Dingbatt: Lions stats are skewed by playing no NZ teams until the semifinals.
The fault of the crap super rugby format, not the Lions.

People are saying that a lot.

They put the Canes to the sword in the weekend.

I guess we'll find out on Sunday morning.

tukapa1:

 

 

 

Stats seem to support Ludez.

 

I would rather a NZ team won it, but I won't be upset if the Lions get up.  They topped the table and were deserved finalists last year.

 

The Lions didn't face a NZ team, the Crusaders played every NZ team, most multiple times. They scored 7 more tries across an entire season. It's hardly a huge difference. 

How many times did the Lions play in the wet?

What was the difference on the SR points table between the Crusaders and the next NZ team vs Lions and the next SA team? That should help speak to the difference in quality the two sides faced in their respective seasons.

You can make stats say whatever you want do, depending on context. 

I am super impressed with the Crusaders this year, to be fair, they had no right to be at the place they are now, based on the number of players they have lost in the past two years. 

It's for me, a little frustrating that any NZ team that does well gets massive Kudos, except the Crusaders, who are indisputably the most successful SR team in history. Maybe people just don't like that

tukapa1:

 

Dingbatt: Lions stats are skewed by playing no NZ teams until the semifinals.
The fault of the crap super rugby format, not the Lions.

 

 

 

People are saying that a lot.

 

They put the Canes to the sword in the weekend.

 

I guess we'll find out on Sunday morning.

 

I am not saying the Crusaders can beat the Lions for sure, like you say, they beat the Hurricanes and I'd suggest you would struggle to find 10 people in NZ who would've bet on the Lions for that win by that Margin.

I am saying the Crusaders have been consistent and won a lot hard matches and had a much harder road to the Final, and I think that makes them deserving of support. 

I am not going to cry into my weetbix if the Crusaders lose, unless it's by a reffing error like it was 2 years ago, because I think the Lions are also a good team, and to be honest SA Rugby needs a win too!

In tables format, the most consistent team deserves the trophy.

Unfortunately in knock out competition, the most consistent doesn't deserve anything. The team with more points on the day (no matter how achieved) will "deserve" the medal.

Thanks the high altitude it is somewhat a fortress. Jo-berg consumes its visitors. Crusaders should be thankful the Lions don't take drop goals. Do they?

How many in the Crusaders 22 have played in Jo-berg before?

networkn:

 

 

 

It's for me, a little frustrating that any NZ team that does well gets massive Kudos, except the Crusaders, who are indisputably the most successful SR team in history. Maybe people just don't like that

I like that Crusaders are the most successful team.

I don't like that their supporters keep telling me that as if they expect me to believe that they are the best team each and every season. So I don't need to add my compliments.

I don't like that they generally come across as the least gracious of the supporters of any of the NZ teams. I've only met one Crusaders supporter who an the exception to this.

I don't like that when the Crusaders were soundly beaten by the Hurricanes last year, their captain gave no credit to the Hurricanes. Kieran Read did not say one good thing about the team that outplayed them.

I really like their latest coach and his obvious enthusiasm. I like that the Crusaders are back to their best.

I don't like watching the Crusader forwards grind down other teams. That's why I'd rather watch the Blues lose than the Crusaders win.

Batman:

 

In tables format, the most consistent team deserves the trophy.

 

Unfortunately in knock out competition, the most consistent doesn't deserve anything. The team with more points on the day (no matter how achieved) will "deserve" the medal.

 

Thanks the high altitude it is somewhat a fortress. Jo-berg consumes its visitors. Crusaders should be thankful the Lions don't take drop goals. Do they?

 

How many in the Crusaders 22 have played in Jo-berg before?

 

Of the 15 that started on Saturday I think all but one have played in Jo-burg. That being Goodhue. 2 Others played for a different team but not 100% about Hall.

Of the reserves 5 are definite , 2 never and I not sure about the final one Pete Samu but I think so.

Dingbatt: Lions stats are skewed by playing no NZ teams until the semifinals.
The fault of the crap super rugby format, not the Lions.

Of the 8 teams that made the playoffs the Crusaders had 7 games against them as opposed to 4 for the Lions.

Looking at home and away stats the Lions are by far and away the best team so you have to favour them in the final.

The other thing which should be massively in their favour is the Crusaders are going from playing night games on a heavy track to a day game on a fast track. Not sure if they can adapt quick enough

Hammerer:

 

networkn:

 

 

 

It's for me, a little frustrating that any NZ team that does well gets massive Kudos, except the Crusaders, who are indisputably the most successful SR team in history. Maybe people just don't like that

 

I like that Crusaders are the most successful team.

 

I don't like that their supporters keep telling me that as if they expect me to believe that they are the best team each and every season. So I don't need to add my compliments.

 

I don't like that they generally come across as the least gracious of the supporters of any of the NZ teams. I've only met one Crusaders supporter who an the exception to this.

 

I don't like that when the Crusaders were soundly beaten by the Hurricanes last year, their captain gave no credit to the Hurricanes. Kieran Read did not say one good thing about the team that outplayed them.

 

I really like their latest coach and his obvious enthusiasm. I like that the Crusaders are back to their best.

 

I don't like watching the Crusader forwards grind down other teams. That's why I'd rather watch the Blues lose than the Crusaders win.

 

I myself have said that the Crusaders haven't been very gracious in defeat (and when they win) on a number of occasions, also when RM won the RWC in 2015, no mention on the Wallabies. It surprises me that the coaching staff of the Crusaders and AB's haven't addressed it. I feel a similar way about the Hurricanes recently, they were especially poor in their concession speech against the Crusaders recently, but then I don't think TJP should be anywhere near the captaincy even though I think he is a fantastic player (except for his continual running of the mouth at refs).

I am surprised about your comments to do with the Forwards. A lot of success has come out of the forwards for both the Crusaders and All Blacks, in fact it's the AB's game plan in most situations to tire the opponents and then let the backs have the park for 20 minutes at the end. 

You need to earn the right to go wide (as cliche as it is) and if you don't do this, you need to rely on more luck or errors on defence. Some teams have been successful by using all out attack for 80 minutes, but it's unusual for that success to be continued as there are ways to negate this, usually with forward dominance.

I wish we had Nadolo back, It would be awesome to see how the Crusaders attack went with a big winger in their midst. He was a highlight for me the past few seasons.

Dingbatt: Lions stats are skewed by playing no NZ teams until the semifinals.
The fault of the crap super rugby format, not the Lions.

Hurricanes are third on the table, how can those stats be skewed? Hurricanes were outplayed by the Lions, stats supported that would happen.

networkn:

 

The Lions didn't face a NZ team, the Crusaders played every NZ team, most multiple times. They scored 7 more tries across an entire season. It's hardly a huge difference. 

 

How many times did the Lions play in the wet?

True, Lions did not face an NZ team. But I dont see the point of this. Sure Lions can't play very well in the wet, but the same can be said for Hurricanes and Crusaders, how many times have they played at altitude?

Crusaders and Lions are the two best teams and both deserve to be right at the top. Personally I think this weekends game could go either way but I do think its in the favor of the Lions simply due to the Home Ground advantage, and altitude. If final was in Christchurch I would put all my money on Crusaders.

Wiggum:

 

Dingbatt: Lions stats are skewed by playing no NZ teams until the semifinals.
The fault of the crap super rugby format, not the Lions.

 

Hurricanes are third on the table, how can those stats be skewed? Hurricanes were outplayed by the Lions, stats supported that would happen.

 

networkn:

 

The Lions didn't face a NZ team, the Crusaders played every NZ team, most multiple times. They scored 7 more tries across an entire season. It's hardly a huge difference. 

 

How many times did the Lions play in the wet?

 

True, Lions did not face an NZ team. But I dont see the point of this. Sure Lions can't play very well in the wet, but the same can be said for Hurricanes and Crusaders, how many times have they played at altitude?

 

Crusaders and Lions are the two best teams and both deserve to be right at the top. Personally I think this weekends game could go either way but I do think its in the favor of the Lions simply due to the Home Ground advantage, and altitude. If final was in Christchurch I would put all my money on Crusaders.

 

The Crusaders do have a mountain to climb, it's a big one, and like you say, I myself as a Crusaders fan, do not have the certainty of a win. I do think the Hurricanes were possibly a little complacent, but maybe I am wrong about that. I think the Crusaders will have learnt something from watching that loss. I do feel the Hurricanes defence was pretty lax in that last 25 minutes and possibly that was the altitude. Kicking will be important.

Even an extra couple of days (in SA) would have made a huge difference to the Crusaders chances. I really hope they lift the trophy though (obviously). 

Wiggum:

Dingbatt: Lions stats are skewed by playing no NZ teams until the semifinals.
The fault of the crap super rugby format, not the Lions.

Hurricanes are third on the table, how can those stats be skewed? Hurricanes were outplayed by the Lions, stats supported that would happen.

<

Most after game speeches and those in the game are a waste of time anyway. They seem to me to be pointless as I know exactly what is going to be said. The stock standard 5 to 6 responses are so old hat.

And if you are the opposition do you really want the team that beat you to say the same old 'Thanks for the game, you played well, it was a tough game' etc etc. It doesn't mean anything. Socialising with the opposition later on is much better.

Dingbatt:

Looking forward to the Rugby Championship (Quad Nations), I am glad to see Crotty back and in good form. Laumape as a battering ram doesn't seem as good a solution as Crotty's brain in the backline.

100% agree with this sentiment. Crotty seemed the best choice to replace Conrad Smith who also had a good Rugby brain and made some very astute decisions in both attack and defence. 

Jas777:

 

Most after game speeches and those in the game are a waste of time anyway. They seem to me to be pointless as I know exactly what is going to be said. The stock standard 5 to 6 responses are so old hat.

 

And if you are the opposition do you really want the team that beat you to say the same old 'Thanks for the game, you played well, it was a tough game' etc etc. It doesn't mean anything. Socialising with the opposition later on is much better.

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah, I was going to say something to similar effect. Sometimes I hear Captains who have just beaten opposition by 30+ points come and say "we knew they'd be tough and all credit to them, they really bought it to us..." and I think... Huh?!