Super XV South African conference now the Hardest?

 It seems that the South African conference may now be harder than the New Zealand conference. 

-

With 3 of our teams in the top 5 in 2012, many kiwis stated this was because we had an easier conference than the New Zealand one. 

-

At the start of the SuperXV this year many of us were pesimistic when comparing the backline exploits of the Kiwi team derby games compared to the more preditable direct SA teams  derby teams. 

-

Now it seems that SA teams often have very strong defences and playing a tigher more structured game.

Although not as expansive and attack orientated the defence is tigher as a result.

-

The Kiwi teams often score 4 tries against each other, so they get more bonus points even if the lose or win.

The attacking game sometimes results in a looser defence.

So the derby games often result in 5 points vs Sa derbies which are typically 4points for a win.

South African teams also score more tries against New Zealand teams than against SA opposition.

So a win against a NewZealand team is typically 5 points, where as against a South African team is is usually only 4 points

-

In summary the NewZealand backs throw the ball around more to score more tries but this means their is more space and it is easier to score tries against than against SA teams. 

SA teams forwards are however consistently better than the NewZealand teams with our excellant loose forwards, lineouts and overall strong carriers dominate the contact area. Our games are tigher and very physical and more attritunal. 

-

The Australian conference has just fallen apart as the do not have the depth for 5 teams, and they are now just piss poor except for the Reds and Brumbies

-

 The Chiefs, the top NewZealand side has just battled to a 36-24 win over the Kings who are probably the weakest SA team. Interesting

Sharkbok

After watching the games played thus far this Round and also last weeks efforts I came to the conclusion that the New Zealand teams are a pleasure to watch if you like so-called attractive rugby - but for  purist they are really not special at all.  

Lets look at some of the games played thus far by the New Zealand teams over the last two weeks and see what happened:-

The Crusaders - Hurricanes Game

This game should have been won by the Crusaders - but the reson why the Hurricanes won was because the Crusaders made more handling errors than the Hurricanes did.    Thus far this year this was the worst game this year from that perspective.   Poor ball handling by the opposition was constantly exploted by both teams and then there was the penalty count that seems to mount all the time on both sides.

Most of the tries scored either was the result of opposition errors in ball handling our outright poor defence.  Matter of fact the defensive efforts were with rare exceptions the rule rather than the exception in this game and may I add also the same in most games thus far this season in which New Zealand teams ws involved..

The Hurricanes - Highlanders Game

The same can be said about this game as was said in respect of the previous game.   Really messy and the same handling error mess was exposed and the same penalty system in place.   The Highlanders made a mess with their contracting as well.   Probably the worst mess was with Thorne - he really is a liability for a team to have in games and I am not surprised they are at the bottom of the log this year.

Of the games played thus far the only New Zealand team better than the Ausstralian teams and as a matter of fact than the SA teams is the Chiefs - but even in their case there are problems.   Their defence is tighter - but their ball handling and penalty count is also not what should be regarded as acceptable. 

We will see what happens this morning between the Bulls and the Crusaders.  If the Crusaders played like they did against the Hurricanes - they are going to get it in the neck and they are going to lose.  

It would be interesting to see what happens in the rest of the season - but I suspect the New Zealand teams in New Zealand will do well - but I give none of their teams visiting SA much of a chance to win here.

SA conference the hardest....no!  Both NZ and SA conferences have their differences but which is the hardest is a machoistic nationalistic rugby fans determination.  Clevermike by your attractive rugby comment I presume you prefer boring winning rugby, as oposed to attractive winning rugby?  If the SA teams played the same type of"attractive" rugby then I bet they would suddenly become "special" then, but since its the Kiwi's playing it well we aren't all that special. I'm amazed at how NZ teams are analysed here and then dismissed as being "not as good as SA teams" despite the win/loss  statistics clearly demonstrating the exact opposite over 2 decades in all major rugby comps between our nations. One thing NZ teams do well is they learn from past defeats, the Crusaders obviously showed that this morning against their mauling of the Bulls and the Chiefs upset your" not much of a chance winning in SA" prediction.

polyboy

I certainly do not prefer boring rugby - but I was merely pointing out how really bad elements of attractive rugby can be.   Yes last week the differene between the Hurricanes and the Crusaders was that the Crusaders made more mistakes than the Hurricanes did.  That is no compliment to say that about either of the two teams. 

I enjoyed the game of the Crusaders thie morning very much - it started off badly insofar as handling errors is concerned - but improved drastically as there was from the start no real pressure applied by the Bulls and they could not exploit the early handlig errors.   Another team - and it is likely that they would have pressurized the Crusaders becaue of the errors and in such an event the later improvements may have vanished.

Clevermike, yes such is the wane and flow of Super 15 rugby,with  the onfield playing team, the environment/locale, jetlag, team tactics, home ground advantage, media pressure( there maybe more) are some influences that determine the winner on the day and even determine the form team.

 If by hardest you mean physically hardest then of course it is. 

Beano this week your rugby teams look like pussies . The Cheetahs being the only saving grace.

The only thing hard is your thick head.

 black udder you suck big time lets be clear about that. Your wee abs are going to get pumped.

Look forward to meeting the crusties at Newlands

Beano it's good to be back as no doubt you've been getting away with murder with no one to put you in your place while i was away. The Stormers are what really suck though and at Newlands they will be getting a lesson they won't forget in a hurry from the greatest Super Rugby team of all time.

Beeno, he meant hardest playing surface, so again I bow to your wisdom.

Hahahahahahahahahaha its hilarious to see these kiwi bird brains so upbeat after last weesk disaster. It seesm they lkearnt nothing.

Kiwi bird brains the Mighty Stormers are the side to beat this year. Remember we were the log toppers for two years running something no kiwi side could do. So kiwis respect your betters please.

Beanob you wannabe tennis hasbean theirs nothing mighty about the stormers except a mighty useless excuse for a rugby team. Everyone knows the Chiefs sat at the top of the log all last year until they met us and the Canes so stop trying to dine out on the back of the Chiefs successes.

By your logic the Chiefs recently outscored you in tries at Newlands therefore a victory for them is'nt that right you dumbarse?

Forget about your team coming anywhere this year Beanob . You're gunna get smoked.

Beeno one thing I was surprised about last week was the measured restraint from SA fans, the tables have turned somewhat this week but is still a long way to go til playoffs.  Topping the log must mean something different in SA, Kiwi's use the word...champions, often too!, Super 15 Champions, RWC Champions, Rugby Championship Champions, even 7's Champions, once they take back U20's it will be complete.

@sharkbok,

easily one of the dumbest things ive read on here. no small feat either considering benno1 aka stormingeds 5000+ posts, :oP

in 2011 every NZ team scored 50% each against SA and OZ opponents.
in the last 3 rounds, 9 teams were finals contenders, 4 fo them were NZ teams.

nether the sharks nor the stormers beat the crusaders or cheifs in 2012.

lions finshed with the wooden spoon and the cheetahs finsished with their BEST ever palcing since reintergartion at powerful 10th place.

every NZ team has played in a super rugby grand final, lions, cheetahs, rebels, force, have not and of that lot the lions are the only ones to have played in any kind of finals.

there have been 17 super rugby conferneces
crusaders have won 7
blues have won 3
chiefs have won 1
bulls have won 3
reds have won 1
brumbies have won 2

SA is the hardest conference??? pffft yeah right, lets just wait till at least ALL the rounds have been completed aye??? i love the timing of this thread too, after a good SA weekend of rugby and before a horrible weeked of SA rugby, LMAO, :oP

 @Sasuke- the title says "now" the hardest. The history of the tournament is not really taken into context.

What I am also saying is that SA teams typically have tighter defences so it is less likely to result in the extra point for 4 tries, where as the NewZealand conference often get the bonus point due to a combination of looser backline defence. 

So far the Bulls have won 1 out of 2 in NewZealand and so have the Cheetas. I would expect the same or better results from the Stormers and Shasks(assuming the Sharks return to form). 

I think the records of South African teams in NewZealand this year is going to be better than NewZealand teams in South Africa "this year".

Also that the win loss ratio of the local conference in SA is not going to be the same as last year with the Cheetas now also being one of the form teams in the tournament. We now have 4 good teams capable of beating any team on their day, with the Kings being a surprise package  

Sharkbok, form is not an accurate measure of who has the hardest conference. Look at the Bulls/Crusaders match...the Bulls were mauled badly 6 tries to 1, after the week before beating the Blues. What's the use of playing in your "percieved" hardest conference if you play like powder puffs outside of it, it makes descriptions such as "hardest conference" pointless, who has the hardest conference is subjective no matter what statitics used.

@sharkbok,

if defence against tries is the main preresquite for u saying the SA conference is "NOW" the hardest conference, then lets just take a look at the atcual tries conceded and scored between NZ & SA.

note - im sure that despite our opinons, we can both agree that theres no need for me to show the aussie numbers as they are by far the easiest conference.

2013 SA clubs
bulls - tries scored 9 - tries against 12
sharks - tries scored 3 - tries against 7
cheetahs -  tries scored 9, tries against 13
stormers - tries scored 5 -tries against 5
kings - tries scored 4 - tries against 6
total - tries scored 30 - tries against 43

2013 NZ clubs
cheifs - tries scored 18 - tries against 8
blues - tries scored 11 - tries against 5
crusaders - tries scored 10 - tries scored 8
hurricanes - tries scored 7 - tries against 11
highlanders tries scored 7 - tries against 10
total - tries scored 53 - tries against 42

2013 SA clubs vs NZ clubs
played 6 SA won 3, NZ won 3

SA tries scored against NZ - 9
SA tries scored against SA - 8

NZ tries scored against SA - 25
NZ tries scored against NZ - 24

now heres small break down of these numbers which dont prove ur point in any way what so ever.
NZ clubs have played a total of 17 games and 6 of those were against SA teams, yet SA clubs are responsible for leaking in almost 50% of those tries.
but more importantly NZ have played NZ teams more then they have SA teams and have conceded the same amount of tries.

rugbys not just about defence, something SA rugby has never learned (cheetahs are the exception to that rule) but its also not about attack, its a mixture of both which my numbers just showed u NZ are doing better then SA in.

i still say wait til all the rounds are done and any predictions can be labelled each to their own, but the numbers clearly show that NZ are in the drivers seat when it comes to any head to head records between our two countries.
 

 It is early days and South Africa has played more away games against NewZealand opposition. 

I do think the likes of the Highlanders and Hurricanes will have a hard time in SA. Time will tell but we may see that South African teams win more games against NewZealand opposition, than  the other way around

@sharkbok,

ROLMFAO, :oD

oh so now that i have shown u the numbers, it is early days??? o_O
wouldnt one think that would be sound advice before even beginning this thread??? O_O

LMAO im just pulling ur leg bro, only time will tell, but i cant see this trend changing ever.

BTW, the cheetahs can beat anyone on their day??? really???

they were beaten by a sharks team playing like kak, they were raped by the cheifs and then beat an injury ravaged highlanders & wooden spoon contenders the waratahs.
theres nothing with the cheetahs results thus far which even remotely comes close to backing up that comment of urs, o_O

 @Sasuke, I new this article post would rally you up. he he.

I remember you said earlier this year about the Kiwi conference system been "canabailistic" due to the competition. 

One thing does apply to both the SA and NewZealand though is injuries , to the smaller unions especially.

With Goosen out, this is going to the effect the Cheetas performance allot.

The Cheetas also had a good start last year(relatively for them) but when Goosen was injured they went downhill. 

The Highlanders also have very good starts but sometimes start falling apart as the season goes on, to what extent injuries play a part I am not sure, but it has to be (a or the) major factor.

 The Cheetas won 3 out of 4 games on tour. The Sharks put a record score against the Rebles. The Stormers beat the table topping Brumbies. More evidence that the SA conference has become the hardest

@sharkbok,

ur a crack up bro, but nothing like a little target practise to keep me sharp, so allow me to shoot those clay pigeons u call arguments, LMAO, :oP

so lets see now, the cheetahs win 3 out of 4 games on tour & thats big news??? i guess it is for the cheetahs, but the cheetahs wins were against teams placed 15th, 12th & 11th, the only team of note they faced tourended up with a cheetahs skin rug lining up the chiefs club room after their 45-3 beatdown, hope soemone remembered to call SPCA, o_O

and the sharks put a record hiding on the rebels, wow, my shoe has shoelaces, now we have two meaningless  things of equal value to add credit to this argument, LMAO, :oD
comeon bro, its the freaking rebels, big whoop. o_O

stormers beat the brumbies though, that argument holds no water with me, cos i never rated the brumbies to begin wtih.
those brumbies smashed the crap out of a woeful sharks & everyone was amazed which had me going WTF??? u only had to look at the sharks since rnd2 to know the sharks are much a do about nothing.
brumibes have gone up a level IMO, btu the stormers were always up there.

but the parameters ur original thread set for that absurd but hilarious question/title was based on the 6 teams ontop of the table & ur argument that NZ struggled against SA cos SA were harder. hmmmmm, lets check those theories out,,,
 

were a thrid of the way through the season now & not only does NZ have 3 teams in the top 6, but our 2nd & 3rd placed teams are only 1 & 2pts behind SA No1 team.
so nope, this dosent prove ur argument.

& the SA vs NZ battles,,,

2013 SA clubs
bulls - tries scored 9 - tries against 14
sharks - tries scored 13 - tries against 8
cheetahs -  tries scored 10, tries against 14
stormers - tries scored 9 -tries against 6
kings - tries scored 6 - tries against 13
total - tries scored 57 - tries against 55


2013 NZ clubs
cheifs - tries scored 19 - tries against 9
blues - tries scored 14 - tries against 8
crusaders - tries scored 17 - tries scored 10
hurricanes - tries scored 7 - tries against 11
highlanders tries scored 8 - tries against 11
total - tries scored 61 - tries against 49

2013 SA clubs vs NZ clubs
played 7 SA won 3, NZ won 4

SA tries scored against NZ - 13
NZ tries scored against SA - 28

NZ have scored more tries then SA and we have conceded less tries the SA as a whole.
nearly half of NZs tries total were scored against SA teams, while the total tries that SA scored against NZ, which is 22% of SA total tries.

ouchies, i wish NZ clubs had the holiday conference aka the SA conference to compete in, LMAO, :oP

or maybe now we can wait until the end of the season to properly compare, but something tells me that another good SA weekend will bring this topic back up, but if this is the last we see of this thread, at least it was entertaining, :o)
 

I would say that both the Stormers and Sharks are on par with the Cheifs and Crusaders, but then I would say the Cheetahs and Bulls are better than the rest of the Kiwi teams with the Kings being cannon fodder.

 @Sasuke. It is the weakest team that have toured New Zealand, and NewZealand have played for more home games as a result. The Kings are just like the Lions- one team in our conference pulling down the average.

The only New Zealand teams that I think are capable of beating the Sharks & Stormers are Crusaders and Chiefs. 

The Chiefs have allready gone down to the Stormers, and I think the same fait awaits the Crusaders who are going to be minus Carter & Mccaw. I am expecting the Crusaders to get beaten against both the Stormers and Sharks

The New Zealand tour for the Sharks/Stormers I would expect these SA teams to win 3 out of 4 of the games at least. The Sharks forward pack will be back to full strength by then so we should dominate up front with

 The super 15 has two clear tiers of strong and week teams. At present the kiwi and SA teams have the strongest teams. Nz- chiefs, crusaders. SA - sharks, stormers. Teams such as the cheetahs, bulls, reds, waratahs are all mid tier team and then you have the bottom dwellers. I say that super 15 should be split into 2 tiers and each team plays home and away. South Africa always have a longer tour which make it much harder. But if each tteam get to play home and away then it would be a better contest. It should be split as follows  tier one nz 2, aus 2 SA 3. Tier 2 SA 3. Aus 3. NZ 3. This should at least almost even up the contest. 

the biggest issue for me is what is the definition of hardest ?

in terms of the physical side of the game then surely the aussies and the kiwi's teams are not on the same level as there game patterns are more open for open running play as to where sa teams play more tigher structured game patterns. sa teams play gain line dominance that is tougher on the body than running it from out wide.

in terms of intensity or skill wise i would have to give it to the kiwis as overall speed and tempo is way higher than what we are dishing out so in terms of talent and competion wise the nz boys might just pip it. the kings are the odd ones pulling the standard down.

I am not going to get into debate about the strength of the conferences - I previously stated clearly that I do not htink the Austraklian conferences are really up to standard - with the exception of the Brumbies.  I also believe that in the SA and New Zealand cases we have comcletely different styles of rugby and it is hard to determine which style is in fact predominant.   

As to the New Zealand and SA confereces the issue is to be determined when the top teams of the two conferences play against each other.  I regard the Chiefs and Crusaders as the top two teams of the New Zealand Conference - the other teams being a mixed bag - except the Highlanders who essentially is being pathetic. 
 

In the case of the SA Conference - the two top teams are the Sharks and the Stormers.  The Stormers lost their two opening games to the Bulls and the Sharks - but they did beat the Chiefs and the Brumbies subsequently.     The game of the Stormers and Chiefs was a 50:50 affair - with the Stormers having a slight edge pointwise only.   Really not conclusive  in repect of the arguments raised here.   The Sharks won all their games thus far - but was pathetic against the Brumbies.   

Over the next two weeks the Crusaders will play the Stormers and the Sharks away from home.   If they lose both games - it would be a pointer against the argument that the New Zealand Conference is a harder nut to ccack than the SA Cnference.   The final determinator will then be the game between the Sharks and the Crusaders in Hamilton.  

My contention is that if the Crusaders - as I believe weakened by the absence of Cartr and even Reid and Dagg - lose against the Stormers and the Chiefs and the Sharks manage to beat the Chiefs in Hamiton - the answer will be obvious - until then we are actually argueing about theory not fact.
 

i agree mike...its tough to argue about these types of facts as only the only way to properly test this theory is to look at the net result at the end of the tournament.

the fact that SA had 3 teams in the end of season playoffs is a massive plus point but that being said we walked away with nothing at the end of it so its a bit of a toss up really. at the end of the day one can only measure the quality of the confs by looking at the silverware i reckon.

i dont really rate the aussies apart from the brumbies and the reds right now the other aussies outfits are just making up the numbers.