The Rugby Championship

I don't actually think the referees are "biased" or have any nefarious intent.

The example I will give is this. In a study 50% of teachers were told their randomly selected group of students were the best in the school. While 50% were not. The teachers who were lied to (about having the talented students) achieved the best test exam scores. Does this mean that any of the teachers involved were incompetent or moody? No it was just the power of expectations.

I don't want to posit a psychological theory for why home town reffing MIGHT exist as I will be pulling it out of my ass. But I suspect that the theory will be subtle influences on the referee that he is not aware of. Pressure from fans, an expectation that the home side will win the game is or the better team etc. or even a more effective coaching staff that asked the right "questions" during the ref QA session before the game.

 

Well 2 hours later after compiling an analysis of the last 2 years of home game the ABs have played and I can't upload it.

The summary is there was mixed results. Caveat - one game is missing (australia vs NZ a few weeks ago that espn did not have)

1) The ABs have conceded fewer penalties 162 vs 180
2) If you accept that penalties are usually conceded when you are on defence however then things looked less biased. ABs concede 1 penalty every 3.8 mins they defend while the opposition concede one every 4.1 minutes.
3) Things do look in the favour of the ABs in terms of kickable penalties they had 78 shots at goal while the opposition had 35 shots at goal.
4) If you neutralize the territory advantage that the ABs have the advantage still holds ABs have one penalty attempt every 9.8 minutes in the opposition half while the opposition have one penalty attempt every 17 minutes in NZs half.

Conclusions: the 162 vs 180 can easily give to the viewer the appearance the opposition are getting pinged more but it is explainable.
The kickable penalty advantage came as a surprise to me and does suggest that when the ABs go on attack the opposition either is forced into infringing to stop them scoring because they are so potent, or the opposition are less effective at defending within the rules, or there is some home town bias.

 

There are a whole heap of reasons why teams perform better at home - it happens in every sport.

A home town team may get more penalties at home but that doesn't mean there is bias. The crowd could put the opposition under more pressure, therefore they concede more penalties. Any difference between home/away penalty counts could be to do with away teams actually infringing more rather than some kind of bias.

It also seems strange to me that you would single out New Zealand. If there was home town bias then I would think South Africa/England would be more likely to get it as those are far more intimidating places to go play than Waikato Stadium.

 

I just see more of their games so they are more top of mind for me .
As for the penalty counts. Its the only scientific stat we can use.

Personally I can't see the ABs infringing less than other teams all other factors being equal because then you aren't pushing the limits of the game/rules. And Ritchie and others push it.

Secondly if you got booed and jeered would this cause you to go offside or dive over the top in the next ruck?

You are right that home town advantage happens in every sport. I have avoided talking about that deliberately as I don't know enough about other sports. I can tell you that some sports give an actual home town advantage. In cricket you know the pitches. In baseball you bat at the bottom of the 9th. In hockey you get the last change on the ice.

But basketball also has home town impact on winning records and the only thing the players talk about is the fans. So I concede the fans do effect the players performance but that is only part of the answer IMHO.

 

coach tactics 301 Intermediate level strategy

When the whole team sucks publicly blame or drop the best player. Usually you just yell at the guy in front of the media - this just shows this coach means business. Standard ploy in the NHL.

edit - usually the rest of the team improves as they really know it was their fault.

 

As mentioned in the crabs subbie I've got $50 on the abs. THe only thing that worries me is the attitude the boks have to the game. They are playing the underdog and talking about the abs being the best in the world. All upsets start with that type of talk. Our journalists are saying this bok team may one of the more intelligent SA sides of the last 10 years and their pre-game talk is consistent with that.

Really though I don't think Morne Steyn should be playing International rugby for anybody and I see his presence as the defining difference between both sides. Look for our scrum to get monstered by the best front row in the world.

 

Right I am cracking open a beer. It is a Tui and the question on the cap is
"What is the smallest bra size"
Any takers?

 

Good start. Hopefully the Springboks get monstered.

 

FMD we are up by 7 points - but SAs defence is looking incredible. This could be more of a battle than I though. We aren't making the gain line easily.