Talk:2011 Super Rugby season
|WikiProject New Zealand||(Rated C-class, Mid-importance)|
Would it be possible to set up a table to keep a running tally of attendance averages? I was thinking something similar to the A-League one below. I just have no idea how to set it up...
|Central Coast Mariners||15||7,713||12,409||5,373||115,695|
|North Queensland Fury||15||4,245||7,195||1,003||63,681|
|Gold Coast United||15||3,434||14,783||1,658||51,505|
4 phased schedule
Is there a reference for the schedule to actually have the four phases listed? It is correct in describing which teams will play each other, and how many times, but I have serious doubts about that the playing order will be that strict. I can't find that in any of the descriptions of the new format released by SANZAR or one of the unions. The reason I'm doubting it is that travel has been difficult enough in the past, and I can't see how they can possibly squeeze in all intercontinental games in just a few weeks in the middle. All SA teams will play 4 games in Aus and NZ, at the same time as the teams from there would travel to SA to play 2 games. This is just one less overseas game than with the S14 format, and then they needed the whole season to fit the overseas games properly into the schedule. Also, if the phases are like that, there'd be three teams having bye-rounds each week in phase 1 and 3. That's a lot of byes, meaning the season will take a lot longer. I'm happy to be disproved with a nice reference. /Coffeeshivers (talk) 16:17, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
- It seems I was right. http://www.superrugby.com/SRp006-007a_draw.pdf shows that the phases are not that distinct in time. /Coffeeshivers (talk) 17:08, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Table or Standings?
The official Super Rugby website seems to list team standings (related to playoff places) rather than a true table sorted by the usual criteria. As such as of the end of round one, the Highlanders should be in 3rd place as conference leaders, despite their worse points difference over the Brumbies. I sugest wikipedia should also reflect this change in presentation. --Evan Roberts (talk) 12:55, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
I preferred the table as it was previously, with the points column determining the standings. Just because you are a conference leader, doesn't mean you should get bumped up the table. if you have 16 points, you are above someone with 14 points. the colour-coding makes it obvious who is a conference leader. surely someone who finishes on say 14 points shouldn't be credited with finishing "Third in the regular season." 18.104.22.168 (talk) 06:48, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
- Actually, you DO get bumped up just because you're a conference leader, according to the rules. The three conference leaders will finish first, second and third in the combined table, regardless of how many points they have. According to http://www.superrugby.com/tables-standings.html -
The Super Rugby Standings to include:
* Three Conference Winners/Leaders in order
* Three Wildcard teams in order
* The remaining nine teams in order.
This is also clearly visible on these logs:
http://www.sarugby.co.za/logs.aspx?categoryid=sarugby/super14&leagueid=795&fullview=true TheMightyPeanut (talk) 10:14, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
Just want to throw this one out there. The official website as stated in the article is www.superxv.com. The official websites are actually www.superrugby.co.nz, www.superrugby.com.au, and I'm not sure about South Africa. This should be changed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 13:39, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
- Agree. I removed it for now, the three websites are still linked under External Links. This  might be the most official Super Rugby site in South Africa? AIRcorn (talk) 20:18, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
- The SA equivalent is http://www.supersport.co.za/rugby Comes.amanuensis (talk) 14:48, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
Byes in Table
- A bye is simply when there's no scheduled game for a team during that round. According to the rules, teams will get 4 points for a bye in any round.TheMightyPeanut (talk) 12:32, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
Official Site stats as follows: (from: http://www.superxv.com/about/index.asp)
Team Three v Team Six - (QF1)
Also in week 1 the team placed fourth at the end of the regular season will play the fifth placed team.
Team Four v Team Five - (QF2)
The winners of the first week of play offs then go through to face the first and second placed team who had just had the week off in the semi-finals.
Team One v Winner (QF2)
Team Two vs Winner (QF1)
The first placed team from the regular season will play the team who won the match between the fourth and fifth placed teams in week 1 of the play offs..
The second placed team from the regular season plays the team that won the match between the third and sixth placed team. The final will be made up by the teams who won the semi-finals.
Whereas, Wikipedia stats:
In the semi-finals, the #2 conference winner will host the higher surviving seed from the first round, and the #1 conference winner will host the other first-round winner
The SuperXV's bracket is not similar to NFL's.
Is that right ? Can we fix the article ?
- http://www.superxv.com is not an official site. http://www.superrugby.com is the official Australian site, according to the rules on there, Wikipedia is correct - http://www.superrugby.com/finals-format.html. TheMightyPeanut (talk) 18:12, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
- Also note that this non-official site mentions the correct (?) structure on its fixtures page, http://www.superxv.com/fixtures/
- It's weird that there's so little official information on this. I've been unable to find how teams on the same points should be ranked, for example. 126.96.36.199 (talk) 10:00, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
Full names in the games section
Does anybody know why, in this article unlike most other related rugby ones, the player names are in full in the games section rather then just surnames? It makes the game reports rather crowded and seems to be against common practice. Calistemon (talk) 20:13, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
Bonus Points in Table
I propose combining BP1 and BP2 to just BP. Either that or include a link in the table that points to the website which uses BP1 and BP2. I tried to update the table and figuring out the bonus point column was too much of a headache. Also I am wondering if including a key for the letters would prove useful, especially for people who aren't familiar with rugby or sports in general. It is not immediately obvious what BP1 and BP2 are referring too (4 tries or <7 points). AIRcorn (talk) 23:59, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
- I agree - I'm looking at fixing that up. One more question - due to byes, it looks at the moment as if some teams have games in hand on other teams (while the points awarded for having byes mean teams are on level footing). Instead of having "Played - Won - Drawn - Lost", can we have something like "Games - Won - Drawn - Lost - Byes", where Games are Games Played plus Byes, so that eg. at the end of Round 7, all teams have completed 7 games?
- I personally wouldn't, having a column for rounds does it better. The teams do actually have a game in hand as all teams end up eventually playing the same number of games before the finals. However, it would be good to mention that four points are awarded for a bye in the points breakdown. AIRcorn (talk) 23:25, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia Homepage mention
Why isn't there any mention of the result of the Final on Wikipedia's Homepage? If the Netball Worlds are on there, then surely the Super Rugby should be there too. Can someone please recitfy this? Thanks. :-) Kiwibeca (talk) 13:21, 11 July 2011 (UTC)