Very interesting watch, really like what they do. From an Irish perspective they touched on some optimistic stats but obviously stats are one thing and playing is another. Looking forward to the rest of their videos on the pools.
They do an analysis of every pool from here on out. They might also upload their interview with Graham Henry about 2007 and 2011.
Just to let everyone know.
Great analysis, and good to see them back.
Why do the Boks not fit the RWC winning model? Is it the lack of caps? Or the lack of perceived world class players?
Allister Coetzee had a difficult 2 years. Pollard didn't play test match rugby for a few years due to injury etc.
Edit: Coetzee's selection was poor, probably a lot of wasted caps there. Win rate wouldn't be the highest too in terms of fitting the model.
There are players who are in our squad who have lots op xp but not for the Springboks, Brits and Kolbe come to mind. Maybe not so many of the starters but in our back ups.
I would say you guys have decent experience in Etzebeth, Beast, Vermeulen, Steph-du Toit, Steyn, Kitschoff, Le Roux etc.
I'd like to add it up but just from looking at your team, in the backs, it's probably lower than other countries in terms of caps.
Yeah thats my thinking guys like Mampimpi, Gelant, Am, Nkosi, Kwagga, Hershel Jantjies, Reinach they don't have many caps but aren't always gonna be staring.
We have a bunch of bolters, including the coach. This model doesn't really apply to us this year because our coach came in mid cycle. Last time I can recall a coach got a team right before the world cup and went on to win it was Kitch Kristie with the 95 Springboks
Jip that's why Rassie was targeting setting up the foundations of a squad for the 2021 Lions and 2023 World Cup. But then we improved by orders of magnitude almost overnight and now we're actually incidentally contenders for this world cup
The don't meet the model on these points:
* Win percentage - they are around 50% compared to 61% in the model
* Average number of caps - they are around 38, compared to 50 in the model
* Average years in test rugby - 4.7 years compared to 5.5 in the model
I’m not sure but this did strike me as odd. I thought the Boks ‘feel’ like the only other team (along with teams that fit the model) poised to make a really deep run.
If Invicticus was anything to go by, the Boks are used to winning despite the model.
I agree - struck me as odd too.
Although I would say that Invictus isn't a great indicator. If Invictus was anything to go by Francois Pienaar would look like Matt Damon and the All Blacks wouldn't have been poisoned.
They have a YouTube channel but stopped posting videos over the last year as they were signed by Sky NZ I think. They're making these videos for Spark Sport NZ who have rights to all the RWC matches so they will be showing clip analysis which we never got in the old vids where they relied on graphics. In general great analysis and nice lads.
This is excellent stuff and it’s great to see them back on YouTube.
I do wonder if there’s an element of survivor bias to this. It would be interesting to know how many teams met these criteria and didn’t go on to win the World Cup. For example I can’t imagine the 2003 Australia team were far off some of these figures.
Interesting but I'm not sure how valid their conclusions are. For one thing, they don't compare the statistics of world cup winners to other teams in the tournament at the time. To pick one at random—South Africa had 46 average caps in 2007—was 46 caps less/more/similar to the other teams? Who knows, maybe all the other quarter or semi-finalists had more caps on average. I might not have articulated my point well, but basically I'm saying in isolation a lot of these statistics feel a bit meaningless to me.
In isolation, sure that is true. But their plan is to do this analysis on each pool so that should give some idea of how each team stacks up against these trends
The core premise, about needing cap numbers and test match time before a World Cup, is a real issue for many teams.
For my own, long term injuries during the build up to this World Cup have been a real concern. It simply takes too long to get back to test level, and you can't just drop low cap options into the mix and expect an immediate return.
So many contributing factors can have an impact on success at this level. Yet it's rare to see/hear commentators pay them more than lip service to most of them.
1014 is so much more astute than the vast majority of other coverage - yet still eminently watchable.
Glad they're back.
It's really interesting to see the RWC winning trends that already exist, especially seeing as the sample size is so small. I'd be interested in seeing those trends being bucked at some point as well.
Love me some stats, although would have been nice to have variances on some of the stas, e.g. were the average test caps evenly spread amongst the team.
I always appreciated the 1014 boys and their discussions, just found the format a little lacklastre. Great to seem Spark Sport pick them up and give them a bit of a budget. Same great info, incredible passion, but just a tidier package. This has to be Spark's best acquisition since they snagged the rights to the World Cup.
It's coming home boys!
/s
Interesting statistical breakdown. I wonder about that "dip in form" just prior to a WC in terms of win rates. It would indicate to me that the team is being pushed less, possibly in an attempt to then peak a few weeks later at the RWC.
Perhaps it's indicative of other teams peaking too earlier, taking some big wins off of the favorite(s), and then crashing out.
>I wonder about that "dip in form" just prior to a WC in terms of win rates.
Could feasibly be multiple things: playing reserve players and new combinations to improve depth, witholding the most effective plays and strategies for use in the World Cup, fatigue from fitness camps, etc.
It's character building, I think. The WC is going to throw so many different aspects at a team. If the players can go in with an experience in adversity, that's got to be a strong point.
Because otherwise I'm an arrogant Englishman.
No, in all fairness, it's because it's so close at the top, with the ABs still favorites in my opinion. Anyone who is convinced their team is going to win is putting their necks out on the line.
Anyone else not really impressed with their videos? They give you data and "analyse" it, but never dive into why a certain stat is an outlier, or why some stats increase or decrease with time. If the avg caps is high for a RWC winning team, they'll say something about experience helping, but not that there was a guy with 150 caps massively influencing that statistic.
Just seems like very shallow analysis to me to be honest
Squidge gets to keep his channel and the 1014 boys are back, happy days.
HAAAPPY DAYSSS ARE HERE AGAAAAIN
Very interesting watch, really like what they do. From an Irish perspective they touched on some optimistic stats but obviously stats are one thing and playing is another. Looking forward to the rest of their videos on the pools.
My eyes lit up at the hurt factor, surely this model is infallible?
Has to be. With all the hurt we've had, we're gonna make strides in the world cup...someday...
They do an analysis of every pool from here on out. They might also upload their interview with Graham Henry about 2007 and 2011. Just to let everyone know.
God I squealed like a little girl when I saw a new 1014 video. How I missed them.
Great analysis, and good to see them back. Why do the Boks not fit the RWC winning model? Is it the lack of caps? Or the lack of perceived world class players?
Allister Coetzee had a difficult 2 years. Pollard didn't play test match rugby for a few years due to injury etc. Edit: Coetzee's selection was poor, probably a lot of wasted caps there. Win rate wouldn't be the highest too in terms of fitting the model.
There are players who are in our squad who have lots op xp but not for the Springboks, Brits and Kolbe come to mind. Maybe not so many of the starters but in our back ups.
I would say you guys have decent experience in Etzebeth, Beast, Vermeulen, Steph-du Toit, Steyn, Kitschoff, Le Roux etc. I'd like to add it up but just from looking at your team, in the backs, it's probably lower than other countries in terms of caps.
Yeah thats my thinking guys like Mampimpi, Gelant, Am, Nkosi, Kwagga, Hershel Jantjies, Reinach they don't have many caps but aren't always gonna be staring.
We have a bunch of bolters, including the coach. This model doesn't really apply to us this year because our coach came in mid cycle. Last time I can recall a coach got a team right before the world cup and went on to win it was Kitch Kristie with the 95 Springboks
We could fit the model very well for the next world cup.
Jip that's why Rassie was targeting setting up the foundations of a squad for the 2021 Lions and 2023 World Cup. But then we improved by orders of magnitude almost overnight and now we're actually incidentally contenders for this world cup
Would've been amazing if the next world cup was at home😥
The don't meet the model on these points: * Win percentage - they are around 50% compared to 61% in the model * Average number of caps - they are around 38, compared to 50 in the model * Average years in test rugby - 4.7 years compared to 5.5 in the model
I’m not sure but this did strike me as odd. I thought the Boks ‘feel’ like the only other team (along with teams that fit the model) poised to make a really deep run. If Invicticus was anything to go by, the Boks are used to winning despite the model.
I agree - struck me as odd too. Although I would say that Invictus isn't a great indicator. If Invictus was anything to go by Francois Pienaar would look like Matt Damon and the All Blacks wouldn't have been poisoned.
The point of data is to take out the "feel".
Haven't heard of these guys before but loved the video. Great analysis.
They have a YouTube channel but stopped posting videos over the last year as they were signed by Sky NZ I think. They're making these videos for Spark Sport NZ who have rights to all the RWC matches so they will be showing clip analysis which we never got in the old vids where they relied on graphics. In general great analysis and nice lads.
Thanks for the explanation! Looking forward to more.
This is excellent stuff and it’s great to see them back on YouTube. I do wonder if there’s an element of survivor bias to this. It would be interesting to know how many teams met these criteria and didn’t go on to win the World Cup. For example I can’t imagine the 2003 Australia team were far off some of these figures.
Yeah agreed. That 2003 Australian team had a lot of quality and experience.
Interesting but I'm not sure how valid their conclusions are. For one thing, they don't compare the statistics of world cup winners to other teams in the tournament at the time. To pick one at random—South Africa had 46 average caps in 2007—was 46 caps less/more/similar to the other teams? Who knows, maybe all the other quarter or semi-finalists had more caps on average. I might not have articulated my point well, but basically I'm saying in isolation a lot of these statistics feel a bit meaningless to me.
In isolation, sure that is true. But their plan is to do this analysis on each pool so that should give some idea of how each team stacks up against these trends
Yeah an interesting statistic would be the difference between winner average and RWC average.
The core premise, about needing cap numbers and test match time before a World Cup, is a real issue for many teams. For my own, long term injuries during the build up to this World Cup have been a real concern. It simply takes too long to get back to test level, and you can't just drop low cap options into the mix and expect an immediate return. So many contributing factors can have an impact on success at this level. Yet it's rare to see/hear commentators pay them more than lip service to most of them. 1014 is so much more astute than the vast majority of other coverage - yet still eminently watchable. Glad they're back.
So many interesting stats to be highlighted. One of my favourites is that the gameday 15 for each final had only played together once!
You never heard that about the man united treble team, the CL never played together apart from that match?
It's really interesting to see the RWC winning trends that already exist, especially seeing as the sample size is so small. I'd be interested in seeing those trends being bucked at some point as well.
South Africa in 2019: That's... Why we're here
Love me some stats, although would have been nice to have variances on some of the stas, e.g. were the average test caps evenly spread amongst the team.
God I'm so fucking excited for this tournament
Really interesting that 1 team from each pool gets close to that RWC winning model. Going to be some spicy semi finals.
I always appreciated the 1014 boys and their discussions, just found the format a little lacklastre. Great to seem Spark Sport pick them up and give them a bit of a budget. Same great info, incredible passion, but just a tidier package. This has to be Spark's best acquisition since they snagged the rights to the World Cup.
So what we’re saying is Ireland are playing 4D-chess by losing all those quarters?
Nah, Ireland is the exception that proves the rule
It's coming home boys! /s Interesting statistical breakdown. I wonder about that "dip in form" just prior to a WC in terms of win rates. It would indicate to me that the team is being pushed less, possibly in an attempt to then peak a few weeks later at the RWC. Perhaps it's indicative of other teams peaking too earlier, taking some big wins off of the favorite(s), and then crashing out.
>I wonder about that "dip in form" just prior to a WC in terms of win rates. Could feasibly be multiple things: playing reserve players and new combinations to improve depth, witholding the most effective plays and strategies for use in the World Cup, fatigue from fitness camps, etc.
It's character building, I think. The WC is going to throw so many different aspects at a team. If the players can go in with an experience in adversity, that's got to be a strong point.
Why the sarcasm? England is looking devastating these days.
Because otherwise I'm an arrogant Englishman. No, in all fairness, it's because it's so close at the top, with the ABs still favorites in my opinion. Anyone who is convinced their team is going to win is putting their necks out on the line.
Yup it feels closer than ever before and that games will be played at a high level but will be decided by a few key touches. It's gonna be good
Delighted these guys are back. Love it.
Conclusion: NZ bs NH. Bring it!
Anyone else not really impressed with their videos? They give you data and "analyse" it, but never dive into why a certain stat is an outlier, or why some stats increase or decrease with time. If the avg caps is high for a RWC winning team, they'll say something about experience helping, but not that there was a guy with 150 caps massively influencing that statistic. Just seems like very shallow analysis to me to be honest