• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

End of Three Seasons

Dai Perk

Bench Player
Joined
Sep 19, 2018
Messages
583
Country Flag
United States
Club or Nation
Scotland
I've been thinking.

This is the tail end of my first full year following rugby. I have watched a TON of rugby, catching all the Pro14, all the Premiership, and all the Super Rugby, on top of internationals and random events.

In each league, the most predictable result has come about- the Irish national team (i.e. Leinster) won the Pro14, England (Saracens) won the Prem, and now, the All-Blacks (Crusaders) will face the Pumas/Jaguares for the Super Rugby ***le...

On one hand, I know I should feel lucky for all the top quality rugby, and should be able to appreciate just how good these top teams are. But on the other, it all feels... anticlimactic? Predictable?

In each of these leagues, is the divide just too big? Or am I only seeing it short-term, being relatively new?

Just looking for thoughts - it's been a fun year, I don't know what I'm going to do with myself until September!
 
Its a bit predictable alright. NZ will probably win the world cup and the 2 favourites for the champions cup (Saracens and Leinster) were in the final.
 
Yeah, you better get used to it! Rugby doesn't have a draft system to level the playing field and/or a huge amount of talent to randomise winners a bit like most US sports or soccer do. Generally the best run teams will rise to the top and have extended periods of success, that only makes the outliers like Connacht or Scarlets pro 14 ***les in recent years a bit more special though.

If unpredictability is important to you the Top 14 is definitely the league to watch, usually there are about 4-6 genuine contenders and a massive battle for the playoffs, stylistically it rarely holds up to the others though, Toulouse this year being a sweet exception.
 
I've been thinking.

This is the tail end of my first full year following rugby. I have watched a TON of rugby, catching all the Pro14, all the Premiership, and all the Super Rugby, on top of internationals and random events.

In each league, the most predictable result has come about- the Irish national team (i.e. Leinster) won the Pro14, England (Saracens) won the Prem, and now, the All-Blacks (Crusaders) will face the Pumas/Jaguares for the Super Rugby ***le...

On one hand, I know I should feel lucky for all the top quality rugby, and should be able to appreciate just how good these top teams are. But on the other, it all feels... anticlimactic? Predictable?

In each of these leagues, is the divide just too big? Or am I only seeing it short-term, being relatively new?

Just looking for thoughts - it's been a fun year, I don't know what I'm going to do with myself until September!

Well at least you had the 6N where very few outside of Wales picked us for the championship let alone a GS (Well, apart from Ger from Off the Ball :D)... Could be remembering this wrong Dave but think you had us for the spoon :p.
 
Could be remembering this wrong Dave but think you had us for the spoon
Lmao, I think you're probably right... That feels like a lifetime ago! :p

I recall I really went out of my way to predict results that defied common logic, so I'm sure I had Scotland winning it or at least coming close. As I like to say, "All predictions wrong or double your money back!"

But point taken - there was, at least, one tournament this year that had an at least semi-surprising result. I believe there was also some craziness at the end of the French Top 14 season, so maybe my sample size is just too small to generalize.
 
the Top 14 is definitely the league to watch
It is incredibly difficult to watch rugby in the US in general, and as far as my searches have gone, the Top 14 simply isn't available at all. I pay a yearly fee to NBC for Prem and internationals (which they don't always carry), and a monthly fee to ESPN for Pro14 and Super Rugby. They also sometimes have Major League Rugby (desperately trying to get into it, but it's tough when you're watching much higher levels of competition elsewhere), but that's not even reliable. It's tough, too, because I basically never see games live (I got my ass up at 3:00 AM to watch Crusaders/Hurricanes last weekend, though), which means I have to stay away from all social media until I've found time to watch the replays.
 
Lmao, I think you're probably right... That feels like a lifetime ago! :p

I recall I really went out of my way to predict results that defied common logic, so I'm sure I had Scotland winning it or at least coming close. As I like to say, "All predictions wrong or double your money back!"

But point taken - there was, at least, one tournament this year that had an at least semi-surprising result. I believe there was also some craziness at the end of the French Top 14 season, so maybe my sample size is just too small to generalize.

Having watched the three leagues, what's your takeaway on the quality, competitiveness, style etc?
 
Having watched the three leagues, what's your takeaway on the quality, competitiveness, style etc?
Interesting question, and one I've been considering a lot...

I don't think there is a clear-cut best league out of these three, as they all have special qualities. I guess I'd say the Pro14 seems more erratic, with the teams at the bottom being REALLY bad, as opposed to the Prem where things stayed at least fairly tight towards the end. That being said, the weekend where all the Pro14 fixtures were derbies (darbies?), it was just brilliant. If the Sarries sort of symbolically represent the Prem while Leinster effectively represent the Pro14, then the result from the Champions Cup seems pretty instructive.

I think I like the Super Rugby style the best. The game seems faster and flows better, and you don't see the endless pick-and-go's and caterpillar rucks, etc., that you do in Europe. When I watch a team like Munster, you have the Peter O-Mahoneys of the world getting a hand in every breakdown, smashing the rucks, and generally causing chaos. On one hand, that's impressive and shows you how good he is. On the other hand, you don't see people really trying that as much in Super Rugby (people like Ardie being the exception), so the game kinda keeps moving a little more smoothly, to me. That may be because, as a relative noob, it's still hard for me to really see all the things happening at the breakdown, so maybe I'm unable to appreciate the finer details.

The Super Rugby style is like the unstoppable force, while the Euro style is like the immovable object. I would die happy if I could see a match between the Saracens and the Crusaders, I honestly have no idea who would win - I imagine it'd be determined by the officiating to a large degree...
 
Interesting question, and one I've been considering a lot...

I don't think there is a clear-cut best league out of these three, as they all have special qualities. I guess I'd say the Pro14 seems more erratic, with the teams at the bottom being REALLY bad, as opposed to the Prem where things stayed at least fairly tight towards the end. That being said, the weekend where all the Pro14 fixtures were derbies (darbies?), it was just brilliant. If the Sarries sort of symbolically represent the Prem while Leinster effectively represent the Pro14, then the result from the Champions Cup seems pretty instructive.

I think I like the Super Rugby style the best. The game seems faster and flows better, and you don't see the endless pick-and-go's and caterpillar rucks, etc., that you do in Europe. When I watch a team like Munster, you have the Peter O-Mahoneys of the world getting a hand in every breakdown, smashing the rucks, and generally causing chaos. On one hand, that's impressive and shows you how good he is. On the other hand, you don't see people really trying that as much in Super Rugby (people like Ardie being the exception), so the game kinda keeps moving a little more smoothly, to me. That may be because, as a relative noob, it's still hard for me to really see all the things happening at the breakdown, so maybe I'm unable to appreciate the finer details.

The Super Rugby style is like the unstoppable force, while the Euro style is like the immovable object. I would die happy if I could see a match between the Saracens and the Crusaders, I honestly have no idea who would win - I imagine it'd be determined by the officiating to a large degree...

I think on the whole most people, particularly casuals or people new to the game but also neutrals and some NH fans will get the most bang for their buck from Super Rugby. I struggle to get as much enjoyment out of it personally, it probably being down to a combination of a lack of any real allegiances and my NH rugby 'upbringing'. That's not say I don't enjoy Super Rugby, the recent Saders vs Canes game was awesome and I saw a match earlier in the season that was great too, think it was the Chiefs vs Canes in Suva.

See my ideal game is a proper 'blood n guts street fight' of a match like the Wales vs England in the 6N but that's just me... I also loved the Saracens vs Leinster HC final.
 
Interesting question, and one I've been considering a lot...

I don't think there is a clear-cut best league out of these three, as they all have special qualities. I guess I'd say the Pro14 seems more erratic, with the teams at the bottom being REALLY bad, as opposed to the Prem where things stayed at least fairly tight towards the end. That being said, the weekend where all the Pro14 fixtures were derbies (darbies?), it was just brilliant. If the Sarries sort of symbolically represent the Prem while Leinster effectively represent the Pro14, then the result from the Champions Cup seems pretty instructive.

I think I like the Super Rugby style the best. The game seems faster and flows better, and you don't see the endless pick-and-go's and caterpillar rucks, etc., that you do in Europe. When I watch a team like Munster, you have the Peter O-Mahoneys of the world getting a hand in every breakdown, smashing the rucks, and generally causing chaos. On one hand, that's impressive and shows you how good he is. On the other hand, you don't see people really trying that as much in Super Rugby (people like Ardie being the exception), so the game kinda keeps moving a little more smoothly, to me. That may be because, as a relative noob, it's still hard for me to really see all the things happening at the breakdown, so maybe I'm unable to appreciate the finer details.

The Super Rugby style is like the unstoppable force, while the Euro style is like the immovable object. I would die happy if I could see a match between the Saracens and the Crusaders, I honestly have no idea who would win - I imagine it'd be determined by the officiating to a large degree...
These are interesting insights, you probably are missing some things because you are a noob, but you also have the advantage of seeing things from a fŕesh perspective. And you are probably the only person on these forums who has watched such a geographically diverse range of rugby.

On the predictability aspect, super rugby isn't always predictable. Actually even this year I don't know that it's obvious the crusaders will win.

Alpha made some good points but it's worth exploring those a bit further. In super rugby the spread of talent across teams is much better than those other competitions for various reasons. But a team will still often have a reign of a three or four years where they are at or near the top. This is largely because success in rugby is so much about the team culture. Not because they've got the top players. You also get coaching innovations that are successful until everyone else adopts or adapts. Another aspect is that top teams produce top players, I.e. it's not always the number of internationals in that team predicting the teams success, rather it's the teams success predicting the number of internationals in the team. But you only see that aspect when watching a team from the start if their reign.

So now some evidence to the counterfactual of your hypothesis. The crusaders before Robertson, when they were under blackadder should have won every year based on how many all blacks they had. They were competitive and consistently finished around fourth without really threatening to win the competition apart from one year when they lost narrowly in the final. The teams that won during that time - the highlander, hurricanes; chiefs, waratahs - did so due to innovative coaching and strong team cultures.
 
See my ideal game is a proper 'blood n guts street fight' of a match like the Wales vs England in the 6N but that's just me... I also loved the Saracens vs Leinster HC final.
Oh, I totally agree, those two games in particular were, to me, the pinnacle of European rugby this year... Sarries/Exeter was pretty great too, I'd say. But Super Rugby seems to have fewer, like, Southern Kings vs. Dragons kinda matchups where your eyes start to hurt... then again, the hapless Sunwolves didn't exactly light up the screen after their surprising start... This is exactly why I can't really decide for sure, and fortunately, I don't have to pick between them!

The crusaders before Robertson, when they were under blackadder should have won every year based on how many all blacks they had. They were competitive and consistently finished around fourth without really threatening to win the competition apart from one year when they lost narrowly in the final. The teams that won during that time - the highlander, hurricanes; chiefs, waratahs - did so due to innovative coaching and strong team cultures.
Great point. This is the same way in the NFL, and is the reason my beloved Patriots have been so dominant over the last 20 years or so - team culture and innovative coaching. We had no business, talent-wise, beating the Rams in the Super Bowl last year, it was pure coaching and team chemistry.

I doubt anyone cares much, but this is a great mini-documentary about the Pats from a few years ago. Great watch.
 
But Super Rugby seems to have fewer, like, Southern Kings vs. Dragons kinda matchups where your eyes start to hurt... then again, the hapless Sunwolves didn't exactly light up the screen after their surprising start...

I gotchya, think you mentioned it above somewhere but this particular aspect is where the Gallagher Premiership has a/the edge.
 
These are interesting insights, you probably are missing some things because you are a noob, but you also have the advantage of seeing things from a fŕesh perspective. And you are probably the only person on these forums who has watched such a geographically diverse range of rugby.

On the predictability aspect, super rugby isn't always predictable. Actually even this year I don't know that it's obvious the crusaders will win.

Alpha made some good points but it's worth exploring those a bit further. In super rugby the spread of talent across teams is much better than those other competitions for various reasons. But a team will still often have a reign of a three or four years where they are at or near the top. This is largely because success in rugby is so much about the team culture. Not because they've got the top players. You also get coaching innovations that are successful until everyone else adopts or adapts. Another aspect is that top teams produce top players, I.e. it's not always the number of internationals in that team predicting the teams success, rather it's the teams success predicting the number of internationals in the team. But you only see that aspect when watching a team from the start if their reign.

So now some evidence to the counterfactual of your hypothesis. The crusaders before Robertson, when they were under blackadder should have won every year based on how many all blacks they had. They were competitive and consistently finished around fourth without really threatening to win the competition apart from one year when they lost narrowly in the final. The teams that won during that time - the highlander, hurricanes; chiefs, waratahs - did so due to innovative coaching and strong team cultures.
Actually , just double checking the internet against my memory, the crusaders won in the first of the 9 years Blackadder was in charge, but that was a hangover from previous coaching and culture. And to add to the winners during that time that had no right to win the reds are the big example. The bulls also had a dominant period but they might have had a fairly strong team, certainly they had du Perez in top form
 
I think there is certainly a pattern in rugby. And upsets doesn't happen a lot, but when it does, it's an amazing thing to see. Just think of the Japan victory over the Springboks during the last World Cup.

I just think that you tuned in the wrong year. Remember that in rugby there is a 4-year cycle because of the RWC. And the teams are now so tuned that the very best will 9 times out of 10 come out on top.

I think you will see a lot of change after this year's world cup. When a lot of SH players move abroad to cash in, and where the SH teams bring in a lot of new faces and talent.
 
I think on the whole most people, particularly casuals or people new to the game but also neutrals and some NH fans will get the most bang for their buck from Super Rugby. I struggle to get as much enjoyment out of it personally, it probably being down to a combination of a lack of any real allegiances and my NH rugby 'upbringing'. That's not say I don't enjoy Super Rugby, the recent Saders vs Canes game was awesome and I saw a match earlier in the season that was great too, think it was the Chiefs vs Canes in Suva.

See my ideal game is a proper 'blood n guts street fight' of a match like the Wales vs England in the 6N but that's just me... I also loved the Saracens vs Leinster HC final.

I have to add, born and bred on NZ rugby...but i find my passion for my teams (Otago/Highlanders) keeps me watching much more than the actual competition and so i can see if you dont have team it could be hard to get into. Also why i think its slowly dying, the lack of interest in games that "your" teams isn't playing in. I was more interesting in watching the AFL last weekend rather than the Super Rugby Semi's and i know a lot of people that feel the same
 
I have to add, born and bred on NZ rugby...but i find my passion for my teams (Otago/Highlanders) keeps me watching much more than the actual competition and so i can see if you dont have team it could be hard to get into. Also why i think its slowly dying, the lack of interest in games that "your" teams isn't playing in. I was more interesting in watching the AFL last weekend rather than the Super Rugby Semi's and i know a lot of people that feel the same

I guess this is part of the issue for some fans. For me, I'm a born and raised Blue Bull fan, and will never cut my allegiance with them, even through the tough times.

But I try my best to watch any and all rugby where my fellow countrymen are involved in no matter the tournament or team. I for one have been treated to some awesome high school rugby this week, with our local Craven Week up and running, which is the only rugby SA players are currently involved in until the RC kicks off.
 
I guess this is part of the issue for some fans. For me, I'm a born and raised Blue Bull fan, and will never cut my allegiance with them, even through the tough times.

But I try my best to watch any and all rugby where my fellow countrymen are involved in no matter the tournament or team. I for one have been treated to some awesome high school rugby this week, with our local Craven Week up and running, which is the only rugby SA players are currently involved in until the RC kicks off.

I agree, i'll never drop the Landers or Otago...but until those guys in the saders put on the black jersey they're the competition so yeah, i'd rather watch school boy rugby, or in the case of this weekend gone, the AFL

My teams across all sports probably take preference over a game of rugby where one of my teams isn't playing
 
I'm Argentine but spend most of my time in W Europe. Most of my friends here follow NH rugby but my teams are SH bound. Until Jaguares joined SR i could barely watch argentine rugby other than the national team, so i watched NH club rugby mostly plus SR games played in RSA (same time zone as W Europe). Since i had no skin in the game, i generally follow talent and entertainment, although i had a disproportionate number of irish friends at the time so i amit a slight predilection for Leinster, but nothing serious. I followed SR but only when played in RSA. Games in NZ and Aus were unnecessarily complicated time wise. But then Jaguares joined SR, so, with skin in the game, that became i main focus, but i still check european rugby games before the weekend starts and if there is something interesting, i'll watch it. I know enjoy waking up saturday morning and watching rugby.
In a nutshell, i think i'm in a relatively similar positon to you in terms of what we watch.

My conclusions are not quite the same thou. Yes, leinster were favourites in the pro 14 but not by much. Final could have gone either way. Same with the premiership: the chiefs could have beaten the saracens.
And regarding super rugby i dont think ANYONE would have predicted Jaguares being in the final. We were 14 out of 15 teams by round 7. I dont think many could have predicted the rebel's collapse after such a start either.
Dont even get me started about the top 14. You want unpredictability? There's the sweetspot.

If you ask me what's my favourite, i'm biased, course, so SR, but even when i the result is somewhat irrelevant, i enjoy more SR than the rest. I'd rather watch chiefs vs blues than Toulon vs Racing, or Sale vs Leicester, or Ulster vs . I find SR to have a much more open and risk-taking approach. I dont have the stats to back it up, but i am pretty sure the results are higher in SR than in most european competitions.
I'd love to see what percentage of points from the total in each competition come from tries vs kicks.

The way i see it is that in SR you win by forcing the opponent to make a mistake, by attacking him relentlessly. In NH you become great by being patient, waiting for the opposition to make a mistake and capitalize on that. You could argue those mistakes come from pressure. Sometimes they do, something they dont. Either way, both are fair approaches to the game, but i see one as being risk-averse and the other as risk taking. As an observer, i prefer the risk taking approach. I might be exaggerating a bit for illustration purposes, but not much. Pretty sure i am directionally correct.

And regarding how predictable super rugby is, well, i think the chart below is worth a thousand words. I dont think many competitions can claim the same.

Super Rugby.JPG
 
That's a fantastic graphic, and yeah, it seems very telling. I guess I was conveniently forgetting the ups and downs of the actual season, and focusing on what seems will be the result (though I'm still holding out hope for the Jags.)

you also have the advantage of seeing things from a fŕesh perspective. And you are probably the only person on these forums who has watched such a geographically diverse range of rugby.
I think this being my first year had a huge impact on how I perceived the different leagues. There were, naturally, months of just figuring out, "OK, who's that guy?" and "Wait, you mean Leister and Leinster are two different teams in two different leagues?" and "Wait, the Highlanders aren't a European team?" and "Is this game in Italy, or South Africa?" and so on... Coming in completely cold with nobody else to sort of talk to about it is a strange experience. On one hand, it's cool because I get to "discover" great players on my own - when you come across a Bill Mata and think, ooh, I should keep an eye on this guy, it's kind of a cool feeling. On the other hand, it's odd having no sense of league history, ins and outs of the comp itself, it's a bit overwhelming. When they stopped playing league games to play Heineken Cup games, I thought I had gone completely mad.

I think you will see a lot of change after this year's world cup. When a lot of SH players move abroad to cash in, and where the SH teams bring in a lot of new faces and talent.
That, I'm worried about, I've been hearing a lot about the impending exodus of SH players, as well as some greats retiring, and I feel like, "Hey, come on, I just got to know these dudes!" The ones who go to France, I may never get to watch again.

Gotta say, I love how much thoughtfulness and insight y'all bring to these conversations, it's always such a help.
 

Latest posts

Top