Dingo Deans’ Wallaby Stats (Pt 2)
In part 1 of this series we discussed the statistics of Robbie Deans win ratios. There were many great discussions that arose from this. Thank you Roarers.
If you missed this stats analysis let me reiterate briefly in one paragraph:
Deans’ overall win ratio is fine, some might say par for the course.
He has done well against the Springboks and it has also been great to see a better win ratio than normal against France and the Home Unions combined. But his win ratio against New Zealand needs to improve.
Leaving that aside, I’d like to move on and focus on the Dean’s Wallabies overall try scoring rate.
After all try scoring is the most important act of scoring points.
The IRB 2011 RWC Statistical Review and Match Analysis show that most games are indeed won by the side that scores the most tries (only 4% of all World Cup matches ever played have been won by the side that scored the fewer tries).
I have read much criticism that Deans’ Wallabies don’t score as many tries as in the past. At the moment the Wallabies try scoring average in all tests under Deans stands at 2.8 per game. But is that good or bad?
This is higher than the overall Wallaby Test-match average of 2.6 tries per test. It is also much higher than the Wallabies amateur era average of 2.2 tries per match.
In fact the current Deans average of 2.8 tries per match is indeed higher than the supposed golden period of Mark Ella (1980-1984). During this time the Wallabies scored a surprisingly low overall average of 2.3 tries per match, much less than what we are scoring today.
Now it must be said that 2.8 tries per match is under the Wallaby professional era average of 3.2 tries per match.
However, it’s hard to be harsh on Deans for this dip at try scoring when all top tier nations are now scoring tries at rates much lower than their respective complete professional era averages.
If we look at a combined average try scoring rate of the Six Nation and Tri-Nation sides since the beginning of the professional era it stands at 2.9 per side per match (interestingly it was only 1.9 in the amateur era). But since 2007 this combined average is .7 less at 2.2 tries per side per match. So Deans’ average try scoring rate is relatively high.
It is also important to note that Australia’s try scoring rate has reduced by a smaller margin than any of the Six Nation or Tri-Nation sides, during the Deans era. This includes the mighty All Blacks.
Comparing professional era averages New Zealand for instance had scored .7 less tries per match since 2007. South Africa has also seen their try scoring rate reduce by .7 tries per match in this Deans period.
England’s has reduced by an alarming 1.1, Scotland’s by 1.0, France’s and Italy’s by .8, Wales’ by .6 and Ireland’s by .5. This means less tries per match since 2007.
The thing is with try scoring rates they ebb and flow in relation to new laws, new tactics etc. If we look to World Cups as beacons of statistics we see massive swings in try scoring rates for example.
At the 1987 RWC there were on average 7 tries per match (not per side). At the 1991 RWC this reduced to just 4.6 tries per match the lowest of all world cups. Rates then sharply rose back up to 5.8 and 5.9 tries per match respectively at the next two world cups before sharply rising once again at the 2003 RWC to 6.9 tries per match.
At the 2007 RWC this rate dropped back down to 6.2 tries per match and again dropped at the 2011 RWC to 5.5 tries per match.
It is clear that over the past four or five years professional defences have caught up with professional attack. So Deans’ Wallabies have done well to maintain its own very close to 3 tries a match average of 2.8.
In fact if we look at the try scoring averages of all the 6 Nations and Tri-nations sides in the corresponding Deans era, Australia’s is second in try scoring behind only New Zealand.
Since 2007, the All Blacks have scored, on average, an envious 3.7 tries per match (it’s still a lot less than the 4.4 tries they’ve been scoring on average in the professional era).
In third place, behind Australia’s 2.8 average, is South Africa with 2.6 tries per match. This last point is significant because the ‘Boks’ have normally had a 0.1 higher try-scoring rate than Australia in both the amateur and the professional eras. So we have in comparison improved.
If we can continue looking at the try scoring averages Ireland and Wales follow with 2.2, France with 2.1, England with 1.9, Italy with 1.2 and Scotland with 1.0 average tries per match since 2007.
In the Dean’s period the Wallaby try-scoring rate is indeed not as good as New Zealand’s but we have in a way closed the gap slightly. Alas there’s still a long way to go.
About 0.9 tries per match as it were in the Deans era. In the entire professional era we lag behind by 1.2 tries per match to the All Black’s.
All the relevant data points to one conclusion; Deans overall rate of try scoring is actually quite good despite what critics might think and say.
What do you think?
There will be a part 3 to come on Dingo Deans’ Wallaby Stats.
In the mean time, Roarers: “Statistics may be defined as “a body of methods for making wise decisions in the face of uncertainty.” – W.A. Wallis.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby Union articles
- SPIRO: ‘Captain Magic’ Quade Cooper goes down with all flags flying (333)
- Deans confirms no spot for Quade Cooper (281)
- SPIRO’s Lions Diary: Foley does Australian rugby a disservice (261)
- Want to beat the Lions? Pick Quade Cooper (229)
- SPIRO: All Blacks learning to live without Carter (218)
- Wallabies’ six worst-kept secrets confirmed (204)
- A lesson in Deans-speak (154)
- Leaked Wallaby lineup – fact or fiction? (5)
- LEAKED: Wallabies team to play first Lions Test appears early (54)
- Fresh Wallabies face tough early test
- Brumbies loss a reality check: Gatland (21)
- SPIRO’S Lions Diary: Brumbies show Wallabies how to do it (113)
- Wallaby fans, don’t get carried away by the Brumbies win (58)
- British and Irish Lions teams post WW2 (part 3) (10)
- British and Irish Lions teams post WW2 (part 3) (10)
- Fifteen reasons why the Lions will beat the Wallabies (17)
- Lions vs Wallabies: the teams I’d pick (14)
- My Waratahs vs Lions experience (2)
- Brumbies vs British and Irish Lions: Tour match live scores, blog (220)
- These British and Irish Lions are different (49)
- Robbie Deans can learn from those Randwick Greens (27)
Recommend this story.
- Explore:
- robbie deans, Rugby Union, wallabies

July 23rd 2012 @ 9:35am
moaman said | July 23rd 2012 @ 9:35am | Report comment
Interesting analysis and I bet very time-consuming so hat’s off to you.
” In the Dean’s period the Wallaby try-scoring rate is indeed not as good as New Zealand’s but we have in a way closed the gap slightly. Alas there’s still a long way to go.” Have you also looked at where the bulk of the tries are being scored.i.e against which opposition (not what part of the field!) during the above period? I’d be interested to see stats for the Tri-Nations eg.Whether or not that tournament reflects the overall stats etc
July 23rd 2012 @ 6:58pm
The Werewolf said | July 23rd 2012 @ 6:58pm | Report comment
I’ve got the stats for this and they will make for interesting reading. Got a busy week at work but will try and give a write up soon.
July 23rd 2012 @ 9:41am
atlas said | July 23rd 2012 @ 9:41am | Report comment
tries – on another forum I saw the predictable ‘but we scored more tries than you’ in reference to the Bulls two tries to the Crusaders one on the weekend. In a game where tries/bonus points dd not apply, the Crusaders content to get six penalty goals instead.
Many a time, in all countries, we see the ‘cynical defence’ ploy of giving away penalties rather than five or seven-pointers.
In the Deans era, 60 tests, the average score has been 25 points to 20, and 3 tries to 2 (160 to 104).
Too early for anything meaningful from Hansen for NZ; but for Henry’s 103 matches as a comparison, average score 35-15 and closer to four tries to one (419-137).
In the end we remember wins, less about how they were achieved.
July 23rd 2012 @ 10:24am
SamClench said | July 23rd 2012 @ 10:24am | Report comment
Would be interested to see similar stats for tries conceded.
July 23rd 2012 @ 10:38am
ohtani's jacket said | July 23rd 2012 @ 10:38am | Report comment
The average score in a Wallabies test during the professional era has been 29-18 (three tries to two.) The average score under Deans has been 25-20 (again three tries to two.) The decrease in the scoring margin reflects the greater number of losses under Deans compared to the professional era as well as poor goal kicking at times, but once again we see that Deans has been par for the course, i.e. there has been no improvement under Deans simply a continuation of the status quo.
July 23rd 2012 @ 6:59pm
The Werewolf said | July 23rd 2012 @ 6:59pm | Report comment
I have researched this and will write an article about that as well.
July 24th 2012 @ 12:17am
SamClench said | July 24th 2012 @ 12:17am | Report comment
Sweet, look forward to reading it mate.
July 23rd 2012 @ 10:53am
Brian Stoddart said | July 23rd 2012 @ 10:53am | Report comment
Short story: Deans is a magnificent coach facing two problems – no depth in key players, and an Oz rugby culture very different from the one in NZ where he proved himself. Add to that facing an ABs team in the past few years several notches above even its good predecessors, and the answers to the stats are all revealed
July 23rd 2012 @ 11:16am
WQ said | July 23rd 2012 @ 11:16am | Report comment
Excellent summary Brian Stoddart apart from your comment about ‘a magnificent coach’.
He is a good coach but not magnificent.
The only other piece you have left out is that most Wallaby fans, regardless of their continued denial, can’t stand the fact a Kiwi is coaching the National side
July 23rd 2012 @ 12:07pm
jeznez said | July 23rd 2012 @ 12:07pm | Report comment
WQ – I think most Aussie fans would prefer an Australian as the head coach of our national side but that is a preference borne out of pride and a desire to support our own home grown talent and be self reliant.
That is a fair way from from not being able to stand that a Kiwi is in charge. I’m sure that some Wallaby fans do struggle with the fact he is a Kiwi. Most of us however were very pleased when he came on board.
Unfortunately he hasn’t taken the team to the heights we hoped he could. He has consistently put out teams with the same issues. His ill-use of the bench, persistence with under-performers, the scrum that remains shaky, the centre pairing that remains unable or unwilling to pass.
I still think he is the best coach in Australia and support him completing his contract – however we need to see him improve the above. The use of the bench during the Welsh series was a step in the right direction. The next critical pieces for me are the centres to be re-jigged, probably with McCabe moving out to 13 and Alexander to be dropped until his scrummaging improves.
The glacial pace of some of this change is the source of this Wallaby supporter’s frustration much more than where he is from.
I’m sick of people brushing off criticism of Deans with comment that equates to you just don’t like him because he is a Kiwi.
July 23rd 2012 @ 1:29pm
Jutsie said | July 23rd 2012 @ 1:29pm | Report comment
Fair points jeznez, my only issue is who is out there who will do a better job. Certainly none of the super 15 coaches have shown over an extended period of time that they are capable of sorting out the issue that have plagued aus rugby for the best part of the last decade (consistency, lack of intensity at the breakdown, poor skills, perceived lack of commitment, senior players not showing initiative or leadership to change game plan midway through a match).
Mckenzie looked to have sorted these issue out at the reds last year and white seemed to have sorted it out at the brumbies during this season but the reds have regressed this year and the brumbies form in the last quarter of the season indicates that the problems that face aus rugby in general are still present in both squads.
Even if we change coach i think we still may need to look outside the super 15 system if we want to turn things around.
July 23rd 2012 @ 1:32pm
jeznez said | July 23rd 2012 @ 1:32pm | Report comment
I haven’t got another name to throw up Jutsie – hence why I said:
“I still think he is the best coach in Australia and support him completing his contract – however we need to see him improve”
July 23rd 2012 @ 1:44pm
Jutsie said | July 23rd 2012 @ 1:44pm | Report comment
No worries, I wasnt arguing with you just adding my thoughts to ur comment. You have nailed most of my feelings on the matter.
Im not so much a deans fan but a non-fan of replacing him with mckenzie based on one year of super 15 success.
Regarding yours and many other fan’s issue with his centre combo, I read today that he has brought tapuai into the wallaby squad, IMO this guy needs to be part of the wallaby centre equation.
July 23rd 2012 @ 1:56pm
jeznez said | July 23rd 2012 @ 1:56pm | Report comment
Tapuai or Barnes or O’Connor at 12. Maybe McCabe to 13 – there are a hell off a lot of options out there given the flexibility of Barnes, O’Connor, AAC etc. I’ll give RD that injuries and time as a squad restricted his options against the Welsh.
If in the RC he just sends out McCabe/Horne again and they continue to stop the ball getting to the outside backs then I’ll think even more questions will need to be asked.
July 23rd 2012 @ 2:00pm
Jutsie said | July 23rd 2012 @ 2:00pm | Report comment
ATM I’d like to see JOC stay on the wing when he recovers from his injury, tomane is injured for the rest of the year and mitchell looks a far way of peak fitness too.
July 24th 2012 @ 12:21am
SamClench said | July 24th 2012 @ 12:21am | Report comment
I’d like to see Barnes given a sustained run at twelve. I know the modern trend is to throw big guys into the centres, but the Aussie midfield is just horribly uncreative at the moment. Sticking Barnes in there would take some of the creative pressure off of Cooper.
July 23rd 2012 @ 5:12pm
WQ said | July 23rd 2012 @ 5:12pm | Report comment
jeznez, sorry it has taken all afternoon to get back to the post I have been caught up in a meeting.
There are a number of well balanced and well informed Roarers on this site that I have no doubt think exactly the way you do in relation to Robbie Deans and his performance as the Wallaby Coach. Unfortunately there are quite a few more that don’t, the point I was trying to make is that their criticisms of his performance stem more from the point he is a Kiwi than his actual ability to perform with the Wallabies. They target him as opposed to having a good unbiased look at the current crop of top line players he has available to select from.
I agree with you about the issue raised over use of the bench, however the other issued you mention I am not so sure there are clear cut alternatives i.e. persistence with under-performers, the shaky scrum and the centre pairing. I think these issues are highlighted by the fact that there is just simply not a lot depth nor legitimate alternatives at the top level for him to select from. As a result of this, he is trying I believe, to build and create these players through persistence at Test level.
July 23rd 2012 @ 5:44pm
Red Kev said | July 23rd 2012 @ 5:44pm | Report comment
“…he is trying I believe, to build and create these players through persistence at Test level.”
Which looked at a different way means that Deans simply doesn’t have any ideas how to improve the Wallabies and coach them to perform any better than they have done over the previous five years.
You say potato…
Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result is AA’s definition of insanity.
I don’t think many people target him because he is a kiwi.
He is targetted because he came with a towering reputation and the spin from JON and Deans himself was “Dingo will fix it”. Well Dingo hasn’t delivered and there’s no accountability for that.
I also think you’ll find that many people target Deans more vehemently because rather than addressing their well reasoned and evidenced criticisms, many Deans supporters simply blow off such points of view as kiwi-bashing or with the one liner “not enough cattle” (something that simply isn’t true – there are plenty of posters that are more than happy to harp on about the number of registered players in Australia compared to New Zealand).
July 23rd 2012 @ 8:45pm
WQ said | July 23rd 2012 @ 8:45pm | Report comment
Sensational thoughts Red Kev, so let’s agree, Dingo’s a rubbish coach.
Tell me who should be the Wallaby coach?
July 24th 2012 @ 6:51am
Red Kev said | July 24th 2012 @ 6:51am | Report comment
That type of response is exactly why people lambast Deans and his supporters so hard. Thank you for proving my point.
July 24th 2012 @ 8:49am
WQ said | July 24th 2012 @ 8:49am | Report comment
You have not answered my question Red Kev, who should be the Australian Coach?
July 23rd 2012 @ 6:03pm
jeznez said | July 23rd 2012 @ 6:03pm | Report comment
WQ, he has always had his favourites in the likes of Baxter until (2009) and his replacement Alexander. Prior to this Mumm and Brown took forever to be moved on from the team despite there being other players worthy of a shot. More recently there was Elsom being picked over Higginbotham.
In the front-row I look at the continuing reluctance to look at Holmes as a LHP alternative – especially when Robinson was injured last year. Alexander’s preference as a THP replacement over Palmer during the Wales test series as another, worst case Slipper should be there.
In the recent test series there were significant injuries with Cooper, O’Connor, Beale, Lealiifano and Tapuai unavailable for all or part of the series. I can accept he was restricted through that period. As I say though if he repeats the McCabe/Horne pairing without getting a passing game from them in the RC then I think that is unacceptable.
Cooper will be able to take back over at 10, Barnes to 12 and then I am ambivalent at 13 as to Ashley-Cooper or McCabe (Horne cannot get picked until he passes – all three are sub-par here but my lad from the Tahs is the worst). Tapuai should get a gig on the bench to be trialled at some stage.
There are options here. Persistence with Robinson when he is underdone fitness wise, persistence with Rob Horne when he consistently takes his wingers out of the game are unforgiveable when there are replacements who appear they could be at worst just as good as the incumbents.
July 23rd 2012 @ 8:57pm
WQ said | July 23rd 2012 @ 8:57pm | Report comment
jeznez, totally agree re Holmes at LHP, I genuinely believe he is underrated and has not been used properly even by QLD. However to be fair, most of the other players and combinations you have mentioned have been used at different times over the past few years with differing degrees of success. None of them have really stood up and made any position their own other than Beale at fullback and Cooper most of the time at 10.
July 23rd 2012 @ 6:06pm
jeznez said | July 23rd 2012 @ 6:06pm | Report comment
ps, I probably reacted to your description of “most Wallaby fans”. I like to think that most of us are reasonable folk and that it is hopefully the minority that “can’t stand the fact a Kiwi is coaching the National side”
July 23rd 2012 @ 7:47pm
Dexter William said | July 23rd 2012 @ 7:47pm | Report comment
We would all love him if he brings home the bacon more often.
July 23rd 2012 @ 11:17am
Red Kev said | July 23rd 2012 @ 11:17am | Report comment
“Story” is certainly the right word, describing Deans as a “magnificent coach” is certainly something from the realms of fiction.
July 23rd 2012 @ 11:52am
ohtani's jacket said | July 23rd 2012 @ 11:52am | Report comment
Jones and Connolly faced a better All Blacks side than Deans has and their sides were by and large more competitive than Deans’ have been. Only the 2010 All Blacks were as good as the 2005-06 All Blacks.
July 23rd 2012 @ 2:10pm
Jerry said | July 23rd 2012 @ 2:10pm | Report comment
Jones got at least one year against a fairly ordinary AB side (02) and they weren’t all that hot in the 04 TN either, to be fair.
July 23rd 2012 @ 12:50pm
Sam Taulelei said | July 23rd 2012 @ 12:50pm | Report comment
Has there ever been as much in depth analysis, and column space devoted to a Wallaby coach?
He really has polarised opinions, more so than Eddie Jones.
When the time comes for Deans to move on, and everyone has had their say on his legacy or lack thereof, what on earth will people have to talk about?
July 23rd 2012 @ 1:23pm
Red Kev said | July 23rd 2012 @ 1:23pm | Report comment
Presumably Ewen McKenzie’s failure to beat the All Blacks and regain the Bledisloe. Same story, insert different coach name.
July 23rd 2012 @ 4:38pm
Sam Taulelei said | July 23rd 2012 @ 4:38pm | Report comment
Ha ha ha, different person same story.
July 23rd 2012 @ 1:39pm
B-Rock said | July 23rd 2012 @ 1:39pm | Report comment
Another good article – a couple of points though…
– the relative improvement in try scoring for the Wallabies is notable but also coincides with a number of special back line talents all coming through together. Of course, RD developed these players to begin with so can take at least some credit for this.
– RD should be able to get the Wallabies try scoring numbers up as back line management is his forte. Most of the criticisms focus on other areas (hopefully addressed in part 3)
Also, how happy would RD be about the Reds performance – McKenzie had a complete mental breakdown with his use of subs/backline rearangement following Lucas’ injury, which will ease pressure on him if performances are not up to scratch vs SA and NZ (as is likely)… And he gets the Reds players in camp 1-2 weeks before NZ and SA to start the prep for the RC.
July 23rd 2012 @ 1:53pm
jeznez said | July 23rd 2012 @ 1:53pm | Report comment
This was at the bottom of the Cooper Tweet story on rugbyheaven today:
“Cooper and teammates Liam Gill, James Slipper, Rob Simmons, Jake Schatz, Radike Samo, Ben Tapuai and James Hanson were called up for a national training”
It notes further on that Genia and Ioane are being rested.
My major questions on this are what has Greg Holmes got to do to get a run? Where on earth is Higginbotham’s name in that list?
July 23rd 2012 @ 1:56pm
Justin2 said | July 23rd 2012 @ 1:56pm | Report comment
Higgers rested also Jez. read it in the Aussie I think.
July 23rd 2012 @ 2:05pm
Jutsie said | July 23rd 2012 @ 2:05pm | Report comment
thats a relief, elsom was given 2 years before getting the chop would’ve been harsh to drop higgy after just 6 tests.
July 23rd 2012 @ 2:05pm
Red Kev said | July 23rd 2012 @ 2:05pm | Report comment
While I agree on Holmes, more disturbing is that Adam Wallace-Harrison who has outplayed every lock he’s been on the park with this year, Australian, South African or New Zealander and he doesn’t even get a look in.
Shipperley similarly omitted (although he might be rested considering he has played every minute of every super rugby match) but with Tomane injured, Speight ineligible, Vuna still crap, and Mitchell and Turner way way way below peak form and fitness I would have expected him to be a certainty.
July 23rd 2012 @ 7:50pm
Dexter William said | July 23rd 2012 @ 7:50pm | Report comment
How can anyone pick Simmons over Adam Harrison??
July 23rd 2012 @ 9:26pm
WQ said | July 23rd 2012 @ 9:26pm | Report comment
Red Kev, ‘outplayed every lock he’s been on the park with this year, Australian, South African or New Zealand’, talk about poetic license!
Do you really believe he is the best Lock in Super Rugby?
July 24th 2012 @ 6:53am
Red Kev said | July 24th 2012 @ 6:53am | Report comment
He IS the FORM lock in Super Rugby, there’s a difference.
He also hasn’t played against every lock in the competition, probably only 50-60% of them. He missed the first few games of the season and was on the bench behind Horwill until his injury. However for the last five rounds he has been without a shadow of a doubt the best lock playing in the competition.
July 24th 2012 @ 8:57am
WQ said | July 24th 2012 @ 8:57am | Report comment
He is going ok Red Kev, however I would suggest Brodie Ratallick,Anton Bresler, Sam Whitelock, Juandre Kruger, Craig Clarke, Andries Bekker and even Luke Romano are going just as well or better!
July 23rd 2012 @ 2:06pm
Brett McKay said | July 23rd 2012 @ 2:06pm | Report comment
Correct J2, as is Anthony Fainga’a and Dom Shipperly, too, I think.
Jez, the Wallabies have essentially turned the squad into a possibles/finess squad now, where they’ll just do a bit of conditioning this week to keep blokes fit. I think we’ll see the RC squad proper named a fortnight out from the first Bledisloe.
I had a chat with someone pretty close to the Wallabies last week, and the plan for this current squad (and the players involved) was always going to be pretty fluid, all depending on how far the Reds went…
July 23rd 2012 @ 2:10pm
Justin2 said | July 23rd 2012 @ 2:10pm | Report comment
Shipperley has been dropped, AF is rested. Maybe harsh on Shipps as it is an extended traiing squad.
He and Morahan need to be encouraged more to use the speed. Both look like they are holding back trying to do the right thing instead of just putting on the after burners.
July 23rd 2012 @ 3:53pm
jeznez said | July 23rd 2012 @ 3:53pm | Report comment
Shipperly and Morahan excluded at the expense of Turner, Mitchell and Vuna seems harsh.
Will hold fire a bit until the 30 man RC squad is named but find it odd that some good prospects in various positins appear to have been exluded while other under-performing or injury impacted players are in.
July 23rd 2012 @ 4:01pm
Red Kev said | July 23rd 2012 @ 4:01pm | Report comment
I can understand omitting Morahan, but not Shipperley, not with the current state of Australian wingers (JOC to miss first two matches, Tomane out until next SR season, Speight ineligible, Mitchell and Turner still a long way from peak form and fitness, and the less said about Vuna the better).
Also (and I don’t know where I got this from) I had it in my head that the RC squad could only be 28 members for each round not 30.
July 23rd 2012 @ 7:53pm
Dexter William said | July 23rd 2012 @ 7:53pm | Report comment
Morahan needs to go to Rugby finishing school – needs to toughen up. He is mentally weak, afraid to be tackled.
July 23rd 2012 @ 7:02pm
The Werewolf said | July 23rd 2012 @ 7:02pm | Report comment
I’ve got one more article to go on try scoring against the tri nations and then i’ve got a few more ideas on some articles that critique some other criticism of Deans tenure. Its not all good mind you.
July 23rd 2012 @ 1:56pm
Justin2 said | July 23rd 2012 @ 1:56pm | Report comment
Stats, stats and more research into stats is all well and good.
It does little to clarify ones ability to coach and see improvements in players, tactics and match day performance. Throw in innovation, which was once a hallmark of the Wallabies, now sadly lacking and what do we have?
Robbie Deans – great provincial “coach” and average Test coach. The rest is window dressing at this point.
July 23rd 2012 @ 3:25pm
Kuruki said | July 23rd 2012 @ 3:25pm | Report comment
Deans had a very good team at the Crusaders it’s very hard to judge him on his coaching skill. Based on some of his decisions i think he could do allot better.
July 24th 2012 @ 12:24am
Athilnaur said | July 24th 2012 @ 12:24am | Report comment
So true, Blackadder has done so well in the past 4 years Kuruki …
July 23rd 2012 @ 6:10pm
Sluggy said | July 23rd 2012 @ 6:10pm | Report comment
Might be a bit harsh – No 2 in the rankings, 2-1winning record against the Boks, second to the ABs in try scoring, wins, and everything… and closer to that level than any other team. Looks alright from that POV. Ireland 2.5 – 1.5, France 5 zip, England 3-2, Wales 8-1.
There might be a bit of a blotch on Scotland results though – lost the two tests played since 2006, albeit by a combined total of 4 points.
July 23rd 2012 @ 6:36pm
Ben S said | July 23rd 2012 @ 6:36pm | Report comment
If we take the England games as an example: England have basically been blasted by the majority of Australian Roarers for close to the past decade now, and yet Martin Johnson (and his team) comprehensively outcoached Deans in the last two Tests they played. A home loss to an England side that was, on average, younger and less experienced than their Wallaby counterparts, and a record away loss isn’t that impressive. Even the Wallaby wins were pretty mundane affairs, with Giteau’s kicking going a long way to recording victory. I only consider the record against France and Wales to be impressive, tbh.
July 23rd 2012 @ 7:12pm
The Werewolf said | July 23rd 2012 @ 7:12pm | Report comment
Deans’ win ratio against England (60%) is higher than both our traditional average (58%) and our current professional age average (52%).
July 23rd 2012 @ 10:23pm
Ben S said | July 23rd 2012 @ 10:23pm | Report comment
So? Eddie Jones faced a far, far superior England than Robbie Deans ever has and yet Deans has recorded a home loss and an away routing. Not only that, but in both matches Australia were comprehensively outgunned.
July 24th 2012 @ 1:51am
The Werewolf said | July 24th 2012 @ 1:51am | Report comment
Not in 04 and certainly not in 05 where his side got demolished. Are you really english?
July 24th 2012 @ 2:46am
Ben S said | July 24th 2012 @ 2:46am | Report comment
No, I’m not English. I’m from Bolivia but I like to come on here and chat to fellow oddballs pretending I’m English. Another astute comment.
What happened in 2004? Australia won in 2004 and that was the England side that routed South Africa. The 2005 England side only lost 19-23 to NZ too. What is your point? Are you really a rugby fan?
July 23rd 2012 @ 9:45pm
Justin2 said | July 23rd 2012 @ 9:45pm | Report comment
You’ve merely regurgitated similar stats. Thats not an analysis of a coach.
July 23rd 2012 @ 10:05pm
The Werewolf said | July 23rd 2012 @ 10:05pm | Report comment
‘statistics are figures the simplest can understand an the astutest can not wriggle out of’.
July 23rd 2012 @ 10:24pm
Ben S said | July 23rd 2012 @ 10:24pm | Report comment
Justin makes a valid point. There is no analysis, just numbers. No response to the consistent and long-held complaints and criticisms of Deans as a coach.
July 23rd 2012 @ 11:25pm
The Werewolf said | July 23rd 2012 @ 11:25pm | Report comment
Ben are you the simplest or the astutest…. I think i know which one.
July 23rd 2012 @ 11:35pm
Ben S said | July 23rd 2012 @ 11:35pm | Report comment
I see. Clever response. I guess you’ve already forgotten about your previous moderation…
July 24th 2012 @ 1:07am
The Werewolf said | July 24th 2012 @ 1:07am | Report comment
cry me a river Ben.
Troll somewhere else!
July 24th 2012 @ 2:49am
Ben S said | July 24th 2012 @ 2:49am | Report comment
This is the issue: somebody questions what you write, and you return with rudeness and childishness. It’s pretty pointless and makes me wonder why you come on here. Justin raises a valid point: this piece is nothing but numbers that imply that Deans really is OK. As aforementioned, it does nothing to dispel the longstanding complaints and criticisms of Deans. So what is the point?
July 24th 2012 @ 2:29pm
Justin2 said | July 24th 2012 @ 2:29pm | Report comment
In case you missed it the first time –
“It does little to clarify ones ability to coach and see improvements in players, tactics and match day performance. Throw in innovation, which was once a hallmark of the Wallabies, now sadly lacking and what do we have?”
Lets not use quotes as some sort of argument, we can all copy and paste…
July 24th 2012 @ 4:50pm
The Werewolf said | July 24th 2012 @ 4:50pm | Report comment
Prove there is no innovation. Its just your opinion and you are wrong.
Statistical analysis proves or disproves theories.
July 24th 2012 @ 8:23pm
Ben S said | July 24th 2012 @ 8:23pm | Report comment
‘Prove there is no innovation. Its just your opinion and you are wrong.’
Wow. Perhaps you could extend that sentence to, and you are wrong because…
Statistical analysis does not prove or disprove theories in a rugby context. That’s a grossly negligent oversimplification.
July 24th 2012 @ 9:52pm
Justin2 said | July 24th 2012 @ 9:52pm | Report comment
Werewolf – you aren’t for real are you?
I can’t wait for your next gem of a rebuttal, goodness me.
July 24th 2012 @ 10:37pm
The Werewolf said | July 24th 2012 @ 10:37pm | Report comment
As opposed to your rebuttal of copying and pasting your own comment Justin?
Its fine to be a Deans hater and to think he is not innovative (I think you are wrong) but stats analysis is part of the game. They are exactly what coaching staff and management use to draw up game plans, training regimes etc. You don’t think our coaching staff for example know exactly how many average tries they’ve scored and from what source etc. You don’t think they have the same information on each opposition.
For the fans stats are important in forming opinions. Deans try scoring is generally very good. If you choose to ignore the stats that is your right but its far too easy to stand on ones soap box and state we are not innovative or he is a bad coach despite that he is statistically doing well. If you read the article and look at the stats he must be doing something right.
July 24th 2012 @ 12:26am
SamClench said | July 24th 2012 @ 12:26am | Report comment
The problem with all of those head to heads is the second number in each. Two losses to England, draw and a loss with Ireland, lost one to Wales, lost two to Scotland… France is the only really impressive record. Should be aiming for zero losses to northern sides.
July 24th 2012 @ 12:59am
The Werewolf said | July 24th 2012 @ 12:59am | Report comment
Oh young Sam you have much to learn.
There has never been a time in our history we’re we could hand on heart say that we were so good that we could guarantee NO losses against any of the top european nations.
Deans record against England, Wales and obviously France is above average. For example against England we have only beaten them 52% of the time since the game went professional. All up we’ve only beaten them on 58% of occasions.
Deans obviously has the 1 loss to Ireland and the 2 losses to Scotland (who also beat South Africa the last time they played) but that is a part of sport and doesn’t change the fact that Deans win ratio against these five nations combined is better than both our combined record against them in the professional era and in test history.
We are not the All Blacks.
July 24th 2012 @ 2:54am
Ben S said | July 24th 2012 @ 2:54am | Report comment
Again, you’re glossing over key issues – Australia should not be losing to Scotland at home. What South Africa did against the same side is irrelevant because PDV’s tenure bordered on farce. Likewise the English losses. England haven’t beaten SA in years now, have they? Is that relevant? Nope.
A record away loss is palatable? The home loss to a younger and less experienced side is OK simply because to expect to win every game is unrealistic? You keep repeating how Australia recently beat the defending 6N champions, well in that case you cannot gloss over a home loss to a side that had just finished 3rd in the 6N.
Btw, Australia has beaten England on 57.5% of occasions, not 58%.
July 24th 2012 @ 3:58am
The Werewolf said | July 24th 2012 @ 3:58am | Report comment
What is 57.5% rounded to the nearest whole number? You are a credit to the english school system. This article is about try scoring btw
July 24th 2012 @ 4:17am
Ben S said | July 24th 2012 @ 4:17am | Report comment
It’s obvious what you’ve done with the number, but not as to why. No need to round up. In any case, it was a one liner. You choose to ignore something about rugby and be insulting instead. Pointless.
July 23rd 2012 @ 6:46pm
biltongbek said | July 23rd 2012 @ 6:46pm | Report comment
Werewolf, interesting stats.
However I would suggest the reason why try scoring on a whole have reduced is due to bigger players, different laws and better defences.
The other issue with comparing our try scoring in relation to australia, we have stagnated and as you well know have struggled under PDV to create play.
As an example, Habana scored 30 tries in 35 tests under Jake White, under PDV he scored 1o tries in 34 matches, hardly worth comparing.
July 23rd 2012 @ 7:09pm
The Werewolf said | July 23rd 2012 @ 7:09pm | Report comment
Having a good head coach is important but a players personal form is also important. Has habana been killing them at super rugby as much as in his hey days?
I agree that players size, the laws and the better coaching of defences is cutting the try scoring opportunities down then what we once saw even 4 years ago. Either way defences today are better across the board particularly the european sides.
July 23rd 2012 @ 9:37pm
WQ said | July 23rd 2012 @ 9:37pm | Report comment
Thanks for a good read that I am sure has few thinking Werewolf.
If you take the Allblacks statistics out of the equation, Australia’s stats are the best in the World under Deans, probably not to bad when it is all boiled down!
It would only be fair to remove the Allblacks statistics, after all it is a bit like comparing every other Test Cricket Batsmen against Bradmen. Most Test batsman these days are not marked on Bradmen as it just would not be fair, his statistics are just so far in front of everybody else’s.
So remove the Allblacks statistics and it all looks good!
July 24th 2012 @ 12:40am
Ben S said | July 24th 2012 @ 12:40am | Report comment
When was the last time England, SA or NZ lost to Samoa?
July 24th 2012 @ 12:37am
Athilnaur said | July 24th 2012 @ 12:37am | Report comment
After sinking as low as 6, to be consistently in the top 3 is good.
Deans took a broken down team, identified new talent, propped it up with people who got the job done and has steadily built the stocks. All on the back of a country that competes as the third, possibly 4th football code in Australia.
The only fault I think that can be legitimately aired is he is used to a kiwi team culture where playing in the back jersey means you play better than you ever have in your life or you’ll be dumped.
And frankly the sooner we can get to that attitude and reality the sooner we will have a genuine shot of taking over as #1.
July 24th 2012 @ 12:43am
Ben S said | July 24th 2012 @ 12:43am | Report comment
Did Australia fall to 6th? I thought they just fell to 5th? Regardless, that argument is a total lame duck. Australia moved up in the IRB rankings before they had played a game under Deans.
He didn’t take over a broken down team either, nor can you say he’s built squad depth. There’s still huge question marks over certain positions in the starting XV let alone the squad.
July 24th 2012 @ 1:32am
The Werewolf said | July 24th 2012 @ 1:32am | Report comment
A fair comment A. When they put that jersey on it has to be like when the new zealanders put theirs on. but i’d like to put a positive spin on it. They should be playing better because they know the fans are with them not for fear of being dropped.
Ben I don’t get your vested interest in this discussion. You are english right? aren’t there english blogging sites to debate the english team and coach?
July 24th 2012 @ 2:59am
Ben S said | July 24th 2012 @ 2:59am | Report comment
Are you new? Did I even address you? I assume other bloggers like OJ have to go to a NZ blog in that case? Please explain to me what I have said in the above paragraph that is either provocative or not worth considering. This may come as a shock to you, but some rugby fans actually watch rugby involving other countries and thereafter like to discuss said rugby.
July 24th 2012 @ 4:03am
The Werewolf said | July 24th 2012 @ 4:03am | Report comment
I thought Athilnaaur’s comment was a good one and not a ‘lame duck’. You are clearly a bored englishman with nothing better to do than try and troll with aussie fans who want to discuss the Wallabies. Sad really.
July 24th 2012 @ 4:21am
Ben S said | July 24th 2012 @ 4:21am | Report comment
Again, stop accusing people of trolling just because you’re unable to refute their arguments. You haven’t actually made any reference to my rugby based points so either engage or stop pestering me. Again, please try and address the points and stop being insulting. It’s unnecessary and boring. Obviously you were unaware of the fact that the Australian post-2007 WC ranking point has been discussed again and again and again on the Roar, and the fact is that it is a lame duck. Australia only placed 5th (and not 6th – as I questioned) due to their loss to England. They then moved up the ladder having not played a game under Deans. This has been noted countless times.
July 24th 2012 @ 6:12am
The Werewolf said | July 24th 2012 @ 6:12am | Report comment
I’m not accusing ‘people’ of trolling. i’m accusing you. Why would an englishman give a rats about the wallabies and their coach?
July 24th 2012 @ 7:02am
Ben S said | July 24th 2012 @ 7:02am | Report comment
You’ve accused others previously. I guess it’s hard to recall all those insults… I repeat: point out what is wrong with what I say in the above paragraph or please stop pestering me. It’s getting odd now.
It’s that sort of comment that makes me question your actual comprehension and involvement with rugby.
July 24th 2012 @ 5:01pm
The Werewolf said | July 24th 2012 @ 5:01pm | Report comment
I have only ever accused you to be atroll as an alleged englishman that makes passionate statements about Deans’ wallabies. There is something strange about that and there is something strange that you only ever comment on my articles.
I’ve got english mates who love rugby and i doubt they’d even know Deans has been criticised let alone take an interest….. funny that they are only really concerned with english rugby with the passion that you seem to have against Robbie Deans. If i didn’t know any better I’d say you either don’t care or you do and are actually somebody else say oh i don’t know an aussie that uses aliases.
July 24th 2012 @ 7:53pm
stillmatic1 said | July 24th 2012 @ 7:53pm | Report comment
strange argument there werewolf. an englishman (or anyone) cant have an interest and debate the merits of a discussion due to not being of the relevant nationality!! im interested in missions to mars, so do i have to be an alien? im a born and bred southland boy, but i cant follow the saders? or now that im in oz, cant follow the broncos?
benS is right, this is a rugby forum, and having posters from elsewhere adds to the knowledge we can gain from it. case in point is KPM and his rambling that gets shot down due to not actually having any evidence on which to base his opinions. pothale, for instance, enlightened us to what “actually” is happening in european rugby at the moment. something that we would not have known if we just believed what KPM was writing.
stats, like mathematics, are pure numbers, but rarely have any context in and by themselves. your stats just gloss over what many of us know to be true and have witnessed. the bean counters may like them (and for the record, i dont mind having that knowledge either), but the real rugby person knows the game and cant easily forget the intangibles that contributed to those numbers.
keep the articles up, but realise you better have some decent analysis beyond the numbers, otherwise the hard task masters here on theroar will grill you on it.
July 24th 2012 @ 8:27pm
Ben S said | July 24th 2012 @ 8:27pm | Report comment
‘I have only ever accused you to be atroll as an alleged englishman that makes passionate statements about Deans’ wallabies. There is something strange about that and there is something strange that you only ever comment on my articles.
I’ve got english mates who love rugby and i doubt they’d even know Deans has been criticised let alone take an interest….. funny that they are only really concerned with english rugby with the passion that you seem to have against Robbie Deans. If i didn’t know any better I’d say you either don’t care or you do and are actually somebody else say oh i don’t know an aussie that uses aliases.’
Odd. I comment on a host of articles, however, only you react so childishly because, I presume, your article are generally very one-dimensional and not that deeply thought – I specifically refer you to the openside flanker debate re the WC: you’re evasive and contradictory and sometimes just plain rude. If you can’t cope with rugby based criticism then find another hobby, I guess.The fact that you continue to suggest that I shouldn’t have an interest in Australian rugby really makes me doubt you are actually a rugby fan. Either engage with what I say that pertains to rugby or stop pestering me please. Thanks.
July 24th 2012 @ 8:49pm
The Werewolf said | July 24th 2012 @ 8:49pm | Report comment
Stillmatic have you read the article? the article is on Wallaby try scoring in general and this bloke keeps arguing about nonsensical tangents because he feels aggrieved that i’ve made him look the fool in the past due to his dishonesty. He’s made comments like he watches a ton of french rugby and dusatour plays in a 6 for his club (when it is a fact that dusatoir has only ever worn a no 7 jersey for his club) and i’ve corrected him. He is angry i’ve shown him up and that is why he is trolling with negative tangents on my articles and I’m sick of it. He has not commented on any other article recently. I know i’ve checked. i believe he is someone i’ve had a long running battle with for some time in reality.
An englishman as any is welcome to comment. However it is strange that one has such strong anti Deans viewpoints. I find it frankly not believable. Comments like ‘scotland should not be beating the wallabies at home’ or ‘there’s still question marks over certain positions in the starting Xv let alone the squad’.
These are the comments of a passioned australian that resents Deans coaching his beloved team. not an english lover of rugby.
I’ve read a few comments on here that have questioned the guy in terms of whether he is actually who he says he is.
He hasn’t even mentioned Lancaster in comparison or brought any comment that reflects an english point of view.
I’d love to hear an english point of view because i can tell you talking to mates here in london they could care less about the fact that Deans took one openside to the world cup for example. the guy istrolling.
But back to the article; Deans has the second best try scoring rate in the world. This was looked at in comparison to past eras and to current top tier opposition. Its as analysed as it could be. People that hate deans are going to hate because the blindest men are the ones that will not see.
I wasn’t a fan of some past coaches but if someone analysed some of their stats to point out certain truths then i’d be happy to read about it and I’d be reluctant to try and break the article up into tangents.
July 24th 2012 @ 9:09pm
Ben S said | July 24th 2012 @ 9:09pm | Report comment
Again, tone it down please. It’s disrespectful and unecessary.
You’re more than welcome to think Dusautoir is an openside, but he isn’t, and a number of Roarers agreed with me on that point. I’m not sure why you feel a need to bring this point up at this point in time?
Stuart Lancaster has nothing to do with this article. I have commented on Lancaster numerous times on other threads. I can’t imagine where his relevance would like given this is just a numbers piece relating to Australia?
That Deans didn’t bring a second openside to the WC was a huge talking point, and also pretty relevant given your suggestion that openside is the most important position on the pitch. If you think an Englishman shouldn’t be able to comment on that then I’m not sure what to say.
Stating that Australia shouldn’t lose to Scotland at home is not an anti-Deans viewpoint. Stating that there are questions over certain positions in the starting XV isn’t an anti-Deans position. Can you expand upon how you think I’m being anti-Deans based on these two comments or please retract what you said.
Just calm down and try to stick to the rugby, please. All this hostility is not a good look and neither is moderation.
July 24th 2012 @ 9:20pm
The Werewolf said | July 24th 2012 @ 9:20pm | Report comment
and still you have not commented on the articles issue of try scoring.
i suppose as a Deans hater you resent being shown that he is actually producing the second most amount of tries in the world. that must be difficult to take because you’d actually need to confront that you are yet again…. wrong.
July 24th 2012 @ 9:29pm
Ben S said | July 24th 2012 @ 9:29pm | Report comment
How old are you, out of interest?
I don’t care how many tries Australia are scoring because they are unequivocally underperforming. There’s not really much more to add to what OJ says at the top. I never made a single reference to tries scored either, so why bring that up and what does that even prove? I’m really unsure as to what you’re trying to achieve here? Again, stick to the rugby or stop pestering me and accusing me of things.
July 24th 2012 @ 9:32pm
The Werewolf said | July 24th 2012 @ 9:32pm | Report comment
oh poor murph