To win the ‘do or die’ games of Test rugby at the world cup, I believe you only need to have the ability to score two tries a match – and obviously concede less than that.
I originally based this theory merely on observations. But I asked myself recently, do my perceptions match the reality?
I thought, if one was to indeed average out the scores of all 49 rugby world cup knock-out games to date, would there be any surprises? I was curious, so I set aside a bit of time and worked it all out.
I wish to be clear that these statistics do not include the ‘playoff for third’ games. They are as useful as personalised number plates. I mean why bother? You only come out looking like a loser anyway.
I found that most world cup finals are tight affairs. I also found that the quarters and semis are much closer nowadays. There are far fewer points available in the knock-out stages than in the earlier rugby world cups.
Here are some fun facts.
• 1991 is the Benjamin Button of rugby world cups – a ‘curious case’, an anomaly. Apart from 1991, there has been an uncanny, steady decline in total tries scored at the knock-out stages of the respective world cups;
• 1987 saw 36 tries in the knock-out stages,
• 1991 saw 19 tries in the knock-out stages,
• 1995 saw 31 tries in the knock-out stages,
• 1999 saw 27 tries in the knock-out stages,
• 2003 saw 23 tries in the knock-out stages,
• 2007 saw 20 tries in the knock-out stages,
• 2011 saw 16 tries in the knock-out stages.
It is clear that there are fewer and fewer tries being scored in the knock-out stages. It also worth noting that 2011 was the first time that no side managed four tries in a game during the knock-out stages. Also, New Zealand scored 13 tries in the knock-out stages in 1987. In 2011, they managed a total of just four.
It is not only tries that are becoming fewer between the top eight sides during the knock-out stages. The points scored have been steadily diminishing since 1999, having steadily risen between the 1987 to 1999 world cups (except for the *1991 anomaly);
• 1987 had an average winning to losing score of 32 to 11 in knock-out matches.
• In *1991 the average score was 19 to 9,
• In 1995 the average score was 33 to 19,
• In 1999 the average score was 36 to 20,
• In 2003 the average score was 28 to 14,
• In 2007 the average score was 22 to 13,
• In 2011 the average score was 17 to 9.
When looking at these facts we must not forget that tries became worth five points in 1992.
But what is probably of most importance is the fact the average margins between winning and losing sides in knock-out stages is on the decline of late.
• 1987 had an average margin of 21 points between winning and losing sides in knock-out stages.
• In *1991 there was an average margin of 10 points,
• In 1995 there was an average margin of 14 points,
• In 1999 there was an average margin of 16 points,
• In 2003 there was an average margin of 14 points,
• In 2007 there was an average margin of 9 points,
• In 2011 there was an average margin of 8 points.
Clearly the average margins sharply dropped after 1987, before steadily increasing from 1995 to 1999. You can see above that margins have also been steadily reducing since 1999.
It is clear that the top-eight sides, the sides that make the quarter finals, are much closer than they once were.
What I think all this shows is that in order to reach the Rugby World Cup final you do indeed just need to be able to score two tries and concede one against the top eight sides.
But what about the final? What historically is enough to win? There have only been seven of these and the average scoreline in Rugby World Cup final is 19-10.
Of course five of the seven world cup finals have been extremely close matches. Interestingly, there has only been one world cup final (1987) where more than a total of two tries have been scored between the two sides.
The truth is there are genuinely eight sides that can win this year’s world cup and that is evident by how close things have become since the 1990s.
Indeed if you qualify for the quarter finals at the Rugby World Cup, you are literally an intercept pass or a charge down away from success or failure.
There is no guarantee that the Wallabies will even make the quarters but if they do they will have just as much of a chance as everyone else of winning the world cup.
Let’s hope they gain some inspiration from their cricketing cousins and let’s hope the fans can get behind them.
Breeze101
Roar Rookie
Basketball definitely is more global than Rugby Union but with World Rugby working hard to grow Rugby it's fast closing the gap with other global sports. It's already the fastest growing team game as a amateur sport in America. Rugby 7s in the Olympics what a blessing what better platform than the Olympics to grow the game. It just lifts the profile of Rugby to greater heights never seen before trust me it will bleed over to the 15s game further cementing Rugby Union's position as a true Global sport!! Not many sports can offer Olympic pathways & provide to different formats of the same game to excel at like Rugby 7s & 15s, Rugby Union is truly blessed!! Reap what you sow, World Rugby continues to plant seeds & it's starting to pay off. Well as far as the point system goes like you said we just have to agree to disagree.
Nick
Guest
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree as all past evidence shows that the ARU proposals will lead to fewer tries and more penalty kicks and thus more stoppages in the long run. If these changes are just confined to Oz and not inflicted on the rest of the rugby world at least the damage will be limited. P.S. I think you're correct about RU being the second biggest outdoor team sport, although if you include indoor sports I would think basketball is probably more global. Still we can hope that'll change in time. Although I don't like 7s all that much I'm hoping its presence in the Olympics will help the 15 man game grow.
Breeze101
Roar Rookie
Rugby 7s is great it's still Rugby!! Rugby Union is a global sport not on par with Soccer no sport will but in comparison to other field sports Rugby Union is clearly right behind Soccer. I'm still going to support NRC Rugby here in Australia & the brand of Rugby it promotes!! The amount of time wasted for scrum resets & Line outs from International level to Super Rugby, Aviva Premiership etc is too bloody long in comparison to the NRC speed the game already!! The core value of the game of Rugby won't be loss because of a 2 point penalty system you serious??.. it's just promotes more running Rugby!! Infringements in the game always happens anyways & that's always been a problem not one created if the point system was changed!! It's just part of the game that's why Yellow & Red cards (even penalty tries) are used to serve it's purpose to stop & limit teams from deliberate infringements!! Deliberate Infringements is an area of the game whether 3 points or 2 is where it's a continuous work in progress for the game to officiate. I see more benefits personally of a NRC brand of Rugby more tries better to watch it's still Rugby Awesome.
Nick
Guest
I'm not interested in RL either. I merely wanted to demonstrate that we have a great and thriving sport which is eclipsing RL elsewhere. I'm not interested in 7s either which is as boring and predictable as 20/20 cricket. I suspect that's the route you'd like to take with the 15 men game, although as I've pointed out the proposal to reduce the value of the penalty is likely to lead to more not less goal kicking contests based on past evidence. We already have a great and successful game without the need for yet more changes at present. Frankly from my experience people are sick and tired of the constant tinkering with the rules and just want a period of consolidation when we can enjoy all the skills that RU brings to the table which includes goal kicking. It's worth remembering that from the beginning of the sport the purpose of getting over your opponents line was not to score a try but to secure a "try" at a goal kick (conversion).
Breeze101
Roar Rookie
I don't care about Rugby league they can concentrate on their little domestic competition. Rugby Union is my passion!! Rugby yes is thriving around the world with Rugby 7s & 15s it's amazing to see how Rugby continues to grow each year!! But you can't tell it's frustrating watching teams opt for the soft option of 3 points cause they know it's there where's the fun & skills in that. Maybe it's World Rugby that is out of touch with the game & the ARU is on course to give fans a true spectacle of Rugby.
Nick
Guest
Not sure what you mean by the "snobby" unions. However, perhaps the ARU should look to countries like France, England and Ireland where crowds are continuing to grow and the game is thriving. While crowds at international level were always bigger in RU than RL, the reverse was true at club level in England. However, twelve years ago RU club attendances overtook those of RL and have done every year since. Only last month a crowd of over 80,000 watched an English Premiership game between Harlequins and Saracens. The point is the ARU's position appears arrogant and out of touch when other countries are succeeding where they are failing.
Breeze101
Roar Rookie
I enjoy watching the NRC with its new law variation & point system. ARU need more support from other Snobby Unions to Support Change!! Given Time the NRC will be a testament that change will work & be good for the game. We a restricted & robbed as Rugby fans who love the game of it's full potential as a spectacle because people within the game are afraid of change as I've already stated in my previous comments.
Nick
Guest
After the try was upgraded from 4 pts to 5 pts the stats show that the number of infringements inside the 22 increased in the knowledge that 3 pts and a possible yellow card was worth risking against conceding 7 pts up front. The idea that a lesser penalty, ie. 2 pts and the possibility of a yellow card will somehow act as a deterrent makes no sense. I understand your desire to cut the number of penalties but what the ARU are proposing will have the opposite effect and the rest of the rugby world knows that.
Breeze101
Roar Rookie
Why would I not watch??.. I love the game that's why I keep saying what fans want!! Rugby's full potential as a spectacle is held back because Grandpa's of the game are AFRAID of CHANGE!!
Breeze101
Roar Rookie
Have you heard of yellow & red cards teams will quickly learn to not infringe and play the game!! Adjustments will have to be made no doubt, but 2 points is more than ENOUGH!! Rugby fans are tired of penalty kicks because it's a Snore feast!! It's killing the game, maybe not in terms of Rugby Unions growth & rapid rise as a sport in Rugby 7s & 15s around the world in particular in non Rugby Nations but Rugby will be more of a spectacle if 2 point penalties was official!! Credit to the ARU for identifying this major problem within the game. I'm more than confident that if the ARU stay on course with their change in the point system with their new provincial rugby competition NRC Rugby fans will demand World Rugby to follow suit.
Nick
Guest
Let me see if I understand your argument. The SH sides play open attractive rugby but are seeing falling spectator/viewer numbers, meanwhile in the NH where they are also competing against other sports, eg. football and rugby league spectator/viewer numbers are growing even though you don't like their style of rugby. Perhaps that explains why the IRB aren't so enthusiastic about changing things.
Nick
Guest
Or Joe Davis or Heather Mckay or AP McCoy. Bradman was a standout in his sport but there have been others in other sports.
Nick
Guest
Sheek, A number of people have blamed the state of the grounds for the lack of tries in '91 and that might have played a part. However, I'm not sure that the overall quality of the sides was that great with no obvious favourite unlike most RWC's. I attended the pool game between the AB's and Italy which NZ eventually won 31-21 but for much of the match the Azurri looked the better side - their fullback Paulo Vaccari was brilliant. The bottom line being that the AB's just weren't that good in '91. As for the finalists I think you could add to your list that Oz pulled off one of the greatest cons in sporting history. Throughout the tournament the Aussies led by Campo ribbed the English for their style of play and then come the final it was as if the teams had swapped shirts with the Wallabies playing percentage rugby while England tried to run the ball, not surprisingly without success. It's all moot now but I've always believed that if Campo & co hadn't duped the English a Wallaby team exhausted by their efforts against Ireland and the AB's would have lost the '91 final if England had employed the tactics they had used throughout the tournament to that point.
Nick
Guest
Cut the points for penalties and all you'll do is encourage teams to commit more infringements to prevent tries being scored in the knowledge that they'll only be giving away 2 pts instead of 7.
SAVAGE
Guest
In this day and age of Professional Rugby, Fatigue and Pressure will dictate a WC Final.
taylorman
Roar Guru
Aim is for the ABs to change that this year Conor. After finally breaking the title choke the criticisms for this year are usually replaced by: - ABs can only win them at home (I.e.- the watered down version of the choke) - AB's were gifted the wins by Joubert, mainly for reasons no one has actually supplied other than generally, rather than specifically, favouring the French. ABs challenge this year is therefore to win away, win it decisively and become the leading side with 3 wins. No doubt the criticism will be further watered down to SA's absences and England thinking the first was a dwarf throwing comp...or something like that.(their excuses are hard to keep track of). This year, the only way to win decisively in the knockout rounds will be to run sides ragged. They can do this by preserving the top side as much as possible during pool play while focussing on their fitness, and the relative struggles other sides will have in pool play. A significantly weaker pool and a usually higher level of fitness, skills levels must be taken advantage of. Yes games will be tight, but stretch a side to breaking point enough, and the rewards will be there.
Bakkies
Guest
I take it you don't watch much cup Rugby elsewhere as it isn't common in Australia. Taking the three points is paramount in big matches and the conversion rate through kicking to the corner is small. James Horwill the thick plank turned down kickable penalties while behind in the deciding Lions test instead going for the corner and coming away with nothing numerous times. You only get one chance to captain against the Lions and he was captaining like he was going for bonus points. The Wallabies won a RWC semi against SA in 1999 and it was one of the most tense games of Rugby. Not a single try was scored in the 110 mins of Rugby that was played.
Bakkies
Guest
Don't watch then. Plenty others are.
Bakkies
Guest
'but suffered some bizarre ref interpretations of the scrum which allowed Australia to kick penalties to stay in the game (as an aside the Aussie try in the final was a hopeful up and under into the in-goal area ' strange remarks. The game would have been over by full time had Ben Kay not dropped the ball over the try line. As for the Tuqiri try it was a smart exploiting of a size miss match that the Wallabies used often when a small winger was in the opposition. I think Mark Gerrard scored one off a similar cross kick against England in Melbourne after that RWC.
2211
Guest
Is that true of '91 as well botham?