Points spread per opponent this coming weekend

First topic message reminder :

The fixtures this coming weekend might be a lot closer than many think. In fact looking at Argentina and South Africa, they are both on the wrong side of the ledger when you look at the average scores of their previous four meetings against their respective opponents for Saturday.

Here is a list of the last 4 meetings between each of these teams, I know I could go 10 matches 6 matches or whatever, but in all honesty if you go back too far you will find many of the players 10 matches or even 6 matches ago aren't playing this coming weekend.

Anyhow, this will give you an idea how close the teams are matched.


Scotland vs Argentina
Argentina 16 – 24 Scotland
Argentina 9 – 13 Scotland
Argentina 13 – 12 Scotland
Argentina 19 – 21 Scotland

Average score Argentina 14.25 – 17.5 Scotland

Wales vs Australia
Wales 23 – 25 Australia
Wales 19 – 21 Australia
Wales 12 – 14 Australia
Wales 26 – 30 Australia

Average score Wales 20.25 – 22.5 Australia

Ireland vs South Africa
Ireland 32 – 15 South Africa
Ireland 15 – 10 South Africa
Ireland 21 – 23 South Africa
Ireland 12 – 16 South Africa

Average score Ireland 20 – 16 South Africa

England vs New Zealand
England 22 – 30 New Zealand
England 15 – 20 New Zealand
England 27 – 28 New Zealand
England 13 – 36 New Zealand

Average score England 19.25 – 28.5 New Zealand

beshocked wrote:Not saying you are cowards but to use a boxing analogy it's like a boxer just fighting in their home country and not venturing out to fight one of the best fighters in the world on their home patch. Or a boxer not fighting one of the toughest fighters to keep their record respectable.

You can speculate whether it's cowardice, not big enough pay day etc. To be honest I don't know why Ireland are avoiding SA but they are.

I just find it interesting and strange that Ireland haven't played SA in SA since 2004.

The relevance to this thread is that it gives Ireland a very flattering points spread and record vs SA which doesn't tell the whole story.

It's like a boxer choosing to fight the best fighter in the world instead of the 2nd best,you see we have played NZ away from home plenty so why would we be avoiding S.A.

SecretFly wrote:Play us in South Africa, Bilt!!!  Don't be hiding.  We demand a few games in the heat and beaches part of the world now!

I fear there isn't enough factor 100 sun creams in SA to cater for the travelling players and fans! You know how hot it gets here during the SA winter after all.

asoreleftshoulder I don't know why you're not playing SA in SA.

If England and Wales can play SA in SA then why can't the Irish?

SecretFly wrote:Play us in South Africa, Bilt!!!  Don't be hiding.  We demand a few games in the heat and beaches part of the world now!

Sorry, no can do, we don't like losing at home

beshocked wrote:asoreleftshoulder I don't know why you're not playing SA in SA.

If England and Wales can play SA in SA then why can't the Irish?

I don't know either,I'm just pointing out that it's ridiculous to claim we're avoiding the Boks in the hopes of having a better record against them.Surely we'd avoid NZ if we were doing that sort of thing.

beshocked wrote:asoreleftshoulder I don't know why you're not playing SA in SA.

If England and Wales can play SA in SA then why can't the Irish?

It is very interesting how they have never toured SA since 2004.

Since then we have seen

14 tests - AUS
13 tests - NZ
05 tests - England
04 tests - France, Argentina, Italy, Scotland & Wales
02 tests - Samoa

Since then Ireland have toured NZ four times, AUS three times and Argentina twice.

So?????????

as in the answer is still out there...and what is it?  

Which of us know the answer?  But 7&1/2's idea on it is as legitmate as Bilt's or Beshocked's.  Maybe SA doesn't rate us and feel we wouldn't draw a sufficient audience down there?
Maybe there are more Scot, Welsh and English ex-pats down there that encourages the SAs to play against these nations over and over and over again?
Maybe the Irish don't travel well?
Maybe they don't like having us?

Fao,I did`nt bring up the injury thing you did but Woodcock,Romano,Carter,Nonu,Retalick,
Crockett,had it been for the RC Cruden would have started.The first 4 fully fit were starters
that does`nt detract from a brilliant Bok win.

As to last minute home decisions Boks over the years have had there fair share too in
recent years too.Joubert was considered best Ref in the world before RWC Final,and just
maybe knew the laws better than the arm chair critics.

Or the ref that officiated the Bok-Aus quarter finals the Boks were robbed according to some
or France in the 1995 SF.Or Wayne Barnes in 1997 we all thing we know better.

SecretFly wrote:So?????????

as in the answer is still out there...and what is it?  

Which of us know the answer?  But 7&1/2's idea on it is as legitmate as Bilt's or Beshocked's.  Maybe SA doesn't rate us and feel we wouldn't draw a sufficient audience down there?
Maybe there are more Scot, Welsh and English ex-pats down there that encourages the SAs to play against these nations over and over and over again?
Maybe the Irish don't travel well?
Maybe they don't like having us?

I don't have any assumption on why they don't meet in SA only that they don't.

What you said would hold more merit if Samoa, France, Italy didn't tour here over the last decade (10 test matches combined). They don't have much of a community in SA.

It could be scheduling but I think its Ireland's loss not testing themselves in the green jersey in SA for whatever reason, whoever's fault.

emack2 wrote:Fao,I did`nt bring up the injury thing you did but Woodcock,Romano,Carter,Nonu,Retalick,
Crockett,had it been for the RC Cruden would have started.The first 4 fully fit were starters
that does`nt detract from a brilliant Bok win.

As to last minute home decisions Boks over the years have had there fair share too in
recent years too.Joubert was considered best Ref in the world before RWC Final,and just
maybe knew the laws better than the arm chair critics.

Or the ref that officiated the Bok-Aus quarter finals the Boks were robbed according to some
or France in the 1995 SF.Or Wayne Barnes in 1997 we all thing we know better.

You'd have to find a very brave person who doesn't think that in the 3 games you mentioned the refereeing was poor.

fa0019 wrote: its Ireland's loss not testing themselves in the green jersey in SA for whatever reason, whoever's fault.

Funny that you should actually stumble on what might actually - ironically and weirdly - be the very issue, FA. There was some genuine talk a few years ago that it might come down to that very point of when a Green shirt should be allowed to be a green shirt.

Now if true, wouldn't that be something - that's it's a dispute about a colour that has delayed Ireland's return to SA? Weird but certainly mentioned in the past.

SecretFly wrote:

fa0019 wrote:  its Ireland's loss not testing themselves in the green jersey in SA for whatever reason, whoever's fault.

Funny that you should actually stumble on what might actually - ironically and weirdly - be the very issue, FA.  There was some genuine talk a few years ago that it might come down to that very point of when a Green shirt should be allowed to be a green shirt.

Now if true, wouldn't that be something - that's it's a dispute about a colour that has delayed Ireland's return to SA?  Weird but certainly mentioned in the past.

What's the big deal?

away side wear's the away strip, home side wear's the home strip or vice versa.... or coin toss.

Do the clothes make the man? Whoever seriously mentioned this in negotiations on either side is a tool and probably never wore the jersey themselves on the field.

Oh I agree that the colour of a shirt shouldn't be an issue serious enough to delay Ireland playing in SA.  
But I keep repeating, SA have been very silent on an issue that Ireland seem to be taking most flak for.  

So it seems to me that if SA felt it was a dumb issue, and Ireland were being needlessly and childishly stubborn, they'd make a toy of it to throw across Ireland's bow every so often in interviews to see us squirm.  But no....nothing.  That suggests to me that if the battle is a shirt-colour one, the ones being 'sensitive' about that colour is the Home town boys, and they're not all that interested in declaring it publically.

That's only IF it's a colour scheme battle that is causing the no-show by Ireland of course.  I'd hope very much that the real reason is a bit more worthy of both sides

Fao lets face it injuries and refs decisions are things you can`t change incidentally in
Wellington.Whitelock,Messam,andKaino were missing.

But players on the field sometimes take the wrong decisions through naivety or lack of experience.
Examples in Wellington SA turned down kickable penalties going for 7 instead and it failed
at Ellis Park NZ did the same in reverse in both cases it may have cost the game.

In 2007 an experienced captain would have set up a dropped goal attempt earlier SA,
France,Argentina,England would have.BUT it had gone out of the NZ game even with
Evans and Carter off injured.

The Humble dropped goal once a prized skill has gone out of the NZ game despite the
examples of 1995,1999,2003,2007 where many crucial games were won by it.

In 2003 it may have been an intercept was the crucial score but the 5 penalties also
had something to do with it.We`ve all shouted Ref should have gone to Spec savers
when we lost.Just watched the Aus v Baa Baas match and several tries allowed or
not were split second decisions before the tmo pity the ref.

Home sides always get the 50/50 calls

Home sides do get 50/50 calls, but in our case it was an act of God, eh?

SecretFly wrote:Oh I agree that the colour of a shirt shouldn't be an issue serious enough to delay Ireland playing in SA.  
But I keep repeating, SA have been very silent on an issue that Ireland seem to be taking most flak for.  

So it seems to me that if SA felt it was a dumb issue, and Ireland were being needlessly and childishly stubborn, they'd make a toy of it to throw across Ireland's bow every so often in interviews to see us squirm.  But no....nothing.  That suggests to me that if the battle is a shirt-colour one, the ones being 'sensitive' about that colour is the Home town boys, and they're not all that interested in declaring it publically.

That's only IF it's a colour scheme battle that is causing the no-show by Ireland of course.  I'd hope very much that the real reason is a bit more worthy of both sides

BUt they don't seem to have a problem in Ireland so what's the problem?

SA have recently played in white vs. Scotland at home.

In 2010 SA beat Ireland 23-21 in Ireland. They played in away white. In 2012 SA beat Ireland 16-12 in Ireland, this time Ireland played in away black.

Looked like they were swapping the away jerseys by match.

Not sure why it would be an issue in SA.

We also played in white the laaaaaaaaaaaaassst time Ireland played in SA

Not saying it is..just said it was a story doing the rounds a few years back. Like I said, I'd expect more from both sides than for that to be the issue. But anyway, the issue is over now when we play there in 2016. I'm sure there'll be journalistic speculation again about the long wait when that time comes up. That'll be entertaining

Biltong wrote:We also played in white the laaaaaaaaaaaaassst time Ireland played in SA

White is worse than Green! That's a real red flag to an Irish bull!

SecretFly wrote:

Biltong wrote:We also played in white the laaaaaaaaaaaaassst time Ireland played in SA

White is worse than Green!  That's a real red flag to an Irish bull!

Not necessarily a great thing given England have beaten you 4 times on the bounce. Too much passion perhaps?

That's because I jest about the White, FA. It's caricature and nice to use when you're playing with colour,

Yeah, 4 wins on the bounce. What can you say. Done and dusted four times. The future is out there. We're getting over our Red Flag (Worst Colour Red) Wales period and we'll be back concentrating on White again in time

...IF we survive the ERCC purge

Currently on one of the betting exchanges;

Argentina are -1 = Sounds fair considering they have a good RC, facing the top sides more regularly, getting more game time together. Scotland also have to bed in a new coach.

South Africa are -7 = Sounds fair considering they pushed NZ so close recently and Ireland have holes and injury concerns in front row, second row, centres and fullback

New Zealand are -9 = This actually feels a little high for me, England are at HQ and it could be a tight enough affair. I would have thought NZ by 3-5 would be the range. There must be a lot of english money going on emotional hedges?

France are -27 = This sounds crazy. Have people not seen France recently? Unless clubs are preventing fijians from assembling a proper matchday squad this should at most be a 12-15 margin for France.

Australia are -3 = Seems fair. These games have been very close recently.

Hi,Biltong if the circumstances of the penalty award wasn't an act of God,they were
certainly unique.I doubt they will happen again is what mean`t the win was well deserved
the penalty right but debatable.

It`s conversion was a brilliant act under pressure and would probably not have succeed
at sea level.

Don`t usually do predictions but NZ by 5-10,Wales v Aus 5 points either way,SA by 5.
BUT Ireland have always been underated and have 3 Bok scalps on there beltin the past.

Nothing unique about it Alan, it has happened many times where the host broadcaster show replays of preceding play.

However we have discussed the situation to death on here, so I am not going to rehash the same conversation.

It happened and it won't be the last time.

TobyBryant wrote:I read that England usually receive three times their average number of penalties at home at twickenham and only 1/10th of their yellow cards. Unsurprisingly their home record is much better although their average try count is statistically indisguishable. 

Some home advantage! 

There is no other team for which this is true.

Actually its true for all teams - All Blacks have been extensively analysed for this for example