Wales vs Uruguay

First topic message reminder :


WALES vs URUGUAY
Millennium Stadium
Sunday September 20th @ 14:30

Live coverage on ITV and S4C


Referee: Romain Poite (France)
Assistant referees: Pascal Gauzère (France), Mathieu Raynal (France)

Television match official: Ben Skeen (New Zealand)



And so it starts.

RWC 2015, first up for Wales are Uruguay. A team of amateur players that are the lowest ranked team in the competition. They qualified by beating Russia, this is their third RWC. They have won two games previously against Spain and Georgia.

Wales are huge favourites for the game but as the Uruguayans are the weakest team in the group Wales actually have a massive pressure on them to perform at the top of their game and set a bench mark score, that should this pool go down to points, will beat the others in contention.

On the back of a disastrous game in Cardiff against Italy, Wales will have had to re-focus themselves for this game.

Wales have never played Uruguay before. Our A team played them once back in 2001 where a young Shane Williams scored two tries and Gavin Henson excelled at fullback for Wales to win 66 points to 22.

We have no idea what damage teams like England and Australia could do to a tired Uruguay team towards the end of the pool stages. Wales will need to put a cricket score on Uruguay to prove a point before going into our first major game at Twickenham.

Wales Team

Liam Williams (Scarlets); Alex Cuthbert (Cardiff Blues), Cory Allen (Cardiff Blues), Scott Williams (Scarlets), Hallam Amos (Newport Gwent Dragons); Rhys Priestland (Bath Rugby), Gareth Davies (Scarlets); Paul James (Ospreys), Scott Baldwin (Ospreys), Samson Lee (Scarlets), Jake Ball (Scarlets), Luke Charteris (Racing 92), Sam Warburton (Captain, Cardiff Blues), Justin Tipuric (Ospreys), James King (Ospreys).

Replacements: Ken Owens (Scarlets), Aaron Jarvis (Ospreys), Tomas Francis (Exeter Chiefs), Dominic Day (Bath Rugby), Dan Lydiate (Ospreys), Ross Moriarty (Gloucester Rugby), Lloyd Williams (Cardiff Blues), Matthew Morgan (Bristol Rugby)


Uruguay Team

15 Gaston Mieres, 14 Santiago Gibernau, 13 Joaquin Prada, 12 Andres Vilaseca, 11 Rodrigo Silva, 10 Felipe Berchesi, 9 Agustin Ormaechea, 8 Alejandro Nieto, 7 Matias Beer, 6 Juan Manuel Gaminara, 5 Jorge Zerbino, 4 Santiago Vilaseca, 3 Mario Sagario, 2 Carlos Arboleya, 1 Alejo Corral.
Replacements: 16 German Kessler, 17 Oscar Duran, 18 Mateo Sanguinetti, 19 Franco Lamanna, 20 Agustin Alonso, 21 Juan De Freitas, 22 Alejo Duran, 23 Francisco Bulanti.

Fanster wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:Lord Dowlais the point SS made is the astounding statements make that a blatently untrue. 88% acuracy is right up with your best, its also fair to say the kick he missed was fairly easy and he shouldnt have missed it. He missed two touch kicks all match and the ones he nailed made good yardage most of the time.

So how can a welsh poster looking at a match only hours finished make a statement like his kicking game was sloppy.

You had major problems yesterday, your front five and your pack who are the heaviest. and biggest of all teams on weekend 1 didnt perform well against the lightest, smallest and most inexperienced in the tournament. You had 24 turnovers (just in case the usual suspects get excited RP didnt get turned over 24 times).

Dan Lydiate was dire in the short period, Warburton looked rusty and ineffective at times. Liam Williams, Lee looked like they both were still carrying injuries from unless it was inexperience and nervousness.

I agree and so would 99% of other rugby fans (not just Welsh ones) that Biggar would have contributed to a larger winning scoreline, but the question could be asked.... Would he have been better defensively?, would he have created any more try scoring opportunities?, would he have found touch with more accuracy?, would he have been turned over more?.

I think in played the full match in a composed well, under orders and nothing too extreme. The aim primarily was to get the BP aind he diectly set up three of the first four tries, he was your best back yesterday, but thats not saying much as it was a disjointed, stuttering performance from your largely second team.

So you want to talk stats...

Please go re check the size of our pack, it was very much middling in terms of weight, under 900 kilos whereas a number of teams were closer to 950. Where you beleive Wales had 'major problems' in a 50 point win, the rest of the world understands a 2nd choice Welsh team were pretty systematic about what they needed to do.

Infact I think the Welsh pack may just be the smallest of the home nations...

I have lost a lot of respect for anyone claiming Biggar cannot defend like Rhys, of the 2 Biggar is by far the more comitted and effective in contact.

I'm sure fhf would absolutely love to talk stats....BUT, I believe he is just reiterating what a commentator said as I heard it also. But what I heard is that Wales has the tallest and heaviest team in the tournament. At 897kg (equal to Fiji's pack, heavier than England's) we aren't the smallest pack among the home nations. I don't believe we're the biggest though when you look at the forwards lining up for Ireland and South Africa. If you include our backs then we MIGHT just be the tallest and heaviest; but that doesn't make us the best.

I thought the pack performed pretty well but like the backs didn't really get out of 2nd gear. So when our players don't really have heart for the game our error count sky rockets. We were dominant in the scrums and lineout, whilst hardly trying by the looks of it, so I can't believe our pack were poor. The fact that this was probably the worst team in the tournament is why most fans aren't pleased with the performance, and some posters seem to be getting really upset that we point out this blatantly obvious factor.

Fanster wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:Lord Dowlais the point SS made is the astounding statements make that a blatently untrue. 88% acuracy is right up with your best, its also fair to say the kick he missed was fairly easy and he shouldnt have missed it. He missed two touch kicks all match and the ones he nailed made good yardage most of the time.

So how can a welsh poster looking at a match only hours finished make a statement like his kicking game was sloppy.

You had major problems yesterday, your front five and your pack who are the heaviest. and biggest of all teams on weekend 1 didnt perform well against the lightest, smallest and most inexperienced in the tournament. You had 24 turnovers (just in case the usual suspects get excited RP didnt get turned over 24 times).

Dan Lydiate was dire in the short period, Warburton looked rusty and ineffective at times. Liam Williams, Lee looked like they both were still carrying injuries from unless it was inexperience and nervousness.

I agree and so would 99% of other rugby fans (not just Welsh ones) that Biggar would have contributed to a larger winning scoreline, but the question could be asked.... Would he have been better defensively?, would he have created any more try scoring opportunities?, would he have found touch with more accuracy?, would he have been turned over more?.

I think in played the full match in a composed well, under orders and nothing too extreme. The aim primarily was to get the BP aind he diectly set up three of the first four tries, he was your best back yesterday, but thats not saying much as it was a disjointed, stuttering performance from your largely second team.

So you want to talk stats...

Please go re check the size of our pack, it was very much middling in terms of weight, under 900 kilos whereas a number of teams were closer to 950. Where you beleive Wales had 'major problems' in a 50 point win, the rest of the world understands a 2nd choice Welsh team were pretty systematic about what they needed to do.

Infact I think the Welsh pack may just be the smallest of the home nations...

I have lost a lot of respect for anyone claiming Biggar cannot defend like Rhys, of the 2 Biggar is by far the more comitted and effective in contact.

Telegraph wrote:Next up we looked at average pack weight, and the winner here was Wales, coming in at 18st 2lbs, helped by the 20st 7lbs Tomas Francis.

The heaviest player at the tournament is France prop Uini Atonio, who comes in at 22st 9lbs.

Just in case you don't believe me or the Welsh commentator who brought up the comment, this is the link amongst other links, but I do believe that the pack is on average taller than anyone other team.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/rugby-world-cup/11868804/Rugby-World-Cup-2015-How-do-the-teams-breakdown-for-height-weight-average-age-and-caps.html

In The loose intheloose.com wrote:4.England are the youngest side at the tournament

Hosts England have an average age of just 26.2, closely followed by Wales, Uruguay, Georgia and Namibia who all have an average age of 26.3

5.Wales are by far the heaviest pack

Wales are the only pack with an average weight over 18 stone (18st 2lbs). They are followed by Australia, England and South Africa who all average 17st 13lbs.

6.The Canadian pack are on average eight stone lighter than the Welsh pack

With an average weight of ‘just’ 17st 2lbs, the Canadian pack are the lightest at the tournament, with the next lightest being Japan and Namibia (17st 4lbs).

Just in case you didn't believe the first link..... strewth


The second statement is a load of crock of sh.. as well. I never said RP was a better defender I asked the question will DB bring a better defensive game to the match, based on the last two full games that RP played he has made 17 tackles and only missed 1 of them. He might not make the headlining full on tackles but he does slow or stop his man. If DB has nailed everyone of his tackles then fair enough but don't bang on about he is a better defender if the facts might prove otherwise.

Its pretty much like you saying RPs kicking out of hand or dead ball kicking was sloppy when he nailed kicks with 88% accuracy and missed just two kicks out of hand all match, if that's sloppy then I want our 10 to be sloppy against Japan mid week   .

Perhaps if by making loose sweeping statements doesn't mean you are right, its just an opinion which it seems not very many share.

Using the numbers on the rather brilliant Americas rugby site the average weight of the Wales squad is 107kg vs 106.3kg for Fiji and 105.3 for England

You do know what average means right?

mikey_dragon wrote:You do know what average means right?

I do believe as an Economist I understand stats and how they can be made to deceive or prove a statement.

By the way Mikey..... seen any live matches lately?

fhf I did on the weekend. But I don't see how it's relevant unless you're trying to urine me off which is supposedly frowned upon according to the house rules. I'm not looking for a fight but I believe your original comment said biggest pack, not biggest on average. Therefore ours would be skewed by guys like Charteris and Francis. The pack's weight was 897kg which is equal to Fiji and perhaps slightly lighter than SA's (just a guess). Whilst being bigger at 3 and 5, we might possibly be equal or lighter at 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8... So on average doesn't really give us an accurate description, so when Fanster says he doesn't believe we have a biggest pack then he might have a point. Our pack seemingly dominated the scrums, lineout and driving mauls even when we made changes so I disagree that they were poor - but it didn't look like they were trying too hard either which is disappointing.

mikey_dragon wrote:You do know what average means right?

In this case there is a list of each squad which may be up to date. Each player has an associated weight on record. I get the spreadsheet to calculate the mean which is the total weight of all the players divided by the number of players.

I hope this helps your understanding of this complex statistical analysis

lostinwales wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:You do know what average means right?

In this case there is a list of each squad which may be up to date. Each player has an associated weight on record. I get the spreadsheet to calculate the mean which is the total weight of all the players divided by the number of players.

I hope this helps your understanding of this complex statistical analysis

Don't bother lostinwales mate.

You prove anything to this "poster" by facts, figures, stats or respected opinions of current players, ex-players, coaches or commentators and he will call it irrelevant and stupid or boring, and stat sling insults.

He would call black white even if the bleeding colour was yellow all along.

*ahem* ................... I think you'll find that the colour was pink, if you look again a little more closely.

Only if you shone a blue light on it.

flyhalffactory wrote:

lostinwales wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:You do know what average means right?

In this case there is a list of each squad which may be up to date. Each player has an associated weight on record. I get the spreadsheet to calculate the mean which is the total weight of all the players divided by the number of players.

I hope this helps your understanding of this complex statistical analysis

Don't bother lostinwales mate.

You prove anything to this "poster" by facts, figures, stats or respected opinions of current players, ex-players, coaches or commentators and he will call it irrelevant and stupid or boring, and stat sling insults.

He would call black white even if the bleeding colour was yellow all along.

How extremely childish. I just quite clearly explained my stance in a comment and as expected you clearly ignore it if you suspect you're wrong.

FYI, the South Africa pack is 928kg so I can confirm that you are wrong. But hey on average you might be right on some days of the week .

What stance have you presented? and the only stance you have presented is that you think that RP has been rubbish since 2011 and you have not matched that with any comments/facts, so as far as I am concerned its just your opinion and not the whole of Wales as you continually try to imply.

I have just given you two sites that state the welsh pack is the bleeding heaviest and you don't believe that .......

I am not wrong I am just presenting you with the bleeding facts off the sites. these are not my facts/figures.

Present the site that you got the SA pack is the heaviest!!

Again, you originally claimed heaviest, not on average, which is what Fanster responded to. You replied by stating our pack was heaviest on average. Now that I've looked it up Fanster was correct. 928kg is clearly heavier than 897kg the last time I checked. What are you having difficulty understanding? I also explained to you how the average is misleading, but whatever you'll likely ignore it again and continue to put in sly, lowlife insults like you have been doing in every response to me. I've never seen a guy get so angry on his keyboard over different opinions and being proven wrong .  

I'm not lying to you. I'm quoting ITV, who I have been all along. You can check it for yourself. SA pack = 928kg. Wales pack = 897kg. Fiji pack = 897kg. Japan = 872kg.

flyhalffactory wrote:What stance have you presented? and the only stance you have presented is that you think that RP has been rubbish since 2011 and you have not matched that with any comments/facts, so as far as I am concerned its just your opinion and not the whole of Wales as you continually try to imply.

You're going off topic now as we've moved on from that discussion. But I clearly held my stance on RP, as others have done, based on observation. Some of what we say is opinion and stats do not prove that to be incorrect no matter how hard you try. I've matched it all along but you choose to ignore it. I even pointed out where it was done days ago and you're still ignoring that. No I don't continually imply that at all, so now you're just telling lies which I assume is out of shear desperation to try and prove your above everyone else.

If you go back a few comments you can see I clearly explained it to you. I've even told you that SA have the heaviest pack and you still won't listen to reason. Is it worth continuing this debate?

intheloose.com wrote:5.Wales are by far the heaviest pack

Wales are the only pack with an average weight over 18 stone (18st 2lbs). They are followed by Australia, England and South Africa who all average 17st 13lbs.

That says Wales have the heaviest pack (the data was collected very recently).

That's come from more than one site, and it was confirmed by an ITV welsh presenter during the match.

What more can I say!

Is it possible that you're using 2 different set of weights as by the most common version of averages (mean) The heaviest pack will also be heavier on average.

ITV wrote:SA pack = 928kg.
Wales pack = 897kg.

SA are the heaviest. Not on average, that was only brought into it when you moved the goal post. SA have the heavier pack though I'm not entirely certain whether it is the heaviest in the tournament.

Presumably the heaviset starting pack in that 1 game as well.

To point out the obvious, if they have the heaviest pack they have the highest average. Every team has the same number of players in a pack.

I'm sure the difference is predicted starters vs actual lineups.

mikey_dragon wrote:

ITV wrote:SA pack = 928kg.
Wales pack = 897kg.

SA are the heaviest. Not on average, that was only brought into it when you moved the goal post. SA have the heavier pack though I'm not entirely certain whether it is the heaviest in the tournament.

Give us the link so we can read the article

Scottrf wrote:To point out the obvious, if they have the heaviest pack they have the highest average. Every team has the same number of players in a pack.

I'm sure the difference is predicted starters vs actual lineups.

I suppose it can be calculated in two ways

Take you entire forward squad total weight and divide it by the amount of forwards
or
Take your potential starters, calculate total weight divided by the pack.

Either way it is the heaviest.

Like you said its fairly obvious

But to go back to fanstars comments where he stated that Wales are way down from the heaviest pack.... which is a load of boll...ks

[img][/img]

I told you all along it was ITV.

Yeah clearly their starters were bigger.

flyhalffactory wrote:

Scottrf wrote:To point out the obvious, if they have the heaviest pack they have the highest average. Every team has the same number of players in a pack.

I'm sure the difference is predicted starters vs actual lineups.

I suppose it can be calculated in two ways

Take you entire forward squad total weight and divide it by the amount of forwards
or
Take your potential starters, calculate total weight divided by the pack.

Either way it is the heaviest.

Like you said its fairly obvious

But to go back to fanstars comments where he stated that Wales are way down from the heaviest pack.... which is a load of boll...ks

It was not a load of lovesacks at all, because 928kg is a significant weight advantage compared to 897kg.

Scottrf wrote:Yeah clearly their starters were bigger.

I would guess they would be heavier again with Oosthuizen, Strauss and Etzebeth coming on.

Mikey old fruit either provide the site to prove your statement or just jack it in.

If you want I will get you a few tickets for England v Wales so you can experience first the joys of a live international rugby match featuring your very own team.... Its wonderful I assure you.

I'll bloody have them!!!

Fhf is there something wrong with you? Look at the image ffs.

I googled "itv heaviest pack in 2015 rugby world cup and nothing. I googled heaviest pack in 2015 rugby world and every data site or media states Wales have the heaviest pack.

I will say it again... The welsh commentator stated the welsh pack is the heaviest and tallest in the competition.

I will say it for the last time before I ignore your wummery for good

A few sites have been shown here qualifying that you guys have the heavies and all you have to do is cut and paste the bleeding link or wrap it up.

Look at the image above. The Wales one bat started was 894kg, SA is 928kg. You're gonna have to give it up I'm afraid because even I'm embarrassed for you now.

Yeah I'm the wum after your posting love sacks like this, as well as the snide and petty insults in all your comments. Please do ignore me. I'm tired of you now. You just come across as some petty old guy without a constructive hobby.

flyhalffactory wrote:

If you want I will get you a few tickets for England v Wales so you can experience first the joys of a live international rugby match featuring your very own team.... Its wonderful I assure you.

Is this fight about 31kgs?

A quarter of an... average...player?

Caum down, caum down......!

mikey_dragon wrote:Look at the image above. The Wales one bat started was 894kg, SA is 928kg. You're gonna have to give it up I'm afraid because even I'm embarrassed for you now.

Embarrassed yes of course I am..... for even starting this with you.

Fecking hell even my deaf blind mute mule in my back garden is making more sense. You are justifying your stance based on one point in time, one moment in play.

The heaviest pack in the WORLD CUP 2015 is WALES according to various data sites and the ITV commentators..... that picture you wacked up shows the pack of SA at that particular moment in time. Wales had at some point

02 H
Scott Baldwin 255lbs

17 P
Aaron Jarvis 255lbs

18 P
Tomas Francis 310lbs but a reportedly 320lbs

That's a combined weight of close to 372-378kg on their fecking own plus you have Jake Ball who is around 125kg, and Charteris who is around 130kg, and your back row will average around 310kg.

That's about 930-940kg even taking into account Warburton being a rather lightweight flanker.

So I could have (at some particular point in time in the Wales match) justified that your country has the heaviest pack, and the data sites are talking a load of old tosh

Taxi!. Time to close this particular nightmare now.

I don't want to cause any issues but I seem to remember seeing the scrum stats from Sunday and Uruguay had a heavier 8 than Wales. I was surprised.

flyhalffactory wrote:You had major problems yesterday, your front five and your pack who are the heaviest. and biggest of all teams on weekend 1 didnt perform well against the lightest, smallest and most inexperienced in the tournament. You had 24 turnovers (just in case the usual suspects get excited RP didnt get turned over 24 times).

Weekend 1, SA's starting pack was 928kg. Wales' starting pack weighed in at 898kg. I don't have the recording so I looked at the squad profile on WRU and added their weight together. When ITV showed it I thought I seen it as 897kg, but according to the WRU that's off by 1kg.

mikey_dragon wrote:<a href=[/img]" />

I told you all along it was ITV.

http://www.wru.wales/eng/matchcentre/wales_seniors.php

flyhalffactory wrote:That's about 930-940kg even taking into account Warburton being a rather lightweight flanker.

Incorrect. See above. You really are an angry little guy going by your comments over the past week. It's actually hilarious, but surely embarrassing for you.

chris_501 wrote:I don't want to cause any issues but I seem to remember seeing the scrum stats from Sunday and Uruguay had a heavier 8 than Wales. I was surprised.

Interesting. chris if you can somehow find them by any means necessary and post them then posters such as I would be grateful. Thanks.

mikey_dragon wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:You had major problems yesterday, your front five and your pack who are the heaviest. and biggest of all teams on weekend 1 didnt perform well against the lightest, smallest and most inexperienced in the tournament. You had 24 turnovers (just in case the usual suspects get excited RP didnt get turned over 24 times).

Weekend 1, SA's starting pack was 928kg. Wales' starting pack weighed in at 898kg. I don't have the recording so I looked at the squad profile on WRU and added their weight together. When ITV showed it I thought I seen it as 897kg, but according to the WRU that's off by 1kg.

mikey_dragon wrote:<a href=[/img]" />

I told you all along it was ITV.

http://www.wru.wales/eng/matchcentre/wales_seniors.php

flyhalffactory wrote:That's about 930-940kg even taking into account Warburton being a rather lightweight flanker.

Incorrect. See above. You really are an angry little guy going by your comments over the past week. It's actually hilarious, but surely embarrassing for you.

Embarrassed "au contraire mon petit".

I have taken the data off the ESPN site looking at individual players one by one and their profiles and compared their weights to two other sites and averaged them for consistency..... its accurate matey.

I am not little or angry (6' 5", played rugby at a decent level, coached and watched it ever since and a jolly contented soul to boot), however for all my light hearted approach to life.....I do not like keyboard commandos who sprout drivel and sweeping statements without back up. Opinions are fun but to justify your opinions by stating that the whole of Wales agrees with you is just..... well you can see how the land lies old fruit.

Over and out

Samoa have the Heaviest pack of the competition, they were around 930 kg and that was without Cencus Johnston who should start in the next games.

flyhalffactory wrote:
Embarrassed "au contraire mon petit".

I have taken the data off the ESPN site looking at individual players one by one and their profiles and compared their weights to two other sites and averaged them for consistency..... its accurate matey.

I am not little or angry (6' 5", played rugby at a decent level, coached and watched it ever since and a jolly contented soul to boot), however for all my light hearted approach to life..... I do not like keyboard commandos who sprout drivel and sweeping statements without back up. Opinions are fun but to justify your opinions by stating that the whole of Wales agrees with you is just..... well you can see how the land lies old fruit.

Over and out

Unfortunately for you, you have proven on several occasions on this thread that you are a keyboard warrior with numerous insults directed at me. You obviously missed so I'll post again.

mikey_dragon wrote:

flyhalffactory wrote:You had major problems yesterday, your front five and your pack who are the heaviest. and biggest of all teams on weekend 1 didnt perform well against the lightest, smallest and most inexperienced in the tournament. You had 24 turnovers (just in case the usual suspects get excited RP didnt get turned over 24 times).

Weekend 1, SA's starting pack was 928kg. Wales' starting pack weighed in at 898kg. I don't have the recording so I looked at the squad profile on WRU and added their weight together. When ITV showed it I thought I seen it as 897kg, but according to the WRU that's off by 1kg.

mikey_dragon wrote:<a href=[/img]" />

I told you all along it was ITV.

http://www.wru.wales/eng/matchcentre/wales_seniors.php

flyhalffactory wrote:That's about 930-940kg even taking into account Warburton being a rather lightweight flanker.

Incorrect. See above. You really are an angry little guy going by your comments over the past week. It's actually hilarious, but surely embarrassing for you.

VinceWLB wrote:Samoa have the Heaviest pack of the competition, they were around 930 kg and that was without Cencus Johnston who should start in the next games.

Prepare to get ignored, slagged off and stalked by fhf.

Fanster was right, as SA had the heavier pack. I suspected there might have been heavier packs elsewhere though, from the likes of Samoa or Tonga.

I heard that Wales had the lightest pack in the competition.

Scottrf wrote:I heard that Wales had the lightest pack in the competition.

You making light of a heavyweight discussion?

When did all these packs get weighed (either individually or collectively)?  Do they have to go through a WC weigh-in?

Because it would seem that as teams prepare for the WC, they can dramatically shape shift in terms of weight gain or loss - depending on what plans they have and training/conditioning they've done.

So are these weights that everyone is saying they are hearing about (all contradictory!) not simply rough ideas compiled from weights registered perhaps months ago.  If they are official recently registered weights then it'll have an official compiler for the definitive weights.  Official 2015 World Cup site?

The official site does have weights.

Then there is the answer.

Why are people mentioning so many sources...go to an official recent one.

I personally wouldn't have a clue where to look as the argument about how much each player weighs don't float my boat

Wales
116 115 107
122 125 103 108
101

897

SA
116 115 123
114 125 110 120
110

933

SecretFly wrote:When did all these packs get weighed (either individually or collectively)?  Do they have to go through a WC weigh-in?

Because it would seem that as teams prepare for the WC, they can dramatically shape shift in terms of weight gain or loss - depending on what plans they have and training/conditioning they've done.

So are these weights that everyone is saying they are hearing about (all contradictory!) not simply rough ideas compiled from weights registered perhaps months ago.  If they are official recently registered weights then it'll have an official compiler for the definitive weights.  Official 2015 World Cup site?

That opens up an whole can of worms and that's when stats become a bit of a lottery.

ESPN are now recognised as one of the most updated and accurate usually derived off sponsored sites or club information. Then dependant on when a player/s is/are on the pitch the pack weight can change dramatically. Information on all the players are not consistent, and they are not weighed by the sponsored site but the data is delivered by each nation using a method agreed by the ruling body, but I assume the top 12 ranked teams provide information fairly consistently, however if you search data on any search engine then they are fairly consistent on who are the heaviest teams and that all we can go by.

As you alluded to a player can gain or lose weight from one week to the next, so the data is more often than not meaningless

Scottrf wrote:Wales
116 115 107
122 125 103 108
101

897

SA
116 115 123
114 125 110 120
110

933

is that the starting pack?

flyhalffactory wrote:

Scottrf wrote:Wales
116 115 107
122 125 103 108
101

897

SA
116 115 123
114 125 110 120
110

933

is that the starting pack?

Yeah from the recent games, based on the weights from the World Cup site.

Scottrf wrote:Wales
116 115 107
122 125 103 108
101

897

SA
116 115 123
114 125 110 120
110

933

897kg was the original stat as shown by ITV (from what I can remember). I can see that you got these from the OFFICIAL world cup website, where-as I got mine from the OFFICIAL WRU site. Some weigh-ins are the same and a couple are different by 1-3kg at the most apart from one anomaly - the world cup stats have Samson Lee at 107kg and standing at 192cm - that's quite clearly wrong. Either OFFICIAL source however shows that my original point was spot on .