The Blues-Cheetahs match, the first match in the fifth round of the 2009 Super 14 tournament, was the 1,000th Super Rugby match since its start in 1996.
The official statistician of the NZRU, Geoff Miller had done all the calculations and he has worked out that 50,689 points were scored in the 999 lead-up matches.
There were 5,724 tries with an average of 5.7 tries a match; 3,965 conversions, with kickers having a 63 per cent success rate; 4,532 penalty goals; and 181 drop goals.
For me the intriguing aspect of these statistics is that there have been substantially more tries scored than penalty goals, and that with over 60 per cent of the tries converted it is obvious that if you score tries you will win most of your Super 14.
The ELVs, moreover, have intensified this bias in the scoring model towards teams that score tries. There are fewer shots at goal with the short arm/long arm penalty regime currently being played in the Super 14.
In the earlier round Hurricanes – Waratahs match, for instance, the Waratahs were penalised by Stuart Dickinson 19 times with short arm penalties. Without the ELVs short arm dispensation these penalties would have been long arm penalties, and given the Hurricanes field position for most of the match there would have been about 10 kicks at goal.
In a sense, the reduction in the number of shots at goal under the ELVs has put an even greater premium on sides having an accurate goal-kicker.
The Crusaders, for instance, should have won their match against the Western Force comfortably if they’d had a half-way decent kicker. Stephen Brett, who otherwise played very well at first five-eighths, had a shocker with the boot missing his first three kicks, all of them relatively easy shots.
Towards the end of the match he was given a final chance to kick the winning penalty from near enough to in front and about 35m out. He missed it comfortably.
Matt Giteau, on the other hand, kicked well in slotting over most of his attempts with an easy nonchalant swing of his left boot.
So another Zavos Rule for the Super 14: It is essential to have a 70 per cent plus goal-kicker in your run-on side.
This rule was violated by the Waratahs (as well as the Crusaders and Highlanders). Kurtley Beale missed his first three kicks, all of them easy shots. This meant that when the pumped-up Brumbies scored a try to go with their penalties, the Waratahs had given up too much ground to make up.
This presumes that they were capable of making up the ground, which I doubt. The Waratahs came out trying to play wide and bringing in their speedsters Rob Horne and Lachlan Turner. Horne had a couple of touches in the first few minutes, more than he has received in most matches for the entire 80 minutes.
But when the initial enthusiasm to run the ball dampened a bit under the ferocious rucking and counter-rucking from the fired Brumbies, the Waratahs lapsed back into their ‘take-no-risks, don’t try to score tries’ game.’
We had Luke Burgess who is playing like the Energiser bunny whose battery has completely run down (where are the scything runs of last year?) kick the ball away to the Brumbies even when the Waratahs were on a bit of a roll.
The Brumbies scored a wonderful try from hand-to-hand passing at speed with backs and forwards charging on to the ball. Why couldn’t the Waratahs do the same? They have skillful backs and agile, fast and big forwards.
The answer must be that the coach Chris Hickey is determined to play it safe as he feels his way into coaching at this level.
He might claim that this slow, safety-first game the Waratahs are playing has given them four wins out of the five games. But the loss to the Brumbies was the first match they’d played with a neutral (in this case non-Australian referee).
It is intriquing, too, that Lawrence put Wycliffe Palu into the sin bin in the first half, when Dickinson threatened to do this to the Waratahs at the end of their match against the Hurricanes, even though he would have been justified in going to full arm penalties and then yellow cards at least early on in the second half.
My feeling, too, is that Hickey may be getting too much imput from officials who should be running the off-field stuff rather than what happens on the field with the Waratahs. The NSWRU, for instance, has a Rugby Committee. What on earth is this for? Surely the rugby side of things should be left to Hickey and his coaching staff?
The Queensland Red’s coach Phil Mooney, on the other hand, seems to have had a free hand to reshape the way his team plays after the locust year of Eddie Jones. Mooney has the team playing a modern, expansive, high-pace and high-skill game.
It hadn’t really come off in the first four rounds because the set piece play was not strong. Against the Sharks, though, the set piece play was excellent, with the lineout and scrum going well. The Reds, like the Brumbies, were enthusiatic and tough at the breakdown. Importantly, too, they tried to score tries rather than hoping (like the Waratahs) that they would somehow happen.
A couple of the tries scored were as good as examples of ensemble play as you could hope to see. They made a mockery, too, of the know-nothings who have been complaining that the ELVs don’t allow for structured play.
What is more structured than player after player, some of them running intricate lines, bursting on to passes and balls popped up out of tackles, or as in the case of Digby Ione’s beauty to seal the match, coming in close to the ruck to take the inside flick?
The Waratahs remain the leading Australian side after the fifth of the 13 rounds of matches before the finals. But their report card should read: ‘The Waratahs need to try harder to score tries’.
The Reds and the Brumbies are getting their game together with their set pieces improving and their attacking play, especially that of the Reds, finally clicking into gear.
Their report card should read: ‘Keep up the good work, the rewards should come at the business end of the season’.
Recommend this story.
- Explore:
- NSW Waratahs, rugby, Super Rugby
March 16th 2009 @ 9:56am
Justin said | March 16th 2009 @ 9:56am | Report comment
Mart, the sun shines on a dogs ass every once in a while
March 16th 2009 @ 9:57am
Farmer said | March 16th 2009 @ 9:57am | Report comment
I think it would be fair to say that the Crusadrers , under Dean’s coaching were the best counter attacking side going around. It did not happen by accident and Dean’s comments confirm this.
There was structure to the Crusaders counter attacking. Players knew what they had to do and time and time again they did it and often tries resulted. Kicking the ball back is the soft option that is too ofter taken by teams that haven’t got a clue or lack the confidence to counter attack ( ie they lack structure).
At any breakdown or quick turnover, the Crusdares pounced. The turnover did not necessarily come from structured play. It happened when the opposition decided to give the ball back to the Crusdaers ( kicking it to them) or the Crusaders took it from them at the breakdown. If you have the worlds best No 7, it makes sense to have a plan for waht you are goin gto do with ball.
Whatever the reason, the counter attack was clinical and well drilled. In good sides, every player knows what they have to do and where they have to be no matter what the circumstance.
Structured play does not just come from scrums and lineouts.
I quote Knives Out
“With reference to Deans I am still unsure how you can coach teams to counter attack because to counter attack means that the ball has probably been gained in an unexpected matter, therefore it is hard to plan where players would/could be etc. You can improve a players skill set but how precisely can you plan to counter attack?”
Seeing is believing Knives Out – and take it from me, we have seen it !
March 16th 2009 @ 10:21am
couchnorm said | March 16th 2009 @ 10:21am | Report comment
The ELV have encouraged more kicking between the 22′s. Teams spend a lot of time working on their kick chase game looking for turn over pressure. In the past the teams that do this the best were at the top of the table. Crusaders have always been one of the teams that kick the most, their point of difference was the ability to capitalise with turn over ball.
One thing missing this year. Because you are able to callapse mauls teams are struggling to get any momentum from lineout set peice, which in the past was the best form of attack as the 2 backlines are 20m apart. It has a become a ‘catch 22′, any lineout ball caught usually becomes a static ruck, with the only option to kick from the base. Any lineout ball off the top, most teams with their lineout defences are sending a extra 2/3 players from the lineout chasing hard against the attack, which didn’t happen berfore. Changing back to the old rule will give teams better opportunity to attack.
Taking the long arm penalty away has given every oppotunity for teams to work on slowing ball down knowing the odds are good for them. Referees now don’t have to make match deciding penalties; Just blow free kicks and no one gets upset.
March 16th 2009 @ 11:33am
Dan said | March 16th 2009 @ 11:33am | Report comment
Sipro
I saw the Waraths Reds game and was disappointed with the way the Tahs played but happy they won.
I did not see the Brumbies game but read the review in the SMH and the pattern of play seemed same as the game against the Reds.
I spoke to Michael Foley on 15.3.09. I said to him the Tahs need to run the ball and to stop kicking it away. Michael said that they did run the ball early against the Brumbies.
The Waratahs will not progess in the Super 14 with their current style of play unless they play with more creativity and use the ball in the backs. The players need to be given the confidence and encouragement rom the coaching staff to do this.
March 16th 2009 @ 11:40am
oikee said | March 16th 2009 @ 11:40am | Report comment
Thought i had better give you a update Spiros seeing you love to stick your beak into the league postings, over 70 tries scored in the real rugby on the weekend, and we still have the entertainers to play monday nite. Good luck with your running rugby.
Thats for giving him back to league, we might be able to keep his nose clean. 
P.S Wendal was amazing, maybe he could have helped with a few more tries for rugby.
March 16th 2009 @ 11:45am
Hammer said | March 16th 2009 @ 11:45am | Report comment
“They made a mockery, too, of the know-nothings who have been complaining that the ELVs don’t allow for structured play.” … now there’s a piece of arrogance that’ll take some beating for quite some time … I know all just listen to me … well Spiro look back in this piece and you’ll find why the ELV’s aren’t the answer to all things …
“In the earlier round Hurricanes – Waratahs match, for instance, the Waratahs were penalised by Stuart Dickinson 19 times with short arm penalties. Without the ELVs short arm dispensation these penalties would have been long arm penalties, and given the Hurricanes field position for most of the match there would have been about 10 kicks at goal.”
Dickinson is a poor ref and gave the Warratahs a free ride in that match – yes the Hurricanes played poorly but still should have won that game but were unable to due to the cynical gameplan we more frequently seeing from all sides … constant infringement with zero repercussions …as Dexter points out “Short arm free kicks are not severe enough to stop foul play, so more players are giving them away. So in a sense we are watching League” …
March 16th 2009 @ 11:47am
True Tah said | March 16th 2009 @ 11:47am | Report comment
oikee
you can keep Big Dell in NRL, lets face it, hes just a big unit who loves running into and over the top of other wingers…he’s perfect for league, in rugby our wingers need to be more than just glorified battering rams…still how hard is it to be an NRL winger when you;re boasting about a 35 year old as being the star of the weekend? More than a few league-heads have said that rugby is a game for old men.
March 16th 2009 @ 11:48am
Keith said | March 16th 2009 @ 11:48am | Report comment
“Ah, but your piece did not make that clear Spiro. Technically I’m correct.”
Some one give this man a cookie.
“because to counter attack means that the ball has probably been gained in an unexpected matter, therefore it is hard to plan where players would/could be etc”
Rubbish. One of the key roles of the back three on a rugby paddock is to read the play for counter attacking opportunities and position themselves accordingly. Of course teams practice counter attacks from various situations, it would be nuts not to.
For an example of plays which adapt structured counterattacks to individual situations, get onto YouTube and take a look at the great Christian Cullen in his prime.
Knives Out, if you’re new to the game I’d also suggest you go to a few live matches and keep an eye on the fullback and the two wings – especially when they are in defence. It’ll help give you a sense of positional play and reveal alot about the team’s gameplan.
March 16th 2009 @ 11:52am
Craig said | March 16th 2009 @ 11:52am | Report comment
oikee, Of course there’s more tries scored in league. They don’t know how to tackle, thats why they are falling overthemselves to get their hands on Beale. Besides most of them are either hung-over, still drunk or distracted with pending court cases and contract offers from France and Japan.
March 16th 2009 @ 12:10pm
AndyS said | March 16th 2009 @ 12:10pm | Report comment
From memory the only law variant being played in the S14 governing the breakdown has to do with an unplayable ball. It seems to me that the big change has been in interpretation of existing laws, and particularly a focus on sealing off of the ball. That makes it harder to guarantee your own possession on attack, and also harder to slow the opposition ball. In both instances you want the rapid restart of play as far from your own line as possible, and hence the emphasis on territory. If the same scrutiny were applied with full arms as the penalty, there would be no running play at all and everything would be kicked.
In my opinion a lot of criticism is aimed at the ELVs on ideological grounds, but I accept I may well be wrong. If I am and the problem is the actual laws themselves, I am curious – which one is written to make everyone kick?