The Roar
The Roar

Advertisement

New Zealand rugby is better than Australian rugby, but by how much? Here's the answer

ANDREW PEDLEY new author
Roar Rookie
5th April, 2017
Advertisement
The Highlanders' Aaron Smith. (AAP Image/ SNPA, Ross Setford)
ANDREW PEDLEY new author
Roar Rookie
5th April, 2017
14
1845 Reads

So much of elite sport revolves around the concept of one per cent. The other ninety-nine per cent, is often assumed to have been achieved to perfection.

Alas, perfection is an illusion and something not possible in sport. By accepting this truth and pursuing it we get the greats, who aren’t judged by their efforts, but by their results.

The New Zealand teams currently perform at a level 25 per cent above their Australian opposition. That’s the equivalent of having an extra three players on the paddock.

How do we measure performance? Proprietary software calculates every single game action and attributes scores to each one. We then tally them up for each player and then add the totals for each player to arrive at team scores.

Taking each player’s Super Rugby performance to date, we’ve constructed ‘Form XVs’ for both Australia and New Zealand after six rounds.

The column in between the squads calculates the rating differentials between players. The scale and direction of dominance is indicated by an increasingly black (New Zealand) or green (Australian) number.

Notable differences are located around the halves with Aaron Smith and Beauden Barrett outscoring their counterparts in Nic Stirzaker and Nicco Lance by a significant 92 per cent margin.

Advertisement

Seen in this light, we are able to appreciate the mountain the Australian teams must overcome when playing their trans-Tasman rivals. History, as is often the case, affords a guide in addressing the shortfall.

Faced with a significant challenge, nowhere does whinging and finger-pointing prove successful.

close