There’s a saying that there are lies, damn lies and then there are statistics. It applies aptly to sport where, in the process of trying to rank an individual or a team, people try to create an exact science by looking at stats.
Last weekend’s Bledisloe Cup Test between Australia and New Zealand is a prime example of why I cannot stand stats.
After the Test, many people praised the Wallabies for their energetic performance, but noted how they didn’t gain a lot of possession. Some criticism was aimed at the All Blacks for not making proper use of their apparent glut of possession.
I maintain the only way to really understand how a team played is to have watched them play with your own eyes.
The first ten minutes of last weekend’s game were fantastic for Australia. Their most effective tactic was unquestionably their ability to kick the ball just outside New Zealand’s 22, preventing them from kicking for territory.
It was fantastic!
Matt Giteau, Berrick Barnes, Lote Tuqiri and Adam Ashley-Cooper at different stages in the first half, put up many high balls which landed only metres outside of New Zealand’s 22.
It should be obvious to anybody who saw those first ten minutes that the Wallabies were pressuring the All Blacks tremendously well. Australia’s loose-forwards have been tremendous – George Smith in particular – and New Zealand looked troubled trying to maintain possession.
After just four minutes New Zealand were given a line-out deep inside their 22 and Dan Carter, for the first time in the match, was able to kick for touch. The look of the All Black forwards said it all, they wanted to play rugby downfield.
But it wasn’t long before another perfectly weighted kick landed just outside the All Black 22 and once again, they were under pressure.
Mils Muliaina booted the ball downfield and Loti Tuqiri made an incisive counter-attacking run, off-loaded to Nathan Sharpe and Australia went on the register their first try from the next phase.
It would appear obvious to anybody who saw the game that Australia were pressuring New Zealand, but because of the amount of times they kicked the ball just outside New Zealand’s 22, New Zealand were dominating possession statistically.
I will submit that in the last 20 minutes of the first half, I thought the All Blacks were starting to get on top of the Wallabies.
They were able to work their way downfield and had a good amount of ball. But at the end of the Test the stats showing New Zealand had 70 per cent of the ball really doesn’t highlight who dominated the game.
A friend remarked that Australia had a tremendous amount of territory of the game, which he couldn’t figure out since Australia had such little possession. This highlights that stats aren’t always a good indication of who dominated a game.
Australia won because of what they did with their possession to maintain territory which pressured New Zealand until they cracked.
It’s a common mistake people make.
Not long ago people talked about how Ireland dominated the statistic for territory against Australia, and many deduced that Australia’s forwards played poorly. Australia’s forwards played quite alright, though they were hardly fantastic.
The real story was that the kicking of Giteau and Barnes, unlike the recent Bledisloe Test
was quite poor. Their clearing kicks didn’t find touch and quite often they squandered their possession.
Australia should be trilled they beat New Zealand on the weekend. Their scrum held up most of the time, the loose-forwards were tremendous and Giteau and Barnes showed a glimpse of what they were capable of as a 10 and 12 combo.
Only for short stages in the game was a lack of possession an issue, something statistics don’t reveal.
Love this article? Nominate it for The Roar’s Armchair Sports Writer Award. Or vote now for this week’s nominated articles.
mudskipper
Guest
Jerry...can you stop the rain like a good host...and cut that grass a little shorter we would like have a good run tomorrow night…
Frank O'Keeffe
Guest
It's shocks me that the All Black coaching staff are admitting they got it wrong and Deans adapted to the ELV's much better. http://www.rugbyheaven.co.nz/4635711a22363.html
Jerry
Guest
Oh yeah, and it's raining EVERYWHERE in NZ.
Jerry
Guest
Mudskipper - It was about 22 mins to the Wallabies vs 10 mins to the ABs. A good portion of that Wallaby time was in the final 20 minutes, crucially.
mudskipper
Guest
Statistics best show trends, not outcomes such as the score line...One stat that is most relevant from last weeks Bledisloe match is the time spent in the oppositions 22. The Wallabies had over 8 and a half minutes while the All Blacks had about 2 and a half minutes... there is the game. That's a trend that won the match for the Wallabies. The stats will be different tomorrow night at Eden Park. The All Blacks will try another tactics or Henry and Smith will have to hand in their NZ passports. New Zealanders Is it still raining in Auckland?
ohtani's jacket
Guest
Yeah, So'oialo fumbled the ball in the ruck and then threw it straight up the air. Not the prettiest of tries, though Ellis did well to catch it and spin out of the "tackle." EDIT: On closer inspection, it was an Aussie hand in the ruck that caused the fumble.
stillmissit
Guest
Chris Ash - unusual for me it was the only time in the game where Lote got my ire. I was pissed that he tried a stupid grab rather than tackle the bejesus out of Ellis.
Chris Ash, syd Aust
Guest
Jerry i think what OJ meant about the Ellis try was that the ball was fumbled through the air and he regained position of it on the way to the try line, you could see Lote's hands flying like a defensive basketball player trying to catch a steal.
stillmissit
Guest
The Riddler - Everyone knows Jones had a serious obsession about them. I didnt realise that John Michell had the illness as well.
stillmissit
Guest
Guys I have belatedly downloaded the game management instructions for refs in 2008 (havent done much this year) and I quote: 'If contact is made with the neck or head after initial contact below the line of the shoulders then it is still a dangerous tackle, IRB Council decision Nov 2007' this is new to me. I guess this is why Brad Thorn was in a situation to get his marching orders.
The Riddler
Roar Rookie
Eventually they are all a guide and only a fool who doesnt understand the game would use them exclusively Both Eddie Jones and John Mitchell were/are very stats focused and driven (obsessed). I make no other comment :-)
The Riddler
Roar Rookie
Eventually they are all a guide and only a fool who doesnt understand the game would use them exclusively Both Eddie Jones and John Mitchell were/are very stats focused and driven (obsessed). I make no comment other comment :-)
Peter K
Guest
I am so so glad I ama rugby supporter rather than a league one. Not just because the game is more varied, interesting etc but I had a quick look over the forums. The content and authors are remarkably superior in rugby. Content, I would have to take up reading and watching soapies to get up to speed. It far more about personalities (celebrities) and what they have got up to and who they have betrayed. Who went drinking, who got banned, who broke his contract etc. Sure there are pieces on improving management and administration like there is here. Far less is on actual games. Then when it is on games it is more of a shallow mine is bigger / better than yours. Very little analysis on actual game strategies , tactics etc (well yes 1,2,3,4,5 kick sorry could not help myself, tell myself to be restrained, balanced but ...) Reading this forum one stretches the grey matter as a percentage of articles far more. There are some good ones on the league one but it is hard work searching for them.
Peter K
Guest
All along I have said possession stats are misleading ESPECIALLY when used as a yardstick to measure how good the forwards are. This comes from the old proverb it is the forwards job to get the ball and the backs to use it. You have to look at turnovers to measure forwards effectiveness at competing for the ball. Both lost and stolen turnover in the tackle, ruck, lineout and scrum. So the turnover stat is very useful. Missed tackles and linebreaks are useful as well. Advantage line gained, metres gained and tackles broken are useful for measuring attacking effectiveness. I find the above stats especially broken down to individuals very illuminating. Sometimes it is only these type of stats that tells the story for the work that forwards do in tight and too many people rate the glory show boats far too highly whilst they ignore the hard yards. Possesion on its own I find misleading and don't use it much. Territory is a stat more telling of an overall team's performance and style of play.
Jerry
Guest
OJ - I'll concede there was an element of luck in the Muliaina try, but the Ellis one? A clean break from Carter, good offload to Nonu and Ellis burrows over from a ruck close to the line? Pretty much a definition of making your own luck, in my opinion. The only way the Wallabies looked like preventing the try was to jump offside, which the ref had spotted and was playing advantage for.
stillmissit
Guest
I have always wondered whether our stats are really useful. There are so many other things happening that the simplistic approach of our stats dont add a lot to the discussion and that is obvious on Inside Rugby where they quote the stats but don't often go into them. Some are obviously useful. How many knockons and line breaks but even these are due to pressure being exerted for example a knock on can be caused by a strong tackle and a line break due to a prop standing in the centres. We need a young phd student to work on secondment with the Wallabies to look at more meaningful data than what we are capturing today. I suspect that all we have done is copy the leaguies stats and use them. Our game needs a complete overhaul and rework of this area. Eventually they are all a guide and only a fool who doesnt understand the game would use them exclusively.
Mitch O
Guest
The gap in the stats simply reflects the gap in the game plans. This weekend I expect to see fairly even stats as the AB's are clearly adopting the Wallabies game plan. It was the AB's unforced errors in the last 20 minutes (stand up Mr Lauaki) that really killed off their chances by handing the Wallabies field position. We're all in for a game of aerial ping pong saturday night, sure the elv's keep the ball in play more, but it spends most of that extra time flying through the air between the sides.
ohtani's jacket
Guest
I completely agree with everything Frank wrote. The alarming thing for the All Blacks was the relative ease with which Australia scored. Contrast that with the scrappy manner in which we scored. We were lucky to score the Ellis try and the Muliaina try.
Benjamin
Guest
I thought that was gamesmanship from Ellis. Benefit of the doubt then.
Jerry
Guest
Benjamin - the knock on was because the ball hit Ryan Cross foot. Ellis appealled for a penalty, though it seemed accidental to me.