Some inter-conference stats

[TRF_stormer2010]

These stats don't count the action and results so far this weekend- so only up to round 16.

Inter-conference points exchange

NZ 141
SA 72
AUS -213


- NZ way ahead thanks largely to some big margin wins by the Hurricanes (Rebels, Force, Sharks).
- Bulls blow-out win against Reds further skews the points somewhat


NZ wins against other conferences
SA 13
Aus 10
23


SA wins against other conferences
NZ 7
Aus 13
20


AUS wins against other conferences
NZ 6
SA 5
11


- Aus teams have struggled against foreign opposition bar the Brumbies and to some extent the Reds
- Bulls and Sharks have fallen against NZ opposition with them losing to the lower placed NZ sides in 'upsets' that should have gone the other way; Bulls lose to Blues at home, Sharks lose big to Hurricanes, Highlanders beating Bulls. Had those games gone the 'expected' route it would have read 10-10 for SA-NZ instead of 7-13.

Unsurprsingly IMO the NZ conference comes out ahead but I have to admit i am somewhat surprised by just how much the Aus teams have struggled. Granted, the Reds had a terrible start to the season and the Waratahs are uncharacteristically losing close games this season.

Just some interesting things about the season. How it will impact the Rugby championship is anybody's guess. Personally I don't think the Aus conference performance will translate in a weak Wallabies team as you only really need 3 good provincial teams as a base and the Aus talent is somewhat distributed with Pocock, Beale and O'Connor not much help for their weak franchises but undoubtedly extraordinary talents.

Also, please rep me for my time spent

 

[TRF_Ezequiel]

I love stats. Can't get enough of it. Did you know we haven't had a draw this season yet? And if all 7 matches end in a win, it will be the first time since 2003 the Super Rugby season ends without a single match ending in a draw.

 

[Rhyer]

Not really surprised by the wins. Maybe the fact that I expected South Africa to do a bit better against New Zealand teams, only 7 but they are doing well against Aussie teams.

Don't really understand the inter-conference points exchange. You say NZ are way ahead but they're in the middle in terms of numbers?

Edit : Didn't see the negative sign.

 

[Shovenose]

The tv numbers.

Those stats don't really say anything other than NZ player pool is devided evenly and they did not have a lot of injuries.

 

[BZHopenside]

Not surprising tv numbers, considering SA has twice as many people as NZ and Australia combined.

 

[TRF Mr Fish]

Don't remember how many years exactly, I believe it is since 2006, but in the last ~5 years only two teams have finished a season without a 4 try BP - the Force and the Lions. If the Stormers don't record four tries this weekend, they will be the third team - and could well finish top of the ladder.

 

[Shovenose]

Not surprising tv numbers, considering SA has twice as many people as NZ and Australia combined.

How many of those people have pay tv? About a third of SA. But you don't get the point. The $$$ comes from it

 

[TRF_Ezequiel]

How many paid subscribers does SuperSport have?

i.e. How many people in SA have the full DStv package?

 

[TNT88]

Bad year for Oz. I think the gap will close up a bit in the next two seasons though, the Rebels should settle soon and the talent pool will start to spread a tad more evenly.

As for TV, we don't have a big rugby following but you'd make f***loads of money off fox sports even if just a few hundred thousand people are watching.

 

[Keithmurdoch]

The talent pool IS spreading, that's why the Tahs are pants and the Reds have no depth. If the Aussie rugby player pool were to be evenly proportioned around the teams, they'd be perenially fighting out positions 9 to 13, all praying to avoid injuries to finish just above the Southern Spears/Kings and the occasional bombed out Kiwi side. The only way things will improve is if Kerry Packer or someone like him gets out a checkbook and makes it rain in Samoa / South Auckland / Argentina. The powers that be in Oz rugby need to get over the fantasy that there are hoardes of undiscovered S15 quality players running around Sydney clubs busting for an oppertunity. It aint true.

 

[TRF_Ezequiel]

Maybe not now, but if Australia wants to improve, they need a domestic league, plain and simple. They don't have one now, which is the main reason we are stuck with the shitty conference-system. Players can develop and in the long run it's a better solution than this.

 

[Keithmurdoch]

An Australian domestic league would be a sensible long-term solution without an immediate financial payoff - ie. not going to happen

 

[TRF_heineken]

How many paid subscribers does SuperSport have?

i.e. How many people in SA have the full DStv package?

http://www.mediatoolbox.co.za/pebble.asp?p=40&relid=2942

http://teeveetee.blogspot.com/2012/06/breaking-south-africas-tv-audience.html

Some info on South African TV and Radio viewers and listeners and the stats.

The second link has some direct stats on how many people in South Africa has the premium DSTV decoder, which includes Supersport, and that is 1.75 million people. Just 1.75 Million of our country's 47 million has DSTV, and Supersport... that is 3.7% of our population!!!

 

[Sker]

Makes sense, you have to be pretty well-off to afford the full package.


Up until this year I watched all the rugby in the pub/devilish whore of an ex

 

[SomeOke]

You don't need the full package to get Supersport. I'm a student in digs with a bunch of guys and we only get about 8 channels they're just all sport .

 

[Gena_ZA]

Although the figures are not yet public, it is estimated that a further 400 000 have the HD package from Multichoice
Nothing beats watching Super rugby on HD on a LED TV

 

[TRF_heineken]

Although the figures are not yet public, it is estimated that a further 400 000 have the HD package from Multichoice
Nothing beats watching Super rugby on HD on a LED TV

That 400 000 is included in the premium package on that 2nd link I posted earlier... and yeah, you're right!!

 

[TRF_Ezequiel]

Well, for me, the most exciting prospect of watching Super Rugby, is going to the pub here in Holland. It's a lot of fun, about 50 to 100 Afrikaners watching there every weekend... It's the next best thing.

 

[Shovenose]

You don't need the full package to get Supersport. I'm a student in digs with a bunch of guys and we only get about 8 channels they're just all sport .

8 Sport and 1 pron chanel haha

Super Rugby Australia gain a cup competition and we lose the Currie Cup. And we pay most of these guys

 

[Larksea]

try and tell a blues fan NZ sides have had a good year for injuries more than 13 All Blacks in the squad? and at times they only had 2-3 on the park..

the Rebels should improve in Aussie but at what cost? Looks to me like the force and Tahs are going down and I think losing Scott will really hurt the Reds, he has been massive for them.

NZ suffer from this conference system. From having basically 5 strong sides, I include the blues because on paper they should be a top 4 side and proved they cab neat anyone. Just been a nightmare year for injuries and poor coaching for them.

you can see the reason why the chiefs miss top spot and the Canes missa playoff spot all together:

Combined Bottom two teams each table (Comp Points/wins):

SA: 63/8
AUS: 59/7
NZ: 82/13

I think this is really important shows a massive power gap. No easy games in NZ - the points spread more evenly - means NZ teams are hindered when it comes to the final table and qualifying positions.

What it means is that a SA or Aussie side will more often than not be top qualifier. Which I think goes a long way to actually winning the silverware.

I think if this season was played under the old conditions where each team plays each other once. We may have seen a situation where 4 NZ teams make the finals, 2 SA and 0 Aussie. basically because NZ teams don't get to play teams like the Force/Cheetahs/ Rebels/ Lions twise infact you can add the Tah's to that list as well they have had an awful year.