RugbyRebels

I’m not sure about your last point. I think Hodge kicked a penalty before Crotty subbed off in Sydney. So actually the average is 1.0 points conceded per game when they are on the field together. More informatively, that is 3 points in about 81 minutes of game time on the field.

Lizard wrote:I’m not sure about your last point. I think Hodge kicked a penalty before Crotty subbed off in Sydney. So actually the average is 1.0 points conceded per game when they are on the field together. More informatively, that is 3 points in about 81 minutes of game time on the field.

Hell no, 3 minutes, most of which is spent with Crotty in Disney Land totally doesn't count.

I heard someone (who should know better) say that over the weekend Chris Ashton became the first Englishman to score 3 tries against New Zealand in his career. This is not true.

He is the first to score 3 tries for England v NZ, but Rory Underwood scored 2 in Lomu’s Test at RWC1995 after getting 1 for the 1993 Lions, and Carl Aarvold scored 3 for the 1930 Great Britain side.

The reciprocal record of tries for NZ v England is 8, shares by Lomu and Julian Savea. The closest current player is Read on 3. Interestingly, those numbers don’t change even if you include matches v the Lions.

Australia has played Italy 17 times with a 100% win rate. The biggest margin was 49 in 1988 and the lowest was 3 in 2012.

Only England boasts a better record with 24 played and won.

Other sides with a 100% record v Italy are New Zealand (13 matches), the Pacific Islanders and Cook Is (1 each).

The Cook Islands result might look surprising. That match was played at the end of Italy's first tour of New Zealand. Italy had played a US West Coast selection and Fiji on the way over. In new Zealand they played five matches in only 15 days (four lesser provinces and a "test" v the NZ U23s). The Cook Islands test was played only one day after the NZ U23s match with 8 of the same players, losing 15-6. Three days later, Italy whipped Tahiti 74-0.

Can I put in a request? How many captains in the professional era have 2 wins against NZ? I'm guessing probably around 10 but I doubt more.

8, if we're counting from January 1st, 1996.

They are as follows

Terrible 2s:
Martin Johnson (England) - 9/11/2002 (home) and 14/6/2003 (away)
Raphael Ibanez (France) - 31/10/1999 (neutral, RWC) and 6/10/2007 (neutral*, RWC)
Victor Matfield (South Africa) - 12/7/2008 (away, Tri Nations/Freedom Cup) and 20/8/2011 (home, Tri Nations/Freedom Cup)
Rory Best (Ireland) - 5/11/2016 (neutral) and 17/11/2018 (home)

Thumping 3s:
Gary Teichmann (South Africa) - 31/8/1996 (home), 25/7/1998 (away, Tri Nations) and 15/8/1998 (home, Tri Nations)
George Gregan (Australia) - 3/8/2002 (home, Tri Nations/Bledisloe Cup), 15/11/2003 (home, RWC) and 7/8/2004 (home, Tri Nations/Bledisloe Cup)

Sexorrific 6s:
John Eales (Australia) - 11/7/1998 (home, Tri Nations/Bledisloe Cup), 1/8/1998 (away, Tri Nations/Bledisloe Cup), 29/8/1998 (home, Bledisloe Cup), 5/8/2000 (away, Tri Nations/Bledisloe Cup), 11/8/2001 (away, Tri Nations/Bledisloe Cup) and 1/9/2001 (home, Tri Nations/Bledisloe Cup)
John Smit (South Africa) - 14/8/2004 (home, Tri Nations/Freedom Cup), Cape Town (home, Tri Nations/Freedom Cup), 2/9/2006 (home, Tri Nations/Freedom Cup), 25/7/2009 (home, Tri Nations/Freedom Cup), 1/8/2009 (home, Tri Nations/Freedom Cup) and 12/9/2009 (away, Tri Nations/Freedom Cup)


*Technically a fixture in a World Cup played in his home country, but assigned to a neutral venue because that year's world cup was organised, apparently, by a deranged ape throwing darts at a map of Europe.

Cheers cas. Thon's a fairly select group.

Cas, could you do me a coaches with an even or better win record against the ABs follow up? Are there any apart from Schmidt? Bearing in mind how close one of the games was, that's a remarkable record.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:Cas, could you do me a coaches with an even or better win record against the ABs follow up? Are there any apart from Schmidt? Bearing in mind how close one of the games was, that's a remarkable record.

There’d be a few Bok/Wallaby coaches back in the day, I expect. Pro era, you’ve got:

Rod McQueen, Aust. 1997-2001: 5 wins from 7, 71.4%
Nick Mallet, SA 1997-2000: 4/7, 57.1%
Jean-Claude Skrela, FRA 1995-99: 2/4, 50%
Rassie Erasmus, SA, 2018*: 1/2, 50%
Joe Schmidt, Ire 2013-2018*: 2/4, 50%
Warren Gatland, Lions 2013-17: 1+draw/3, 50% (obviously much less if you include his Wales matches)

*Incumbent

Cheers Liz. So 2 better and 2 equal (how did I forget about Rassie?!). Pretty good company to be in.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:Cheers Liz. So 2 better and 2 equal (how did I forget about Rassie?!). Pretty good company to be in.

Not all of Rassie’s or Joe’s eggs have hatched yet, so I wouldn’t go counting their chickens just yet, though.

From the amateur era (bearing in mind coaches weren’t really a thing until post WWII, and varied hugely in their roles) you can add at least:
Danie Craven, SA 1949-56, 5/8, 62.5%
Johann Claasen, SA 1970, 3/4, 75%
Careen James, Lions 1971, 2+draw/4, 62.5%
Ian Kirkpatrick, SA 1976, 3/4, 75%
Pierre Berbizier, France, 1994, 2/2, 100%

Of these, only Craven coached against NZ in more than one series.

I should note that in compiling the above I ignored coaches who may have won their only match v NZ.

It’s also interesting to note that until Wales first appointed a national coach in 1967, it had a 60.0% success rate against the All Blacks. Since then, the rate has precipitously declined to 0.00%. I think there is a lesson there.

I've been trying to figure out how to compare NZ and Ireland. NZ are ranked #1 by WR. Ireland have beat NZ 2 out of the last 3. Who is best?

I've compared all head-to-head results for NZ and Ireland, for all opposition (excluding Lions) since RWC 2015. Here are my observations.

1. For countries outside the old 5N and 3N, both Ireland and NZ are practically invincible. No such team has beaten either of them since RWC2015.

2. No team from within the old 5N and 3N (i.e. WR's top 8 ranked countries) has a 100% record against NZ or Ireland since RWC2015. Essentially, both sides are capable of beating any other side in the world (including each other).

3. The difference is that since RWC2015, NZ has a 100% record against Wales, England, Scotland and France and has only lost to Ireland (x2), SA (once) and Australia (once). Ireland does not have a 100% record against anybody and has lost to all seven other top 8 nations (once each to NZ, Aus, Wales, Scotland, England & France, and twice to SA).

So you could argue that on overall recent record, NZ are still clinging on as top dog. On the other hand, differing playing schedules skew the results a little. It all depends on how far back you think results are relevant.

Lizard wrote:I've been trying to figure out how to compare NZ and Ireland. NZ are ranked #1 by WR. Ireland have beat NZ 2 out of the last 3. Who is best?

I've compared all head-to-head results for NZ and Ireland, for all opposition (excluding Lions) since RWC 2015. Here are my observations.

1. For countries outside the old 5N and 3N, both Ireland and NZ are practically invincible. No such team has beaten either of them since RWC2015.

2. No team from within the old 5N and 3N (i.e. WR's top 8 ranked countries) has a 100% record against NZ or Ireland since RWC2015. Essentially, both sides are capable of beating any other side in the world (including each other).

3. The difference is that since RWC2015, NZ has a 100% record against Wales, England, Scotland and France and has only lost to Ireland (x2), SA (once) and Australia (once). Ireland does not have a 100% record against anybody and has lost to all seven other top 8 nations (once each to NZ, Aus, Wales, Scotland, England & France, and twice to SA).

So you could argue that on overall recent record, NZ are still clinging on as top dog. On the other hand, differing playing schedules skew the results a little. It all depends on how far back you think results are relevant.

Right now (like, this week) I think we're the better team, just, though I'd expect the home team to win any matches between us. However I don't expect that to survive even to the next international window, even though there's a decent chance that we'll actually be number 1 by the end of the 6N

That’s probably right. Maybe the real question is whether Ireland’s rise marks a permanent change in the pecking order, or is a bit of a flash in the pan. Given the systemic, structural basis of Ireland’s success (which is rooted in having your domestic operation directed towards international success, much like NZ) it may well be long term.

It wasn’t too long ago that the accepted order of things was that NZ was top dog, very closely followed by SA and Australia. England and France rounded out the “teams capable of winning the RWC” club. That has all been turned on its head.

NZ is clearly being threatened for top spot and the days of the Big Three are well and truly over. Our SH friends are struggling a bit. SA seems to have turned things around but how sustainable is that splitting your domestic game over both hemispheres? The future looks pretty grim over the Tasman with popularity of the sport declining. You can tell it’s bad when the NZ press start admitting that a strong Wallabies side is good for the All Blacks.

England no longer dominates 6N rugby but has its moments in the sun. Wales has retrieved itself from years of decline - perhaps due to finally getting to grips with the regional system? Scotland has finally regained its mojo and is no longer scrabbling around the bottom of the barrel with Italy. France, in the meantime, seems to have disappeared completely up its own derriere, becoming a millionaires club content with getting less than the sum of its parts from an overpaid, overweight cohort of semi-retirees and to hell with the national game.

Overall, international rugby is probably more competitive than it’s been in years, which is a good thing. It will be interesting to see how things sit by 2021.

Definitely not permanent. Ireland does have some structural advantages but we're always going to struggle with depth. We've somehow managed to land ourselves with unprecedented depth right now, but i fully expect a reversion to the mean after the RWC. Besides unless the NZRU are idiots or the IRFU suddenly manage to get together the most massive bung ever Schmidt will be coaching the ABS after 2019 and the rest of us may as well give up.

Jordie Barrett's 4 tries v Italy puts him 3rd= for most tries in a test match for the All Blacks, alongside his brother Beauden. The full list:

6 - Mark Ellis v Japan, RWC1995
5 - Jeff Wilson v Fiji, 1997
4 - Duncan McGregor v England, Originals Tour 1905
John Gallagher & Craig Green, v Fiji, RWC1987
John Kirwan v Wales, 1988
Jonah Lomu v England, RWC1995
Christian Cullen v Scotland, 1996
Jeff Wilson v Samoa, 1999
Mils Muliaina v Canada, RWC2003
Sitiveni Sivivatu v Fiji, 2005
Zac Guildford v Canada, RWC2011
Beauden Barrett v Australia, 2018
Jordie Barrett v Italy, 2018

World Rugby Ranking Positions Held in Top 10 since RWC2015

NZL: 1
AUS: 2-7
IRE: 2-8
ENG: 2-8
RSA: 3-7
WAL: 3-8
SCO: 5-9
ARG: 5-10
FRA: 6-10
FIJ: 8-10
JAP: 9-10

I reckon those spreads show that top-tier rugby has been quite competitive recently. 7 Countries have been both top 5 and below 5th.

Interestingly, apart from New Zealand, no team has been permanently higher than 7th.

Also no team has peaked at 4, 7 or 10.

When did Ireland end up 8th? Must've been quite quick after the 2015 RWC?

Puja

Puja wrote:When did Ireland end up 8th? Must've been quite quick after the 2015 RWC?

Puja

15 February to 13 March 2016.

Remember when selecting players born in another country (or even players with names from another country) was deemed to be a dastardly practice,verging on cheating? Notice how things have changed now that our friends in the North have discovered they can buy their way out of player development problems?

Anyway, time for the annual "6? Nations Poaching Round-Up" summarising the players born in one country but capped for another.*

Working from the squads (original plus replacements) on Wikipedia:

Scotland are easily the champions with their deliberate and successful scouting campaign securing 19 foreign-born squad members (9 ENG, 4 NZ, 3 SA, 2 AUS, 1 USA)

Wales and Italy are ties for silver with 9 apiece. Wales will no doubt argue that their 7 English-born players are a mere feudal hangover, although their 2 Kiwis might be harder to account for. Italy have cast the net a little wider, drawing from 7 other nations, boasting 3 NZers and 1 each from Guinea, Germany, Zimbabwe, Argentina, South Africa and Ireland.

England is only a little behind, with 8 foreign-born players, although they ought to receive a hefty handicap having by far the biggest local player pool, and one of the more brazen attitudes to the whole thing. They have 3 NZers, 2 AUS, 2 Fiji and 1 Samoan.

Ireland have 7 players off the boat. 2 NZers, 2 SA, a Frenchman an English and a Spaniard.

About the only thing French rugby has to its recent credit is bringing in a passport requirement for national selection. Thye only have 5 introduced players (and would probably argue its only 4): 2 SA, 1 NZ, 1 Cameroon and 1 New Caledonia (which is technically part of France).

On the other side of the coin, countries supplying players to others are
England: 17
NZ: 15
SA: 8
Aust: 4 (surprisingly low)
Fiji: 2
Arg: 1
France: 1
Germany: 1
Guinea: 1
Ireland: 1
New Caledonia: 1
Samoa: 1
Spain: 1
USA: 1
Zimbabwe: 1

Although you could technically select an English Exiles XV to play an NZ Exiles XV, the match would be hampered somewhat by the fact not a single 6N team has any foreign-born hookers!

And before you ask, for balance, I can report that the NZ October/November 2018 touring squad of 48 included 5 foreign-born players: 2 Tongans, 1 Samoan, 1 Fijian and an Aussie.

*Yes, I'm well aware that there are shades of grey involved e.g. Welsh players with Welsh parents who happened to live nearer an English whelping facility are not the same as Samoans contracted to serve their 3 years and be available which are not the same as the middling Super Rugby Player with a foreign granny who has his Scottish kit mailed to him before he's even got on the plane. Chill out, it's just a bit of fun.

Here's one - England have now scored a try in the first three minutes of their last 5 tests - NZ, Japan, Australia, Ireland, and France.

Puja

Lizard wrote:Remember when selecting players born in another country (or even players with names from another country) was deemed to be a dastardly practice,verging on cheating? Notice how things have changed now that our friends in the North have discovered they can buy their way out of player development problems?

Anyway, time for the annual "6? Nations Poaching Round-Up" summarising the players born in one country but capped for another.*

Working from the squads (original plus replacements) on Wikipedia:

Scotland are easily the champions with their deliberate and successful scouting campaign securing 19 foreign-born squad members (9 ENG, 4 NZ, 3 SA, 2 AUS, 1 USA)

Wales and Italy are ties for silver with 9 apiece. Wales will no doubt argue that their 7 English-born players are a mere feudal hangover, although their 2 Kiwis might be harder to account for. Italy have cast the net a little wider, drawing from 7 other nations, boasting 3 NZers and 1 each from Guinea, Germany, Zimbabwe, Argentina, South Africa and Ireland.

England is only a little behind, with 8 foreign-born players, although they ought to receive a hefty handicap having by far the biggest local player pool, and one of the more brazen attitudes to the whole thing. They have 3 NZers, 2 AUS, 2 Fiji and 1 Samoan.

Ireland have 7 players off the boat. 2 NZers, 2 SA, a Frenchman an English and a Spaniard.

About the only thing French rugby has to its recent credit is bringing in a passport requirement for national selection. Thye only have 5 introduced players (and would probably argue its only 4): 2 SA, 1 NZ, 1 Cameroon and 1 New Caledonia (which is technically part of France).

On the other side of the coin, countries supplying players to others are
England: 17
NZ: 15
SA: 8
Aust: 4 (surprisingly low)
Fiji: 2
Arg: 1
France: 1
Germany: 1
Guinea: 1
Ireland: 1
New Caledonia: 1
Samoa: 1
Spain: 1
USA: 1
Zimbabwe: 1

Although you could technically select an English Exiles XV to play an NZ Exiles XV, the match would be hampered somewhat by the fact not a single 6N team has any foreign-born hookers!

And before you ask, for balance, I can report that the NZ October/November 2018 touring squad of 48 included 5 foreign-born players: 2 Tongans, 1 Samoan, 1 Fijian and an Aussie.

*Yes, I'm well aware that there are shades of grey involved e.g. Welsh players with Welsh parents who happened to live nearer an English whelping facility are not the same as Samoans contracted to serve their 3 years and be available which are not the same as the middling Super Rugby Player with a foreign granny who has his Scottish kit mailed to him before he's even got on the plane. Chill out, it's just a bit of fun.

Ultan Dillane I assume is our Frenchman but who's our Spaniard?

Lizard wrote:Remember when selecting players born in another country (or even players with names from another country) was deemed to be a dastardly practice,verging on cheating? Notice how things have changed now that our friends in the North have discovered they can buy their way out of player development problems?

Anyway, time for the annual "6? Nations Poaching Round-Up" summarising the players born in one country but capped for another.*

Working from the squads (original plus replacements) on Wikipedia:

Scotland are easily the champions with their deliberate and successful scouting campaign securing 19 foreign-born squad members (9 ENG, 4 NZ, 3 SA, 2 AUS, 1 USA)

Wales and Italy are ties for silver with 9 apiece. Wales will no doubt argue that their 7 English-born players are a mere feudal hangover, although their 2 Kiwis might be harder to account for. Italy have cast the net a little wider, drawing from 7 other nations, boasting 3 NZers and 1 each from Guinea, Germany, Zimbabwe, Argentina, South Africa and Ireland.

England is only a little behind, with 8 foreign-born players, although they ought to receive a hefty handicap having by far the biggest local player pool, and one of the more brazen attitudes to the whole thing. They have 3 NZers, 2 AUS, 2 Fiji and 1 Samoan.

Ireland have 7 players off the boat. 2 NZers, 2 SA, a Frenchman an English and a Spaniard.

About the only thing French rugby has to its recent credit is bringing in a passport requirement for national selection. Thye only have 5 introduced players (and would probably argue its only 4): 2 SA, 1 NZ, 1 Cameroon and 1 New Caledonia (which is technically part of France).

On the other side of the coin, countries supplying players to others are
England: 17
NZ: 15
SA: 8
Aust: 4 (surprisingly low)
Fiji: 2
Arg: 1
France: 1
Germany: 1
Guinea: 1
Ireland: 1
New Caledonia: 1
Samoa: 1
Spain: 1
USA: 1
Zimbabwe: 1

Although you could technically select an English Exiles XV to play an NZ Exiles XV, the match would be hampered somewhat by the fact not a single 6N team has any foreign-born hookers!

And before you ask, for balance, I can report that the NZ October/November 2018 touring squad of 48 included 5 foreign-born players: 2 Tongans, 1 Samoan, 1 Fijian and an Aussie.

*Yes, I'm well aware that there are shades of grey involved e.g. Welsh players with Welsh parents who happened to live nearer an English whelping facility are not the same as Samoans contracted to serve their 3 years and be available which are not the same as the middling Super Rugby Player with a foreign granny who has his Scottish kit mailed to him before he's even got on the plane. Chill out, it's just a bit of fun.

It just goes to show how misleading statistics can be when you pick a random metric.
I suppose this "bit of fun" is revenge for all the past "bits of fun" pointing out New Zealand's policy of scouring the Southern Pacific islands for prospects.

Any bites?