TRF World XV 2014 [Poll on first post]

[Mikel92]

Are you actually serious or soft trolling us South Africans?

Anyway, how are we going to do this? I can't see any lists? My XV:

15 Bin Smuth
14 Teddy Thommy Bowe
13 Tevita Kuridrani
12 sentimental tip of the cap to retiring JdV
11 Julian Savea
10 Jonathan Sexton
9 Connor Murray
8 Duane Vermeulen
7 Richie McCaw
6 Bernard le Roux
5 Paul O'Connel (tempted to go Lawes but too similar to Retallick and I prefer Retallick)
4 Brodie Retallick
3 no idea, has anyone really stood out? I'd have gone for Herrera just after the RC but he hasn't carried that dominance past rounds one and 2
2 Adriaan Strauss
1 James Slipper and I can't believe I'm nominating an Aussie prop

This probably closely resembles my view. And don't worry, I too struggled a bit with the first three. I was tossing up between Rory Best, Dane Coles and Biz du Plessis. For locks I came up with Launchbury who is a tackle machine, and Rettalick who would add mobility. But you could also get away with putting O'Connell there. Can Duane Vermeulen play blindside out of interest? If so, I put him there. Sam Warburton at 7, and Read at 8.

I'm surprised a lot of people are going with Ben Smith. His running game has been very subdued this year compared to 2013. He does have have a better kicking game and is probably more confident putting boot to ball, but I'd still be inclined to put Folau.

 

[Darwin]

This probably closely resembles my view. And don't worry, I too struggled a bit with the first three. I was tossing up between Rory Best, Dane Coles and Biz du Plessis. For locks I came up with Launchbury who is a tackle machine, and Rettalick who would add mobility. But you could also get away with putting O'Connell there. Can Duane Vermeulen play blindside out of interest? If so, I put him there. Sam Warburton at 7, and Read at 8.

I'm surprised a lot of people are going with Ben Smith. His running game has been very subdued this year compared to 2013. He does have have a better kicking game and is probably more confident putting boot to ball, but I'd still be inclined to put Folau.

I'm not. His running game has been fine for the AB's in 2014. He has been a bit quieter (yet still very good) during the end of year tour, but he has some outstanding games for the AB's this season (2nd and 3rd English test, 2nd Bledisloe, 1st South African test). Folau may have a slight edge in terms of the running game, but Smith is miles ahead in terms of positional play, kicking, passing, defense etc. Folau still has a long way to go in terms of fullback play - his unwillingness to kick the ball is a bit of a liability for Australia (which many teams are now exploiting). Indeed if I was picking a world XV I would probably pick the likes of Mike Brown and Rob Kearney ahead of him (perhaps I'm a bit too conservative!). I would be very tempted to pick Folau on the right wing, but that is another story.....

 

[Kapa O Pango]

Back-line

15 Folau
14 North
13 Kuridrani
12 Roberts
11 Savea
10 Sexton
9 Smith

Some very big bodies, that could probably scoring anywhere with the creative geniuses from Smith and Sexton.

 

[Big Ewis]

Back-line

15 Folau
14 North
13 Kuridrani
12 Roberts
11 Savea
10 Sexton
9 Smith

Some very big bodies, that could probably scoring anywhere with the creative geniuses from Smith and Sexton.

how about the front ? Keep it in the same spirit, more or less the same, yeah ?

8 Dagg
7 Folau
6 North
5 Kuridrani
4 Roberts
3 Savea
2 Sexton
1 Smith

Consistenkey. That's the way to go. If you like one idea, just keep on going that path and don't you let anyone tell you what you can or can't do.

 

[Mikel92]

I'm not. His running game has been fine for the AB's in 2014. He has been a bit quieter (yet still very good) during the end of year tour, but he has some outstanding games for the AB's this season (2nd and 3rd English test, 2nd Bledisloe, 1st South African test). Folau may have a slight edge in terms of the running game, but Smith is miles ahead in terms of positional play, kicking, passing, defense etc. Folau still has a long way to go in terms of fullback play - his unwillingness to kick the ball is a bit of a liability for Australia (which many teams are now exploiting). Indeed if I was picking a world XV I would probably pick the likes of Mike Brown and Rob Kearney ahead of him (perhaps I'm a bit too conservative!). I would be very tempted to pick Folau on the right wing, but that is another story.....

He's been a bit quiet in more than just the end of year tour. You could tell in the Super 15 that the 2013 form wasn't there. I know Kiwi posters are convinced that Smith is the descendant of Jesus Christ, but there are actually more in-form people out there. If you look at clean breaks, tries, meters gained, things of that nature - Folau is better.

In both their respective games against Wales each, the Wallabies and All Blacks had roughly the same amount of possession against the Welsh. Folau made 146 meters, Smith made 52. Folau beat 3 defenders, Smith beat 0. Folau made 2 clean breaks, Smith made 0. Folau scored 2 tries, Smith assisted in 1. There is nothing slight about that, and it is typical of the statistics. Smith has made around 40 to 50 meters running on this tour, Folau usually makes AT LEAST 60, sometimes going into the hundreds. The one exception was the match against England. But before that game, is was 42 meters against SA. What is slight, is Ben Smith's so-called tackle advantage. Nowhere in the statistics does it suggest Folau misses an outrageous amount. Smith, at stretch, makes a couple more than Folau every so often. The notion that Ben is the best fullback in the world is just a myth, and I don't know why posters cling to it. Yeah, Smith kicks better. I could use the same argument for Dagg vs. Smith and those very supporters would (and have) reject it.

I've gone with the offensive fullback over the one who is defensive mainly because this is supposedly a team with the best forwards in the world on current form. Also, while I like Mike Brown as well, he hasn't had the best tour either.

 

[Darwin]

He's been a bit quiet in more than just the end of year tour. You could tell in the Super 15 that the 2013 form wasn't there. I know Kiwi posters are convinced that Smith is the descendant of Jesus Christ, but there are actually more in-form people out there. If you look at clean breaks, tries, meters gained, things of that nature - Folau is better.

In both their respective games against Wales each, the Wallabies and All Blacks had roughly the same amount of possession against the Welsh. Folau made 146 meters, Smith made 52. Folau beat 3 defenders, Smith beat 0. Folau made 2 clean breaks, Smith made 0. Folau scored 2 tries, Smith assisted in 1. There is nothing slight about that, and it is typical of the statistics. Smith has made around 40 to 50 meters running on this tour, Folau usually makes AT LEAST 60, sometimes going into the hundreds. The one exception was the match against England. But before that game, is was 42 meters against SA. What is slight, is Ben Smith's so-called tackle advantage. Nowhere in the statistics does it suggest Folau misses an outrageous amount. Smith, at stretch, makes a couple more than Folau every so often. The notion that Ben is the best fullback in the world is just a myth, and I don't know why posters cling to it. Yeah, Smith kicks better. I could use the same argument for Dagg vs. Smith and those very supporters would (and have) reject it.

I've gone with the offensive fullback over the one who is defensive mainly because this is supposedly a team with the best forwards in the world on current form. Also, while I like Mike Brown as well, he hasn't had the best tour either.

Comparing stats from a one off game is completely pointless. If you must compare stats you need to do it of a decent periods of time, rather than just selecting a one off game that supports your point of view (then claiming it is typical of the statistics when it is clearly not!)

Yes Ben Smith hasn't quite matched his 2013 form he we was New Zealand Super Rugby player of the year and was nominated for IRB Player of the Year. However he has still had a fantastic year. He was outstanding for the Highlanders. His tackle breaking / linbreaking / metres run stats were (slightly) down on his 2013 season (2013 - 186 carries, 1427 metres, 19 clean breaks, 57 defenders beaten; 2014 - 190 carries, 1265 metres, 14 clean breaks, 47 defenders beaten) but his tackling and breakdown work was much improved, and what really stood out was his distribution. He created a lot of linebreaks and tries for the Highlanders this season with his passing game. He was phenomenal against England once shifted to fullback, and continued that form into the Rugby Championship before he was shifted back to the right wing (where he - like most who played on the right wing for the AB's this season - was starved off ball). He was a standout against South Africa in Wellington when shifted to 12 as he actually got the ball in his hands! He then had a quieter (by his standards) but still very good end of year tour.

If we compare Super Rugby stats I think you will find that Ben Smith made more metres than Folau (1265m in 190 carries vs 1187m in 185 carries). So if we compare them as fullbacks they make a very similar number of metres per run - Folau runs slightly more metres per game (nowhere near 40-60 though!) simply because he runs the ball more per match. Folau obviously had a big advantage in terms of clean breaks (25 vs 14) and an slim advantage in defenders beaten (52 vs 47) at Super Rugby level. This is behind the Waratahs forward pack which is anything but a joke (indeed is far superior to the Highlanders forward pack!).

If we compare their performances during the Rugby Championship this year:

Folau: 6 Matches, 480 minutes, 2 tries, 1 try assist, 69 carries, 498 metres, 7 clean breaks, 27 defenders beaten
Ben Smith: 6 matches, 480 minutes, 2 tries, 1 try assist, 49 carries, 299 metres, 9 clean breaks, 18 defenders beaten

Folau has slightly more metres per carry (7.2 vs 6.1), though this would be expect given he spent the whole time at fullback (as fullbacks should make a lot of easy metres carrying it back.... especially if they don't kick the ball!). They beat a similar number of defenders per carry (Folau 0.39, Smith 0.37), Smith had almost twice as many clean breaks per carry (Folau 0.10, Smith 0.18), though I do believe playing on the wing helped Smith stats in this regard (as if wing is on the end of an overlap they are credited with a clean break even if all they had to do was catch the ball!). I would suggest that their offensive stats during the Rugby Championship are pretty comparable overall, with Folau having a edge statistically in terms of Super Rugby performances.

In terms of defense the difference is quite large. Folau has an amazing ability to put himself in positions where he doesn't have to tackle. You would think given the fact Australia have conceded quite a few tries this season he would have had to make quite a few tackles, but amazingly his tackle count is rather low! This comes down a positional thing as much as anything - in terms of making head on tackles I would have thought Folau would have a slight edge over Smith (who I still believe is still too passive in the tackle at times, though is improving in this area).

In terms of Super Rugby:
Folau: 1092 minutes, 19 tackles, 5 missed tackles (79%, 1.4 tackles/80 minutes)
Smith: 1280 minutes, 69 tackles, 15 missed tackles (82%, 4.3 tackles/80 minutes)

In terms of the Rugby Championship:
Folau: 480 minutes 13 tackles, 3 missed tackles (81%, 2.2 tackles/80 minutes)
Smith: 480 minutes, 20 tackles, 3 missed tackles (87%, 3.3 tackles/80 minutes)

The big thing about Ben Smith is he does the little things that make everyone else perform better. That's exactly what you want in a fullback IMO. Though he had a 'quiet' game against Wales was was heavily involved in 3 of the AB's tries. He ran a brilliant line and delivered an excellent pass to create the linebreak for Coles in Kaino's first try, he made an excellent kick return giving the AB's front foot ball in Barrett's 1st try, and his brilliant aerial work lead to Barrett's 2nd try. None of these acts were exceptional, they we just basic skills executed very well. Folau in contrast has skills that Smith (indeed most players in world rugby) could never dream of, but he is a finisher rather than a creator, and I still think he is learning about the game. For me he still looks like a wing playing at fullback. If I was the Australian coach I would seriously look at playing James O'Connor at fullback with Folau on the wing (along with Speight) next year....

I get that you like Dagg (and believe he is unfairly criticized at times, which is fair enough), but surely you can see that everyone outside of Canterbury thinks that Ben Smith is pretty damn good!

 

[sharkfan]

15. Israel Folau Aus
14. Ben Smith NZ
13. Tevita Kurindrani Aus
12. Jamie Roberts Wales
11. Julian Savea NZ
10. Johnny Sexton Ire
9. Aaron Smith NZ
8. Duane Vermeulen SA
7. Sam Warburton Wales
6. Kieran Read NZ (have to find a place in the team for him)
5. Paul O' Connell Ire
4. Brodie Retallik NZ
3. Owen Franks NZ
2. Bismarck Du Plessis SA
1. Marcos Ayerza Arg

 

[Mikel92]

Darwin, I've edited my post a few times now, just a heads up. Not sure when you started replying but I've added a few things in. Those attacking stats really put Folau out in front. I'm mostly going by recent statistics, cause I assume this is a World XV on current form. Granted, there are some things statistics don't tell you which favor Smith. Like the positional play, effectiveness of his kicks, etc. But the bottom line is this, Folau has significantly been the better attacking full back in recent times, but Smith usually makes a couple of tackles more. I would also point out that if Smith was so amazing on defense, Johnny May shouldn't have been allowed to do what he did. Yeah, Dagg missed the last-line of D, but he did waltz through Conrad and Ben.

Also, I did add in my post that the Welsh game was typical of the statistics on this tour. I wasn't just saying "heres a one off game to prove it". The one game Smith sort of turns it around is when the ABs faced England. It's no use dragging up stats from before 2014, because my understanding was this is a team on current form? If we're going back a year or two then absolutely Ben Smith would be there. But the issue is, that form is non existent now. Other posters than me have acknowledged BS (funny initials) was pretty average against Scotland and Wales. Then again, everyone was average against Scotland.

Let's not forget how long Ben Smith has been playing Union compared to Israel Folau though. I'm not surprised Benny knows a couple more tricks of the trade in terms of when to kick, etc. But given the context of this thread, and with all of these brilliant forwards that should ensure awesome territory and possession, I'd want a backline who could blitz the opposition. And that includes the fullback. That's just me though.

 

[Darwin]

Darwin, I've edited my post a few times now, just a heads up. Not sure when you started replying but I've added a few things in. Those attacking stats really put Folau out in front. I'm mostly going by recent statistics, cause I assume this is a World XV on current form. Granted, there are some things statistics don't tell you which favor Smith. Like the positional play, effectiveness of his kicks, etc. But the bottom line is this, Folau has significantly been the better attacking full back in recent times, but Smith usually makes a couple of tackles more. I would also point out that if Smith was so amazing on defense, Johnny May shouldn't have been allowed to do what he did. Yeah, Dagg missed the last-line of D, but he did waltz through Conrad and Ben.

Also, I did add in my post that the Welsh game was typical of the statistics on this tour. I wasn't just saying "heres a one off game to prove it". The one game Smith sort of turns it around is when the ABs faced England. It's no use dragging up stats from before 2014, because my understanding was this is a team on current form? If we're going back a year or two then absolutely Ben Smith would be there. But the issue is, that form is non existent now. Other posters than me have acknowledged BS (funny initials) was pretty average against Scotland and Wales. Then again, everyone was average against Scotland.

I have edited my post several times too accordingly

As I understand it this is World XV for 2014 - not a World XV for the the last month - hence all of the stats I've provided (from earlier in 2014) are entirely relevant. If I were picking a world XV based on the end of year tour I'm not sure who I would would pick at fullback. Smith played quite well but was a bit quieter than normal, I thought Folau didn't play as well as well as usual, and I don't rate Le Roux. I would perhaps go for Kearney, as his ability under the high ball was the key to Irelands wins against South Africa and Australia.

In terms of the Johnny May try there is no way Ben Smith is remotely at fault. He (rightly) stayed on the man he was marking on the outside and trusted his inside man to make the tackle. If he had gone off his line and tried to tackle May (and left his man open) he would have (rightly) got a good bollocking from the coaches! This is not to say Smith's defense is exceptional - indeed it is one of the weaker aspects of his game in my opinion - he is just clearly better in this area than the likes of Folau and Dagg IMO.

 

[ENZED-88]

Seems like the 12 jumper is pretty split in this forum. No real stand outs this year, seems a few people picking Roberts pretty much making the rest of the backline redundant.

 

[Mikel92]

I have edited my post several times too accordingly

As I understand it this is World XV for 2014 - not a World XV for the the last month - hence all of the stats I've provided (from earlier in 2014) are entirely relevant. If I were picking a world XV based on the end of year tour I'm not sure who I would would pick at fullback. Smith played quite well but was a bit quieter than normal, I thought Folau didn't play as well as well as usual, and I don't rate Le Roux. I would perhaps go for Kearney, as his ability under the high ball was the key to Irelands wins against South Africa and Australia.

In terms of the Johnny May try there is no way Ben Smith is remotely at fault. He (rightly) stayed on the man he was marking on the outside and trusted his inside man to make the tackle. If he had gone off his line and tried to tackle May (and left his man open) he would have (rightly) got a good bollocking from the coaches! This is not to say Smith's defense is exceptional - indeed it is one of the weaker aspects of his game in my opinion - he is just clearly better in this area than the likes of Folau and Dagg IMO.

But even in earlier Rugby Championship games, while Smith had a better RC than end of year tour, it still favors Folau. I know meters gained isn't the only stat in existence but Folau gained more in the Sydney and Auckland clashes. Not by much in Sydney mind you, but that was pretty rain sodden. In Auckland...bit of a different story. 159 meters to Smith's 61. He also beats more defenders. And that's all I'm saying. IMO I'd go with an attacking fullback, given the utter strength he's surrounded with. Even the wing comparisons favor Folau. Surprisingly, I've even seen some stats where Folau has made all of his tackles and Smith has missed two or three here and there.

 

[profitius]

At 6, Peter O'Mahony has been one of the best players on the pitch in all his games this year and been on most team of the tournaments in the 6 nations and november tests.
I'd have Ben Smith ahead of Folau. Folau is very impressive but Ben Smith's kicking and passing are far better.
Bernard Foley close to Sexton.
Ryan Crotty would be one of my centers.
Aaron Smith would be my choice of 9.
Vermuelen stands out at 8 although Read was top class again.
Hooker is a difficult one! So many to choose, its even hard to choose between the 2 South Africans. I'll go with Hartley though. I'm sure England had the best lineout this season.
Wings Savea and ?
Openside goes to Michael Hooper.
Second row would be Retallick and Paul O'Connell.
I'll put Adam Ashley-Cooper on the other wing.


15 Ben Smith
14 Ashley-Cooper
13 ?
12 Crotty
11 Savea
10 Sexton
9 Aaron Smith
8 Vermuelen
7 Hooper
6 O'Mahony
5 O'Connell
4 Retallick
3 ?
2 Hartley
1 ?

 

[Mikel92]

Rugby championship stats:

27 defenders beaten - Folau
18 beaten - Smith

203 meters gained â€" Smith
498 â€" Folau

Clean breaks and tries/assists are even from memory. I can see what people mean by Folau being suited to the wing position. It's just that personally I'd stack my backline with pace, ability to make meters, make inroads with ball in hand. Surely the defence would be taken care of with the forward pack.

 

[Darwin]

But even in earlier Rugby Championship games, while Smith had a better RC than end of year tour, it still favors Folau. I know meters gained isn't the only stat in existence but Folau gained more in the Sydney and Auckland clashes. Not by much in Sydney mind you, but that was pretty rain sodden. In Auckland...bit of a different story. 159 meters to Smith's 61. He also beats more defenders. And that's all I'm saying. IMO I'd go with an attacking fullback, given the utter strength he's surrounded with. Even the wing comparisons favor Folau. Surprisingly, I've even seen some stats where Folau has made all of his tackles and Smith has missed two or three here and there.

That's fine, and I can certainly understand why people would choose Folau. I just don't think you should be surprised that some people (not just Kiwi's either!) favour Ben Smith, as he has had another excellent season.

While I commend you for your use of stats to back-up you arguments I do feel the way you are using them is highly misleading. As I've mentioned before comparing an arbitrary stat like metres gained from a one-off match isn't going to give any indication who the best attacker is. For example in the Sydney match Folau had 3 more runs than Smith to get his extra 7m (Smith therefore was making more metres per run), though Folau did break more tackles (which along with line-breaks is a far better indication of attacking ability in any case). In Auckland Folau ran far more metres but Smith made more clean breaks, beat more defenders, and even made more offloads. Personally I think metres gained is not a very useful indication on attacking ability. A player could get an intercept and run 70m down the field which can artificially inflate these metres gained stats (perhaps, for example, as Folau did in the Auckland test!). I think if you look at the overall stats there is enough evidence to suggest Folau has had the edge attack wise this season over Smith (I don't think you even need stats to confirm this), but this doesn't mean that Smith isn't a fantastic attacking player in his own right!

The fact that there are games where Folau made all his tackles and there are games that Smith missed tackles is hardly surprising, and doesn't remotely indicate anything about their respective defensive ability (especially when you consider Folau's issue on defense are more to do with not being in position to make tackles rather than missing tackles he is in position to make). For example I've seen matches where Richard Buckman has broken 3 tackles, and I've also seen matches that Julian Savea has not broken any tackles. Does that indicate they are similar attacking threats? Does it suggest Buckman is better on attack? No it simply suggests comparing player stats from one off games can be highly misleading!

Rugby championship stats:

27 defenders beaten - Folau
18 beaten - Smith

203 meters gained – Smith
498 – Folau

Clean breaks and tries/assists are even from memory. I can see what people mean by Folau being suited to the wing position. It's just that personally I'd stack my backline with pace, ability to make meters, make inroads with ball in hand. Surely the defence would be taken care of with the forward pack.

I have already summarized these stats here. I like it how you omit the clean break stats which don't favour your argument (Smith 9, Folau 7) and claim that they are the same "from memory", while you have taken almost 100m Smith's running metres (the actual number is 299m) As I stated Folau has a very slight advantage in metres/carry and defenders beaten/carry, but Smith has almost twice as many line-breaks per carry....

 

[Mikel92]

That's fine, and I can certainly understand why people would choose Folau. I just don't think you should be surprised that some people (not just Kiwi's either!) favour Ben Smith, as he has had another excellent season.

While I commend you for your use of stats to back-up you arguments I do feel the way you are using them is highly misleading. As I've mentioned before comparing an arbitrary stat like metres gained from a one-off match isn't going to give any indication who the best attacker is. For example in the Sydney match Folau had 3 more runs than Smith to get his extra 7m (Smith therefore was making more metres per run), though Folau did break more tackles (which along with line-breaks is a far better indication of attacking ability in any case). In Auckland Folau ran far more metres but Smith made more clean breaks, beat more defenders, and even made more offloads. Personally I think metres gained is not a very useful indication on attacking ability. A player could get an intercept and run 70m down the field which can artificially inflate these metres gained stats (perhaps, for example, as Folau did in the Auckland test!). I think if you look at the overall stats there is enough evidence to suggest Folau has had the edge attack wise this season over Smith (I don't think you even need stats to confirm this), but this doesn't mean that Smith isn't a fantastic attacking player in his own right!

The fact that there are games where Folau made all his tackles and there are games that Smith missed tackles is hardly surprising, and doesn't remotely indicate anything about their respective defensive ability (especially when you consider Folau's issue on defense are more to do with not being in position to make tackles rather than missing tackles he is in position to make). For example I've seen matches where Richard Buckman has broken 3 tackles, and I've also seen matches that Julian Savea has not broken any tackles. Does that indicate they are similar attacking threats? Does it suggest Buckman is better on attack? No it simply suggests comparing player stats from one off games can be highly misleading!




I have already summarized these stats here. I like it how you omit the clean break stats which don't favour your argument (Smith 9, Folau 7) and claim that they are the same "from memory", while you have taken almost 100m Smith's running metres (the actual number is 299m) As I stated Folau has a very slight advantage in metres/carry and defenders beaten/carry, but Smith has almost twice as many line-breaks per carry....

Ok, I'll hold my hands up on the last point and say I made an honest mistake with that one. Hey we're not all perfect! But this is meant to be a 2014 form based selection right? Actually, the original article, if we stretch back, was a end of year tour-form selection. And if it's the latter, Folau would coast in even more easily. Smith just didn't really make an impact at all against Scotland and his statistics for that game were not impressive. That's typical of the tour. Same against Wales. You could argue in the Scotland game the forward pack was very experimental and go forward means everything. But considering the last few games where the Aussie forwards were monstered, I don't really think that's a valid argument.

Let's just clear a few things up though, because facts actually help. The fact that Folau had "more runs than Smith therefore it doesn't count" isn't really an argument you can use. You do realize people can make 'runs' but not even go a meter? That happens plenty of times. Just because Folau had more runs than Smith in Sydney doesn't mean you can discount it. You're skewing the statistics while accusing me of doing it. Folau having X amount of opportunities over Smith's Y amount is irrelevant, you still actually have to MAKE the meters, and plenty of players don't. So the thing I would say is just mind who's being misleading with the stats, because IMO you've just come out with a whooper. If we're going to continue using statistics I'm not sure if I can trust you any more if you're going to give them you're own personal spin.

Personally I think metres gained is not a very useful indication on attacking ability.

You're doing the same thing with this though because of Eden Park. You can't discount or back away from the statistic because one game happens to bump a player up. Smith and Folau both had opportunities to make breakways through the RC. Folau managed to, and Smith didn't. If the boot was on the other foot you'd be crowing like a rooster.

Both guys are created equal, both have a brain, limbs, legs. Just because Folau did something amazing in one game and Smith didn't isn't my problem. Just keep in mind which player is facing the greatest rugby team on earth and making these breakaways as well. The other point is that you're acting like Eden Park was the only match where he's been in the 100 meters zone. That certainly isn't the case. I'm not defending Folau's poor tackling compared to Smith's. Initially I thought this was a end of year tour comparison hence why I said it was "slight". What I have done is take Folau's strengths and weaknesses and say why I would have him in my World XV over a more defensive player. On the other hand, you've shyed away from things that actually support my argument and have acted like they don't count. Well, sorry matey potatey, they absolutely do.

I'm not arguing Smith isn't a fantastic player, but I happen to think Folau is better this particular year. I also think the way some New Zealand posters (and I have to be honest, mostly you) bring Dagg down, but build Smith up is ******. Smith is a decent player, but by his standards he is definitely not in form.

p.s: I also left out offloads which would favor my argument. Folau happens to have more. You didn't point that out I noticed I don't mind you hauling me up, but be consistent eh?

 

[Darwin]

Ok, I'll hold my hands up on the last point and say I made an honest mistake with that one. Hey we're not all perfect! But this is meant to be a 2014 form based selection right? Actually, the original article, if we stretch back, was a end of year tour-form selection. And if it's the latter, Folau would coast in even more easily. Smith just didn't really make an impact at all against Scotland and his statistics for that game were not impressive. That's typical of the tour. Same against Wales. You could argue in the Scotland game the forward pack was very experimental and go forward means everything. But considering the last few games where the Aussie forwards were monstered, I don't really think that's a valid argument.

I actually don't think Folau had a great end of year tour at all (unless of course we judge fullbacks solely by their metres run stat ). He was generally well contained, and his lack of kicking game was exposed by England and Ireland in particular. He was solid, but I don't think he was much better (if at all) than Smith (as I mentioned previously I would probably have picked Kearney as my "fullback of the end of year tour", though I though Mike Brown played pretty well too).

Let's just clear a few things up though, because facts actually help. The fact that Folau had "more runs than Smith therefore it doesn't count" isn't really an argument you can use. You do realize people can make 'runs' but not even go a meter? That happens plenty of times. Just because Folau had more runs than Smith in Sydney doesn't mean you can discount it. You're skewing the statistics while accusing me of doing it. Folau having X amount of opportunities over Smith's Y amount is irrelevant, you still actually have to MAKE the meters, and plenty of players don't. So the thing I would say is just mind who's being misleading with the stats, because IMO you've just come out with a whooper. If we're going to continue using statistics I'm not sure if I can trust you any more if you're going to give them you're own personal spin.

I didn't say anything along those lines. I simple think comparing players tackle breaking / line breaking stats based on the number of times they ran the ball is pretty logical. I'm not 'skewing' the statistics at all. I have simply summarized all the relevant stats so they are comparable. In my opinion it is far more relevant to compare metres/run or tackle breaks/run than to compare raw stats, as it corrects for the amount of ball a player receives. It is not remotely misleading. Indeed it is the way real statisticians work.

You're doing the same thing with this though because of Eden Park. You can't discount or back away from the statistic because one game happens to bump a player up. Smith and Folau both had opportunities to make breakways through the RC. Folau managed to, and Smith didn't. If the boot was on the other foot you'd be crowing like a rooster.

I'm not sure what your point is? I never said your should discount stats from single match, simply that you shouldn't read too much into a single match. That's exactly why I suggest that you look compare players stats for a whole tournament / season. My point is that metres gained isn't in my opinion as relevant as defenders beaten or tackles bust in assessing attacking ability, as it is much easier to artificially inflate this stat (particularly in a single match) than the other attacking stats. Why would I be "crowing like a rooster" if Smith made a huge number of metres in the Rugby Championship? Smith made more metres than any other player in Super Rugby, but that doesn't mean I think he was the best attacking player in Super Rugby....

Both guys are created equal, both have a brain, limbs, legs. Just because Folau did something amazing in one game and Smith didn't isn't my problem. Just keep in mind which player is facing the greatest rugby team on earth and making these breakaways as well. The other point is that you're acting like Eden Park was the only match where he's been in the 100 meters zone. That certainly isn't the case.

When did I remotely suggest this? I would imagine he does this frequently at all levels. Indeed I would imagine Folau has easily made more metres than any other player in world rugby this year. He has probably had more runs than any other player, and is the most dangerous attacking fullback in the game - those two things combined will certainly lead to a lot of running metres!

I'm not defending Folau's poor tackling compared to Smith's. Initially I thought this was a end of year tour comparison hence why I said it was "slight". What I have done is take Folau's strengths and weaknesses and say why I would have him in my World XV over a more defensive player. On the other hand, you've shyed away from things that actually support my argument and have acted like they don't count. Well, sorry matey potatey, they absolutely do.

I'm not arguing Smith isn't a fantastic player, but I happen to think Folau is better this particular year. I also think the way some New Zealand posters (and I have to be honest, mostly you) bring Dagg down, but build Smith up is ******. Smith is a decent player, but by his standards he is definitely not in form.

And I've stated that I disagree, but you are entitled to your opinion, and I can certainly see why you (or anyone else) would pick Folau at fullback. I haven't "shyed away" from anything - I have acknowledged that Folau is the better attacking player, but suggested that you are under-rating Smith's attacking ability (and backed this up with stats).

I (like many others) don't think Dagg should be the starting NZ fullback. But I don't think I bring Dagg down "unfairly". I judge Dagg the same way I judge all players - I think the AB's would be better starting Smith at fullback and Piutau on the wing so I state that. It's not unfair to point out that Dagg has some pretty obvious flaws in his game right now. I've pointed out numerous times that I can understand why the AB's selectors would pick him, and indeed mentioned that I myself would pick him if there was a RWC final tomorrow and Smith was unavailable. Anyways this thread isn't about Dagg.....

p.s: I also left out offloads which would favor my argument. Folau happens to have more. You didn't point that out I noticed I don't mind you hauling me up, but be consistent eh?

I didn't mention offloading for the same reason I didn't mention passing/kicking/turnover stats - we were discussing ball running ability, and I don't consider offloading as ball running! There is no doubt that Folau makes far more offloads than Smith - indeed I would imagine Folau makes more offloads than anyone in the game not called Sonny Bill Williams.....

Surely we can agree that both Smith and Folau are valid choices for fullback of the year?

 

[Mikel92]

I actually don't think Folau had a great end of year tour at all (unless of course we judge fullbacks solely by their metres run stat ). He was generally well contained, and his lack of kicking game was exposed by England and Ireland in particular. He was solid, but I don't think he was much better (if at all) than Smith (as I mentioned previously I would probably have picked Kearney as my "fullback of the end of year tour", though I though Mike Brown played pretty well too).

He was better overall than Smith in my view. If Folau was well contained, then surely Smith was ineffective. The only area that Smith can hold his head up with pride is the clean breaks stat. Folau has made more meters, beaten more defenders and has offloaded more times than Smith. Personally I feel any stat is important, even offloading. Those create attacking opportunities. Also why try assists are important.

I didn't say anything along those lines. I simple think comparing players tackle breaking / line breaking stats based on the number of times they ran the ball is pretty logical. I'm not 'skewing' the statistics at all. I have simply summarized all the relevant stats so they are comparable. In my opinion it is far more relevant to compare metres/run or tackle breaks/run than to compare raw stats, as it corrects for the amount of ball a player receives. It is not remotely misleading. Indeed it is the way real statisticians work.

As I've mentioned before comparing an arbitrary stat like metres gained from a one-off match isn't going to give any indication who the best attacker is. For example in the Sydney match Folau had 3 more runs than Smith to get his extra 7m (Smith therefore was making more metres per run)

That is what I mean. You can't shy away from the end stat of who has gained more meters. It could be because of a variety of reasons, sure. But at the end of the day, I want to know who does more with ball in hand. The 3 more runs than Smith thing is totally irrelevant. I don't care how many runs you've made, you still need to do the hard yards and make the meters, which Folau does.

I'm not sure what your point is? I never said your should discount stats from single match, simply that you shouldn't read too much into a single match. That's exactly why I suggest that you look compare players stats for a whole tournament / season. My point is that metres gained isn't in my opinion as relevant as defenders beaten or tackles bust in assessing attacking ability, as it is much easier to artificially inflate this stat (particularly in a single match) than the other attacking stats. Why would I be "crowing like a rooster" if Smith made a huge number of metres in the Rugby Championship? Smith made more metres than any other player in Super Rugby, but that doesn't mean I think he was the best attacking player in Super Rugby....

Personally I think metres gained is not a very useful indication on attacking ability. A player could get an intercept and run 70m down the field which can artificially inflate these metres gained stats (perhaps, for example, as Folau did in the Auckland test!).

That was what I was disagreeing with. It's still a useful indication. Who cares if the guy runs 70 meters away? That just proves to me he has the awareness and skills to do that. Just because it doesn't favor Ben Smith doesn't Mean we shouldn't use this stat. Yes it inflates a statistic if you are wanting to view a number over the course of the season. But it also tells you another story as well, you had the awareness, skills, judgement, ability to race out of the line, back themselves for a long range try.

Smith does some of the traditional stuff very well, like tackling and when to pass, the position he should be in. But I always have a soft spot for shining lights in bad teams. And the Wallabies this year have really been a piece of work. Yet Folau has scored quite a few tries, brought them into the 22 nicely, and created those opportunities with offloads that only Savea and Sonny Bill could match on our side. That's what I'd want in my side. Now if this were a thread about the Wallabies .. maybe they need Folau to either move to wing, or seriously work on his defensive abilities and positional play. But like I've said a few times, I've aimed for a backline to blitz the opposition. I wouldn't place such a gigantic emphasis on the last line of defence. If I were to do that, then Smith would be thereabouts. But thats not the strategy I've opted for. I'm just trying to point out his attacking ability, and I also contest that he "only just" is in front of Smith in this regard. That's basically it.

 

[Darwin]

He was better overall than Smith in my view. If Folau was well contained, then surely Smith was ineffective. The only area that Smith can hold his head up with pride is the clean breaks stat. Folau has made more meters, beaten more defenders and has offloaded more times than Smith. Personally I feel any stat is important, even offloading. Those create attacking opportunities. Also why try assists are important.

Folau was better with ball in hand during the end of year tour than Smith. There is no doubt about that. He did some good things, but I don't think he was as effective as he was earlier in the season (e.g. at Super Rugby level / vs France) when he was all but unstoppable at times. I felt his defensive positioning / lack of a kicking game was particularly exposed versus England and Ireland, which is the main reason I would mark his overall performance down.

I never said anything about offloads not being important. Of course they are (as long as they are accurate!). I don't consider them a measure of how good a ball runner a player is (I would consider them more in terms of a players distribution ability)...

That is what I mean. You can't shy away from the end stat of who has gained more meters. It could be because of a variety of reasons, sure. But at the end of the day, I want to know who does more with ball in hand. The 3 more runs than Smith thing is totally irrelevant. I don't care how many runs you've made, you still need to do the hard yards and make the meters, which Folau does.

That was what I was disagreeing with. It's still a useful indication. Who cares if the guy runs 70 meters away? That just proves to me he has the awareness and skills to do that. Just because it doesn't favor Ben Smith doesn't Mean we shouldn't use this stat. Yes it inflates a statistic if you are wanting to view a number over the course of the season. But it also tells you another story as well, you had the awareness, skills, judgement, ability to race out of the line, back themselves for a long range try.

You are misunderstanding what I'm saying. I'm not 'shying' away from the metres gained stat. Of course you should look at metres gained when assessing players statistically. I simply think there are clearly better stats to assess how dangerous a player is with ball in hand (and comparing how many metres two players made in an arbitrary game tells you next to nothing about their respective attacking abilities!). Do you disagree with this? For the reasons already mentioned I think line breaks / tackle busts are a better judge of a players attacking ability, but ideally all the attacking stats should be used together (and weighted appropriately) over the course of a season. I do feel you are putting far too much weight on the metres gained stat. If metres made is the only attacking stat of importance then Ben Smith was the best attacking player in Super Rugby this season. Huzzah!

Smith does some of the traditional stuff very well, like tackling and when to pass, the position he should be in. But I always have a soft spot for shining lights in bad teams. And the Wallabies this year have really been a piece of work. Yet Folau has scored quite a few tries, brought them into the 22 nicely, and created those opportunities with offloads that only Savea and Sonny Bill could match on our side. That's what I'd want in my side. Now if this were a thread about the Wallabies .. maybe they need Folau to either move to wing, or seriously work on his defensive abilities and positional play. But like I've said a few times, I've aimed for a backline to blitz the opposition. I wouldn't place such a gigantic emphasis on the last line of defence. If I were to do that, then Smith would be thereabouts. But thats not the strategy I've opted for. I'm just trying to point out his attacking ability, and I also contest that he "only just" is in front of Smith in this regard. That's basically it.

Again I'm more than happy to accept this reasoning for including Folau - I have never once debated that Folau would be a very valid choice for the best fullback in 2014! If there is a vote on the forum I think it would be a 2-horse race between him and Smith (though again I do have a lot of time for Brown and Kearney, and Le Roux does have his supporters).

 

[Mikel92]

Folau was better with ball in hand during the end of year tour than Smith. There is no doubt about that. He did some good things, but I don't think he was as effective as he was earlier in the season (e.g. at Super Rugby level / vs France) when he was all but unstoppable at times. I felt his defensive positioning / lack of a kicking game was particularly exposed versus England and Ireland, which is the main reason I would mark his overall performance down.

I never said anything about offloads not being important. Of course they are (as long as they are accurate!). I don't consider them a measure of how good a ball runner a player is (I would consider them more in terms of a players distribution ability)...

I've shown areas where, including towards the end of the season, he has been better with ball in hand than Smith. Actually, if anything, Smith kept the gap more narrow during the RC by making all of those awesome tackles. The difference in tackles wasn't so phenomenal towards the end of the year. Offloads and defenders beaten are still two different stats which are weighted in Folau's favour. Smith kicks far more Folau, and in reality I'm sure he is more effective at it. Although how many of those kicks are absolute magic that gets the ABs deep into the 22 like Dagg does I'm not sure - how do I know they aren't just up and unders? My point here is there are other areas I've pointed to outside of meters gained.

In that case Smith's better passing that is being touted would be void then? Surely that is in the distribution category with offloads? Folau is generally pretty comfortably in front in that stat. There were a few areas that were noted that Smith does better. Passing was one of them. Fine. But the offloads go Folau's way. So distribution is even.

You are misunderstanding what I'm saying. I'm not 'shying' away from the metres gained stat. Of course you should look at metres gained when assessing players statistically. I simply think there are clearly better stats to assess how dangerous a player is with ball in hand (and comparing how many metres two players made in an arbitrary game tells you next to nothing about their respective attacking abilities!). Do you disagree with this? For the reasons already mentioned I think line breaks / tackle busts are a better judge of a players attacking ability, but ideally all the attacking stats should be used together (and weighted appropriately) over the course of a season. I do feel you are putting far too much weight on the metres gained stat. If metres made is the only attacking stat of importance then Ben Smith was the best attacking player in Super Rugby this season. Huzzah!

Is Super Rugby relevant though? How many players could I list right now that are fantastic at Super rugby level do you reckon? Pretty sure Buckman is handy. Wouldn't put him in a black jumper though. When I've compared stats today I've done so through their international appearances. I'm a bit puzzled why you're bringing Super rugby into it.

I disagree, yes, that comparing two player's running meters throughout various tours and different parts of the years is helpful. I think it is. You could analyse it further and think, how many meters were gained relative to their carries. But like I said, I don't really get why you're explaining that Folau made 7 more meters because he had X amount of carries over Smith. There are plenty of players who get the ball in hand and technically go on a run but don't make meters. There is just no comparison between the two of them in terms of their individual performances internationally this year. Folau has created more opportunities for his fellow players, and considering he's not even a winger has beaten a tremendous amount of defenders and gained inroads for his pretty inept team. Now imagine him doing that for a World XV. Or even .. imagine him getting a chance to do that for a pack like the ABs, as Smith gets to do each week.

Again I'm more than happy to accept this reasoning for including Folau - I have never once debated that Folau would be a very valid choice for the best fullback in 2014! If there is a vote on the forum I think it would be a 2-horse race between him and Smith (though again I do have a lot of time for Brown and Kearney, and Le Roux does have his supporters).

And for me it'd have to be Folau all day long (even if I'm alone there!). Kearney would be up there. Brown would usually be up there, but he's buttoned off a little bit during the AI. And honestly, I haven't seen enough of Le Roux to judge.

 

[Big Ewis]

omg no, a needlessly meticulous pedantic forum battle !

About Folau and Ben Smith, to summarize, I'd just say Ben Smith is the "better Rugby player" while Folau's the much better athlete. And in this instance, I'll pick the better athlete as my fullback.