Super Rugby AU Team of the Week

[dru]

Who knows, maybe rugby fans could be "voting for" the players they reckon are best, even if they're not from the franchise with which they are aligned? Maybe not accounting for the odd skew that so few Brumbies are in the cumulative team, but this process does not necessarily reward the best "team", and take into account the best drilled playing group, maybe.
I like it, for what it is.

And for the end of season cumulative vote, please pick a system and let it be just one.

 

[KOB1987]

And for the end of season cumulative vote, please pick a system and let it be just one.

Yes, that was decided to be the votes for the final 5 rounds, adjusted so that each week is worth the same towards the total. Happy to share the spreadsheet with a couple of scrutineers.

 

[Wilson]

But I do think the small representation of the Brumbies is more complicated than the one poorer performance against the Rebels. It more likely, imo, reflects a smaller voting population among Brumbies fans. You might be able to confirm that. So, if t8hree Brumbies fans vote for Sio, for example, and eight Rebels fans vote for Orr, then there is some skew in the result possibly reflecting team bias rather than indicating superior performance. Same could be said for other positions like Maddocks tallying fewer votes than Campbell (just an example).

Is there some way to correct for differences in team's supporters? Maybe some sort of average over the number of inputs from supporters from each of the five teams?

Which Brumbies do you think have missed out because of individual bias?

 

[Sully]

The team does seem light on Brumbies.

 

[Merrow]

Champion team, not a team of champions

 

[Sully]

Champion team, not a team of champions

And which do we want?

 

[Merrow]

A team that wins.

 

[Wilson]

The team does seem light on Brumbies.

I don't disagree, I'm just not convinced it's due to bias

 

[Brumby Runner]

Who knows, maybe rugby fans could be "voting for" the players they reckon are best, even if they're not from the franchise with which they are aligned? Maybe not accounting for the odd skew that so few Brumbies are in the cumulative team, but this process does not necessarily reward the best "team", and take into account the best drilled playing group, maybe.
I like it, for what it is.

I like it too, and have participated from the start. I just think there is an obvious flaw when the team that dominated the competition has so few players in the Team of the year. Over the duration of the competition, it would be reasonable to think that the best team would also reflect in probably the most players. Would anyone suggest, for example, that the Crusaders would only earn one starter and a couple of benchies in a similar exercise in SRAO?

KOB has undertaken to do some sort of analysis after the last game, but I'm not really suggesting he should do so. I hope this little selection exercise will continue next year, but to recognise that there appears to be an anomaly in the way the votes contributed this year and look to make some way of balancing out the differences in voters support. It would have more integrity if that is possible.

Just for clarity, I really don't think there is any possibility that fans have always voted for the players they reckon are best. It is just human nature for us to favour the players from the franchise we support, and that could be telling when there is little between individual performances.

 

[Brumby Runner]

I don't disagree, I'm just not convinced it's due to bias

What then? Surely nobody would suggest Tom Wright is the only Brumby worthy of a spot in the TOTY when the team itself dominated the series.

Others who probably should have earnt a spot would include Fainga'a, where no hooker actually stood out head and shoulders above the others; Slipper who was a model of consistency over the series; and Simone who really was a standout No 12 during the whole of the tournament. I accept that players like Neville, Samu, Lolesio, Banks were either missing for a swathe of the series or out of form for some part and wouldn't get a spot based on overall performances in the series, but it beggars belief that only Wright made the team. Clear as day to me that there are too few Brumbies supporters voting against the bigger numbers particularly from the Reds.

 

[Wilson]

What then? Surely nobody would suggest Tom Wright is the only Brumby worthy of a spot in the TOTY when the team itself dominated the series.

Others who probably should have earnt a spot would include Fainga'a, where no hooker actually stood out head and shoulders above the others; Slipper who was a model of consistency over the series; and Simone who really was a standout No 12 during the whole of the tournament. I accept that players like Neville, Samu, Lolesio, Banks were either missing for a swathe of the series or out of form for some part and wouldn't get a spot based on overall performances in the series, but it beggars belief that only Wright made the team. Clear as day to me that there are too few Brumbies supporters voting against the bigger numbers particularly from the Reds.

I'm not arguing there shouldn't be more Brumbies in a team of the season, just that it's not because of bias that they're not in this team. It's a cumulative team, based on the teams of the week for past 5 rounds - it naturally favours standout performers over consistency and that doesn't have anything to do with supporter bias.

Of the players you've mentioned:

Folau Faianga'a - Played 3 of those games, one from the bench, one the thrashing against the rebels. (you only selected him for one of those 3 games in your ToTWm favouring Horton and BPA, with Uelese getting no starts but two bench appearances)

Irae Simone - Played well and made the overall bench, lost out to To'omua who has been one of the Rebels best. (You favoured Simone 3-2, but had To'omua in the side whenever he played, Simone was not on your bench the week you didn't pick him to start)

Slipper (and Sio) - The job sharing at loose head for the Brumbies makes it harder for either of these two to stand out as they don't tend to play more than half a game and they trade the start (You had Orr on equal footing with Slipper - one start, one bench each)

I'm not certain on KOB's weighting for starting vs bench, but even if the side was picked on your votes alone it doesn't look like those brumbies would necessarily be favoured, and as a side that could be considered to be exhibiting much more obvious supporter bias than the one you're complaining about.

I'm not doubting that we all vote with some degree of bias, I just don't think it has as great an impact on selections here as you're claiming.

 

[Up the Guts]

More of a factor than perceived biases of the posters is the Brumbies resting half their team the last two weeks and chop changing of the front row and back row throughout the season.

A good example would be McIenerny who has been in the 23 the past two weeks but didn’t get a start before that.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Wilson, you're probably spot on with your explanations. Brumbies players probably suffered by being part of arguably the strongest roster which allowed them to play fewer games generally and to share time on the field moreso than the opposition sides. I will bow out now and just once more congratulate KOB on a mighty fine effort compiling the teams each week.

 

[dru]

I'm not arguing there shouldn't be more Brumbies in a team of the season, just that it's not because of bias that they're not in this team. It's a cumulative team, based on the teams of the week for past 5 rounds - it naturally favours standout performers over consistency and that doesn't have anything to do with supporter bias.

Of the players you've mentioned:

Folau Faianga'a - Played 3 of those games, one from the bench, one the thrashing against the rebels. (you only selected him for one of those 3 games in your ToTWm favouring Horton and BPA, with Uelese getting no starts but two bench appearances)

Irae Simone - Played well and made the overall bench, lost out to To'omua who has been one of the Rebels best. (You favoured Simone 3-2, but had To'omua in the side whenever he played, Simone was not on your bench the week you didn't pick him to start)

Slipper (and Sio) - The job sharing at loose head for the Brumbies makes it harder for either of these two to stand out as they don't tend to play more than half a game and they trade the start (You had Orr on equal footing with Slipper - one start, one bench each)

I'm not certain on KOB's weighting for starting vs bench, but even if the side was picked on your votes alone it doesn't look like those brumbies would necessarily be favoured, and as a side that could be considered to be exhibiting much more obvious supporter bias than the one you're complaining about.

I'm not doubting that we all vote with some degree of bias, I just don't think it has as great an impact on selections here as you're claiming.

+1 across the whole post. You saved me having to draft something.

I guess part of the bias is that most fans will be intricately aware of the individuals from 1 through 23 in their home team. Less so elsewhere. While it is surprising that the form team is not better represented, there area rationales available for most of the obvious queries.

It also says something important about the coaching, and I suspect the Ben Darwin theories.

 

[KOB1987]

Certainly the rotation/resting has affected the Brumbies with an exercise like this. That said, even if you look at the ‘B’ team that I posted is there a consistent performer from the Brumbies best that just has to be picked for the Wallabies? Possibly Slipper. Obviously more will be, and rightly so, but there hasn’t been a standout for the Brumbies like there has been from the other teams.

Reds: JOC (James O'Connor), Tupou, Petaia, McDermott, Wright, LSL (Lukhan Salakaia-Loto)
Tahs: Hooper, Maddocks, Dempsey, HJH (Harry Johnson-Holmes), Gordon
Rebels: Uelese, Phillip, To'omua, Koroibete

It’s definitely the team dynamic for the Brumbies

 

[Froggy]

Another issue here is inconsistency.
Let's say Maddocks has three blinders and two shockers, and makes TOTW three times, but would probably rate last among 15's for the other two weeks. Hodge has a big game one week and makes TOTW once. Then, say Banks makes TOTW once, and is second best among the 15's for every other week. Obviously, Maddocks gets the gig on three number ones, but you could quite fairly argue that Banks was consistently the best performer, which is why something like TOTW is highly entertaining, but not necessarily the ultimate selection tool.
That, with a number of the Brumbies best playing less games than those in other teams in their positions, and you could easily explain the Brumbies being the dominant team but with few in the cumulative TOTW.

 

[KOB1987]

Another issue here is inconsistency.
Let's say Maddocks has three blinders and two shockers, and makes TOTW three times, but would probably rate last among 15's for the other two weeks. Hodge has a big game one week and makes TOTW once. Then, say Banks makes TOTW once, and is second best among the 15's for every other week. Obviously, Maddocks gets the gig on three number ones, but you could quite fairly argue that Banks was consistently the best performer, which is why something like TOTW is highly entertaining, but not necessarily the ultimate selection tool.
That, with a number of the Brumbies best playing less games than those in other teams in their positions, and you could easily explain the Brumbies being the dominant team but with few in the cumulative TOTW.

I can tell you that hasn't happened though. Even so, it's accounted for in the scoring by giving the also ran half a point. Ironically the biggest victim of the scoring system has been Hooper, he's been on a lot of benches. If someone is to fall victim to the scenario you outline it will be him.

 

[KOB1987]

Footnote: the Brumbies actually aren’t the form team, the Reds are.

 

[Wilson]

I can tell you that hasn't happened though. Even so, it's accounted for in the scoring by giving the also ran half a point. Ironically the biggest victim of the scoring system has been Hooper, he's been on a lot of benches. If someone is to fall victim to the scenario you outline it will be him.

I was thinking Ala'alatoa had it particularly bad, given Tupou has been so dominant and his/the reds worst game was against the tahs/HJH (Harry Johnson-Holmes), the only other contender for tighthead.

 

[Dctarget]

1. Hoopert - not a night for loosies, Orr wasn't bad except he had 1/3 tackles which is shocking.
2. Ready - big game from the big, big man.
3. Tupou
4. Philip - makes metres a backrow would be proud of.
5. LSL (Lukhan Salakaia-Loto)
6. Wright - 17/17 tackles with a great attacking game. HM to FLW (Fergus Lee-Warner)
7. McReight
8. Samu - surprised to see only 2 runs (Higgers 2.0?)
9. Tate
10. JO'C
11. Daugunu - 14 runs, 113m run metres, 5 defenders beaten, 2 clean breaks, 3 offloads and 8/9 tackles. Close to MotR
12. Taefu gets in with no other ICs covering themselves in glory.
13. Petaia
14. CFS
15. Campbell
16. Uelese
17. Orr
18. Ainsley
19. Blyth
20. FLW (Fergus Lee-Warner)
21. Lomani
22. To'omua
23. DHP