S15: Australia dont have depth

[MajorlyRagerly]

Love how you made it an 8 year cutoff MR Brilliant use of statistics, don't have to put in those pesky Bledisloe Cup wins.

Yes, we should have done better, but my point was more related to a country like England, which has huge numbers of players in the system, 2000 member clubs of the RFU, a strong club competition etc, but have poor results against Aus, NZ, SA etc. If depth was the only requirement for getting good results, they would be sitting #1 on the IRB rankings.

Well yeah.. but first wins in 8 years I guess is just as compelling!

Indeed... depth is good only when the depth is good.

 

[daz]

Clearly these odds are taken from an Australian betting website ranking the Lions and Cheetahs well below the Rebels, Force, Brumbies, Hurricanes etc. I'm sure the odds would be significantly different if taken from a South African or even a kiwi betting website.

With respect to RWC wins - SA are 2 wins from 5 attempts (40%), Aus are 2 wins from 7 attempts (29%).

Yes I realise you are trying to make a point to Mudskipper, but I thought I would add further evidence to that.

Thanks, I think. I'm defending SA rugby and you throw statistics at me to show how superior SA rugby is compared to Oz rugby? You just convinced me to stop defending SA rugby.

I'm now considering joining mudskipper.....

 

[Brisbok]

Thanks, I think. I'm defending SA rugby and you throw statistics at me to show how superior SA rugby is compared to Oz rugby? You just convinced me to stop defending SA rugby.

I'm now considering joining mudskipper.....

Haha I was mainly targetting 'Mudslinger' and tried to add to your statistics with further evidence! And don't pretend you'd be able to defend MS's completely biased views, I know you couldn't bring yourself to do that! That would be like the equivalent of a neutral fan watching a Reds/Wallabies game and finding Greg Martin's commentary informative!

 

[mudskipper]

Odds are only 1 factor, SA admin is a mess, we're talking about player depth and my point is, So where were the results at last years RWC? and the Reds won the S15 comp last year... No SA team in the final, I’m not interested in looking back at all years I’m talking recent…
Depth isn’t everything… In recent years we've done more with less...

 

[Brisbok]

Convenient sample to use to back up your theory MS. Let's wait for 8 years for an Australian team to win something, we'll completely write-off the years leading up to that, and then we'll talk about the relative state of a country's rugby. We'll also ignore the fact that Australian teams occupied three of the bottom four positions in Super Rugby last year and that the Reds had the benefit of playing each of these 3 teams twice.

 

[Godfrey]

Good luck, that evidence doesn't support his team. It won't be accepted.

 

[qwerty51]

Oh dear you didn't just mention the Reds playing in the weakest conference did you? I'm so sick of this excuse and I hate the Reds.

The Reds lost to the Waratahs and the Brumbies and IIRC the Crusaders only lost the Blues and the Highlanders as well. Where's the advantage? The Reds also were pushed all the way by the Force twice and the Tahs in the 2nd match.

 

[Brisbok]

Oh dear you didn't just mention the Reds playing in the weakest conference did you? I'm so sick of this excuse and I hate the Reds.

The Reds lost to the Waratahs and the Brumbies and IIRC the Crusaders only lost the Blues and the Highlanders as well. Where's the advantage? The Reds also were pushed all the way by the Force twice and the Tahs in the 2nd match.

...I'm sorry, I forgot....you can conclude that a team is a stronger team if they finish in the top 5 on the table, but you CAN'T conclude that a team is a weaker team if they finish in the bottom 5.

 

[suckerforred]

Convenient sample to use to back up your theory MS. Let's wait for 8 years for an Australian team to win something, we'll completely write-off the years leading up to that, and then we'll talk about the relative state of a country's rugby. We'll also ignore the fact that Australian teams occupied three of the bottom four positions in Super Rugby last year and that the Reds had the benefit of playing each of these 3 teams twice.

And this is evidence as to why we do not have the depth.

 

[mudskipper]

Convenient sample to use to back up your theory MS. Let's wait for 8 years for an Australian team to win something, we'll completely write-off the years leading up to that, and then we'll talk about the relative state of a country's rugby. We'll also ignore the fact that Australian teams occupied three of the bottom four positions in Super Rugby last year and that the Reds had the benefit of playing each of these 3 teams twice.

S15 is a new era... you need to get on board or could be left behind... SA can't agree on running their own conference... point made I think... OZ teams will continue to over perform... why because we run a better conference... SA can't dominate like the kiwis until they get their own house in order...

 

[SuperGrover]

S15 is a new era... you need to get on board or could be left behind... SA can't agree on running their own conference... point made I think... OZ teams will continue to over perform... why because we run a better conference... SA can't dominate like the kiwis until they get their own house in order...

I think our lack of depth and a domestic competition to rival either the CC or ITM cup means that we need them more than they need us. And as has already been pointed out 3 of our teams finished in the bottom four last year; You can't really believe that is 'over-performing'.

 

[PaarlBok]

S15 is a new era... you need to get on board or could be left behind... SA can't agree on running their own conference... point made I think... OZ teams will continue to over perform... why because we run a better conference... SA can't dominate like the kiwis until they get their own house in order...

I think you are still 3 or 4 years back in memory or just have a real feel for SupeRugby or just have a lack of rugby knowledge, or myself looks at the wrong place of the SupeRugby logs.
2009: We had one team in the semis and won the title via the Brutes. Australia had fuckall in the semis.
2010: We had two teams at the top of the log and both played in the finals. Australia had one in the top 4.
2011: We had two teams in the top six. Australia had two.

S15 new era has shown that the Australia conferense the easiest by many a mile. Even the Cheetahs had more points on the log then the Australia bottom four who have been dishing points out like Chrismast gifts to the Reds and Waratahs. But then the Cheetahs beat the highly rated Tahs at home. The twenty point gap between the Tahs and Force is a big concern and show up the weak Aus conferense.

 

[cyclopath]

Surely the weaker teams of each conference will "dish out" points to teams in their own conference because they play each other twice? The assumption from many a Kiwi and South African poster that their teams would automatically do so much better if they got to play all the Oz teams twice is amusing, particularly based on one season of the format, AND especially from the Republic. Historically, the Lions and Cheetahs have been awful, they rose a bit last year. Hardly makes and enduring argument just yet. Placing an asterisk against the Reds achievement last year with this argument is, dare I say it, disrespectful.

 

[PaarlBok]

Surely the weaker teams of each conference will "dish out" points to teams in their own conference because they play each other twice? The assumption from many a Kiwi and South African poster that their teams would automatically do so much better if they got to play all the Oz teams twice is amusing, particularly based on one season of the format, AND especially from the Republic. Historically, the Lions and Cheetahs have been awful, they rose a bit last year. Hardly makes and enduring argument just yet. Placing an asterisk against the Reds achievement last year with this argument is, dare I say it, disrespectful.

I can promise you that it aint never easy for any SA team to play at Osfontein or Ellispark. Always been like that and the CC have everything to do with this. SA derbies is a bitch.

 

[cyclopath]

I can promise you that it aint never easy for any SA team to play at Osfontein or Ellispark. Always been like that and the CC have everything to do with this. SA derbies is a bitch.

Local derbies are hard fought wherever, not just in South Africa. It seems arrogant to infer all teams from SA have it harder when patently there have really only been 3 strong teams from there throughout Super Rugby; maybe all the SA teams were poor last year, hence the closer log there? You can interpret these things many ways.
I do agree our conference will tend to be a little weaker, but I don't agree the difference is as great as some would like to think.

 

[PaarlBok]

Local derbies are hard fought wherever, not just in South Africa. It seems arrogant to infer all teams from SA have it harder when patently there have really only been 3 strong teams from there throughout Super Rugby; maybe all the SA teams were poor last year, hence the closer log there? You can interpret these things many ways.
I do agree our conference will tend to be a little weaker, but I don't agree the difference is as great as some would like to think.

Nee Boet the closer the log within the conferense the tougher the conferense. Trust me SA will have a tough one in 2012. They fight for survival. SA teams still have it tougher then their Aus and NZ counterparts. They all are longer away from home.

 

[Bardon]

From reading the last page or so of the thread anyone who didn't know would think that the Reds played Oz teams all the way through last years S15 including the semi-final and final. If they had played such poor competition in half of their conference games then they would have been under cooked and easy pickings for the blues in the semi-finals.

Other than that I'm not sure how the most interesting current thread (at least to me) turned into a bit of a mud slinging contest.

 

[Brisbok]

Local derbies are hard fought wherever, not just in South Africa. It seems arrogant to infer all teams from SA have it harder when patently there have really only been 3 strong teams from there throughout Super Rugby; maybe all the SA teams were poor last year, hence the closer log there? You can interpret these things many ways.
I do agree our conference will tend to be a little weaker, but I don't agree the difference is as great as some would like to think.

One question Cyclopath...are you forgetting that there is in fact an overall table? If one country had 3 teams in the top 4 you could not deny that they had the strongest conference. But 3 of the bottom 4 clearly doesn't mean that conference is weaker.

 

[PaarlBok]

From reading the last page or so of the thread anyone who didn't know would think that the Reds played Oz teams all the way through last years S15 including the semi-final and final. If they had played such poor competition in half of their conference games then they would have been under cooked and easy pickings for the blues in the semi-finals.

Other than that I'm not sure how the most interesting current thread (at least to me) turned into a bit of a mud slinging contest.

Well it help their cause getting home games in the business end after ending at the top of the overall log. All this caused by a weaker Aus conferense.

 

[Waylon]

Well it help their cause getting home games in the business end after ending at the top of the overall log. All this caused by a weaker Aus conferense.

The Reds beat everybody

Australia won the tri nations

The Force belted the Highlanders on their own dung heap after the kiwis described the Australian conference as school boy games........that must have been embarrasing for them

Australia has 15 or 16 pro mungo teams

5 pro rugby teams is a cinch. The extra teams in the west and in Melbourne create places for our vast junior talent to get professional contracts instead of going to minileague

A lot of the south african teams have struggled in super rugby so to talk up the RSA conference over the Australian one is laughable. Apart from a very good Bulls team that won a few titles, RSA teams have been bonus points. Dead set