Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

Sharks Vs Hurricanes: Whose Fans Will Be More Let Down If They Don't Finally Break Their Long Title Drought This Season?

Ben Barba and Julian Savea

Two footy teams whose fans have been waiting a very long time to win a title are well-poised to break their respective droughts this year. Jamie Wall compares the tortured histories of Super Rugby’s Hurricanes and the NRL’s Sharks.

ADVERTISEMENT

If there’s two sets of fans that may be feeling rather nervous at the rarefied air their teams are currently inhabiting, it’s the Hurricanes of Super Rugby and the Sharks of the NRL.

They’ve both been here before, seemingly waltzing their way to glory. Yet, following these two sides over the years has been an exercise in despair when it gets near the time to start spraying each other with champagne and engraving a new name onto a trophy.

The Hurricanes have been around for 20 years; the Sharks, 49. The total number of titles between them: 0.

So let’s weigh up the factors and determine whose fans will face the biggest let down if they come up short again in the 2016 postseason.

History
Hurricanes: They haven’t been around as long, but they’ve been stacked with enough All Blacks to win the damn thing a few times. Total grand final appearances: 2
Sharks: A sprinkling of good seasons separated by long stretches of of mediocrity in between. Total grand final appearances: 3
Verdict: Sharks. The Canes finally reached a final in 2006, but thick fog made it impossible to tell what was going on, but the Sharks managed to disappoint their fans in a completely separate competition in 1997.

Fanbase
Hurricanes: Represent most of the lower North Island of NZ, including eight provincial unions. That’s around 400,000 people who have lived without a title.
Sharks: Represents the Cronulla-Sutherland Shire of Sydney, with a population of 210,00.
Verdict: Hurricanes. The simple fact is the Canes have let more people down on an annual basis, plus it’s easier to move from Cronulla to Bondi or Kogarah if you really want to support an historically successful team.

ADVERTISEMENT

 
nrl_banner

 

Greatest player never to win a title
Hurricanes: Tana Umaga (122 games)
Sharks: Andrew ‘E.T.’ Ettinghausen (328 games)
Verdict: Sharks. Both did everything BUT win a title, but Tana may yet achieve the feat as a coach. E.T. will not as the host of a fishing show.

2016 season so far
Hurricanes: Started off with a horrible loss to the Brumbies, but clawed their way back into contention via a stunning end of season run.
Sharks: Lost two of their first three, won their next 15. Could potentially go unbeaten for the rest of the regular season.
Verdict: Hurricanes. The NRL is looking decidedly top-heavy this season, so the Sharks have had more than a few gimme games. In contrast the Canes managed to top the Battle Royale that was the New Zealand Super Rugby conference.

Off-field drama redemption factor
Hurricanes: Alienated a great deal of their fanbase when former coach Mark Hammett showed All Blacks Ma’a Nonu and Andrew Hore the door.
Sharks: Had nine players banned for taking banned supplements. CEO quit in disgrace. Salary cap breaches. Todd Carney.
Verdict: Sharks. By a mile.

ADVERTISEMENT

Final verdict
The evidence stacks up pretty firmly in favour of Sharks fans as the greater candidates heartbreak if their team fails to bring home a trophy. Of course, that’ll be little consolation to Hurricanes fans, considering they went through all of this last season.

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
JW 5 hours ago
Does South Africa have a future in European competition?

I rated Lowe well enough to be an AB. Remember we were picking the likes of George Bridge above such players so theres no disputing a lot of bad decisions have been made by those last two coaches. Does a team like the ABs need a finicky winger who you have to adapt and change a lot of your style with to get benefit from? No, not really. But he still would have been a basic improvement on players like even Savea at the tail of his career, Bridge, and could even have converted into the answer of replacing Beauden at the back. Instead we persisted with NMS, Naholo, Havili, Reece, all players we would have cared even less about losing and all because Rieko had Lowe's number 11 jersey nailed down.


He was of course only 23 when he decided to leave, it was back in the beggining of the period they had started retaining players (from 2018 onwards I think, they came out saying theyre going to be more aggressive at some point). So he might, all of them, only just missed out.


The main point that Ed made is that situations like Lowe's, Aki's, JGP's, aren't going to happen in future. That's a bit of a "NZ" only problem, because those players need to reach such a high standard to be chosen by the All Blacks, were as a country like Ireland wants them a lot earlier like that. This is basically the 'ready in 3 years' concept Ireland relied on, versus the '5 years and they've left' concept' were that player is now ready to be chosen by the All Blacks (given a contract to play Super, ala SBW, and hopefully Manu).


The 'mercenary' thing that will take longer to expire, and which I was referring to, is the grandparents rule. The new kids coming through now aren't going to have as many gp born overseas, so the amount of players that can leave with a prospect of International rugby offer are going to drop dramatically at some point. All these kiwi fellas playing for a PI, is going to stop sadly.


The new era problem that will replace those old concerns is now French and Japanese clubs (doing the same as NRL teams have done for decades by) picking kids out of school. The problem here is not so much a national identity one, than it is a farm system where 9 in 10 players are left with nothing. A stunted education and no support in a foreign country (well they'll get kicked out of those countries were they don't in Australia).


It's the same sort of situation were NZ would be the big guy, but there weren't many downsides with it. The only one I can think was brought up but a poster on this site, I can't recall who it was, but he seemed to know a lot of kids coming from the Islands weren't really given the capability to fly back home during school xms holidays etc. That is probably something that should be fixed by the union. Otherwise getting someone like Fakatava over here for his last year of school definitely results in NZ being able to pick the cherries off the top but it also allows that player to develop and be able to represent Tonga and under age and possibly even later in his career. Where as a kid being taken from NZ is arguably going to be worse off in every respect other than perhaps money. Not going to develop as a person, not going to develop as a player as much, so I have a lotof sympathy for NZs case that I don't include them in that group but I certainly see where you're coming from and it encourages other countries to think they can do the same while not realising they're making a much worse experience/situation.

144 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ 'Springbok Galacticos can't go it alone for trophy-hunting Sharks' 'Springbok Galacticos can't go it alone for trophy-hunting Sharks'
Search