Chiefs coach questions Super Rugby format

I don't think that SANZAAR has understood the importance of league tables to followers of sports, nor how strong habits are among supporters. League tables are how teams continuously compete overall with other teams through the year. If the tables are not functioning in a reasonably proportional manner, then the sport is missing something. It's the main reason that leagues exist. If people just wanted to see matches, then teams could just organise their own schedule of matches. This is what used to happen before leagues came into being. Rugby competitions have no history of sub-league groupings of teams, and traditional sports in Australia, NZ, or South Africa have no history of it either. The number of web sites that still show an overall Super Rugby league table, even though it has no relevance anymore is testament to the cultural misfit - presenting an overall table is just silly for a competition that works with conferences. You never see an NFL, NHL, or NBA combined league table. Fans are better off looking at the conference tables and then comparing points between second and third places on these tables to see who qualifies for finals. The competition makes more sense that way. Teams are listed in order of competition points, and move up and down in proportion to those points. Presentation of the competition is just as important as the competition. In North America, it took 30 years for conferences and divisions to become established, and a further 20 years for them to reach their stable and current structure. These structures slowly replaced straight round robin competitions over time, but it was five decades before they reached close to their current form in all the major sports. In competitions with mostly one team per city and a lot of teams spread over a wide area, they function better than straight round robin, but it is not something you can just shove onto a population and expect it to go over well without some care in it's presentation. A full home and away round robin structure is unfair when a couple of the teams have to travel half way across the globe for half their games, and most other teams don't. In theory you could compensate them by adding bonus points for wins on different continents, but then you're into a different set of confusions and misunderstandings.

why is he worried? if the 1/4 s are held now Chiefs will play Brumbies in ACT. he shud be happy :D unless he is worried of going further down the table to 6 7 8 .... :D

As I said Peter I was just attempting to give some context to the stats following on from Taylor's comment - nothing less, nothing more. I'm sorry that you have had to lower the discussion to personal criticism of me. :-(

...who apparently played very well while getting kicked though ?

by that time BLUES hopefully will have their full squad back and will be a little refreshed. just cant understand how they cannot string 2 very good performances in a fortnight. one bad week follows a good week and then back to a bad week.

i think they will play nz teams next year - at least some of them . considering the size matter , one option would be to break it into 2 tiers of 9 reach. and then each one to play all teams on a home and away basis. that makes it 16 games per side . and they play a final round with the top 2 of each tier. ofcourse given there will be more matches , ALL will not be televised. but then in most tournaments in the world - rugger or footy - all matches are not shown. when u watch (or drift in and out) a match like Kings and Jags , the meaning of SUPER loses its meaning in any sense u can think of DUH. seriously that was rubbish. fortunately the IPL semi was on and David Warner played a sweet inning to take Hyderabad to finals.

Peter - thanks for the compliments … yet again. I was merely giving the statistics that you quoted some context which I think was the point Taylor was making. This applies to all statistics across the board. Here’s my insight – I didn’t have to go to the stats centre for this – The Chiefs got their backside kicked by the Waratahs.

@ taylorman : i thought so too BUT after watching the Bulls match , i come to my own conclusion that it is a very hard balancing act. the chiefs did not contest at all. on the other hands bulls thre the proverbial kitchen sink at the ruck. both sides conceded a number of trys. in the chiefs match , more than the ruck , i think it was the ball carriers offloading ACCURATELY that tore the defence apart. now i thought it was strange that having not contested rucks the chiefs would have more bodies in defence but there were many holes. i said before the match that missing Leitch and Ngatai may be an issue for Chiefs. i wonder why they have lost faith in Vaipulu at 8 (is he injured??) also i found interesting that folau was roaming like 13 14 15. it looked to me as if he was targeting Mckenzie - mismatch a lot and staying away from Seta.

Rennie won't be calmly commenting to his players, where it really counts I can assure you.

Yeah but why spoil a good story! Frankly I don't know why he bothers with a SA non kiwi clash. If it's likely the first vs NZ game one of those sides plays is against a wildcard NZ side in the playoffs then chances are they'll lose anyway. They've not been playing to that level all year...made obvious by the conference boards so their chances of winning isn't good anyway. Don't think he's appreciating the positive value of playing the best sides all year.

then take out the longest run from the chiefs. It would still be 1/3rd more each carry. It was clear the difference was how much easier it was for the tahs to make metres as opposed to the cheifs. The tahs hit harder and drove back in tackles. The tahs bigger players made easier metres. The offloading and missed tackles(percentage wise) were the same for both teams so this was not the difference. What was the difference then ClarkeG or you just being contrary and difficult again with no actual insight offered.

Is that to me? Obviously I do not agree with the current set up hence my proposal. I just pointed out his wish for a 16 team round robin is unrealistic considering the legal and contractual issues. So I proposed the fairest system I could, very close to a round robin, you only play teams in your conference once, and 5/6 teams in the other conferences.

And if you take out Folau's 90m carry then it becomes just over a metre more per carry as oppossed to nearly 2 metres.

The main point from Rennie is making is some of SA teams never play any teams from NZ, " Thats not a bad draw is it" Or do you think that seems legitimate to you?

Pet, my main point was the Chiefs were on holiday, they weren't aggressive enough compared to the Waratahs. Hence the scoreline, Chiefs didn't play to their standards. Defence wasn't good enough.

I explained how you could not go back to 16 teams next year, the contractual obligations to sunwolves and jagueres and even to the broadcasters, so that is out of the question. I suppose legalities are not an issue to you.

Round robin with 16 teams takes 14 weeks and then add 3 weeks for finals. 17 weeks.

Oh please. Take YOUR anger out on something else Kuruki. Is a coach nor allowed to CALMLY comment on the Super Rugby system and its impact on those that do not top their pool in NZ? He said that is just the way it is and I guess fans taking their frustration out on him irrationally is also 'just the way it is'.

no more than WEST and the missed tackles. Watching the game it was clear the difference was how the tahs forwards punched up and made easy metres per run. Chiefs were pushed back by hard hitting defence and the tahs were not. Both team missed a lot of tackles and that was not the difference, and that is clear from watching the game. Both teams offloaded a lot as well.

Yeah I get the feeling thatsince hes commented on the Super Rugby system that hes lost focus, doesnt care about the next game and has doomed the Chiefs to obscurity. If only he pretended not to hear the reporter when asked or if he pretended he hadnt considered what topping the table meant. Oh well, the Chiefs are doomed. Im sure no other coach has thought about where they sit on the table and what it means to their team within this system.