Stat's interesting: The numbers that count after Round 13

And that is the crux. Take the Force. They have zero punch in their carries consequently low metres per turnover even though they hang onto it. Then when they get tired or realise they are going nowhere they kick it... even though they are well inside the opposition half.

I've just glanced at the two columns of rankings. Without graphing the trend line, it seems risk is being rewarded: teams lower in the t/o rankings are generally higher in try rankings. So it looks like more turnovers = more tries.

That is the most important stat of all. Though I do enjoy the odd Cuban

The Master McKay, pulling out the big guns by going all stats on us eh?

I also look at the stats for Brazilan beach volleyball starlets

Thanks Brett. The only reliable statistic I look at are win/losses and scoreboard. Then I look at players stats, as it contributes critical parts of the game. There's just so many ways to win/lose a game. Having said all that, as certain teams play certain ways, then I look at the stats which highlights their specific strength or weaknesses. eg set piece, TOWs etc I do wish that the game administrators, provide more stats esp in collisions, rucks. And metres made from kick return

Brett Any statistical analysis of this season that includes correlation to tries scored will produce skewed stats for some teams. The Crusaders for example are top of the table for tries scored virtue of two large victories over the Sharks and Reds. The Brumbies were similarly placed earlier this season by virtue of their two big victories over the Reds. The porous defence by the Reds, will also inflate the number of carries per turnover for the Crusaders. “The Hurricanes and the Waratahs are the only teams to sit among both the top six try-scorers and the top six ball-carriers per turnover conceded.” This doesn’t surprise me given how Kiwi teams and the Tahs are playing the game. The Hurricanes in particular give the ball a lot of air, regardless of field position. They also commit fewer players to rucks in attack and so are vulnerable to turnovers from handling errors or ineffective cleanouts at the breakdown exposing the ball to be pilfered. The Highlanders play a similar style of game. Both teams will usually have less time in possession as they don’t always contest at the breakdown and instead concentrate on maintaining their defensive line, however when they receive the ball their metres gained is superior to the opposition due to their speed and ability to transition from defence to attack as well as their better footwork and passing skills to evade contact and put teammates into gaps. On attack their preference is to let the ball beat the man which can be difficult to defend against but also carries a higher risk of committing handling errors and conceding turnovers. Why the Highlanders are the worst performing Kiwi team for carries per turnover is probably influenced by the fact they're the only Kiwi team to have never registered a higher number of carries than their opposition this season. Even the Blues have done that at least twice this year. “If anything, the opposite is true: the Force hold the ball the most per turnover, yet sit ninth on the tries scored list. The Rebels similarly hold possession well, yet only three teams have scored fewer tries in 2015.” An example of the opposing style of play favoured by these teams in comparison to the Canes and Highlanders. Their attacking philosophy relies more on breaking down defences by weight of possession forcing the opposition to tackle more and theoretically tire, creating holes in the defence. Many of these carries are directly from or one off the ruck, advancing little more than a metre or less at a time, which accrue more carries but less metres gained. As the ball rarely moves beyond one person, there is also less opportunity for turnovers conceded and greater effort required to cross the advantage line. Unless they can recycle quick ball, they're also not creating space for their outside backs so when the ball is finally spread wide, the defence can easily drift to pick them up and shepherd them towards the touchline.

And distance limits for CLL used to help his percentage when White was taking long range shots. That said, his 2013 percentage for the wallabies (was it over 20 shots in a row?) was AMAZING. I live in hope that he regains this form for the past 1 yr+ for the brumbies...

Interesting idea though that Harry suggests in logging carries per turnovers. If we keep track of this for a few seasons from now (or if someone could be bothered to look at these stats over say 10 past seasons) we could get a clearer idea of whether counterattack, enterprising play yields more than maintaining possession. I like your comments Allanthus, really interesting for me because I, as the typical Aussie rugby fan Brett illustrates, hate watching my team make mistakes and remember them clearly. Maybe I'm too focused on this...???

disagree about the reds being the exception. The tahs of the last three years have also been willing to chance their arms which in my mind is illustrated by Brett's carries/turnover/tries sttats. I believe that both the 2011 reds and tahs are willing to chance their arm and veer from the gameplan however the style they do it in is very diiferent which is largely to do with the type of playmakers they have in the team.

Interesting to read just how poor the Reds were (not) tackling the Crusaders. I was so disgusted I haven't watched that game again yet or looked at the stats. Thanks for venturing into that dark place for us Brett. The look of James Horwill laying on the grass about 5m out as another Crusader galloped in for a second-half try was so sad. I hope he has a couple of good moments before he's gone - I don't want to remember him as past it. As for the correlation between the handling errors and tries scored. I think it would be more interesting, and perhaps enlightening to see the carries per turnover:tried allowed stat. Because quick moves to score off mistakes are common as are mistakes in a teams' own half leading to tries. Might be a stronger correlation? I think the only great correlation I've found in rugby stats so far was a few years ago I worked out how many sequences of five phases or more a team had and whether they won the game. It was just under 70% a winning stat, which is a fairly big number in professional sport. The thing about the five-phase stat is it doesn't mean they have to have more possession. But it indicates a team awareness - we need to be patient here and not bomb this.

Exactly, so not sure why the surprise at the statistics. The ABs worked it out years ago.

isn't that basically the ABs game plan in a nutshell? Got to admire their ruthless efficiency.

Yeah, Pollard has a great strike; fluid action. But he is expected to take 50-60 m shots all the time

"What you do with the ball when you have it is far more important than how much you actually have it". No truer words spoken Brett

Hey, I appreciate the shout out! Good article, as usual. Amazing kicking stats. Does JOC only take long range shots? That usually keeps Frans Steyn's % down. Catrikilis only kicks 45m and in. Pollard attempts from 60 in