Interesting facts about Super XV over the past two years.

Two regular season have come and gone. Time to pull out the calculators and statistics to see which teams are making the grade and which aren't.

First up, lets look at the total log points earned by each team over the past two seasons and see who has made the grade.

TOTAL LOG POINTS EARNED TWO SEASONS

Spoiler:

Not much to say here, but further investigation is necessary.


TEAM SCORING MORE POINTS OUTSIDE THEIR CONFERENCES

Spoiler:

This talbe shows which teams are gaining more points outside their conference and whether they in fact gain from touring teams and touring themselves. What is surprisingly clear on this table is that only 6 teams are gaining more points outside of their conference, with the Cheetahs by far the leader on this log, ahead of the Hurricanes, Chiefs, Blues and Sharks.

This log belies the fact that the cheetahs are a poor team when travelling or entertaining touring teams.

MOST POINTS CONFERENCE MATCHES

Spoiler:

The breakdown of each individual conference shows the New Zealand conference spread over two years is by far the most even, split by only 19 log points from the crusaders to the Blues. The South African conference shows a 43 points spread from the stormers who have only lot 2 conference matches in two seasons to the cheetahs who have only won 2 matches in two seasons.

The Australian conference shows a similar trend to the South African one with a points spread of 35 points.

MOST POINTS TOURIST MATCHES

Spoiler:

The big winners.
The sharks are the big movers, moving from 6th place on conference log to number one touring team, the Cheetahs move from 15th place in conference log points earned to 8th place in touring match success.The Chiefs move from 9th position in conference points to 5th in touring match log points earned.

The big losers.
The Waratahs drop from 5th in conference log points to 12th in touring success, whilst the Brumbies drop 4 places.

Summary.
There is a misperception that the cheetahs are easybeats, for some reason their conference statistics bely their abilities as they have shown over the past two seasons that although they may be free points to the SA team, they are by no means easy beats for the others, the Sharks have rightfully earned a play off spot in both years, inspite of coming having only a 59% win rate in their conference.

Overall this confirms that the NZ teams are closer matched in quality, however on the road, that reality is shared by 4 South African teams. Sadly the oppositie is true for the australian teams bar the Reds.

Did the chiefs really play that badly last year. Because their total points and their points this year is very close.

Fern, it seems I. Stuffed up somewhere, will have to check everyone's figures.

Fixed, my apologies

Over the years not just the last two,The Rebels,The Force,Cheetahs,Lions and Highlanders have been poor fighting for the bottom spot.The Conference system
means there are a lot of easy points in the Australian conference.When Eddie Jones says Australia can only sustain at best 3 teams maybe it is time to listen.The thing about Super rugby if you take teams lightly you can come unstuck.The Bulls in there prime took the Lions lightly and lost,Highlanders were the first side to beat the Bulls home and away.The Crusaders last year were amazing every match an away fixture,a load of key players missing and still making the Final.Beating both the Sharks and Stormers away they seldom miss the knock out stages no matter how badly they start.THAT is consistency.

Not so sure of the conclusions drawn from this biltong. The reason the cheetahs figure so highly in the away from conference results is because their derby results are so much poorer than most. Their actual aways arent so out of step with others, certainly not near the top.

What it highlights for me is the strength rather than evenness of the nz sides. You have to count to five from the bottom to even arrive at a nz side in any of the tables and in the away vs derbys nz sides have all five in the top seven. An incredible statistic.

What that infers is as well as all nz sides winning a higher pc of away matches they are assisting the oz and sa sides on the table by beating eachother in home derbys.

By not having two habitual bottom dwellers it works twofold against our conference. We dont get to play the lions twice as SA sides do, and we get to play, say the saders twice, or the chiefs twice. .Something SA and oz dont need to do. The conference system would work better if there were three nz like conferences. Or three SA like conferences etc. But the way it is now it suits perfectly a 3 good...2 poor side conference.

Not sure I fully agree with you taylorman.

The Cheetahs are well entrenched in the mid table when it comes to overseas teams, in fact they have been more successful than two NZ franchises.

The Sharks only have a 59% win rate in their conference of the past two years and have qualified both years by virtue of being the team that has scored the most log points outside of their conference.

The Stormers have won 14/16 derby matches, but are still third when it comes to non derby matches.

So in my view you need to compare the two.

How did a team do inside his conference and how did he do outside of his conference, which provides a more accurate reflection.

If you compare the second table which in my view is the more important one here.

Each team played 16 conference matches and 16 non conference matches.

The Cheetahs showed that although they struggle to be top of their conference, they are 28/2 = 14 log points better when compared to the non conference Franchises.

The Hurricanes, Chiefs and Blues show the same trend which you would expect from the strongest conference.

I think it shows that it shows that the Cheetahs is stronger than what their conference matches indicate.

I really think that if the Cheetahs played in the Australian conference they might of had a chance at the play off this year.

The struggle with the same things the Aussies struggle with. Look at this weekends game, when Brussouw got injured there was no one else to slow the ball down and the Sharks just ran rampant after that. When Goosen got injured, they almost fell out of the race against the Brumbies after they were ahead by 3 tries. They don't really have the depth the other SA franchises have which I think is the same with most of the Aussie teams.

I also think that is why the Reds are lower this year. But with all their players back, I would not be surprised if they win the whole thing.

Yes I agree Goosen has been their catalyst this season, but not having Coenie for the latter part also made a difference.

But you rightly said, the Cheetahs don't have depth, how can they when their squad is milked every year.

In sitting back and looking at it more SA and NZ are actually very similar in the conference make up. The issues are still more around the who plays who, and perhaps more importantly who doesnt play who.

To make up for it they could make the playoffs eight and make it simply the first 8. If teams miss out...tough, they lose the revenue and have to ensure they fight for it the following year.

Correct, SANZAR might as well have extended the tournament by two weeks.

Consider this

Stormers didn't play Chiefs and Brumbies
Chiefs didn't play Stormers and Rebels
Sharks didn't play Crusaders and Rebels
Crusaders didn't play Sharks and Brumbies
Bulls didn't play Hurricanes and Force
Reds didn't play Hurricanes and Cheetahs
Brumbies didn't play Stormers and Crusaders
Hurricanes didn't play Bulls and Reds
Highlanders didn't play Force and Lions.

Yes interesting. From that you could say the Brumbies and to an extent Canes were lucky they got as far as they did, not having to play two qualifiers.

Similarly the Highlanders are the unluckiest of the list not playing two anywhere near qualifying.

The Bulls and Reds also did it a bit tough, missing out on playing two non qualifiers.
The rest did ok generally not playing one in and one out.

So overall, the teams that got through deserved it in the end, SA doing well to clinch 3. Your earlier comments about the Cheetahs certainly assists the SA teams here- losing to practically everyone in the derbys then having an above average team on away matches- taking away the Oz and NZ points.

I think theyre the main reason SA nabbed the third team- a perfect side to have in your conference!

Well done Biltong...a good read...

I don't like this conference system. But I hate to admit that the derbies have come up with some cracking matches. This unfortunately will only succeed in convincing SANZAR that the higher gate takings and increased viewers are a sign that the conference system is the way to go. Because it is a deeply flawed system in my view. The Hurricanes are the victims this year but there will be others next year as well.

Still, a good read Biltong nonetheless. I find the Cheetah's record away the most surprising. No wonder my picks this year were so rubbish with teams like that! It took me six rounds to realise that the Brumbies' rag tag fugitive side were the pick of the aussie franchises!

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:. It took me six rounds to realise that the Brumbies' rag tag fugitive side were the pick of the aussie franchises!

...and another ten rounds to find out that they werent,. Weird alright.
Reds as last qualifiers getting a home match is a joke.

As reunion pointed out its also weird that the stormers topped the table with 14 out of 16 wins yet not one four try bonus.

What if they needed one in the last round to top the table? ...not pretty..
I think kia somethings brewing at the saders and they'a lot to make up for. Last years loss, poor form lately.

I'm thinking they might unleash something big next couple of weeks.

Not sure there is a valid reason to question why the Stormers are leading the log.

Why?

Because they didn't score 4 trybonus points?

They did that three times last year and didn't finish first, this year they won enough matches to lead.

Sure it is pretty pedestrian rugby, but no reason to question the validity of their position.

I think the stats prove that the conference system is a little unfair on NZ esp. This year NZ sides have played SA sides 20 times in total and won 13, lost 7... yet SA have 3 sides in the top 6, to NZ 2.

It is clear however that the stormers deserve to be on top however and the bulls & the sharks are also very strong. In NZ however there are probably 4 very competitive sides which means the conference system is a little weighted to those with less competitive games... i.e. AUS and to a minor extent SA.

In terms of the Stormers, I think people should appreciate that we have missed perhaps 2 full backrows near all season due to injuries... its really messed with our continuity and made scoring more difficult.

Schalk, Vermuleun & Koster (our 1st choice backrow) have been out for either the entire or 3/4 of the season. Then add a host of other injuries to our back up backrow and it sort of shows what we've been up against.

At the moment we've been playing Kolisi & Elstadt at 6 & 7. Both big tacklers but neither prolific on the floor to match Schalk & Vermuleun.... if we had those guys back we would certainly have scored more tries.

We lost 2 matches all season, 1 away to the Sharks and 1 away to the crusaders. 9 wins from 10 in the SA conference is not to be sniffed at... and 5/6 to AUS/NZ sides proves we can win both at home or away.

FA it is actually 7 in the SA conference and 7 with cross conference matches.

sorry yes.... not sure why I thought it was 10 matches... I'm just a palestine!

biltongbek wrote:Not sure there is a valid reason to question why the Stormers are leading the log.

Why?

Because they didn't score 4 trybonus points?

They did that three times last year and didn't finish first, this year they won enough matches to lead.

Sure it is pretty pedestrian rugby, but no reason to question the validity of their position.

Wasnt questioning the validity of the position. Was raising the point that given the superxv is well known for its fast, open rugby that the table topper can't manage four tries in a single match out of 16, 14 that were won, where the were teams screaming out to have at least four tries against them at the bottom.

3 tries is at best 2 in one half and one in the other- for the entire 16 matches...incredible.

It does reflect the standard of SA rugby in terms of a lack of an attacking, or more accurately, try scoring focus, and why they are unable to dominate at test level, having soooo, so many matches all won with unconvincing scorelines and why it only takes a little thing to go wrong here or there, and it all falls to pieces.

The very best teams should put bottom teams away, bury them completely- at least ONCE in a season...

But its true..it does show the usual dogged determination, the ability to defend and win matches (regardless of the opposition).

I suppose I just wonder if thats enough when theres more out there on the field for them.

Ok, sorry misunderstood then.

Yes I think it should concern Allistair Coetzee that they aren't hungry enough to put teams away, I was watching them Saturday (admittedly drifting off every now and then) and wondered why they never put the foot down, they went into a lead of 16-0 then fell asleep until the Rebels were 2 points behind, then immediately went and scored only to find the lull until the Rebels scored again, then quickly woke up to start playing for the win.

But we have discussed this before, the "old guard" had this dogged determination and unwavering belief they could win by defensive rugby, and JDV in my view needs to go. He has no inclination to show a hunger to pulverise a team, was that a youngster that lead the team, at 16 points ahead they would put the throttle down.

In looking at it again, this is one of the most astounding records I've ever seen. Along with the 11 (!) sides that scored more points than the Stormers.

In 2012 there were 57 bonus points for four tries- ALL the remaining 14 teams team got at least 2, including the bottom dwellers.

The next 7 placed teams got at LEAST 4 four try bonus points- one got 8.

In 2011 of the 56 four try bonus points only the Force got none, the rest at least 2 each.

In 2010 of the 57- ALL got at least one.

So for Stormers to win 14 and top the league and not get a single 4 try bonus of the 57 handed out and scoring less points than 11 other teams defies logic...

Defense is truly all they have...Amazing...

Sorry Biltong they couldnt put the throttle down because...they simply dont have one in the car.

Not really Taylor
Defence wins games as much as attack.
The Crusaders have almost always built pressure on the basis of excellent defence and then taken opportunities when their defence has created turnovers etc.
I've never seen them as attack kings like the Hurricane's and the Blues of old.
Losing costs you four points but scoring 4 tries only gives you one point.

Are the stormers the new bulls? Who is (that's for you kia) their D coach? And should he be in the bok set up? Amazing stat really, good on them.

I thought it was an interesting decision by the SANZAR judiciary to decide that to be suspended for a semi final was a much bigger penalty than being suspended for a couple of games in pool play. hence Quade was suspended for only one week, oh and also they took into account his "unblemished" record.??????? how can a competition that does a lot of things right, turn round every now and then and blank range, blow their feet off.

nganboy wrote:Not really Taylor
Defence wins games as much as attack.
The Crusaders have almost always built pressure on the basis of excellent defence and then taken opportunities when their defence has created turnovers etc.
I've never seen them as attack kings like the Hurricane's and the Blues of old.
Losing costs you four points but scoring 4 tries only gives you one point.

Well I wouldnt quite say defence wins 'as much games as attack' but I know what you mean.

Not having a go at the Stormers but whether by good fortune or injuries etc to be as dominant on the table, without scoring many tries, and without having any match results swing in the same wild manner as every other teams (not looking at the Blues or Reds at all mind you) its still an incredible statistic, one well worth considering by any team looking to play them over the next two weeks.

basically if you dont crack that defence youre going to lose...but if you do crack it and score tries, theyre not likely to come back very quickly...if at all.

EBOP wrote:Are the stormers the new bulls? Who is (that's for you kia) their D coach? And should he be in the bok set up? Amazing stat really, good on them.

Stormers have always been strong in defence. Got them to finals recently. They just havnt been able to put the points on the board to win the finals. Theyre actually quite amazing these two teams, how theyve managed to keep almost the identical modus operandi for so many seasons...