Injuries as a predictor of the 2010 TriNations Series

I wrote at the end of the 2010 Super 14 Series about my theories/observations linking injury incidence within Australian provincial teams and their log placement.

Let's apply that to the upcoming 2010 Tri-Nations tournament.

This weekend, following Nathan Sharpe's injury in training, the media reported the entire Australian tight five was down to 2nd choice or lower players.

As a rough observation I believe that at about 12 of the starting 15 positions have been changed/disrupted due to injury. That's about 80% injury rate.

Without have the same knowledge of the Springboks or the All Blacks, it appears to me that the Boks have the choice of playing their starting line up, and the Blacks would not be far from this.

So the injury incidence, at a rough glance, over the last 4 wks, would rank from lowest to highest:

1. Spring Boks (lowest)
2. All Blacks
3. Australia (highest)

Will this be the order of the log at the end of the 2010 Tri-Nations tournament?

Aust v Eng 12 Jun 2010

Not sure what was worse - watching Australia scrum or the English back line attack. I don't blame the English forwards from being reluctant to give the ball to their backs. Only challenge is pick and drive from a few meters out is a very predictable thing to defend.

I expect England to do what most touring teams do and drop their performance levels as the tour progresses, for tonights 2nd test. In other words the points differential in Australia's favor to exceed 10 points.

Not that the result gives much indication of how the Wallabies will stand up to a team that not only has 15 players on the field, but one that has 15 players constituting an effective forward pack AND backline.

Reflections pre final

The Super 14 2010 season final has been played, and before I sit to watch the replay, without knowing the outcome, I share the following reflections.

Of the four teams that made the finals from the end of regular season log -

1st  Bulls
2nd Stormers
3rd Waratahs
4th  Crusaders

Only 2 of these teams have an historical expectancy of winning, and they - the Crusaders and Bulls - played each other in the semi-final, meaning only 1 (the Bulls as it turned out) could progress.

The other semi was played between two teams that do not have this historical expectantcy of winning.

The Bulls and the Stormers met overnight in Soweto, SA, for the title of 2010 Super 14 Champion.

Bulls to win. No reshaping of history in relation to teams who have won a Super competition during the last 18 or so years.

Injuries correlate with team success

Back in the early 1990s I tested my theory that the incidence and severity of injuries in a rugby team is inversely correlated with team success i.e. the more injuries you have, the lower down the competition ladder you finish.

I tested that theory and confirmed the hypothesis.  The Brumbies noted this and intentially, with my support, sought to replicate this in the second half of the 1990s and the early 2000s.  With success.

In 2010, I suggest that this theory is borne out again in at least the four Australian team - that their position on the ladder at the end of the 2010 Super 14 season will be inversely correlated with their injury stats.

First it was the Force to suffer a 'horrific injury run'. They will finish the lowest of the Australian team this  year.

Then it was the Brumbies to suffer a 'horrific injury run'.  They are currently sitting second bottom of the four Australian team, with three games left to change that.

The Waratahs have not attracted this level of 'horrific injury run', nor have the Reds. They sit 2 and 1 of the four Australian teams currently respectively. No surprise here.

The conspiracy of injury will ensure that few if any pick up on this pattern, and few if any learn from this and change their approach. The cycle will continue and the medical, therapy and pharamcuetical industries will continue to be the primary beneficiaries.

The Red's Dream Draw in 2010

Let's go through the dream draw:

Rd 1 vs NSW Waratahs - home game, giving them a much greater chance of winning.

Rd 2 vs Crusaders - home game and early season - the best time to play a typically slow to get going team like this

Rd 3 vs Blues - home game against another Kiwi team, giving them a much greater chance of winning

The worst way to start the season is

1. play on the road

2. play South African team in SA - as they are better earlier in the season, compared with NZ teams that are more likely to be a bit off pace in the first few games.

So the first 3 games were heaven-sent, ideal for a team that needed to get confidence back. The fact that they were 1-2 win / loss was only a result of their initial dis-belief in themselves. This was a dream draw to start, and their 2 close losses gave them enough confidence to build upon.

Rd 4 vs Chiefs - played away, but against a team coming back from SA. Away games don't get much better.

Rd 5 vs Force - at home, against the lowest ranked team - doesn't get much easier than this.

Rd 6 - bye.

So the second 25% of the regular season games again are based on a draw that doesn't get any better.

Now for the third 25% of the regular season:

Rd 7 vs Cheetahs - an away game against a team competing with the Cats to be the worst SA team this season.

Rd 8 vs Sharks - an away game that most years would have been tough, but this season this team has struggled to win anything and is sitting as low on the table as the Cats and Cheetahs.

Rd 9 vs Cats - an away game against a team that will probably not win a game this season.

So the third 25% of the regular season games become the 3rd block of 3 games that are nothing short of heaven sent.

Now for the final 4 games:

Rd 10 vs Bulls - at home, but tough because first game back from a road trip - but this is the Bulls 4th and final road game, one they may never have won (i.e. last game on the ANZ road trip) - so for a game against the Bulls it doesn't get much better - Reds at home, Bulls last game on tour.

Rd 11 vs Stormers - at home, with a team peforming better on the road this season than the Bulls but still better than playing them at their home. The Stormers 3rd game on the road.

Rd 12 vs Brumbies - away, which is tough [yet to be played]

Rd 13 vs Hurricanes - away - tought but not as tough as say playing a strong SA team early in the year at altitude [yet to be played]. If the Hurricanes are out of final contentions by then their committment to winning the game will be lower

Rd 14 vs Highlanders - at home, against the lowest ranking NZ team [yet to be played] - should be a given

So the Reds had 9 games to get in the groove, before having really challenging games. Ideal draw for a team, especially one rebuilding their self-belief.

In summary the best draw for an Australian team is one where you:

1. have home games to get your season rolling
2. play NZ teams early in the season, especially Cantebury. They bare not ususally at their best yet,
3. play SA teams at lower altidues when you do tour SA
4. play teams from colder climates at home earlier in the season where you have heat acclimatization advantage
5. play the weakest SA team on your road trip to SA
6. play the strongest SA teams late in the season, at home, and late in their road trip schedule
7. play the Brumbies at home early in the season so you have a heat adaptation advantage AND their unique winter dew is not a factor

Look familiar? Sumes up the Reds drawer (except for one point).

On the flip side, the toughest draw for an Australian team is one where you:

1. go on the road to SA up front
2. play the strongest SA teams early in the season at their home grounds
3. play SA teams at altidue
4. play teams from colder climates at home later in the season where you lose your heat acclimatization advantage
5. play the NZ teams later in the draw, especially Cantebury
6. play the SA teams at home early in their road trips
7. play the Brumbies away late in the season where you don't have a heat adaptation advantage AND their unique winter dew IS a factor

The Reds can win the 2010 Super Title

The Queensland Reds can win the 2010 Super 14 title. With only 3 games to go, they sit equal 2nd on points with 2 other teams, and 4 on for and againsts.

In fact, this could be their best chance of winning because:

1. They have had a dream draw in 2010.
2. They are arguably the freshest team in the competition
3. They have the lowest injury rate of Australian teams
4. Other teams are still not fully prepared to treat them with the respect they deserve as 2009 cellar dwellars.

This will change in 2011 because:

1. They may not have the dream draw
2. I predict their injury rate may rise in 2011 and 2012.
3. Other teams will have planned their years in advance with the Reds as a tough game to win.

The fading point

Each session I look for a point at which a team fades and fails to recovery. The best example in the 2010 Super 14 season so far, with 3 games to go, has been the Chiefs.

A top 4 team for 3 games, they have not recovered from their loss at home to the Reds. If anything they have faded further. That's a very early season fade, and their ability to recover with so many games left may have many insiders scratching their head.

The most spectacular fade award historically and perenially would go to NSW. Until Coach McKenzie broke the mould, probably by applying training volumes used by Queensland during the 1990s, which for a very brief period Coach Dwyer used (1994 domestic tests vs. South Africa).

Now it appears Coach McKenzie is using these same methods on the originating team, as coach of the Queensland Reds. At least with the Reds he has a team that has been a winner, unlike NSW who as a provincial team have not won a championship since the introduction of Super Rugby in 1991 - that's nearly 20 years of failing to win the title.

One of the greatest tests of a teams workload and related recovery is their ability to win their first game home after being on the road.  The Brumbies did it but they were playing the low ranked Cats. Queensland did it with a top of the table clash against the Bulls. The Chiefs failed this test, not they they were the only ones to in the 2010 season.

Brumbies not the brumbies of old

From Round 4 when the Brumbies failed to achieve the 4th try bonus despite spending approx. 7 1/2 mins in the low ranking South African Cats 25 metre zone, it's been apparent that the Brumbies lack the attacking skills of the Brumbies of old. No surprise when you consider the ability of Larkham to get over the advantage line and shred opposing back line defences.

What they have gained in up front set piece power they have lost in back line tactical superiority.

SA teams to fade out of Top 4 if....

Here's my calls...

* The Stormers may fade out of the Top 4
* If the Blue Bulls lose too many on the Road they will at best make 3 or 4, and from memory no SA team has won the competition from that position, because unless they play on home soil, the travel over here AGAIN to play in the finals is their undoing
* If the SA teams fade as above, that leaves more spaces for AUS and NZ teams.
* If the playoffs occur in AUS or NZ, it raises the chances of the ANZ teams winning compared to if they were being played in SA
* Unlike last year Aust will have 1 if not 2 teams in the Top 4

The next question is - will this translate into a better performance by Aust in the Tri-Nations?

Private investors

Druing the last week the Queensland newspaper ran an article about how the Queensland Reds were investigating the possibility in future of private equity partners.  My understanding is that the 2011 new entrant into Super rugby, the Melbourne Rebels, is the first privatized rugby franchise in Australian rugby.

The Brisbane Broncos showed just how well run and finanically successful a private franchise could be in a competition with the other teams that are not privately run.

I had to laugh at the comment by the Reds administrators. Fifteen years ago I said to a Red player 'The only chance of creating something create in Australian rugby at state level is to have a privately owned team'.

Of course at that time, it was considered inconceiveable by everyone that this could happen. In fact I suspect that the killing of the RWC in 1995 may have had something to do with the fear of the rise of private money in a game run for so long by a board of socially connected and control-oriented people.

He is the least fit looking....

During the Round 9 game between the NSW Waratahs and the SA provincial team the Cheetahs, one of the commentators described a Cheetahs prop as being the 'least fit looking....' etc etc.  This was after a mention of the fact that he has missed no games this year or similar.

Comments about how someone 'looks fit' do not help the cause of physical and athletic preparation. At one time i am sure the commentator (an ex-player) knew better than this, but unforunately he along with the majmority get caught up in the mainstream misconception that you can judge a persons 'fitness' to succeed in sport by their looks.

This only results in mis-guided focus on low body fat and bulging biceps, neither which are in my opinion correlated with success on the scoreboard.

Reminds me of the before and after photos used by the Wallabies conditioner in the lead up to the 1999 world cup.  I thought such dumb and misguided interpretations of preparedness for sport were limited to bodybuilding magazines....

But we are so strong in the gym....

The tragic evidence of the adoption of the US sports and cultural mentality...

In a quiet moment of the Round 8 game between the Western Force and the Blue Bulls, a commentator made mention of his conversations prior ot the game with Western Force players proudly sharing that some of the team achieved PBs in the gym that week....

With a 0-7 win loss to that time, and last on the ladder, the last thing anyone interested in the Force's success would want to hear about is anything that has nothing to do with the scoreboard. They may as as well boast about their ability to play marbles....

I don't need any more evidence to support my theory that there is no correlation between the load lifted in the gym and the scoreboard (and I introduced strength training to more rugby players than any other individual in the history of the game) - and sadly, no amount of evidence of the absence of this correlation will help the limited intelelligence (when it comes to training) of so many connected to the game, including those who actually do influence the training....

Reds dream draw continues

If you wanted to win against SA teams from ANZ would you play their strongest teams in SA and their weakest team in Aust? No - you would play their weakest teams in SA and their strongest team in Aust, where SA teams winning is as rare as a LNP winning the state election in Queensland during the last 10 or more years.

The Reds played the Cheetahs first (11th placed out of 14 teams), then the Sharks next (12th placed out of 14 teams), and then the Lions (13th placed out of 14 teams. And the Lions will have just come back from their ANZ road trip, so they will be totally smashed. And possibly winless on the road.

The Super 14 committee could not have given the Reds a better draw to lose that losing feeling and join the middle ranks of the competition from the cellar where they have dwelled for almost a decade.

Waratahs v Force - 2 tired teams or tradition?

The Round 6 clash between the Force and the Waratahs was a close, low scoring, flat game.  The commentators put it down to tradition, with the last 4 of their games being decided by 5 points or less.

I know another tradition - the Waratahs fading anytime from half-way onwards in the season. Now since Coach McKenzie was the first coach to stifle that tradition after it held for over a decade, they do seem less prone. But I am not convinced it's gone away.

As for the Perth. I have said enough about that - they define fatigue, by their fades, low win rate, and exhausted faces.

SA teams weak means more final chances for Australian teams

When SA has two strong teams in the Super competition, it means less Aussie teams make it to the final 4. When SA have say the Sharks and the Bulls firing, that leaves only 2 spots to fit all Aust and NZ teams into. Sounds simplistic, but this was one of the factors that contribed to no Australian teams making the playoffs in 2009. A point I am sure is not lost on the ARU.

In 2010, with the Sharks strong on paper and weak on the field, only the Bulls are left. What about the Stormers you ask? If they were still in the mix at the end of the regular season it would be almost out of character. They have a habit of slipping out of contention as the season moves to an end. As for the winning the championship - that would be really against history.

'Are the Reds the real deal now?' asked the butcher

'Are the Reds' the real deal?' asked the butcher.

'I don't know', I said.  'Ask me that in a year or two - they are in their honeymoon year.'

The first year under a new coach is what I call the honeymoon year. Everything is great, everyone's happy.  Year two is a 'Settling' year, and if there are cracks they begin to appear towards the end of year 2 and become more apparent in year 3, the 'Reality' year.

The last Australian team to win a Super Rugby Championship, the Brumbies in 2004,  did so in the 1st year of a new coaching cycle.

Moving up the ladder board substantially in the first year of new coaches cycle gives everyone a warm feeling and enhances the new coaches position when negotiating their contract in the latter stage of year 2 (ironcially they typically get signed up for a new term before the reality year 3 happens!)

One thing we can draw upon is the coaches pattern.  McKenzie is 0 from 5 for Super Rugby Championships, although his former team was in the playoffs, and he made the finals quite a few times. So all things being equal, this could be repeated. Every year that goes and a coach does not win a championship, the lower the chances of them ever winning one. If a coach is aware of this, it must feel like a noose tightening around their neck.  Winning coaches usually win early in their career, and consistantly.

However a challenge, rarely recognized, with finishing up too high on the ladder in year one is the pressure it places on year 2.  The best long term outcome is a progressive and continual movement up the ladder in a multi-year plan.

Either way, each years final ladder result presents the opportunity to draw a trend graph.

One thing i am sure of for this year? The Western Force have taken on the Reds role as the Australian team whipping boys of the 2010 season, and will finish the lowest ranked Australian team.

The question that remains for the decision makers in Queensland Rugby - can the Reds win a championship under the current coach?  Well the Reds are one of only 6 teams to have ever won Super Rugby, but is was a long time ago now. And the Coach has not won one yet. Can they collectively re-shape this? It will take something special. Even though to coaches take major credit for championship wins, I suggest if you look deeper you find stronger correlations or contributors. Have the Reds got this in the playing or support team?

Travel fatigue on first game back real for ANZ sides

Despite firm claims I've heard from coaches at national and provincial level, I firmly believe that the trip to South Africa by Australian and New Zealand provincial teams, if not handled properly, results in fatigued performances on the first game back home minimum.

Not to overlook the cost of failing to manage the training when the Australian teams are in SA - their poor win/loss record in SA speaks for itself - a discussion for another day.

Round 4 in this years Super 14 Competiton against confirmed my this theory - in fact is it is obvious now that even the commentators make loose mention of it. After participating in and observing Super rugby for nearly 20 years, I don't need to see any more evidence. Apparently the coaches do....

The Chiefs lost at home to the Reds and failed to get a 4 try bonus point. The Waratahs and the Brumbies both scraped a win at home against the Sharks and Cats respectively. None of the latter two winning teams were able to achieve a four try bonus point. The averages points scored by all six teams in these three games was roughly 50% of the average in the four games so far this year with the new rule interpretations.

SA scrums like Samson after a hair cut

Just as South African back lines finally learn to run straight (advancing to switches and other finesse are for another decade) the forward packs loose their power, like Samson after a haircut.

Once the pride of South African rugby and the fear of all other nations, the SA provincial packs are looking like schooboys agasint me.

In Round 3 the Waratahs destroyed the Bull, and in Round 4 the Brumbies destroyed the Cats, as two examples.

Improved Australian scrums or weakened yarpie scrums? Time will tell.

ARU and the QRU

Announced today in the Australian papers, the ARU rescue package and their increased 'involvement' in the decision making within Queensland Rugby. Mmmm.

Guess it means one less step in the process - tt used to be the ARU had to threaten to rehold funding if the QRU didn't act in obeyance of their wishes - now than can just say no.

Two down, 2 to go. The only escape now will be full privatization, something I talked about over 10 years ago. The Rebels may be in that model, and it is inevitable. Just a matter of when.

Reds up over Chiefs in NZ

For the first time in 5 years the Reds won at Waikato against home town the Chiefs. Tired Chiefs (just back from South Africa/Perth leg) or hot Reds? Time will tell.

The continuation of the Reds dream draw for 2010. Meeting teams just back from SA - next best thing after a home game.