Devil in statistics for our Bledisloe woe
By Bay35Pablo, 10 Aug 2010 Bay35Pablo is a Roar Guru
- Tagged:
- All Blacks, Bledisloe Cup, Rugby Union, Tri Nations, wallabies
Related coverage
- Rugby Union news
- Wallabies news
- Tri Nations Tournament news
- New Zealand All Blacks news
- Wallabies v All Blacks news
- 2013 Wallabies squad news
The ashes and sackcloth Wallabies fans are declaring woe is us, on the back of nine Bledisloe Cup defeats to the All Blacks, and not having won the Cup since 2002. However, the devil is as always in the statistics.
Which any “real” rugby fan would be aware of (i.e. the ashes lot are usually idle rugby fans, or “other media” briefly doing a piece on the Wallabies because media loves to report misery), as we have refined our self flagellation so we only beat ourselves up over worthwhile causes (of which there are plenty). So I will recap here for those who came late to the class.
From 1999 to 2005 there were only two games for the Bledisloe, as it was part of the Tri Nations where each team played each other twice. There was no third game. As such, the holder only needed to win one game to draw the series and keep the Cup. Indeed, the Wallabies retained the Cup in 2002 winning one of two games (having won both in 2001 – hah!).
2003 and 2005 saw the ABs win 2-0, but 2004 was split. 2006 saw a three game series won 3-0 by the boys in black (ouch). The series then went back to a two game series in 2007 (World Cup year), which was split 1-1.
Then in 2008 the ARU and NZRU commenced “Operation Foreign Cash Cow”, by extending it to four games and earning extra cash by playing the fourth in Hong Kong or Japan. Great for the coffers, not so good if you were trying to win the Cup back (i.e. the Wallabies) as you needed to win three of the four games.
So when considering whether we should all drown our sorrows and take up badminton to get away from the scary ABs, keep in mind that we haven’t made things easy for ourselves over the last eight years while that part of the trophy cabinet reserved for the Bledisloe has been empty.
New Zealand historically has been the dominant team up until the late 1990s, but the recent domination since 2003 has not been hurt by the ABS having a favourable wind in the format.
So fear not all true believers, the end to this black wash will come. Just keep in mind it’ll be easier if we manage to co-ordinate having a good team with playing only three games for the precious silverware!
Sport, all day long. Does this sound too good to be true? We're searching for a Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. If you're a sales star who doesn't mind a hit, kick, throw, or cycle, we want to hear from you. Apply now.
Have you seen the new Wallabies jersey? Want one of your own? We're giving away a brand new 2013 Wallabies jersey to one lucky Roarer, click here to go in the running to win.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby Union articles
- Wallabies squad announced: Folau in, no Quade Cooper – yet (266)
- Deans: Should he stay or should he go? (245)
- SPIRO’s Lions Diary: Deans goes for experience, plus Folau (238)
- Quade Cooper misses Wallaby squad selection (208)
- Wallabies 25-man Lions squad: analysis (197)
- Quade shouldn’t be fly half against the Lions (184)
- What gives with Israel Folau? (184)
- Time for Wallabies to harness ‘Poly’ power (111)
- Lions cheat-sheet: the Wallaby game plan (140)
- Wallaby six-pack: who gets the June call-up? (126)
- AAC: the man for this moment (25)
- Berrick Barnes inclusion a bright prospect (27)
- Will Genia must stay injury free for the Wallabies to be a chance (52)
- Roar Stats from Super Rugby Round 12 (53)
- Lions cheat-sheet: the Wallaby game plan (140)
- AAC: the man for this moment (25)
- Berrick Barnes inclusion a bright prospect (27)
- Jesse Mogg needs to move back to Queensland (28)
- Open letter to ARU CEO Bill Pulver (pt two): nationalise Super Rugby (30)
- King George you will be missed (13)
- NZRU show the height of sporting arrogance (55)
Recommend this story.
- Explore:
- All Blacks, Bledisloe Cup, Rugby Union, Tri Nations, wallabies



August 10th 2010 @ 9:43am
sheek said | August 10th 2010 @ 9:43am | Report comment
Pablo mate,
I didn’t quite follow all of what you might have been trying to say. Whether we play the ABs twice, thrice or 4 times YEARLY is largely irrelevant. We’re just not any bloody good at playing rugby these days! Or any other days!!
Historically, we only win about 28% of our matches against the ABs – 28%, that’s less than 3 in every 10. Historically!!!
Forget the stats, the history is even more depressing. Spiro wrote a good piece in the SMH this morning where he argued that getting close to the ABs in scoreline & performance is no guarantee that you’re actually “getting closer to a win”.
Being close is not the same as winning. I’m over it. I don’t care for close scorelines. This indicates how desperate we’ve become. Get within 10 points of the ABs, & we consider it some kind of moral victory. It’s all that’s left for us to hang our hopes on.
My self-analysis is brutal. The Wallabies have some wonderful individuals – Robinson, Pocock, Cooper, Genia – but collectively they are very ordinary. Historically, the Wallabies are ordinary.
Yet the deepest analysis from a bland rugby public is to sack the kiwi coach, as if somehow this is the only thing stopping us from winning. Changing the coach might make people feel good about doing something proactive, but it doesn’t provide a long-term cure.
But Australian rugby fans & administrators will continue to believe what they want to believe. And this means the Wallabies will continue to be ordinary for a long time, more often than not.
Those who ignore history are condemned to repeat its mistakes…..
August 10th 2010 @ 12:48pm
RedsNut said | August 10th 2010 @ 12:48pm | Report comment
The more times the ABs win, the nearer they are to loosing!
August 10th 2010 @ 12:53pm
Blinky Bill of Bellingen said | August 10th 2010 @ 12:53pm | Report comment
I used to have the reverse logic for lottery tickets. It doesn’t work.
August 10th 2010 @ 4:54pm
Campbell Watts said | August 10th 2010 @ 4:54pm | Report comment
So the AB’s must have a loss to Ireland and Scotland just round the corner then one would assume – since neither has EVER beaten the AB’s
Hmmm…. won’t be putting my hard-earned on that I’m affraid!
August 10th 2010 @ 1:13pm
Bay35Pablo said | August 10th 2010 @ 1:13pm | Report comment
How about Wales? They must be very, very, very close to winnng.
August 10th 2010 @ 10:25am
Mr Grumpy said | August 10th 2010 @ 10:25am | Report comment
Pablo,
Australia drew both series in 1999 and 2000 to retain the cup.
In the five seasons the Wallabies held the Bledisloe Cup, they won two of the five series – 3-0 in 1998 and 2-0 in 2001. This included Australia’s last win on New Zealand soil – 23-15 at Carisbrook.
Australia have lost their 11 tests in New Zealand, nearly double the previous record of six tests in the 1990s and from 1967 to 1978.
You would think the Wallabies would have a better record with the regularly matches aqainst New Zealand players at their venues through the Super competition.
There were positives from Saturday’s test in Christchurch but we still lost.
What odds for the All Blacks to win a record 10th straight test in Sydney on September 11?
August 10th 2010 @ 1:14pm
Bay35Pablo said | August 10th 2010 @ 1:14pm | Report comment
I am hopeful we can get a win in Sydney (in part because I will be at the game). The 4th game in HK they will likely win though (especially if we win in Sydney).
August 10th 2010 @ 4:56pm
Campbell Watts said | August 10th 2010 @ 4:56pm | Report comment
Now THERE’S something I will bet on
August 10th 2010 @ 10:39am
Jerry said | August 10th 2010 @ 10:39am | Report comment
Since Australia lost the Bledisloe in 03, they’ve only won 4 total matches against NZ (one of which was the WC semi final).
The overall Bledisloe record since 03 is 18 wins to 3.
In the All Blacks current run of 9 seasons, there’s been 2 times when the series was level (compared to 3 times in the 5 seasons the Wallabies last held it).
And both neutral venue matches have been dead rubbers.
It’s not the format, it’s the teams. The Wallabies haven’t been good enough to win a match most of the time.
August 10th 2010 @ 10:59am
Republican said | August 10th 2010 @ 10:59am | Report comment
NZ are better at Rugby Union and will soon be consistently so at League the way they are going.
Union’s status is fairly low in Australia and unless this changes little ol NZ will continue to dominate us at this game.
I would be more concerned if I were a League devotee, becuase NZ are as good at this code as Australia, despite not being a League country and only a population of around 5mill.
Australia, I am told does have a very strong League culture so there are no excuses for Oz in Leagues case – or are there?
August 10th 2010 @ 4:02pm
Harry said | August 10th 2010 @ 4:02pm | Report comment
Wait till NZ start winning at league consistently instead of the current once in a blue moon … if you have a look at it their record in the last 6 years in league is worse than it was in the previous period so I don’t see what your getting at.
But anyway, who cares about international league?
August 10th 2010 @ 11:03am
ohtani's jacket said | August 10th 2010 @ 11:03am | Report comment
Personally, I thought the extra Bledisloe Test would’ve been way more exciting had it been a one-off for the Cup. The NZRU would’ve never agreed to it, but that’s what I would’ve liked to have seen.
I agree that it’s next to impossible to win the Bledisloe back in a four Test format, but if you look back on this nine Test losing streak there were missed opportunities for the Wallabies during 2008 and 2009.
August 10th 2010 @ 2:02pm
stillmissit said | August 10th 2010 @ 2:02pm | Report comment
OJ – Certainly not in Wellington! which is the worst, most gutless rugby test I have seen by any Australian rugby team in the last 25 years.
We have had our chances but they seemed to mostly have come after the Bledisloe has been secured or after a big win and the AB’s were a bit complacent.
August 10th 2010 @ 3:38pm
Fog said | August 10th 2010 @ 3:38pm | Report comment
I think you are being too hard on the Wallabies. At the ground on the day it felt more like the Blacks played well. Who was going to stop Nonu that far from the line and with a head of steam up for what I think was the final try? Being ruthless in the assessment of your team doesn’t mean having unreachable expectations for their performance. You will inevitably be frustrated. A case in point is the damaging myth of “Australia’s brilliant backline”. Frankly, we haven’t seen a lot of that this century in the Trans-Tasman clashes. If you keep stepping on to the field with a “brilliant backline” and a game plan based on that myth, you will be doomed to disappointment. While they have many good or excellent players the Wallabies dont currently have a hard core of reliable excellence in any part of the 22 at the moment. That core is your backbone when things get tough. None of the basic units of the team (or even sub-units) are there yet. If all of your first choice front row is available that unit would qualify, but it would be the only one. Even setting aside injuries and suspensions, the backline selections change far too frequently for any effective unit to develop.
August 11th 2010 @ 8:06am
sheek said | August 11th 2010 @ 8:06am | Report comment
Fog,
In which year are we being too hard on the Wallabies – 2003? 2004? 2005? 2006? 2007? 2008? 2009? 2010???
Or maybe the tiny, oblique hint that the problems lie elsewhere, apart from the coach & players….. ?
August 10th 2010 @ 3:45pm
ohtani's jacket said | August 10th 2010 @ 3:45pm | Report comment
Brisbane and Hong Kong in 2008 were missed opportunities for the Wallabies, I think, as well as Eden Park and Sydney last year. Brisbane was probably the worst as I geniunely believe it’s had a long term effect on how this whole thing has played out.
August 10th 2010 @ 3:44pm
thesportsguy said | August 10th 2010 @ 3:44pm | Report comment
in the current 4 game format, it is unlikely in the near future australia have a good enough team to trump the ABs in three tests in one year.
Also, given that NZ will win more often then not on neutral venues, and almost never loses at home, it would require AUS to win 2 times at home, and least once on the road which is something they havent done in nearly ten years against the blacks.
So its feasible, that australia are further away from recovering the bledisloe because of the way it is structured. is that the point u were trying to make BAY35?
i would agree with that logic.
August 10th 2010 @ 3:48pm
ohtani's jacket said | August 10th 2010 @ 3:48pm | Report comment
This is the final year that we’ll have the four match format. From next year, there will only be two Tri-Nations matches between New Zealand and Australia. Both O’Neill and Tew have stated that they’d like to reduce the number of Tests being played, but the $ will win out in the end and there may be a third Bledisloe Test from time to time.
August 11th 2010 @ 11:14am
Bay35Pablo said | August 11th 2010 @ 11:14am | Report comment
Yep
August 10th 2010 @ 3:47pm
Gary Russell-Sharam said | August 10th 2010 @ 3:47pm | Report comment
If we had one BC test or ten we wouldn’t win the B cup with the set-up we have at the moment. The players are not quite there and nor are the coaches. I for one was right behind Deans when he was first appointed but sadly his record speaks for itself. I would suggest that after the WC we get back to basics and install an Aussie coach (maybe the likes of McQ as chief advisor) with a new coaching team and put the broom through the side to clear out all the dead wood and start afresh. At least that way we will not have any excuses. They say you have to hit bottom to start to rise, I don’t think we have hit bottom yet, that will probably be when we don’t make the quarters in the WC.
August 11th 2010 @ 8:29am
sheek said | August 11th 2010 @ 8:29am | Report comment
The problem when the game became professional is that money now overrides practicalities. When pay-TV first appeared, it was desperate to get any sport into its programming.
As it raked in enormous money & gained power from that, it began to dictate to sports to come up with more meaningless matches to help pay-TV’s scheduling programs.
What we see today is driven purely to satisfy pay-TV primarily. It’s not good enough to have separate football & cricket seasons, there has to be football 24/7/52 & cricket 24/7/52.
The impracticality in rugby is that we still have a contest for the Bledisloe Cup & Mandela Challenge Plate within the Tri-Nations. Simple answer, let’s just have more test matches. But now the quality is being diluted, & fans aren’t as motivated to watch wall-to-wall test matches, no matter how much we might love our sport.
When Argentina joins in 2012(?) we might see some sanity return. Each of the 4 countries play each other twice for 6 games each – 3 home, 3 away. If it means Wallas & ABs playing each other twice only (each year), then so be it. The 3-4N takes precedence over the BC.
The alternative is to can the 3-4N, & return to 3 test match tours every couple of years. Since the 3N is here to say, I would much prefer the likely format from 2012 onwards.
Another question is why we need to have 4 tests in the northern hemisphere EVERY year (bar WC years). Again, it’s driven by pay-TV. I would suggest a calender schedule of only 2 x incoming tests, 6 x 4N tests & 2 x outgoing tests. That’s a maximum of 10 tests in non-WC years.
In WC years, I would reduce the 4N to just 3 tests each, plus the incoming tests, plus the WC matches (4-7), which would mean 9-12 tests in a WC year.
It should be remembered if the Wallabies hosted 2 incoming tests, & toured 2 outgoing tests in each of 3 non-WC years, they would end up playing northern hemisphere 6N countries twice during this period – once at home, once away. WC appearances against various nations would be in addition to this.
Having less (tests) is actually more. It will heighten, rather than dilute, the anticipation of sports fans.
August 11th 2010 @ 9:20am
Jerry said | August 11th 2010 @ 9:20am | Report comment
I’d like the TN to be a four yearly tournament spaced 2 years between WC’s, or at the very most a two yearly tournament. It’ll never happen, but it’d allow for meaningful tours in the off years.
August 11th 2010 @ 10:32am
chuck said | August 11th 2010 @ 10:32am | Report comment
you are right jerry it wont happen
August 11th 2010 @ 10:43am
sheek said | August 11th 2010 @ 10:43am | Report comment
Jerry,
If we lived in a perfect world we might go back to the following scenario.
2012 – Australia tour NZ; SA tour Argentina.
2013 – NZ tour SA; Argentina tour Australia.
2014 – Australia tour SA; NZ tour Argentina.
2015 – Mini round of 4N (3 matches each); Rugby World Cup.
2016 – NZ tour Australia; Argentina tour SA.
2017 – SA tour NZ; Australia tour Argentina.
2018 – SA tour Australia; Argentina tour NZ.
2019 – Mini round of 4N (3 matches); Rugby World Cup.
And so on…..
It’s just another variation, trying to combine the best from the old amateur days with the best from the current professional days. Which would make practical common sense, wouldn’t it….. ?