[2019 Super Rugby] Round 17 (7 & 8 June 2019)

[Cruz_del_Sur]

@petite

Lavanini, cubelli if de klerk is uneligible, matera 50/50 starter/sub.
That's it.

I'm sure someone will come with counter examples, but I have this idea that most of our players today are small by bock standards. Other than sh and fy size tends to be non negotiable to get into the springboks.

I was just thinking about center. Our biggest is probably de la fuente. When i was thinking about south african centers (playing in SR and abroad) these names came to mind: kriel, de allende, RJVR, Francois Steyn, Serfontein, Mapoe..... Our centers are smaller.

 

[Dai Perk]

15 teams means 7 games a week plus one team has bye

But since it takes two teams to play, how can only one team have an extra game? Who was their opponent? I'm sure the math works out somehow, but this is very confusing...

 

[unrated]

I would take Boffeli, Matera and then Argentina has this one flanker that I can't remember right now but I think he plays his rugby in France now, I would put that guy in our starting lineup ahead of Kolisi

Update: Facundo Isa

 

[Al Bangor]

15 teams means 7 games a week plus one team has bye

I agree with Dave...since it takes two teams to play, how can only one team have an extra game?

 

[Kiwiwomble]

Oy. Feels like a lost season for the Highlanders. When you look at the roster, it feels like they should be a lot better than they are, but as Bill Parcells said, "You are who your record says you are."

I thought we played really well, very exciting, we just need to shore up that defense

already looking forward to next year, exciting times for us lots of change coming

 

[argie]

I agree with Dave...since it takes two teams to play, how can only one team have an extra game?

Because the other team was already bye previously.
Every team has two byes per season. Saders is the only one missing to complete that.

 

[Al Bangor]

Because the other team was already bye previously.
Every team has two byes per season. Saders is the only one missing to complete that.

OK, got it. Thank you!

 

[Umaga's Witness]

But since it takes two teams to play, how can only one team have an extra game? Who was their opponent? I'm sure the math works out somehow, but this is very confusing...

7 games each with 2 teams (7 times 2 equals 14) means 14 teams playing. So there are 15 teams but only 14 can play any one week. That means 1 team has to have a bye, because they can't play themselves.

 

[Umaga's Witness]

OK, got it. Thank you!

Aah I think I see what your problem was. You can think this one through reasonably linearly.
These are our parameters:

1, or 3, or 5, 7,9 etc teams can have a bye on a given week, leaving an even number of teams to play against each other. At least one team has to have a buy

Each team plays 16 games.

Let's look at the options:

If you played 16 rounds then because one team would have to have a buy each round you'd have 15 teams having played 15 games, but one team would have had to have had two buys, hence only played 14 games.

What about 17 rounds? Now that team that only played 14 games in the scenario above can play a 15th, 13 other teams can play a 16th, but one other team has to remain having played 15.

What about 18 rounds? Now the two that had previously played 15 games can get their 16th. The remaining 13 could have a bye. Or you could distribute 12 of those buys in chunks of two to previous rounds. I.e 6 of the 18 rounds have 3 teams on a bye, the other 12 rounds have one team on a bye. 6 times 3 plus 22 times one equals 30. 30 divided by 15 teams equals 2 byes per team over the 18 rounds.

 

[smartcooky]

15 teams means 7 games a week plus one team has bye

Yup.

One team does not play in the first week, and another team does not play in the last week. It happens in any competition with an odd number of teams.

In this competition, every team gets two bye rounds, and since there are 15 teams that means 30 byes in only 16 rounds, there are some weekends where three teams don't play (only six matches instead of seven). This season it was rounds 5, 7, 9, 10, 11 and 14

 

[Umaga's Witness]

i was wondering if as phil kearns say jags are a national side, wich players would make it to the bocks if the jags was a SA team.
every week i read the best xv from NZ SA and Au but there is no best team for argentina (ovbiously)
so the closest thing would be to see which one could at least be included if not in the springboks in the SA xv of the week
bonfelli and matera would make it this week cubelli? who else ?

its hard for me to imagine wich of the argies could make it to the bocks

no fist rowers (maybe creevy subtitution to marx?
second row lavanini or petti? after ezebet and de jager or du toit?
3rd: would matera make it ahead of kolisi? vermuleen kolisi du toit sound damm solid
maybe cubelli (hes not better than de klerc maybe over cronje
bonilla over pollard?
de la fuente is having a good season but is he ahead of kriel or Esterhuizen?
moyano? is he better than mapimpi?
bonfelli or le roux ?
opinions?

Moyano and matera to start, cubelli, creevy, de la fuente on reserves. This is based on jaguares players competing against all south Africans, not just south African super rugby players. And I'll probably change my mind tomorrow

 

[petite]

Moyano and matera to start, cubelli, creevy, de la fuente on reserves. This is based on jaguares players competing against all south Africans, not just south African super rugby players. And I'll probably change my mind tomorrow

yep we all agree that ill be 2 or 3 guys at the most.
in the other hand it would be strange if jags where South african, that the leading team by 10 points only deliver 3 players to the bokke.
but it makes sense cos the jags is more about the team than the individuals. wich lead us again to how the jagauares are "internationals" and will have and advantaje over others at the world cup ( mentioned in every article about about jags lately ) imo it B S. if it was such an advantaje SA would take, lets say the bulls to the wc. (ridiculous)
yes we ll have "fine tunnig" but not even closer to the other tier one nations in terms of depth and pool of players. (arg has less than 50 pro players to choose from + the europeans

if i was a coach ill have moroni in my team.

 

[TRF_heineken]

yep we all agree that ill be 2 or 3 guys at the most.
in the other hand it would be strange if jags where South african, that the leading team by 10 points only deliver 3 players to the bokke.
but it makes sense cos the jags is more about the team than the individuals. wich lead us again to how the jagauares are "internationals" and will have and advantaje over others at the world cup ( mentioned in every article about about jags lately ) imo it B S. if it was such an advantaje SA would take, lets say the bulls to the wc. (ridiculous)
yes we ll have "fine tunnig" but not even closer to the other tier one nations in terms of depth and pool of players. (arg has less than 50 pro players to choose from + the europeans

if i was a coach ill have moroni in my team.

I don't see any SA Super Rugby team only delivering just 3 players to the Springboks. My estimation is that each team will deliver at least 5.

I guess the international season will tell us if the opinion of the Jags are accurate or not.

But aren't you at least a bit worried? The Jags have done remarkably well to curb injuries this season, and have been relatively injury-free for the most part. But surely this will become an issue at one point or another? And the fear is that it might hit the team at the World Cup. The Jags had no policy in place to rest players who will be going to the World Cup, and some of them played nearly every game and sometimes played the full 80.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

no Bender for the game against the Tahs...not good...sad way to end his Highlander career...small consolation there is little chance of getting injured before the WC

 

[Umaga's Witness]

yep we all agree that ill be 2 or 3 guys at the most.
in the other hand it would be strange if jags where South african, that the leading team by 10 points only deliver 3 players to the bokke.
but it makes sense cos the jags is more about the team than the individuals. wich lead us again to how the jagauares are "internationals" and will have and advantaje over others at the world cup ( mentioned in every article about about jags lately ) imo it B S. if it was such an advantaje SA would take, lets say the bulls to the wc. (ridiculous)
yes we ll have "fine tunnig" but not even closer to the other tier one nations in terms of depth and pool of players. (arg has less than 50 pro players to choose from + the europeans

if i was a coach ill have moroni in my team.

Tell philnkearns he can take the reds to the World Cup haha. I get confused between Maroni and Moyano tbh. Maybe it is maroni i rate. CAn you get one of them to change their name for me?

Just looked them up as a reminder. It is Moroni I rate. Also, de la fuente could start at 12. The springboks don't have anyone overwhelmingly great in that position.

 

[petite]

I don't see any SA Super Rugby team only delivering just 3 players to the Springboks. My estimation is that each team will deliver at least 5.

I guess the international season will tell us if the opinion of the Jags are accurate or not.

But aren't you at least a bit worried? The Jags have done remarkably well to curb injuries this season, and have been relatively injury-free for the most part. But surely this will become an issue at one point or another? And the fear is that it might hit the team at the World Cup. The Jags had no policy in place to rest players who will be going to the World Cup, and some of them played nearly every game and sometimes played the full 80.

yep! on the spot. that's what I mean.
if you read some media. it's like los pumas will have a huge advantage over others to the point of cheating. but as you say they'll be tired and there will be no step up. maybe the Europeans (just 5) could bring some fresh air to the team.
but it wasn't a low rate of injuries for U's
there's lots of injured players
moyano, allemano, landajo, tuculet, delguy, lezana are injured right now.

about the amount of bokke each team delivers. we are all clear that Jags would have 3 player's selected (if they where south african) at the most. and I pointed that it won't be to much for a team who's leading the conference by 10 pts. how many all blacks are going to come from the saders. more than 3 for sure!

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

But aren't you at least a bit worried? The Jags have done remarkably well to curb injuries this season, and have been relatively injury-free for the most part. But surely this will become an issue at one point or another? And the fear is that it might hit the team at the World Cup. The Jags had no policy in place to rest players who will be going to the World Cup, and some of them played nearly every game and sometimes played the full 80.

Yes and no.
I am worried. But despite no strict policy Jaguares have rotated players a LOT, especially on the last Oceania tour. I have to stand corrected with regards to Quesada. At the beginning of the season, 3 games actually, i basically thought Quesada had destroyed what ledesma fought so hard to build. But i have to admit, he toured, played against tough opposition and managed to win and convincingly so. He rotated players and managed to keep up the level. Came back to buenos aires, with players tired and all, and still managed to get a key bonus point win against a direct competitor that pretty much guarantees us not only a QF at home, but also avoiding NZ teams until the final.
I recall 2016 and 2017 when perez was excusing the teams performance with the travelling schedule (which all teams had).
I hate to admit it, but Quesada has managed this very, very well. I just see a very disciplined team and that is a sign of good management. I dont always like what quesada does tactically, but from a managerial point of view, i bring nothing but compliments to the table.

If it were up to me, i'd play the rugby championship with subs and test a few (montero and carreras comes to mind). I'm serious. I really dont give a flying turd about this years TRC.

A cohesive, confident, injury free and well-rested jaguares + some euros could surprise even the most optimistic argentines in the world cup. Lot of ifs, i know.

 

[TRF_heineken]

yep! on the spot. that's what I mean.
if you read some media. it's like los pumas will have a huge advantage over others to the point of cheating. but as you say they'll be tired and there will be no step up. maybe the Europeans (just 5) could bring some fresh air to the team.
but it wasn't a low rate of injuries for U's
there's lots of injured players
moyano, allemano, landajo, tuculet, delguy, lezana are injured right now.

about the amount of bokke each team delivers. we are all clear that Jags would have 3 player's selected (if they where south african) at the most. and I pointed that it won't be to much for a team who's leading the conference by 10 pts. how many all blacks are going to come from the saders. more than 3 for sure!

Oh for sure. But It's always been a trend in South Africa. The Bulls and WP (Stormers) always produce the Locks, Scrumhalves, and Fly Halves. The Sharks and to a lesser extent the Cheetahs, produce the Props. The Lions usually produce the odd centre/hooker/winger and then it's a mashup of all of them for the other positions. I guess that's also part in parcel something to do with the areas. The big guys are usually farm boys that got a scholarship, the locks are usually guys that was bred as a lock since he started showing he has height over his friends of the same age.

But back to the Jags, for me only Landajo, Tuculet and Moyano would be selected ahead of the guys currently starting. And the current teams is basically a full fledged Pumas squad that can play tomorrow if they have to. I mean your reserve hooker, already has over 50 caps for Argentina...

 

[die_mole]

Aah I think I see what your problem was. You can think this one through reasonably linearly.
These are our parameters:

1, or 3, or 5, 7,9 etc teams can have a bye on a given week, leaving an even number of teams to play against each other. At least one team has to have a buy

Each team plays 16 games.

Let's look at the options:

If you played 16 rounds then because one team would have to have a buy each round you'd have 15 teams having played 15 games, but one team would have had to have had two buys, hence only played 14 games.

What about 17 rounds? Now that team that only played 14 games in the scenario above can play a 15th, 13 other teams can play a 16th, but one other team has to remain having played 15.

What about 18 rounds? Now the two that had previously played 15 games can get their 16th. The remaining 13 could have a bye. Or you could distribute 12 of those buys in chunks of two to previous rounds. I.e 6 of the 18 rounds have 3 teams on a bye, the other 12 rounds have one team on a bye. 6 times 3 plus 22 times one equals 30. 30 divided by 15 teams equals 2 byes per team over the 18 rounds.

you really think you're gonna be able to explain math* to americans, smdh

fine, maths

 

[TRF_heineken]

you really think you're gonna be able to explain math* to americans, smdh

fine, maths

Well we could explain the metric system, which is so much easier than the imperial system... But hey, we need to start somewhere...