RugbyRebels

rowan wrote:That's all tests, right? Apparently the SCG is the away ground at which the All Blacks have won the most times - anywhere in the world.

I expect that would probably be right if you included non-tests. For tests, I've got:
SCG: played 28, won 17, lost 9 drawn 2
Twickenham: played 25, won 18, lost 6, drawn 1
Murrayfield: played 17, won 16, drawn 1
Lansdowne Road: played 16, won 14, lost 1, drawn 1
Millenium Stadium: played 14, won 12, lost 2

I assume that NZ has played far more tour games at the SCG than at any single UK ground.

You would also be right if you were only counting test matches against the home team. NZ has only ever played tests against Australia at the SCG, while its Twickenham tally includes Aussie and SA, both in RWC2015.

So it's actually Twickers then, where the ABs have won the most tests away from home. Again my stats were a couple of years out of date. Meanwhile, those long tours used to be the highlight of the rugby season when I was a kid. Strange how they just fell by the wayside in the professional era with barely a murmur of protest. Of course, their time had passed, with the advent of the RWC & SANZAR competitions, along with increased inter-action with the NH. But they were thoroughly absorbing, like a favorite TV saga you tuned into a couple of nights a week for two months or so.

Continuing the theme of success rates by ground…

Clean Sheets on Foreign Fields

Here is a list of teams with the most matches on an opposition’s ground* while maintaining a 100% win rate:

10 matches: New Zealand at Millennium Stadium, Cardiff, Wales (2002-17)
8: Argentina at Prince of Wales Cricket Club, Santiago, Chile (1958-2008)
7: France at Estadio GEBA, Buenos Aires, Argentina (1949-1960)
6: England at Stadio Flaminio, Rome, Italy (2000-10); Ireland at Stadio Flaminio, Rome, Italy (2001-11)
5: 6 different team/ground combinations. The most interesting is Scotland at Athletic Ground, Richmond, England (1891-1909)


*Neutral matches are not included. If you include them, Argentina holds the top 4 places at two Chilean and two Uruguayan grounds, I presume from South American tournaments being hosted there.

Here’s a fun one:

Most matches for a single player at an away ground, with a 100% win rate.

The winner is no surprise:

RH McCaw: 8 matches v Wales at the Millennium Stadium

The runner-up is also no surprise:

RH McCaw: 7 matches v Scotland at Murrayfield (tied with Nonu and Woodcock at MilStad)

McCaw’s efforts in Edinburgh aside, the remaining top 12 places (spanning 6 to 8 matches) are all All Blacks, Springboks or Wallabies at the Millennium Stadium. There are 29 combos tied for 13th place (i.e. 5 matches) of which 15 are 3N players at MilStad (and 1 Frenchman at Cardiff Arms).

If you include neutral matches, McCaw loses his Cardiff record (2007 and All That). His Scotland effort drops to 3= with 7 others. The top two places are M Nonu and C Smith with 8 each, again at the Millennium Stadium. Nonu started in 2004 and had one RWC2015 match, while Smith began in 2005 and played 2 RWC2015 games there.

And now the other end of the scale...

Most matches for a single player at an away ground, with a 0% win rate

Both Adam Ashley-Cooper and Stephen Moore have worn Canary Yellow at Eden Park 8 times, yet remain winless. Both have also played a record 13 times in NZ against the All Blacks and have never won. The only other player to have played that many is David Campese, who played in 4 victories.

Inspired by some fairly premature pre-RWC2019 woe on the England board…

National success rates since RWC2015
England: 88.88% (played 27, won 24, lost 3)
New Zealand: 87.50% (p28, w24, l3, d1)
Ireland: 72.22% (p27, w19, l7, d1)
Scotland: 60.00% (p25, w15, l10)
Wales: 51.78% (p28, w14, l13, d1)
Australia: 48.27% (p, w, l, d)
SA: 48.00% (p25, w11, l12, d2)
France: 38.00% (p25, w9, l15, d1)
Argentina: 29.62% (p27, w8, l19)
Italy: 15.38% (p26, w4, l22)

This ranking makes no allowance for relative strength of opposition.

Italy LOL delete ur account

Yes, it would provide a much more accurate indication if it were broken down, at least into separate categories for SH and NH opposition, but realistically per individual nation. Still, there's no denying England have been outstanding since the last World Cup and i think most of us have been taken by surprise this year. Seems like England generally peak between World Cups, instead of at them, as the All Blacks used to do . . .

England have had a problem at the back of the scrum for over a year.

They've got away with it because other teams they've been playing haven't been generally good enough to exploit it.

but Eddie's also quite a stubborn bastard - which is probably necessary to being a good coach at that level in some respects, but isn't serving him well atm. I've never rated Lawes, not because of lack of talent but because he's always been an uncontrolled missile who literally leads with his head. His being injured might be one of the best things to happen to England this year.

But it's not just him, the whole 6,7,8 axis has been poor for a while and were particularly bad against Scotland and repeated that failure against France this weekend. Coughing up the ball on the try-line ... screwing up your own 5 metre line-out ... meh.

In other news, good to see Tiger Woods one putt from a playoff victory.

England have certainly cast the net widely looking for answers at the back of the scrum.

Since RWC2015, they have used the second-fewest players of the TRC/6N teams, but the most loose forwards. A third of their players used have been loose forwards. France has used the second most loosies but that’s no surprise given their roulette-style selection policy (84 players used – 10 more than next most, 74 by Ireland). The All Blacks have used an average number of loose forwards but have selected way fewer players (49) than any other team (59 to 84), pushing up the proportion of flankers and no. 8s.

Number of loose forwards/total players selected since RWC2015
England: 19/58 = 32.8% (117 tests)
New Zealand: 14/49 = 28.6 (120)
Wales: 15/65 = 23.1% (112)
France: 18/84 = 21.4% (103)
Australia: 14/65 = 21.5% (115)
Argentina: 14/66 = 21.2% (112)
South Africa: 13/61 = 21.3% (104)
Scotland: 13/61 = 21.3% (105)
Italy: 13/65 = 20.0% (104)
Ireland: 14/74 = 18.9% (108)

Remarkably, none of the teams considered have had a bench-only loose forward. All the players selected have started at least 1 match.

Lizard wrote:England have certainly cast the net widely looking for answers at the back of the scrum.

Since RWC2015, they have used the second-fewest players of the TRC/6N teams, but the most loose forwards. A third of their players used have been loose forwards. France has used the second most loosies but that’s no surprise given their roulette-style selection policy (84 players used – 10 more than next most, 74 by Ireland). The All Blacks have used an average number of loose forwards but have selected way fewer players (49) than any other team (59 to 84), pushing up the proportion of flankers and no. 8s.

Number of loose forwards/total players selected since RWC2015
England: 19/58 = 32.8% (117 tests)
New Zealand: 14/49 = 28.6 (120)
Wales: 15/65 = 23.1% (112)
France: 18/84 = 21.4% (103)
Australia: 14/65 = 21.5% (115)
Argentina: 14/66 = 21.2% (112)
South Africa: 13/61 = 21.3% (104)
Scotland: 13/61 = 21.3% (105)
Italy: 13/65 = 20.0% (104)
Ireland: 14/74 = 18.9% (108)

Remarkably, none of the teams considered have had a bench-only loose forward. All the players selected have started at least 1 match.

Not sure you are right on that last one. Pretty sure Luke Hamilton has never started for Scotland but came on against the All Blacks in November (and then went off again).

You are absolutely correct. There seems to be a glitch in the database.

There’s also:
Jelonch, Galletier, Chat (FRA)
Lealaialoto-Tui, Hardwick, Houston (AUS)
Griffiths (WAL)
Armand (ENG)
Reidy (IRE)
Montagner (ARG)

Last time England finished 5th the 6 Nations was actually the 5 Nations, meaning they came last. That was in 1983 - 35 years ago!

From the beginning of professional Super Rugby in 1996, until the end of the 2015 season, there were 370 matches between Australian teams and NZ teams:

Australian wins: 163 (44.1%)
NZ wins: 202 (54.6%)
Draws: 5 (1.3%)

From the 2016 season, there have been 52 trans-Tasman matches:

Australian wins: 3 (5.8%)
NZ wins: 48 (92.3%)
Draws: 1 (1.9%)

This has been a sudden change. Annual win rates for AU v NZ in Super Rugby are typically around 30-50%:
1996: 66.7%
1997: 47.1%
1998: 46.7%
1999: 43.8%
2000: 50.0%
2001: 53.3%
2002: 43.8%
2003: 37.5%
2004: 58.8%
2005: 32.1%
2006: 23.8%
2007: 30.0%
2008: 42.9%
2009: 45.0%
2010: 50.0%
2011: 47.8%
2012: 35.0%
2013: 54.5%
2014: 50.0%
2015: 31.8%
2016: 11.5%
2017: 0.00%

Guess I'll just take the final step and graph it...



Must've taken a while to assemble all that? Where did you get the results?

EDIT: Updated to highlight seasons where they collectively reached >= 50%

NSW & Queensland used to hammer Wellington in the South Pac series. Then again, ACT were easy-beats back then. Times have certainly changed!

zer0 wrote:Guess I'll just take the final step and graph it...



Must've taken a while to assemble all that? Where did you get the results?

EDIT: Updated to highlight seasons where they collectively reached >= 50%

Good on ya. As I posted that I thought it would good to have a graph. Data is from www.pickandgo.info. It takes a bit of finding but you can analyse Super Rugby results by nationality of team, so it was pretty easy

rowan wrote:Last time England finished 5th the 6 Nations was actually the 5 Nations, meaning they came last. That was in 1983 - 35 years ago!

Hence, Italy.

Lizard wrote:From the beginning of professional Super Rugby in 1996, until the end of the 2015 season, there were 370 matches between Australian teams and NZ teams:

Australian wins: 163 (44.1%)
NZ wins: 202 (54.6%)
Draws: 5 (1.3%)

From the 2016 season, there have been 52 trans-Tasman matches:

Australian wins: 3 (5.8%)
NZ wins: 48 (92.3%)
Draws: 1 (1.9%)

This has been a sudden change. Annual win rates for AU v NZ in Super Rugby are typically around 30-50%:
1996: 66.7%
1997: 47.1%
1998: 46.7%
1999: 43.8%
2000: 50.0%
2001: 53.3%
2002: 43.8%
2003: 37.5%
2004: 58.8%
2005: 32.1%
2006: 23.8%
2007: 30.0%
2008: 42.9%
2009: 45.0%
2010: 50.0%
2011: 47.8%
2012: 35.0%
2013: 54.5%
2014: 50.0%
2015: 31.8%
2016: 11.5%
2017: 0.00%

Sorry, I missed something.

Was 2016 5% or 11%

Lizard wrote:

zer0 wrote:Guess I'll just take the final step and graph it...



Must've taken a while to assemble all that? Where did you get the results?

EDIT: Updated to highlight seasons where they collectively reached >= 50%

Good on ya. As I posted that I thought it would good to have a graph. Data is from http://www.pickandgo.info. It takes a bit of finding but you can analyse Super Rugby results by nationality of team, so it was pretty easy

Maybe the RWC 4 year cycle is leading to a cycle of hope and depression in national rugby sides?

scuzzaman wrote:

Lizard wrote:From the beginning of professional Super Rugby in 1996, until the end of the 2015 season, there were 370 matches between Australian teams and NZ teams:

Australian wins: 163 (44.1%)
NZ wins: 202 (54.6%)
Draws: 5 (1.3%)

From the 2016 season, there have been 52 trans-Tasman matches:

Australian wins: 3 (5.8%)
NZ wins: 48 (92.3%)
Draws: 1 (1.9%)

This has been a sudden change. Annual win rates for AU v NZ in Super Rugby are typically around 30-50%:
1996: 66.7%
1997: 47.1%
1998: 46.7%
1999: 43.8%
2000: 50.0%
2001: 53.3%
2002: 43.8%
2003: 37.5%
2004: 58.8%
2005: 32.1%
2006: 23.8%
2007: 30.0%
2008: 42.9%
2009: 45.0%
2010: 50.0%
2011: 47.8%
2012: 35.0%
2013: 54.5%
2014: 50.0%
2015: 31.8%
2016: 11.5%
2017: 0.00%

Sorry, I missed something.

Was 2016 5% or 11%

“From 2016” means 2016 and 2017 together (there haven’t been any trans-Tasman matches in 2018 yet)

And for comparison's sake, win rates for SA teams v NZ teams:

1996: 45.5%
1997: 38.1%
1998: 14.3%
1999: 38.1%
2000: 40.0%
2001: 60.0%
2002: 20.0%
2003: 30.0%
2004: 33.3%
2005: 20.0%
2006: 30.8%
2007: 55.6%
2008: 32.0%
2009: 44.4%
2010: 57.7%
2011: 36.4%
2012: 31.8%
2013: 50.0%
2014: 36.4%
2015: 30.0%
2016: 30.0%
2017: 16.7%
2018: 33.3%*

*To date

And to compare AU with SA:

So pretty sure I got Pick & Go's queries working right, which can give us the collective international win rates for AUS, NZL and SAF since the start of SR.



2018 is obviously as of last week.

England’s lowest score v NZ: 58 (cricket)
NZ’s highest score v England: 64 (rugby union)

To mark an historic occasion yesterday, today we divert to cricket.

Fewest innings to score 10+ test centuries by a New Zealand batsmen
18 centuries: Williamson (114 innings)
17: Williamson (113); Crowe (120)
16: Williamson (107); Crowe (118)
15: Williamson (105); Crowe (106)
14: Williamson (92); Crowe (102)
13: Williamson (85); Crowe (91)
12: Williamson (79); Crowe (87)
11: Williamson (77); Crowe (79)
10: Crowe (72); Williamson (73)

Four other NZers have scored 10 or more tons (Astle, McCullum, Wright and Taylor.) None of them are in the same ballpark with respect to the number of innings to reach each milestone.