty is wishful thinking, as soon as the illegal cleanout by Akker occurs the penalty reverses, Brits then responds with an OPEN HAND,-sanction penalty. At this stage a yellow for both players is appropriate, HOWEVER Akker retaliates with multiple punches from above on a prone defenceless man–RED CARD.

      In fact I would probably at most have given Brits a YELLOW, yeah its pretty easy to give anybody a hiding when you are sitting on top of him and doesn’t reflect well on your character

      • Barry

        Yeh Sweet, we have already establish for some time now that you’re a Britz fan.

        • SweetAz

          Regarding the Judicial Committee, they definitely do not agree with you, they clearly stated that Akker was the instigator and Brits acted in self-defence.

          From Brits’ appeal judgement. “With respect to sanction the Judicial Committee deemed the act of foul play merited a mid-range entry point of 6 weeks due to the World Rugby instructions that dictate any incident of foul play involving contact with the head must start at a mid-range level. The evidence demonstrated the player contacted the opposing player’s head with more than one punch. However, taking into account mitigating factors including the player’s demonstrated remorse, extensive experience, the fact the player’s actions were in self-defence and the player has pleaded guilty at the first available opportunity, the Judicial Committee reduced the suspension by 2 weeks. The Judicial Committee was conscious of the fact that the player was not the instigator of the incident, but due to the player’s previous two periods of suspension for striking offences, the Judicial Committee were unable to provide the full 50% discount for the sanction. This leads to a sanction of 4 weeks.”

        • SweetAz

          Yeah, the man has a certain Joie De Vivre that is lacking in most SA teams, he turns a dull, humourless team into something where the players are all enjoying themselves. He did it at Sarries, is doing it at the Bulls and hopefully will do it at the Boks. The guy is always ready with a smile.

          He also kicks out of hand, has good acceleration, a better sidestep than most South African backs and does the basics reliably and consistently. I rate him the best hooker in South Africa comparable to what Uli Schmidt used to be. As Wesley noted, teams need balance and complimentary qualities, THAT is what Brits brings

          At the moment I would actually rate Bongi Mbonambi as our nr 2 hooker with Marx 3rd. Akker is somewhere below the 3 of them and not even 4th. Both Marx and Van Der Merwe are humourless, angry players with little joy in the way they play, this is not good for team building and morale and isn’t sustainable long term. In my opinion, Marx is a retreaded flanker/fetcher too slow to be a loosie and only stands out for his turnover skills, he is often found wanting in pressure situations where basic skills like lineout throwing lets him down.

          • Barry

            You started off by telling us that you had “no dog in the race” but from this emotional statement it’s clear you’re on his campaign team!

            We had this debate after the Pretoria game and after the stats were put up, it was clear that Akker was the better player on the day by some considerable margin, so let’s have a look at Saturday’s stats – VDM/ Brits:

            Runs: 5/6
            Meters made: 10/3

            Tackles: 4/6
            Missed tackles: 0/1
            Line outs won: 11/9

            Your player rankings maybe need a bit of a re-think again!

            Anyway chat again in four weeks. Lol!

      • John Comyn

        Thing is Sweet, when Mallett speaks, as far as Barry is concerned, it is cast in stone. See his comment above re the disallowed try. In this specific case Mallett agreed with the double red. I’d be interested to see his comments.

        • Wesley

          Ding ding ding! This just in! Akker banned for 3 weeks! Lets see how Schalk’s fares…

        • Barry

          Not really John, but he does have more credibility than you and I. The in-studio pundits seldom talk out about poor refereeing, but when they do, it’s because the decisions are outrageously wrong and game changing, as this one was! I also agree with the double red – both players used their fists, there’s no debate! The point I make above is that it is important to understand how this came about and who started the sh..t.

        • Wesley

          Simple as this, Brits was there illegally in the red zone, Akker illegally cleaned him out, (even if the player is there in the ruck illegally, you may not trample or charge the player, i thought we had settled this argument when stamping was banned f’n years ago). So both yellow card offences in my view up to that point.

          Brits then threw the first punch (it was a closed fist), after he was charged. Akker then did the same, with both players trading blows multiple times, even though most never land. So both escalated to red. Refs got it right, Mallett got it right, now lets see what the judicial outcome is. I’m saying 2 weeks each, both with exemplary records it would be quite harsh if anything more than that.

          • Barry

            Yes Wesley a fair take on it. I would like to see rugby following common law, where the perpetrator (the guy that’s starts the trouble) is dealt more severely than the guy that reacts to it. Britz new exactly what he was doing when he slowed down Sharks ball in the red zone !

        • SweetAz

          Mallett is not a ref, he also doesn’t always get it right. If you look at the respective player’s history, general demeanour and style of play it would be fair to assume that Akker is the main aggressor and escalator. His cleanout was meant to hurt so if you take it from there he really set all subsequent events in motion with his dirty play, he is also the one escalating it far beyond just “handbags”

          • Barry

            Well the judicial commission certainly don’t agree with your view on this.

            Britz gets Four Weeks. It is probably about right, though I would have added a week for going and sitting with the spectators and trying to make a joke of proceedings, after copping a red card! Is this really the sort of behavior we want to project to our youngsters???

          • Barry

            It’s not about demeanor or style of play, it’s about an incident that occurred on the rugby field, one that was initiated by Britz, through sinical play in the red zone, followed by a punch (punch Sweet, that’s when you clench your fist!), by Britz. Unfortunate situation, but he kind of got what he was looking for!

          • John Comyn

            Heres another take on the two incidents:

            “How the hell was Schalk Brits ever given a red card in Durban? Shame on you (referee) Mike Fraser. The inadequate and clearly inferior Akker van der Merwe clearly headbutted Brits, who took exception to the cowardly act of thuggery.

            Both players were given a red card on the 65th minute and kudos to the veteran Brits who spent the rest of the match sitting among the home Sharks crowd. Van der Merwe hasn’t earned the right to lace Brits’s boots; let alone take to him with the head.

            Akker van der Merwe during the match against the Bulls at Kingsmead Stadium on Saturday. Photo: Samuel Shivambu/BackpagePix
            Akker van der Merwe during the match against the Bulls at Kingsmead Stadium on Saturday. Photo: Samuel Shivambu/BackpagePix
            3. Speaking of mistake, to borrow from colleague Mike Greenaway, there was a howler from TMO Christy du Preez that cost the Sharks a try early in the match. Referee Mike Fraser referred an initial try to the TMO with an instruction ‘I believe it is a try see if there is clear evidence that it is not ’ There was no clear evidence. Christy confirmed his doubts and in doing so Fraser changed his decision.

            What a disgusting indictment of the incompetence of officiating in Super Rugby. Don’t expect a reprimand, though, such is the nature of protection among officials that both Christy and Fraser will be lauded for their bravery in getting it wrong’


  • Barry

    Well John at least he got half of it right!

  • humblepie

    It was a shocking display of rugby that glaringly highlighted how outdated their (both teams) approach to rugby is. Journalists abuse statistics to prove their point, whatever it is. A 53% possession stat is insignificant and doesn’t prove that one team had more possession than the other.
    Another shocker is that Rassie also seems to think that this is how rugby should be played (all brawn and no brain). We are in for a very difficult World Cup. Man, our nation desperately needs to be inspired. Sport is a fantastic vehicle to achieve this but for the foreseeable future, our national team is unlikely to rise to this occasion.

    • Wesley

      Nah i don’t think that’s entirely what Rassie is about, but i believe the players at the franchises are not compatible in some sense, causing some trouble. Yes its a team game, but it doesnt mean there may be no concentrated weaknesses in certain positions or collectives. The Bulls are most balanced, solid front pack, worthy backline. Lions and Sharks sit in the middle, both forwards and backs kinda there, with some glaring weaknesses. The worst offenders especially between the forwards and the backs are at the Stormers. Man, the backline is atrocious. Not one person in that backline will make it on the plane to Japan if I was to choose. The most glaring is DDA, because he is the most experienced and accomplished in Bok caps worth. The Stormers forwards are class, that’s why I believe they come close but never winning in tight games. I’m not stressing about those forward players being included in the Bok setup, but when the ball swings, they make nothing of it. In both losing SA teams, how many movements went past the centres? How many speculative kicks went to hand? Its time the players at both ends pull their weight.

    • Safmarine

      Agree. Boring as hell game. Thank goodness for the dust up, it at least brought some entertainment to probably the worst game I’ve seen in years.
      Also, if the Bok team is going to structure itself around the Stormers pack and a few backs too, we’re going to struggle in Japan. Bok laden team couldn’t pull off a win v the Blues. Worrying signs.

      • Barry

        You’re absolutely right, not wanting to kick Stormers whilst they are struggling, but it is a major concern when what is predominantly the current Springbok side cannot beat the Blues, then we have a problem! With so few test remaining, there simply is not time to bed down alternatives!

        • SweetAz

          The Stormers pack have bossed every pack they have come up against. The Blues pack has a lot of AB’s or potential AB’s in it. The current Bok side has the potential to be very good with Pollard and the ex-kitten scrumhalf. It’s the rest of it that’s problematical,-not one of our franchises have truly world-class players from 11 to 15.

          And that’s why the Stormers struggle, with a decent backline they should have easily won that game. Even their replacement props were dominating the 2 All Black props that came on as replacement BUT as soon as the ball leaves the scrum or the forwards it turns into a mess.

          • Barry

            Sorry to burst your bubble but the reality check is that they are 9th on the log. It is way more than just backline play that needs attention!

            Again not getting at teams that are down for the moment, but concerned that most of this team will end up in Japan, because we have largely put most of our eggs in one basket with Springbok selections!

  • Joos

    All valid point, but I think you guys are forgetting that at the end of the day these are rugby players normal human beings with emotion just like us, and if you have been dominating the game in all fasets of play except the score board I can guarantee you will get frustrated and throw in being 5m from the try line just pushes you over the top, Akker and Birts always plays their heart out and that is why we love the game because of the passion desire to be the best that is what rugby is about.

    • Barry

      Yes good point. I am a little old school – a time when slowing opposition ball on your try line was considered cheating and you expected to get sorted if you did it!

      • SweetAz

        LOL, you must really love the Crusaders then, they have cheating on their own try line down to a fine art.

        • Barry

          Have a goid friend in the Sanders management, so they are my NZ go to team. Spoiling in the red zone is unquestionably something out of the NZ text book on how to “Cheat properly in footie”

  • Herman Schroder?

    Barry, John and not so SweetAss. I will make this very short and ‘sweet’ oh ye sufferers in the SR wilderness and suggest you do only one thing before ranting any further on this most pitiful of so called rugby matches – kindly watch the Heineken Quarter Final match between Leinster and Ulster this past weekend showcasing just how rugby should be played. 80 minutes of teams RUNNING at each other from all over the park with superb skills, vision, commitment and smarts.

    Please, if you are not prepared to watch the entire game ( not a highlights package ) then don’t bother to comment at all. If I was ever convinced that the Boks were on a hiding to nothing at the WC then I am now. We are like minnows compared to those guys and clueless Rassie doesn’t even know just how far off the pace these so called ‘Boks’ in reality are. Not a Springbok in sight this past weekend. True Story. Cheers.

    • SweetAz

      Shit but you are dumb and you seem so oblivious to it. Heineken QUARTER FINAL MATCH after a season building momentum, continuity and skills and you want to compare it to Southern Hemi teams not even a third into their season.

      Sad but True Story

      • Herman Schroder?

        Is that the best response you can come up with ?? Foul language, personal insults and the stupidest reason for the poor rugby played anyone has ever come up with. You sully these forums old chap. Suggest you clean up your act. Cheers.

        • SweetAz

          Huh?????? What foul language your worship? You obviously must be some reject altar boy because no rugby guy I’ve ever met would find foul language in that post. Did a priest diddle you or something? As to calling a moron dumb, you should be thankful I gave you a bit of credit, that wasn’t an insult, I was trying to uplift you,-moron. Exactly what is wrong with my reason? You will find the level of rugby and the myriad mistakes made very similar over all the franchises at this stage of the season, even the mighty Crusaders came a cropper a week ago. Leinster played their first game of the Heineken cup in OCTOBER LAST YEAR you tool. Super rugby only started in February this year.

          If you can’t discern the progress of a team re. its skills and continuity relative to the trajectory of the season then you are even dumber than I thought. Suggest you go back to primary school because it would appear that’s where your education stopped. I may slightly sully these forums but you are the proverbial Exxon Valdez with the amount of braindead crap you spout on here.

          Now run home and cry to your mommy that the bad man called you a naughty name.

          • SweetAz

            What debate, tool? There is no debating with you, everyone else on this forum owns up when they get it wrong or a different point of view is more valid. NOT YOU, you are the only one who always insists that you and only you are the only one that has any clue. I don’t debate with you, it’s pointless, I merely point out your stupidity for all to see.

            You’re like a reverse lemming,- the retarded one that tried to lead them into the fire before they all ran screaming over a cliff to get away from him.

          • Herman Schroder?

            SweetAz, Methinks the dolt dos’t protest too much. Your foaming at the mouth is indicative of your tortured frame of mind old chap, give it a rest.

            As for your laughable reason as to why the Leinster game was so superior to ours is absolutely ludicrous. You mention ONE Crusaders game to back up your theory and ignore the other six games where they were unbeatable. Even the Sunwolves show more enterprise and skill than our lot. Oh and by the way the Stompies ( your boys ), Sharks and Bulls haven’t shown those Leinster skills in the last five years no matter what part of the season they were in. So your pathetic attempt to find an excuse for our sorry lot is without foundation.

            But let me apologize for calling you a ‘dolt’ ( i hate calling people names it’s demeaning ) but your rant is there for all to see and not an ounce of class can be detected in your tirade. Your lack of debating skills is alarming. Cheers.

  • Herman Schroder?

    It’s funny that Akker without the guiding hand of the Lions has become thug No.1 under the influence of the Sharkettes who actually believe they can dominate and win a game with dom krag tripe. Our ‘derby games do not prove anything, it’s a clear case of the blind leading the blind and any team that plays against them with a bit of pace and smarts will probably come out tops. Lions exempt of course, lol.

    The ‘new look’ Lions cubs team are still the flagship it seems and but for ‘SecondsGate’ would have been even more so. There’s that proverbial cream again rising to the top while scoring many tries along the way.

    As for Britz, well he spent most of the game flat on his back and his sending off came just in time for him. Folks he’s past it and the occasional little hoppity skip here and there does not him a WC Bok make. Are we so hard up ?

    I know some people misguidedly call me negative but ask yourself, after last weekend ( and the past four years ) what is there to be positive about ?? The three ‘other’ Franchises need new coaches urgently, there is still another ten rounds to go for heaven’s sake. My thoughts go out to you long suffering fans and I wish you well on your journey and I trust that you will take this as ‘constructive’ criticism, you guys deserve so much better. Cheers.

  • Joos

    All realistic points I don’t think we have enough in the group of boks to upset the script for the WC but I do believe that anything is possible and the WC is looking a lot more and more like open season for any team.

    Regarding new Coaches I think against all odds Pote Human is doing a great job if you look at things (exclude the style of play) there is two ways to build a winning team 1. The Jake white method were you drill the guys into the ground, strick curvews ect. 2. The Akerman way where you concentrate more on the players and what they can offer as a collective unit as we have seen the lions players together is a unstoppable force but individual they are average not hating on them but seeing what an actual team can be when you drop the so called stars and start with youngsters you are willing to do the hard work on and off the field as rugby is more mental then Physical (stomers vs Hurricanes good example) just wish that the coaches will see it and I do believe that Pote is realizing the bigger picture and hope my team with Dobbo next season will start playing as a unit and not individual stars.

    • humblepie

      Pote looks like a nice guy but hold back on the complements for now. It is early days and there is still a spill over from the Mitchell era. We will get a better picture when the business end of the competition arrives. However, Fleck and to a lesser extend, Du Preez are not successful at Super Rugby level and I don’t think they understand the modern game. It just amazes me how patient Newlands is with underperformance. A nice, big, happy underperforming family.

    • Herman Schroder?

      Thanks for that Joos and I agree the Bulls are a step ahead of the other two. They were the only genuine loss the Lions have suffered so far.

      It’s the Ackerman method that should be deployed. That is why I have a problem with Rassies selection policy for the Boks. The AB’s and the Crusaders for example build their success on continuity and a winning culture of brotherhood just like the Lions have. How do you build that winning culture when you are choosing players from all over the world to assemble before test matches and think you can weld them into a formidable unit ? It won’t happen and was apparent last year with our lucky 50/50 win ratio.

      However I can’t agree with your contention that the Lions players individually are average. Most of those players were unfortunate to have Bok coaches like Coetzee and even Rassie to contend with. Poor coaching and a totally confused game plan and lack of cohesion has reduced just about all our players to ‘average’ status when it comes to playing on the world stage.

      This is also reflected in the Stormers debacle. May I suggest you guys give Fleckie a gold watch and a pension right now and not wait until the end of the season. Let Dobbo or better still a real coach from overseas pick up the pieces now so that you are well prepared for next year rather than stumbling on with clueless Fleck, he is only going through the motions until July imo. Cheers.

      • SweetAz

        May I suggest you STFU and stop making a fool of yourself?

        • Herman Schroder?

          Tut, tut. Cheerio old chap.

Comments are closed.