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 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.

'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.

History and winners

A breif summary of winners in Super rugby:

* From 1992, to 2009 - only 6 teams have ever won the competition
* 2 of those so long ago it's a distant memory
* Which leaves us with only 4 winning outfits in the last 10 years
* The NSW Waratahs have not won a thing, in 19 years of Super Rugby. Not the only ones, but as they are the power house financially, politically, demographically and geographically of Australian rugby (and SA and NZ power bases of their times have all produced at least one win), the Australian master plan isn't working - no wonder since they keep basing on the NSW Waratahs....)
* Only 3 of those 6 teams have a 100% win ratio in the big game, the final
* The Brumbies have the poorest win:loss ratio in finals of all teams who have played the finals. even though they deserve credit for going to the finals the second most times of all teans. But no-one remembers who lost....

Super 6

 1992 - Queensland (now the Reds)

Super 10

1993 - Transvaal (then the Cats and now the Lions)
1994 - Queensland (now the Reds)
1995 - Queensland (now the Reds)

Super 12

1996 - Blues
1997 - Blues
1998 - Crusaders
1999 - Crusaders
2000 - Crusaders
2001 - Brumbies
2002 - Crusaders
2003 - Blues
2004 - Brumbies
2005 - Crusaders

Super 14

2006 - Crusaders
2007 - Bulls
2008 - Crusaders
2009 - Bulls
2009 -

Team Wins Runner-up

Team    Won   Runner Up

Crusaders    7      2
Blues           3      1
Brumbies     2     3
Reds            3     0
Bulls           2      0
Lions          1      0

Sharks         0     3
Waratahs     0     2
Highlanders 0    1
Hurricanes   0    1
Chiefs          0    1

Wins by Country

Country         Wins    Runner-up

New Zealand 10         6
Australia        2           5
South Africa  2           3




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_14#Past_winners

Brumbies get a lesson from the Bulls

In Round 2 the Brumbies lost to the Bulls, which at the moment is not a complete embarrassment with the way the Bulls are playing.

However with a star-studded team the Brumbies are under presesure of expectation to perform well this year. Nothing they have done so far meets that expectations but it is early days.

At this stage my prediction is they will be just in or just out of the top 4.