Stats interesting: Sifting through the numbers from Round 14

By Brett McKay / Expert

One of my favourite sayings about stats – and my apologies for not knowing its origin – is: “Statistics are like bikinis – what they show is interesting, but what they hide is crucial.”

And it’s certainly true, we can make stats say whatever we want them to.

But if nothing else, stats are the ideal conversation starter, and with that in mind here are a few discussions worth having out of last week’s Super Rugby numbers.

China shops safe with these Bulls around
Every now and again, you see a set of numbers that just leave you shaking your head.

The Blues-Bulls game in Auckland last Friday night didn’t reach any great heights, but throughout the game – and particularly the second half – I couldn’t quite pin why the Bulls were just unable to get their noses in front.

The Blues rallied very well to stay one step ahead, and certainly made good use of dominant possession and territory in the second forty. But the Bulls just lacked something. And that something was back-five forward impact, which for a side known for its ability to play pragmatic, forwards-led rugby, was rather surprising.

For the match, the Bulls made 82 runs as a side. Of that figure, just 21 come from their starting back five forwards. In order, Flip van der Merwe, Victor Matfield, ‘Lappies’ Labuschagne, Arno Botha, and Pierre Spies made four, none, six, eight, and three runs each, for a collective 37 metres gained. The Bulls made 285 metres for the match.

To be fair, again, both flankers Labuschagne and Botha were replaced in the 51st minute, by Deon Stegmann and Jacques du Plessis, respectively.

And the benchies provided even less impact: one and two runs respectively, as they spent their 29 minutes of action in defence, essentially (they made nine and eight tackles each in that same time).

If it wasn’t already questionable what Matfield is bringing the Bulls this season, his numbers for 80 minutes were terrible: no runs and so obviously no impact in attack at all, two passes (surprisingly), ten tackles in 12 attempts, and eight lineout takes.

Guess. The. Game plan. Flip van der Merwe, Matfield, and Spies all played 80 minutes each, and took 16 lineout throws between them. The Bulls mauled 15 times.

I know it wasn’t much of a game, and the Blues’ total run numbers aren’t that much different, but they’re running 13th in the competition. The Bulls currently lead the South African conference, and you have to wonder how that is, on those numbers.

My forward projections three weeks ago had the Bulls finishing seventh overall, and I’ve seen nothing since to change my mind, not with locks and a backrow providing very little other than a maul.

‘High-octane rugby’: How’s that going?
It was the SANZAR catch cry heading into the 2015 edition of Super Rugby, but has it actually been achieved?

In 2014 there were 614 tries scored in total across the 125 games, at an average of 4.9 tries per match. There were 59 four-try bonus points achieved during the regular season, ranging from the Waratahs’ nine to the Rebels’ one.

In 2015 already, we’ve had 443 tries scored in 92 games, an average of 4.8 tries per game. With four full rounds and 28 more games to play, there have already been 44 four-try bonus points achieved.

Though the try average hasn’t really changed, there’s no reason to think why the bonus point mark won’t be topped – the current top six teams have only five fewer four-try bonus points now than what the eventual top six finished with last year.

Of course ‘better’ or ‘more entertaining’ rugby isn’t necessarily just about tries being scored, though that is certainly what makes the headlines and what is remembered long after other details are forgotten.

Part of the thinking behind ‘high octane rugby’ was to have the ball in play more often, and specifically the focus on ensuring more space for teams to attack at set piece and at the ruck via quick exits of tacklers.

So, if there is – or was supposed to be – a focus on creating space, are teams carrying more this season? If the extra space is there, are teams looking to exploit it?

Well, in a word, no.

Carries per game: 2015 v 2014

team 2015 ave 2014 ave More? Diff
WAR 1491 124.25 2389 132.72 no -8.47
BLU 1472 113.23 1854 115.88 no -2.64
REB 1450 120.83 1853 115.81 YES 5.02
FOR 1436 119.67 1741 108.81 YES 10.85
HUR 1424 118.67 1984 124.0 no -5.33
CRU 1370 114.17 1936 107.56 YES 6.61
CHI 1366 113.83 2004 117.88 no -4.05
BRU 1349 103.77 1900 105.56 no -1.79
LIO 1325 101.92 1506 94.13 YES 7.8
STO 1315 109.58 1701 106.31 YES 3.27
RED 1264 105.33 1698 106.13 no -0.79
SHA 1146 88.15 1733 96.28 no -8.12
HIG 1143 95.25 1640 96.47 no -1.22
BUL 1116 93.0 1476 92.25 YES 0.75
CHE 993 82.75 1544 96.5 no -13.75

Only six teams are carrying the ball more per game in 2015 than they were in 2014: the Rebels, Force, Crusaders, Lions, Stormers, and Bulls. But even then, of these six teams only the Force have increased their number of carries by more than ten per game on average (10.85 carries/game more in 2015).

At the other end of the scale, of the nine teams carrying less than in 2014 only the Cheetahs have reduced their number by greater than ten per game on average (13.75 carries/game fewer than 2014).

So in all this, it would very difficult to conclude that the supposed focus on creating space has made any difference at all. Such little difference – up or down – in the carry numbers season-to-season is just as easily explained by game plan changes by the individual teams. High-octane rugby looks the same as it ever was.

The Round 14 standouts
A couple of fullbacks were the big metre-eaters, with Cheetah Clayton Blommetjies and Waratah Israel Folau running for 115 metres from 11 carries and 114 metres from 14 carries, respectively. Red James O’Connor also broke 100 metres, while I’ll come back to the two Chiefs wingers in a moment.

If you don’t like fullbacks in this sort of rating, then Waratah Bernard Foley (18 runs for 94 metres), Brumby Christian Lealiifano (11 for 87 metres), and Lions backrower Jaco Kriel (12 for 85 metres) are the names for you. I’ll come back to Kriel in a sec, too.

Just on the Waratahs, Foley’s 18 carries, along with Kurtley Beale’s 16 and Folau’s 14, represented just under 45 per cent of all the Waratahs’ ball-carrying for the match against the Sharks. Between the three of them.

The Chiefs wingers, Hosea Gear and Bryce Heem, were engaged in a good old-fashioned shootout. Anything you can do, old fella, I can do just as well, the former sevens star proved.

Gear: 15 runs for 104 metres, four offloads, three clean breaks, seven defenders beaten.
Heem: Eight runs for 101 metres, four offloads, three clean breaks, five defenders beaten.

Jaco Kriel was outstanding at Ellis Park, and jagged the second-half try that belatedly fired the Lions into action. How about these numbers: 12 runs for 85 metres, one clean break, seven defenders beaten, 14 tackle attempts, none missed. Wonderful game, and a quality player.

And on the tackle machines, Hurricanes lock Jeremy Thrush made 18 tackles from 20 attempts, Brumbies flanker David Pocock 16 tackles for zero missed, Rebels’ George Smith clone Jordy Reid made the same number with two misses, and the heir apparent to ‘Seven Black’, Sam Cane, made 15 tackles without a miss.

Some fair efforts.

The Crowd Says:

2015-05-21T16:28:01+00:00

Ozinsa

Guest


No problems acknowledging the shortcomings of some stats but your interpretation of the Bulls' back 5 carry stats is hard to argue with. Fingers crossed the Boks keep picking Matfield -- Comment from The Roar's iPhone app.

2015-05-21T12:15:40+00:00

RobC

Roar Guru


oops, re above. I meant to say white Aussie policy, instead of whole Aussie policy

2015-05-21T12:13:59+00:00

RobC

Roar Guru


ah yes, I do think this year is a lot more fast action and close calls, esp around collision area. Either Im getting old (ie even older), and / or the games are more difficult to blog this year because of all the things going on. I really pity the Refs. And I dont mean it figuratively.

2015-05-21T10:59:30+00:00

Harry Jones

Expert


I'm the same. I would like to have access to all the performance stats. So instead I just have a friendly coach tell me interesting tidbits Like a healthy Jean de Villiers is the second fastest Bok. And Eben Etzebeth has the second best vertical leap.

2015-05-21T10:42:32+00:00

Harry Jones

Expert


Steven Kitshoff will score the winning try in the RWC SF v NZ, after running a terrific support line as Damian de Allende beats 3 Kiwis, after Etzebeth steals a defensive lineout from Retallick.

2015-05-21T09:39:41+00:00

Dcnz

Guest


Great article brett ... Stats don't cover all nuances however. Eg the Canes are making breaks and scoring tries up the Middle of the park now ..

AUTHOR

2015-05-21T07:06:33+00:00

Brett McKay

Expert


Yep, I did. I'd hate to be compiling the answers - especially where you had to rank items of importance for game in Australia...

2015-05-21T07:01:38+00:00

Digby

Roar Guru


Yes most likely right but would love it none the less. Would love to sit down with a group of coaches as they go over the analysis, how it related to their gameplan and match situation, how it relates to the individual, what they use for next week and in training, what they use to prepare for the next opponent and what they take from their opponents analysis and look to implement and exploit, would be fascinating. I want the nitty gritty!!

AUTHOR

2015-05-21T06:41:11+00:00

Brett McKay

Expert


In many respects Digger, I'm glad we don't. It's hard enough making sense of the stats set we do see - our heads might explode with the stats the teams use! :shock:

2015-05-21T06:24:50+00:00

Digby

Roar Guru


Stats, stats, stats. I do wish we could get our hands on the detailed analysis the Coaches get. Why does it seem to me that Rugby seems way behind many other sports when it comes to stats in terms of what we, the average punter can easily access? Thanks for the piece Brett.

2015-05-21T06:08:35+00:00

Smiggle Jiggle

Roar Guru


Anyone else do the Rugby survey? http://bit.ly/1eegmAw

2015-05-21T06:07:00+00:00

Suzy Poison

Guest


Old Bugger, no doubt the Chiefs will win. And win well. No doubt Bulls will be pissed off and will fire up for the first 60. Bulls have dropped Lappies and Arno to the bench, and brought in Stegman and big Jaques Du Plessis. So they are gonna have a crack at the breakdown. Sad to watch Matfield hanging in too long.

2015-05-21T05:58:33+00:00

QldFan

Guest


My favourite quotation about statistics - at one time attributed to Winston Churchill, but don't know if that's true "There are lies, damn lies, and statistics.

2015-05-21T05:50:49+00:00

Old Bugger

Guest


Suzy Do you think he'll play such an assertive and similar role against the Chiefs?? I'll keep my fingers x-ed that he does, if you will.....??

2015-05-21T05:25:11+00:00

Suzy Poison

Guest


Agree about Bulls,Brett. It's kinda sad to think that the one time strength of the Bulls is now a weakness. The Bulls have one of the weakest tight fives in the competition. I watched Matfield in the rucks, and he was just taking up, space. He was a passenger. Sure, he won the line-outs. But when one member of your tight five is not pulling his weight and not hitting the rucks, and jogging around the pitch, the other 4 players have to do extra work.

AUTHOR

2015-05-21T05:06:08+00:00

Brett McKay

Expert


All really good points, Allanthus. And I reckon you're right - carries v clean breaks would be another interesting exercise (writing that down..... now) And I can think of at least one 'Badger in space' moment this season - he scored a try in front of me on the Canberra Stadium sideline..

2015-05-21T04:49:19+00:00

Geoff Parkes

Expert


Yes the Force are probably the best example of why to treat these stats with caution. I agree with Die Hard that a possession game for possessions' sake usually equates to both unattractive and ineffective rugby. Without resorting to stats I'd be certain that the Force are the least effective team in the comp for creating line breaks and space for the outside backs to work in. Have a think about how many times this season H.Badger has received the ball from a back line movement with space to work in? If it isn't none it's a very low number close to that. The other thing about those tackle numbers is that they don't show the type of tackle made. Which is kind of your point about Laurie Fisher. In that respect i thought Same Cane was outstanding against the Canes last week. Not just making those tackles but many of them had real force and impact.

AUTHOR

2015-05-21T04:39:40+00:00

Brett McKay

Expert


Haha! :lol: Harry mentioned it above, Hooper is second to Warren Whiteley in the competition for tackles made, with 139 in 12 games. However, he also ranks 18th in the competition for missed tackles, with 18. Still, an 88.5% success rate isn't terrible..

2015-05-21T04:28:52+00:00

Taylorman

Guest


Stop it right there Brett, I need to go find some Hooper stats and insert them before yours and Jameswns comments so Cheika reads no further. Meanwhile... Talk about something else please... :-)

AUTHOR

2015-05-21T04:27:13+00:00

Brett McKay

Expert


Another vote for better public stats, Stayer!

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar