RugbyRebels

Gatland...Fozzie....yeah, nah.

zer0 wrote:Well, no need to confront any possible angst over English involvement in the AB's, as Farrell will be taking over Ireland after the 2019 RWC. Schmidt, on the other hand, may not be coaching at all after 2019.

"I have decided to finish coaching and will prioritise family commitments after the RWC in 2019."

If that is the case, and he decided he didn't have enough time with his family and epileptic son while coaching Ireland in the 6N -- where their longest journey is hopping over to Italy -- I don't see how going on week long jaunts across the Pacific and Indian oceans as part of the RC will fit into that.

Thus my next hope/conspiracy is that he's simply not wanting to take the wind out of Jabba's Christmas proclamation regarding his coaching future.

I'm expecting that he's announcing retirement on the basis of not wanting to look desperate or camping out for the NZ job. If you offer it to him, he'll find a new lease of life; if you don't, then he can say he was happily retired and save face.

Puja

zer0 wrote: But I have a sinking feeling it'll be more of Hansen. Hope I'm wrong though.

How good would his record need to be to see you content with Hansen continuing? Tbh it seems more than a little harsh to say his retention would equate to a sinking feeling

zer0 wrote:Well, no need to confront any possible angst over English involvement in the AB's, as Farrell will be taking over Ireland after the 2019 RWC. Schmidt, on the other hand, may not be coaching at all after 2019.

"I have decided to finish coaching and will prioritise family commitments after the RWC in 2019."

If that is the case, and he decided he didn't have enough time with his family and epileptic son while coaching Ireland in the 6N -- where their longest journey is hopping over to Italy -- I don't see how going on week long jaunts across the Pacific and Indian oceans as part of the RC will fit into that.

Thus my next hope/conspiracy is that he's simply not wanting to take the wind out of Jabba's Christmas proclamation regarding his coaching future.

Well that's a relief re Farrell, the second part is a bit of a worry though. My thinking was that Steve would decide to go after WC because if they win again no coach is going to come within a country mile of his achievements for many a year and if they don't it's time for fresh blood. I'm with you on the rest of it, or maybe the Steve and Joe partnership, one easing out, one easing in. No idea if there is a precedent for that though, let alone whether it would work!

I generally agree it’s not good to keep coaches too long, but it’s not like we’ve suddenly dropped off a cliff, performance-wise.

In the Henry/Hansen era (15 years), our success rate is 87.68%, losing 1.53 tests/year, with an average margin of 19.37 points. This year we’ve managed 85.71%, losing 2 tests, with an average margin of 21 (up on last year - 82.14%, 2 losses and a draw, av margin 18.00)

Over the 15 years we have lost 2 tests in a year 6 times, 1 test 7 times, zero tests once and 4 tests once.

In most respects, 2018 has been about average.

The only aspect where we’re noticeably worse than average is defence. The 255 points conceded this year (18.21/test) is the worst ever over this time period, exceeding the 249 (17.79) last year.

Does oz going to shite and bokke going thru a srsly bad spell not duke the stats realistically 6n teams have never been so close to ye

Digby wrote:How good would his record need to be to see you content with Hansen continuing? Tbh it seems more than a little harsh to say his retention would equate to a sinking feeling

As Lizard has outlined, overall the results are still largely there. But aggregate stats can obviously hide patterns. Since the 2015 RWC win the serious tests have come from the B&I Lions, England, Ireland, and South Africa (Erasmus edition). Against those sides, the record is 8-4-1 (62%) and a PD of +135. Include only the Erasmus Boks, and it drops to 4-4-1 (44%) with a PD of +7. And we're pretty fortunate that it's not 3-5-1 (33%) with a PD of 0, assuming Farrell would've converted that dissalowed try. Now things aren't looking so rosey.

I'd rather heed off the downward trend now (well, post 2019) instead of going full 1991 and relying on good performances from years ago to justify the current approach.

Some fair points, though the Lions series saw an influential red card and the Lions defending miles offside. If you have problems they focus on a lack of carrying options, but in most games you move the ball fast enough to accommodate

zer0 wrote:

Digby wrote:How good would his record need to be to see you content with Hansen continuing? Tbh it seems more than a little harsh to say his retention would equate to a sinking feeling

As Lizard has outlined, overall the results are still largely there. But aggregate stats can obviously hide patterns. Since the 2015 RWC win the serious tests have come from the B&I Lions, England, Ireland, and South Africa (Erasmus edition). Against those sides, the record is 8-4-1 (62%) and a PD of +135. Include only the Erasmus Boks, and it drops to 4-4-1 (44%) with a PD of +7. And we're pretty fortunate that it's not 3-5-1 (33%) with a PD of 0, assuming Farrell would've converted that dissalowed try. Now things aren't looking so rosey.

I'd rather heed off the downward trend now (well, post 2019) instead of going full 1991 and relying on good performances from years ago to justify the current approach.

Ignoring a shitload of wins will tend to make things look less rosy...

A shitload of wins against teams never in the race, yeah. Unfortunately beating up on Australia, with a musical chairs defence so porous you could parallel park the Titanic in the gaps, and murdering Japan with the third XV doesn't do much to prepare for tests where the opposition actually knows what they're doing.

I guess you could start weighting results by the quality of opposition, but ain't nobody got time for that.

zer0 wrote:A shitload of wins against teams never in the race, yeah. Unfortunately beating up on Australia, with a musical chairs defence so porous you could parallel park the Titanic in the gaps, and murdering Japan with the third XV doesn't do much to prepare for tests where the opposition actually knows what they're doing.

I guess you could start weighting results by the quality of opposition, but ain't nobody got time for that.

Actually, the world rankings do that, and you've been number 1 for a very long time. And whilst you might briefly lose that, depending on how Ireland go in the 6N, the longest ever reign at number 1 and mostly by the biggest ever margins doesn't exactly smack of any decline.

OK. The All Blacks have never been ranked lower than 3rd. So let's look at matches between the All Blacks and teams that were either ranked above them, or next best when we were no. 1, for at least part of the year in which the match occurred (I'm not going to go too-fine grained on this). I will rely on this table and this info https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Rugby_Rankings to figure out when relevant matches were played. This also conveniently excludes the Lions. On this measure, we do seem to be a little below par.

2003: NZ's lowest rankings ebb, behind both England and Aussie at various points. Played 4, won 2, lost 2 - 50.0%
2004: Below England briefly, Aussie also were at 2 for a bit. Played 4, won 3, lost 1 - 75.0%
2005: NZ #1. Aust and SA filled the #2 spot. Played 4, won 3, lost 1 - 75.0%
2006: NZ #1. SA and France next (remember France?). Played 5, won 4, lost 1 - 80.0%
2007: NZ started as #1 over Aust, briefly France, then SA. RWC hiccup saw us dip to #2 behind SA. Played 7, won 5, lost 2 - 71.42%
2008: NZ regained #1. France bubbled under never to see the top 2 again. SA dominated the also-rans, with a brief cameo at 2 by Australia. Played 7, won 5, lost 2 - 71.42%
2009: NZ and SA shared 1 & 2, but perhaps really shouldn't have. Played 3, won 0, lost 3 - 0.00%
2010: NZ begins an unbroken run at #1. SA and Aust share #2. Played 7, won 6, lost 1 - 85.71%
2011: As per 2010. Played 5, won 3, lost 2 - 60.00%
2012: As per 2011. Played 5, won 4, lost 0, drew 1 - 90.00%
2013: SA kept a firm grip on #2. Played 2, won 2, lost 0 - 100.00%
2014: As per 2013. SA kept a firm grip on #2. Played 2, won 1, lost 1 - 50.00%
2015: Fresh blood! As well as the familiar SA/Aus duopoly, Ireland and Wales each had a turn at #2. Played 5, won 4, lost 1 - 80.0%
2016: The Jones Bounce sees England return, superseding Aussie as #2. Played 3, won 3, lost 0 - 100.0%
2017: England cling on, awaiting their big clash. Played 0 NA
2018: England slip from the perch, the Irish Rise. Played 2, won 1, lost 1 - 50.00%

Overall: Played 61, won 44, lost 16, drew 1 - 72.95%