Now for the play-oofs

I have all along predicted that there will be two SA teams, 1 from Australia and 1 from New Zealand in the ply-offs/   My orginal prediction was as folows:-

1 Chiefs

2 Stormers

3  Brumbiews

4 Crusaders

5 Bulls

6 Sharks

I also said that if the Chiefs got beaten - they can end up on position 2 - with the Storemers taking position 1.The Stormers was very disappointing today - but they still won.   They are in no 1 position in the semis - so we can discuss tht issue when the results of the play-offs become known.

Where I went wrong was that I could not foresee that the Brumbies wouuld get knocked out by the very poor performance in evidence today,   The fact that they seriously under-performed. which  gave an opening to the Reds - so the only change in my predictoion was affectively That the Reds came in and the brumbies wenrt out,

Now lets look at the play-offs.   Play-off one will be the Crusaders and the Bulls.   Both tems blew hot and cold this year.   The Crusaders for evsmple  lost against the Rebels this year - whilst the Bulls barely managed to beat the Rebels.    However. I do not think that the game is a foregone conclusion.   I also think travelling to New Zealand could b a detrimental factor.    Based on overall performances this year I give the Crusaders a 60% chance to win the game.   Provided the Sharks beat the Reds - whomsoover win this game will have to meet the Chiefs in the semi.   

In the case of the Sharks-Reds game I confidently predict a win for the Sharks - the chances of that happeining is 80% and again my prediictopm is based on performances during the Round Robin games.   There could be an upset here - but I believe that the Sharks will get the better of the Reds.

I hope for an upset win for the Bulls in Christchurch.   I that happens - the situation could easily be that there are no New Zealand teams in the final. alnd team in the finals.   It would be interesting to see twoo SA teams in the final.

 I would have to say that both the Red and Crusaders are strong favourites to win on home soil. Of the 2 SA teams- the Sharks have the best chance of winning. I would say about 45%, and the Bulls about 20%. 

The Reds have a terribale start to the season and probably the most injuries to key players of all the teams. They have won the last 7 games in a row and starting to get back into top form- especially with the thief back at 10. 

The Crusaders rarely if ever lose in the business end of the tournament when playing in Christchurch. 

I would back the Bulls and Sharks to win at home- but playing away less confident. The Sharks do have a good shot, but the Bulls I think are allready out!

I agree with you Sharkbok......the Bools are doomed, and the Sharks have genuine chance. I'd actually put their chances at 40% of beating the Reds.....the pack might rise up.

This conference thing is flawed, we have the Sharks having to travel to the Reds, despite having more log points than them - its so obviously stupid

....would have been nice to see a Hurricane vs Bull matchup this year... Chiefs vs Stormers also and might've helped fill your empty stadiums..what other matchups has sitting bull missed...playing some teams twice and other teams not at all seems like a flawed system to sitting bull and in need of a major rethink....

@saffex,

Agree totally about the format and how the conference process works. But you do have to remember that it was our own SA dingbats that pushed strong;y for this format to be included and now here we are being penalised by this stupid process.

Nonetheless, we have 3 teams in the semis and with the Stormers topping the table they must surely be favourites to take the comp out?

Can someone please confirm my understanding. If the Crusaders win and the Reds win or vica versa that would mean that the Stormers will play the winner between the Reds and Sharks and the Chiefs will play the winner between the Bulls and Crusaders?

If we go on form then I see the semis being the Chiefs vs the Crusaders and the Stormers against the Sharks as I dont rate the Reds in any way at all......

If this is correct then the Sharks I believe are probably the only team that could beat the Stormers at home.

But if the Crusaders march on and beat the Bulls and then the Chiefs the scenario would be that the Sharks would then have the extreme challenge of firstly going  to OZ to beat the Reds (which they will) going back to Newlands to win and then going to Fortress Crusader land to challenge for the final if the Cursaders win?

I know the Crusaders fell over last year when they had to do a triple trip and TBH guys the challenge may just be a hurdle to far over the next 3 weeks...Hope I am proven wrong!

 Shitting bull- your stats as allways are wrong- " Fill our empty stadiums". South African games have been the most attended from all 3 countries by far- and 66% of the spectators in stadiums and TV are in South Africa. The lowest is in Australia

....sitting bull had the impression that soccer is SA national sport hence the empty stadiums...but will take sharkboks word for it...

Radtad

There seems to be some misunderstanding on the semis. The four teams that are playing the playoffs, do so within their ranking based on their final super table standing, ie:

3. Reds

4. Crusaders

5. Bulls

6. Sharks

The highest ranked winner from these playoffs will play the Chiefs and the lowest ranked will play the Stormers. If the two SA teams win (unlikely), then it would mean that the Bulls, who are the highest ranked in that scenario, will play the Chiefies and the Sharks who are lower ranked, will play the Stormers.

My predicted scenario is the Crusaders, ranked 4, will win their game and play the Chiefies and the Sharks, ranked 6, will beat the Reds and play the Stormers.

It is clear that the system is completely flawed due to the Reds having the least points yet receiving the highest ranking. Another flaw is the manner in which the Reds and Brumbies accumulated their points, ie. by playing twice, teams such as the Rebels, Waratahs and Force!!! Ridiculous format.

I think the format is indeed a problem and people are correct n saying so.   Take the following as an example:-

The Sharks now has to travel to Brisbane to play in the play-offs.   If they win - they have to travel back to Cape Town to play in the semis.   If thye beat the Stormers and the Crusaders beat the Bulls - they then have to travel back to Chrristchurch to play the Crusaders in the final.   Same applies if the Chiefs beat the Crusaders.   That means three trips in three weeks.   The final may just as well not be played - it will hand the trophy over to the Chieds or Crusaders on a plate.   One trip may be OK - three are impossible.over a period of three weeks.

I can understand why it is impossible to actually be of value and it puts teams at  mmassive disadvantage.   I think what should happen is that the moment the conference issue has been decided - the teams should be put in the order they finish on the log.   In that case the order would be as follows:-

1   Stormers

2   Chiefs

3   Crusaders

4   Bulls

5  Sharks

6  Reds

In that case the result would be that the Reds would meet the Crusaders and the Bulls would play the Sharks - a much more reasonable situation.  

The Conference idea was proposed by SA and supported by the other members of Sanzar to keep the public in all three countries interested as long as possible.  I believe the reason is that if one of the countries involved ended up being out of contention early on - the public in that country loses interests in the games and they do not turn up for matches.   I do not accept tripe - such as that mentioned by Sitting Bull - for instance - that the empty stadiums need to be filled up throught the conference system.   Soputh African stadiums where rugby is being played have much bigger seating capacity than those in New Zealand and Australia and in the case of the leadoing contenders are attended by larger numbers of spectators.

Now back to the play-offs.   I think that the discussions are based on what happened in the past - for many years the Crusaders was the force to be reckoned with in the competition.   The team strengths have changed through the years - and the Crusaders over the past five years have gradualy weakened as a team - compared to the other contenders.   The results were also influenced by the referees - even though this statement could be contested.    However, this year the Crusaders were beaten in FIVE Round Robin games as against the Chiefs who were beaten THREE times.  That says that the Crusaders lost nearly 20% of the games they played in.   That means they are beatable.   I agree that they are the favourites in a clash against the Bulls on home soil - but on the day they can be beaten, hence my suggestion that they are the favourites - but to say they only have to trun uip at the game and win is wrong -  hence my comments as to their chances of winning.  This is proven not only by the number of wins and losses in the competition - but also the Point Differences.   The Crusaders scored 485 points and the opposing teams 343 points - a net differrence of 142 points.  Statsitically they can be beaten - but I always said stats really mean nothing on the day of the game.   By the way - the Crusaders won the trophy seven times, but they did not in the past four years, so they may not be as strong in the competition as they used to be.  

In the case of the Sharks - they are to my mind the favourites to beat the Reds.   The Reds came into contention because of the poor performances of teams in the Australian conference - more than anything else.   They lost more games than any other team in the competition playing foreign sides - even at home. An injury-ridden Stormer team beat them in Brisbane.   The Sharks this year started off badly - but at this stage they really peforming better than other teams in the closing stages of the competition.   The travelling scenario plays a role in this case - but I do not rate the Reds as favourites against the Sharks.   I think that the Reds has only a 30% chance of winning.   

We will see next weekend who in effect will win the play-offs.   My guess is that it would be the Crusaders and Sharks going through to the semis - so lets wait and see.   There has been far too many upsets during the competition and especially in recent weeks to be 100% certain of anything. 

I agree Saffex the log is FLAWED how many games have the sharks won?? they got there on bonus points not on winning so happy to debate that 'flaw'.

the new format is utter rubbish to me anyways. i cant understand how some teams come through a whole full season without playing other teams.

i do think this format will be change come the 2016 season. the conferance system to me is lacking. i do like the concept of the playoffs but it should bot be bounded by the country that the team comes from.