Crusaders v Waratahs. Christchurch.

[Lee Grant]

Don't know where to post this but a thread for the next game will do:

Taking the bye into account. As I wrote when the Tahs were "4th" after the Force game:
Every team has a possibility of getting 5 points in a game. The teams who have played 7 games could have earned 35 points by now, and those that have played 8 games could have earned 40.

Thus the table is better expressed in terms of points lost with the team which has lost most at the bottom.
As follows:

PL
Bulls 7
Crusaders 10
Stormers 11
Waratahs 12
Reds 14
Chiefs 14
Brumbies 14
Blues 15
Hurricanes 22
Sharks 24
Cheetahs 26
Highlanders 29
Force 30
Lions 32

Now I accept that the Tahs deserve 4th spot.

Such a table does not take into account the standard of opponents played against, or not, to date; but it is a better measure of quality than the standard table.

 

[Lee Grant]

Re: Waratahs v Crusaders

Unless Palu and Waugh are healthy again I wouldn't change the team at all.

I'd tend to rest Palu regardless so that he gets 3 weeks rest in total.

I wouldn't be too heroic with Waugh either. It will be good to see Alcock play against better opponents anyway.


Any update about their injuries - or Horne's?

 

[Biffo]

Re: Waratahs v Crusaders

Don't know where to post this but a thread for the next game will do:

Taking the bye into account. As I wrote when the Tahs were "4th" after the Force game:
Every team has a possibility of getting 5 points in a game. The teams who have played 7 games could have earned 35 points by now, and those that have played 8 games could have earned 40.

Thus the table is better expressed in terms of points lost with the team which has lost most at the bottom.
As follows:

PL
Bulls 7
Crusaders 10
Stormers 11
Waratahs 12
Reds 14
Chiefs 14
Brumbies 14
Blues 15
Hurricanes 22
Sharks 24
Cheetahs 26
Highlanders 29
Force 30
Lions 32

Now I accept that the Tahs deserve 4th spot.

Such a table does not take into account the standard of opponents played against, or not, to date; but it is a better measure of quality than the standard table.

The Tahs are top of the table. That is a matter of fact, not opinion or biases. I learned a long time ago that games in hand have less real than apparent value. In the early 1970s, on my first trip to England, Leeds soccer team was some 9 points in front with 2 games in hand. I jumped in and had a fairly decent bet at 8/1 for them to win the championship. The games in hand yielded precisely nothing. Leeds then got buried and finished quite a way below the winner. Clearly, the bookies had done their homework on the value of games in hand, on home and away games to come and on the quality of opposition met and yet to be met.

I like your counting but, as I pointed out elsewhere, a more convincing analysis would take into account the gap between the expected values of games played and of points to date - with reference to games at home and away against those above and below the subject team.

On average, a game in hand has an expected value of something like 2.5 competition points (not differentiating between home and away games). Thus, the Tahs bye to come should reduce their points by 2.5 on a "real" table. They would be still in the four. If the assessment of 2.5 points is correct, the Tahs are second on a "real" table.

 

[waratahjesus]

during the waratahs bye round, what are the fixtures, can someone please do the ground work cos i dont want to. are teams that can leapfrog the tahs playing each other?

 

[Lee Grant]

Best to pose that question next week wj.

 

[waratahjesus]

good point, but hte bye isnt worth five if the teams are yet to play each other is a valid point

 

[Langthorne]

If there is any doubt about the fitness of Palu and Waugh I wouldn't play them. It is always best to start the match with 22 players who are fit to play.

I do REALLY want them to be fit though as the Crusaders are a lot tougher than the Cheetahs.

 

[Hawko]

I like Lees table. The only thing the table doesn't factor in is the home/away advantage and the unknown variables to come (like the Tahs getting Kaplan as ref). What it shows is that the Bulls are still well out in front, which they are, and that Stormers and Crusaders have the wherewithall to go top too. So do the Tahs. Next step is to look at the games to come, who they are against, which team travelled in which direction and where they are played. To know that the Bulls have dropped only seven potential points so far is mind-blowing and shows how far they are in front despite Saturdays loss.

Without writing a long analysis, I still think the likely finish order is Stormers/Bulls 1/2, Crusaders/Tahs/Blues/Brumbies/Reds to make up the other two slots. But that is now far more uncertain if the results of last round are considered. The Stormers loss was crucial and they go to Auckland for a must win fortnight against the Blues and the Chiefs. Drop one of those and their hold on 1/2 is now tenuous at best. Next three weeks for the Tahs are season defining. Two wins and the bye have them an excellent chance of coming first, especially if the Bulls trip up at the Chiefs (alas the Chiefs tight five are not up to it) or the Saders or Stormers knock them over.

Why the interest in who's first? Because if its the Bulls I think the result is pre-destined. The high veldt is too much of a home advantage unless you can get a long acclimatisation. The Stormers would play in front of 50,000 mad supporters and if they don't win the ref will be under immense pressure. A bridge too far. So, if the Tahs are to lift the trophy they need to finish first so that they have a home semi and home final. To do that, the Crusaders and Brumbies are must-win matches. They could drop one and still do it, but it would be a herculean task and lots of other Bulls results would have to go our way. Hence the vehemence of my posings over the past few weeks about having the best team on the park, fit and well, for the game against the Crusaders. If Palu is not right for this game then please refer to my earlier posts about giving key players time to properly recuperate from their injuries. I told you so has a very bitter taste to it, because this year we now have a real chance to lift the trophy.

Lest I be accused of fence sitting, my head says it will be Bulls, Stormers, Waratahs, Blues. But my heart says Waratahs, Bulls, Stormers, Blues. We'll know in about three weeks time, I think. We won't need to wait till round 14.

 

[steiner]

Re: Waratahs v Crusaders

Unless Palu and Waugh are healthy again I wouldn't change the team at all.

I'd tend to rest Palu regardless so that he gets 3 weeks rest in total.

I wouldn't be too heroic with Waugh either. It will be good to see Alcock play against better opponents anyway.


Any update about their injuries - or Horne's?

Though the idea of resting Palu and Waugh for 3 weeks has some merit, if their injuries are only minor I'd want to play them. Mainly because a victory here is worth more because it's also a loss to a competitor. Given the Crusader's run home we can really dent their semi aspirations if we win.

Though Alcock played well on the weekend Waugh is the man I'd want at Jade Stadium and Palu's value is obvious. The bye will do them for a rest, hopefully.

 

[Lindommer]

Some may rabbit on about the Tahs' position at the top of the table being somewhat artificial but I'd rather be there than elsewhere. There's some merit to Bruce's suggestion (there, I've praised you, BR) to notionally allocate four competition points for the bye to show a clearer picture as the season progresses; the NRL do it for their byes.

A more careful study of what teams the other top three contenders have to play should instil some optimism in Tahs' supporters. The Tahs have played both the Stormers and Bulls, so we aren't capable of taking points off them. We simply MUST beat the Saders next week, then they can have their match points when we have our bye and we're still sitting pretty. But consider who the Bulls, Stormers and Saders have to play: each other. No matter who wins the loser loses competition points relative to the Tahs. And both the Bulls and Stormers have tricky games against the Reds, Chiefs and Sharks to come, all away apart from the Bulls/Sharks match. As well as these potential point-sapping matches the Stormers play the Blues in Auckland and the Saders have a very difficult last match against the Brumbies in Christchurch on their return from Safferland.

The Bulls, Stormers and Crusaders each have the potential to drop quite a few points in the tail end of the season. And they will. The Tahs' ability to finish on top of the table is firmly in their own hands.

 

[Biffo]

There's some merit to Bruce's suggestion (there, I've praised you, BR) to notionally allocate four competition points for the bye to show a clearer picture as the season progresses; the NRL do it for their byes.

A bye in hand is not worth four points. The average game is worth four points to the winner plus about one bonus point for a total of five. The average competition points for each team per game is therefore worth 2.5 points. Allotting four points assumes that every team with a game in hand will win that game, which is false.

That calculation of 2.5 points is the average. To get the real figure for each team, you'd have to adjust for the number of its remaining games at home and away and against higher- and lower- placed teams. The Tahs have two home games and three away games to come, which would mean that their bye is worth more than the average to other teams. An offset is that the Tahs have four games against teams below them on the ladder, which would make their bye worth less to other teams.

 

[Scotty]

I like Lee's table and think it gives as accurate indication as any of the 'real' situation. Points lost is a good way to see it. Possibly a better way to see it would be average points lost or gained per game?

1 Bulls 4.0
2 Saders 3.6
3 Tahs 3.5
4 Stormers 3.4
5 Reds 3.0
6 Chiefs 3.0
7 Brumbies 3.0
8 Blues 2.9
9 Canes 2.3
10 Sharks 2.0
11 Highland 1.4
12 Cheetahs 1.3
13 Force 0.7
14 Lions 0.4

 

[Biffo]

I like Lee's table and think it gives as accurate indication as any of the 'real' situation. Points lost is a good way to see it. Possibly a better way to see it would be average points lost or gained per game?

1 Bulls 4.0
2 Saders 3.6
3 Tahs 3.5
4 Stormers 3.4
5 Reds 3.0
6 Chiefs 3.0
7 Brumbies 3.0
8 Blues 2.9
9 Canes 2.3
10 Sharks 2.0
11 Highland 1.4
12 Cheetahs 1.3
13 Force 0.7
14 Lions 0.4

Again, if you adjusted for games played at home and away and against higher- and lower- placed teams, it would be more accurate.

 

[Scotty]

Yep, but I've wasted enough time on it already. It are the games that are to come that are more important, and just about any team could lose to any team, as seen on the weekend.

(Although I seriously doubt that the Cheetahs have any chance of beating the Brumbies.)

 

[Sully]

I think you should get 4 points for the bye then there would be a lot less discussions on the whole thing.

 

[waratahjesus]

I think you should get 4 points for the bye then there would be a lot less discussions on the whole thing.

disagree, you should have to earn points, the fact that you get a free win in the nrl for not playing always seems like a rip to me. it works out in the end and so will the table.

 

[Sully]

what is the difference between a free win and a free loss?

 

[Moses]

I think you should get 4 points for the bye then there would be a lot less discussions on the whole thing.

That would almost double the Force's tally!

 

[waratahjesus]

what is the difference between a free win and a free loss?

points should be earned, its not a free loss, you dont play a game, you shouldnt be rewarded for that. why not just start every team on fifty points and take points off for a loss or add for a win, that way even if you lose every game you will still finish with points.

 

[CanadianRugby]

any chance I can convince to stop refering to Bruce and Lee's table as "real?" The real table is the current Super 14 one with the 'Tahs on top. The others are valid arguments, but they aren't the real table.

Some things that haven't been accounted for in the other tables, like the fact that the Bulls and Stormers have looked a little weaker in recent weeks (though not ACTUALLY weak, but still, not invincible), and as mentioned, home games vs away games etc...

Therefore: Waratahs are 1st. Wouldn't want them any place else. We will see again after this week.