Fuck I love stats – can’t get enough of them.
A rough analysis of the teams from the three nations involved in the Super 14 reveals some interesting stuff.
NZ is the worst performed country in both attack and defence, only scoring a combined team average of 19.8 points per game (P/G) while leaking a combined average of 23.70 P/G. The only indicator where NZ teams on average are out-performing their counterparts is bonus points, averaging 0.90 bonus points per game (BP/G). Interestingly, only once this season has a Nu Zulend team been able to score a bonus point and win the match at the same time.
Seth Efrican teams on average are the best performed attacking units with 26.10 P/G. This result is skewed somewhat due to the Lions v Cheetahs score-a-thon in week one and the Bulls demolition of the Blues from week two. Defensively, the Jappies on average are conceding 21.80 P/G, which is only slightly worse than the Australian team average. On average SA teams are averaging 0.60 BP/G. As no SA teams bar the Cheetahs have travelled yet, I think these results are a little kind and expect the scoring average to drop slightly but the defensive average to increase significantly over the coming weeks.
Where does that leave Australian teams, well, we are averaging only 1 point better than NZ teams in attack with an average of 20.88 P/G however we have the best defensive record of any team only giving up on average 21.38 P/G. On average bonus points are largely consistent with the SA teams with 0.63 BP/G however three out of the five bonus points scored by Australian teams were earned despite losing the game.
What does this mean, not much to be honest however the fact the the NZ teams are able to accrue bonus points while losing matches is an interesting statistic. I guess it means that once they get their travelling out of the way and string some home games, and presumably victories, together, they could be looking good.
I also didn’t expect the SA teams to be as statistically good as they are but, as mentioned, let’s see how they hold up in the coming weeks when they have to travel.
And for our teams, well I guess the lack of scoring is something that is concerning, particularly when viewed along side the P/G conceded. A paltry 27 points scored from the Force and the ‘Tahs in round 2 doesn’t help, neither does the shithouse Reds defence.
|
|
Points For |
Points Against |
Bonus Points |
|
SA Teams Total |
261 |
218 |
6 |
|
average |
26.10 |
21.80 |
0.60 |
|
NZ Teams Total |
198 |
237 |
9 |
|
average |
19.80 |
23.70 |
0.90 |
|
AUST Teams Total |
167 |
171 |
5 |
|
average |
20.88 |
21.38 |
0.63 |
<span class="dsq-postid" data-dsqidentifier="1324 https://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/?p=1324">12 Comments
JC – are you a policy wonk as well?
Good work JC,
Heres some telling stats before the byes make it hard to work out.
Aus 25 points divided by 4 teams = 6 1/4
SA 30 points divided by 5 teams = 6
NZ 21 points divided by 4 teams = 4 1/5
I know it means little when the aussie teams havent met each other yet, but its still good signs. So long as the Australian teams who aren’t making the finals upset the others and not the other Australian teams, i hate when that happens.
On a side note i was reading some SMH opinion peice about kicking where the torpedo was mentioned, along with the drop punt and the gerrard.
Bobas’s last blog post..Nil All, Good For Qualifying, Bad for Spectators.
these are ladder points, 4 for a win + etc.
42.7% of stats are made up on the spot.
I particualrl like the Foxsports story about the Tahs today.
http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,8659,25096054-5002381,00.html
Tahs adopting an Under 11’s attitude to criticism is speaking wonders for the maturity of the club and their concern for the way they play.
The fact they are saying LOOK AT THE SCOREBOARD smacks of arrogance, where in the 2nd game of the round, and depleted Chiefs side, was playing just as badly as the Tahs, and the Tahs feel (by assumption of the way they are carring on) that they can keep winning this way. Dean Mumm, what a fkhead, seriously…
At least the coach has some sense and recognises some sort of problem with the attack through the backline. But correct me if i am wrng, but wasnt it WINNING UGLY that god Link McKenzie fired?
Next thing we know, the tahs when roughed up a bit by a burly Safa pack, will complain to the ref 15 minutes in, and then 20 miutes in take their ball and go home pouting. please….play some fking rugby and stop talking to the press, beucase its quite obvious they lack the sense to give honest self-criticism.
Well said. If the Tahs won the comp playing ugly, people wouldn’t mind so much. Problem is that ugly sides don’t win the comp. They might win most games, maybe make the semis, but they don’t win the comp. What have the great Crusaders, Brumbies and Blues sides that have won the comp all had in common. They played beautifull skillfull attacking football and when they won it was great to watch. Winning ugly might get you into the top 4, but as the Tahs, and history have proved, it won’t win you the S14.
Unless they try and play some better footy they will continue to be nothing more than a good solid footy side with a shot at the semis each year, and the crowds will continue to fall.
Yeah, i guess it has dawned upon me the distinct difference that people have to make.
Winning ugly is doing what is ncessary, in condiditons, against a certain oposition, wth a certain press hyped lead up etc etc…to win the match. It could be an Aussie team for example msucling up to a HEavy forward oriented Sharks outfit, and winning through competitive set piece and field positon..thats winning ugly.
Playing ugly, is what the waratahs did. sure, they won…but winning ugle and playing ugly, differ.
and you are right mark…ugy teams make the top 6 maybe and if lucky get a spot in the finals…but rarely does an ugly team that has to revert to 1980 Schoolboy tactis of say forward hit ups off the 9, maybe 1 in 5 is a hit up off the 10…win a compeittion in this day and age. Seamless teams win….ugly teams just get lucky.
I’ll call you on that, McKenzie was fired for choking. If he had two butt-ugly S14 final wins under his belt he’d be coaching the Wallabies, not teaching pink mungos the subtle art of falling just short.
actually Patrick you know what, i think you are right to a certain extent. lets remember though in his final season…McKenzie was fired BEFORE the S14 Final…even before the semis…so you cant be completely correct…i think STYLE had a lot to do with his dismissal.
Choking….although what amaazes me more is…that they had a chance to choke in the first place. the wya they have played some of their games…they shouldnt have been in the finals.
Agreed the Tahs performance wasn’t a ‘gritty 10 man style’ but rather a clusterfuck.
However, this does feel like deja vu from last year when the Tahs were a frikken mess until about half way through the comp and then played some decent footy.
What’s interesting is why it goes so shapeless for the Tahs. I reckon it all unfairly rests on Beale’s shoulders. Without anyone else with a Scooby Doo inside or outside him, if he has a shocker (or gets injured like last years final) then there’s no-one to call the shots.
That’s the frailty you can’t win a comp with.
i want to see halanagahu get a chance. I think beale is there at the moment on individual skill and NOT ability to play 10 in that Tahs team. his cohesion with that team i dont think is as solid as it should be. but Meh, they;re the tahs…who gives a fuck.
If you like stats then look at the Brumbies Crusaders match. Brumbies held the ball for 9 phases to score the first try and 11 phases to score the winning try. All the talk is about The crusaders defence but how many teams have done that to the Crusaders in the past. Fact, Stats dont mean shit, the Crusaders and Brumbies are two of the more favoured teams and that game was far from free flowing but was a cracker any way. Some times you have to win ugly.
Are the Brumbies going back to the keepings-off game of Rod Macqueen perhaps?