There's a European final this weekend? Racing 92 vs Saracens match thread

irishbucsfan

Buer wrote: »

He's bizarrely ignored in Ireland. I can only guess it's slightly influenced by the fact that he's from NI (and therefore not as covered by the southern media).

Compare him to guys like COS (very hit and miss record with Quins) and ROG (has won nothing and is an assistant coach) who are regularly covered by the media and touted to be involved in top Irish jobs. Even Jackman who has a pretty poor record at Grenoble enjoys more positive press. A casual fan may not even have been aware an Irish coach was in charge of Saracens a few weeks ago.

Whilst McCall has already had a crack at a provincial gig, he has gone to another level completely in the past few years. I'm delighted for him.

McCall isn't really particularly media friendly and never has been, so from the media's perspective it does make sense to spend more time focusing on the guys who are. COS and ROG make themselves available.

Brewster

irishbucsfan wrote: »

McCall isn't really particularly media friendly and never has been, so from the media's perspective it does make sense to spend more time focusing on the guys who are. COS and ROG make themselves available.

McCall is ruthless, very focused guy. he has build and developed this team by himself. Nothing to do with Venter now. I just hope he has ambitions to coach us some day.

JPNelsforearm

Saracens are poison to watch, why would anyone wish for that, we are playing poison under Joe and have been for a while, McCall would be more of the same, bosh rugby.

irishbucsfan

Brewster wrote: »

McCall is ruthless, very focused guy. he has build and developed this team by himself. Nothing to do with Venter now. I just hope he has ambitions to coach us some day.

He hasn't built or developed the team by himself, that's an overstatement. But he's a very good coach and deserves recognition.

kilns

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

Saracens are poison to watch, why would anyone wish for that, we are playing poison under Joe and have been for a while, McCall would be more of the same, bosh rugby.

Most were very happy and not complaiming when Munster were playing "poison" rugby winning their Heiniken Cups

Crimsonforce

My distaste for Saracens began when they tried to drown out the Munster fans with that shyte song some years back...

That's said
Farrell, Kruis, ijtoe, Goode, mako vunipola all came through their academy

They have picked up some players from the 1st division league whilst dipping constantly into the south African well...

So it can't be really said they bought the cup. Whilst I'm no fan of them and hope Exeter win their league this season, they have brought through some good players....

Brewster

irishbucsfan wrote: »

He hasn't built or developed the team by himself, that's an overstatement. But he's a very good coach and deserves recognition.

Clearly there are other great coaches at the club, some have come and gone, but he does have overall responsibility at the end of the day. Sarries as a team have been building for years, he must get a lions share of the credit.

BBDBB

Saracens

6 hours after the finish, I still vote Racing

Halloween Jack

As a casual (at best) rugby fan, can i say that was a pitiful spectacle and as the notional pinnacle of the european club game, a tragedy for the sport. The paucity of imagination and attacking intent had me wondering what the hell i was doing wasting my time tuning in. I understand nit every game can be full of verve and flair especially in less than ideal conditions, but that was **** in a stick rugby, and as drama free a final as you could ever hope to see....

JPNelsforearm

kilns wrote: »

Most were very happy and not complaiming when Munster were playing "poison" rugby winning their Heiniken Cups

As a Leinster fan I was glad to actually enjoy watching rugby during that period and have fond memories, Bath, Toulouse, Agen, all great days, wonderful rugby. I wouldnt trade those memories for a tin pot and some reflected glory and nothing much else, poisonous rugby is poisonous rugby.

shootermacg

I'm starting to warm to Farrell. He has some Northern brogue on him! He played a great game and you could see how much it meant to him.

Utopia Parkway

Buer wrote: »

He's bizarrely ignored in Ireland. I can only guess it's slightly influenced by the fact that he's from NI (and therefore not as covered by the southern media).

Don't think it's that to be honest. I just don't think Saracens are very highly thought of in Ireland and are viewed as being a bit plasticy (rightly or wrongly). Whereas Quins would be seen as a traditional old English club in comparison. People just don't like Saracens. Even though they have actually developed many of their own players. They just can't shake that stink.

phog

I only saw some of the 2nd half and thought Saracens fully deserved their win. Put pressure on Racing when they had the ball and played as much as possible in Racing's half of the field. Kicked their points too. Hard to argue with the win.

Rightwing

Rightwing wrote: »

Agreed. I fancy Sarries to win, but I wonder will it be a sell out or even close to it?

Biggest club competition?.. perhaps, but it's quickly losing its lustre.

Nailed it. Racing found out at the highest level.

Sarries the only to win all their games en route to success.

Great champions, they compare very well to any of the other great sides who won it.

kilns

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

kilns wrote: »

Most were very happy and not complaiming when Munster were playing "poison" rugby winning their Heiniken Cups

As a Leinster fan I was glad to actually enjoy watching rugby during that period and have fond memories, Bath, Toulouse, Agen, all great days, wonderful rugby. I wouldnt trade those memories for a tin pot and some reflected glory and nothing much else, poisonous rugby is poisonous rugby.

And during this period Munster were the opposite to those types of teams, thats my point. But the whole of Ireland loved it.

Buer

Utopia Parkway wrote: »

Don't think it's that to be honest. I just don't think Saracens are very highly thought of in Ireland and are viewed as being a bit plasticy (rightly or wrongly). Whereas Quins would be seen as a traditional old English club in comparison. People just don't like Saracens. Even though they have actually developed many of their own players. They just can't shake that stink.

I reckon there's more to it. I don't think the casual fan really is too aware of the traditions of respective clubs. I do think there's a level of bitterness among the media in this part of the world towards the demise of the HEC though which is possibly manifesting itself in the coverage of McCall.

Obviously Saracens are getting a lot of coverage now. The Indo and IT sports sections on their sites have two articles each on Saracens win yesterday.

How many times do they mention an Irish man leading them to the European title? Zero. His name does not feature a single time in any of the articles. It's bizarre.

Glad I 'watched' this on the radio in the back garden in the sunshine with a pint of G&T instead of using my eyes.

Bazzo

Saracens

Deleted User wrote: »

Glad I 'watched' this on the radio in the back garden in the sunshine with a pint of G&T instead of using my eyes.

Somebody doesn't **** around when it comes to Saturday R&R :pac:

Brewster

Buer wrote: »

I reckon there's more to it. I don't think the casual fan really is too aware of the traditions of respective clubs. I do think there's a level of bitterness among the media in this part of the world towards the demise of the HEC though which is possibly manifesting itself in the coverage of McCall.

Obviously Saracens are getting a lot of coverage now. The Indo and IT sports sections on their sites have two articles each on Saracens win yesterday.

How many times do they mention an Irish man leading them to the European title? Zero. His name does not feature a single time in any of the articles. It's bizarre.

Nail on head. Usually the media make such a song and dance about these issues, it's so over the top sometimes. We have the best young Irish coach emerging for many a year and he gets ignored? I, for one, can't understand it. I don't believe for a second it's because he is from Ulster. Could you imagine the coverage Conor O'Shea would get? And I'm taking nothing away from Conor who is an absolute gent. McCall simply a better coach, has been for a while.

irishbucsfan

https://twitter.com/rpetty80/status/731768281531613185

Here is how Sarries stack up against previous winners statistically.

Larbre34

Depressing how poor the European cup product has become under the new regime. Whether its being run into the ground on purpose or not is unclear yet, but being run into the ground it is.

The trans-continental game had its best days under the ERC and as many of us feared, the spirit has been lost. I wonder do Sarries even give that much of a frig that they finally won it eventually.

irishbucsfan

Larbre34 wrote: »

Depressing how poor the European cup product has become under the new regime. Whether its being run into the ground on purpose or not is unclear yet, but being run into the ground it is.

The trans-continental game had its best days under the ERC and as many of us feared, the spirit has been lost. I wonder do Sarries even give that much of a frig that they finally won it eventually.

Well that's a load of ****e anyway.

irishbucsfan

Saracens

irishbucsfan wrote: »

https://twitter.com/rpetty80/status/731768281531613185

Here is how Sarries stack up against previous winners statistically.

I can't really find any significant pattern in that

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

I can't really find any significant pattern in that

practically useless statistics to compare on too tbh. Presence of some fairly serious outliers...

Oyonnax contribution removed would make a significant dent in those averages. Do the same for the other years and the 'superiority' that is being attempted to be shown will probably fall apart. Oyonnax conceded 30 tries in the tournament, only 3 less than Treviso.

http://www.skysports.com/rugby-union/saracens-vs-oyonnax/73341

http://www.skysports.com/rugby-union/oyonnax-vs-saracens/73336

15 of Saracens tries and 100 of their points came against them.

So 11 tries in their other pool 4 games (120 points), and 4 tries in the 3 knock out games (74 points).

15 tries in 7 games (for a still reasonable 2.15 tries per game), and 194 points in 7 (for a very solid 27.7 points per game).

irishbucsfan

[Deleted User] wrote: »

practically useless statistics to compare on too tbh. Presence of some fairly serious outliers...

Oyonnax contribution removed would make a significant dent in those averages. Do the same for the other years and the 'superiority' that is being attempted to be shown will probably fall apart. Oyonnax conceded 30 tries in the tournament, only 3 less than Treviso.

http://www.skysports.com/rugby-union/saracens-vs-oyonnax/73341

http://www.skysports.com/rugby-union/oyonnax-vs-saracens/73336

15 of Saracens tries and 100 of their points came against them.

So 11 tries in their other pool 4 games (120 points), and 4 tries in the 3 knock out games (74 points).

15 tries in 7 games (for a still reasonable 2.15 tries per game), and 194 points in 7 (for a very solid 27.7 points per game).

I don't think that guy is saying they're superior to anyone, pretty sure he did the same statistics last year, or someone did.

Its interesting nonetheless, I would have thought Leinster were a lot more prolific than Wasps for example if I was to recall those seasons off the top of my head (particularly remembering our demolition of Racing and Saracens when we played them)

Yeah_Right

Saracens

keith16 wrote: »

Farrell I think has a nasty streak to him, but not the kind of one that helps á la Richie McCaw.

Can you expand on this? What sort of nasty streak are you talking about?

crisco10

Deleted User wrote: »

I can't really find any significant pattern in that

No not really. Given Sarries were the first team to win 9 from 9, I'd be surprised if they weren't up there..I assume the point is that Sarries have scored more than most other winning teams?

Really weird that no one seems to mention Mark McCall with Sarries. I've mentioned it to a fair few people (most reasonable rugby fans, if not that interested in EPL) this weekend and very few have known or realised that one Irish man did win the Champions Cup. Yet, everyone knows Peter Stringer got POTY for his club, or that COS lost the Challenge Cup final on Friday. It really is all media appetite for particular stories.

irishbucsfan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I don't think that guy is saying they're superior to anyone, pretty sure he did the same statistics last year, or someone did.

Its interesting nonetheless, I would have thought Leinster were a lot more prolific than Wasps for example if I was to recall those seasons off the top of my head (particularly remembering our demolition of Racing and Saracens when we played them)

They're a prime example of misapplication of statistics.

If McIlroy shoots 61 on the most beautiful day at Augusta, and the entire field is under par with a few 63s and 64s, is that more impressive than if Day goes around it the next year in 65 with the wind howling around corners and the rain smashing the course, and only one other player who's managed to break par?

If you simply compare the two numbers, McIlroy's shot far better than Day, but Day's score is far far better than McIlroy's when it you consider it against the context of the field.

Exactly the same thing going on here. Trying to present some sort of comparison where there is none without context.

irishbucsfan

Deleted User wrote: »

They're a prime example of misapplication of statistics.

If McIlroy shoots 61 on the most beautiful day at Augusta, and the entire field is under par with a few 63s and 64s, is that more impressive than if Day goes around it the next year in 65 with the wind howling around corners and the rain smashing the course, and only only other player who's managed to break par?

If you simply compare the two numbers, McIlroy's shot far better than Day, but Day's score is far far better than McIlroy's when it you consider it against the context of the field.

Exactly the same thing going on here. Trying to present some sort of comparison where there is none without context.

I think if you were to take the scores over 18 holes over 19 years at Augusta some people might be interested in seeing how it stacked up.

irishbucsfan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I think if you were to take the scores over 18 holes over 19 years at Augusta some people might be interested in seeing how it stacked up.

Ok.

Can I summarise this as "some people are interested in misapplication of statistics"?

Saracens scoring statistics are padded massively by the results vs Oyonnax.

irishbucsfan

Deleted User wrote: »

Ok.

Can I summarise this as "some people are interested in misapplication of statistics"?

It would be a misapplication if they were actually being applied in some way. Noone is claiming Wasps were the best champions while Bath were the worst?

irishbucsfan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

It would be a misapplication if they were actually being applied in some way.

Oh, that's odd. I recall them being placed in a table, presented as some form of comparison?

Which is what I took umbrage with, as they're rubbish as a comparison.

Deleted User wrote: »

practically useless statistics to compare on too tbh. Presence of some fairly serious outliers...

Deleted User wrote: »

They're a prime example of misapplication of statistics.
.......
Exactly the same thing going on here. Trying to present some sort of comparison where there is none without context.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Noone is claiming Wasps were the best champions while Bath were the worst?

There was also a Tin Man and a Lion as well as the scarecrow/straw man. She got home in the end when she tapped her heels together.

crisco10

For the craic, I did up Leinster stats for the 04/05 season, (the year they cruised through a group of Bath, Bourgoin & Treviso - then got thumped by an Ollie Smith inspired Leicester in the QF) Average score was 38.5, tries was 4.85.

If Leinster had won it that year, their score would have been sky high (if they had gone on to win the semi and finals 3-0 in each, they would still have average over 30 points and 4 tries a game) but that would soley have been down to Bourgoin and Treviso rolling over in Dublin. The statistic is useless when you include the group stages because of the disparity in quality of the opponents. What might be a useful stat to make the point he was trying to get at is maybe the average score and tries in the knockout stages..?

irishbucsfan

Deleted User wrote: »

Oh, that's odd. I recall them being placed in a table, presented as some form of comparison?

Which is what I took umbrage with, as they're rubbish as a comparison.







There was also a Tin Man and a Lion as well as the scarecrow/straw man. She got home in the end when she tapped her heels together.

This is a table of the average number of tries scored, average number of points scored and also the average winning margins. Sorted by date.

It's useful if you want to compare the average number of tries scored.

It's useful if you want to compare the average number of points scored.

It's useful if you want to compare the average winning margins.

irishbucsfan

crisco10 wrote: »

For the craic, I did up Leinster stats for the 04/05 season, (the year they cruised through a group of Bath, Bourgoin & Treviso - then got thumped by an Ollie Smith inspired Leicester in the QF) Average score was 38.5, tries was 4.85.

If Leinster had won it that year, their score would have been sky high (if they had gone on to win the semi and finals 3-0 in each, they would still have average over 30 points and 4 tries a game) but that would soley have been down to Bourgoin and Treviso rolling over in Dublin. The statistic is useless when you include the group stages because of the disparity in quality of the opponents. What might be a useful stat to make the point he was trying to get at is maybe the average score and tries in the knockout stages..?

You can't use statistics like this to compare the quality of the teams themselves at all.

The fairest way to actually try to compare the quality of the teams themselves would be using something like ELO, like 538 do for the NFL and many others do for baseball, and http://www.eloratings.net/ do for soccer. But that's an entirely different thing.

thomond2006

Saracens

In terms of ranking, does playoff finish or regular season finish determine ranking? I can't find it on the website.

irishbucsfan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

It's useful if you want to compare the average number of tries scored.

It's useful if you want to compare the average number of points scored.

It's useful if you want to compare the average winning margins.

So long as you fully understand that these metrics are absolutely terrible descriptors of the underlying information and so can never be considered in attempts to draw any inferences about that underlying information, then I guess that's probably okay *. That's a fairly monumental proviso that needs to be stuck in whenever referring to or considering them of course, which I doubt is ever likely to be actually considered.

If you seek to misapply statistics, and also understand that you are misapplying statistics, then I guess it's fine (*if pointless) to choose to misapply statistics. It is important however to never present anything other than the misapplication of said statistics as being shown by the statistics that you have chosen to misapply.

irishbucsfan

Deleted User wrote: »

So long as you fully understand that these metrics are absolutely terrible descriptors of the underlying information...

What underlying information are you on about?

irishbucsfan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

What underlying information are you on about?

The games of rugby.

former total

thomond2006 wrote: »

In terms of ranking, does playoff finish or regular season finish determine ranking? I can't find it on the website.

They go on playoffs.

awec

Playoff winner
Playoff runner up
Highest ranked losing semi finalist
Lowest ranked losing semi finalist
The rest

IMO it should be done on league position and ignore the playoffs. There has to be some recognition or reward for finishing top in the regular season.

awec

Deleted User wrote: »

Glad I 'watched' this on the radio in the back garden in the sunshine with a pint of G&T instead of using my eyes.

If you're a fan of rugby league you'd have loved it cause that's effectively what it was. Pass, bosh, repeat. Pass, bosh, repeat.

Awful rugby to watch, but not unique to Saracens or Racing unfortunately.

vienne86

Saracens

awec wrote: »

IMO it should be done on league position and ignore the playoffs. There has to be some recognition or reward for finishing top in the regular season.

I agree completely. The league position before the playoffs is a good indicator of form for the season. You could do well in the playoffs by being lucky with form for those couple of weeks, getting lucky with injuries etc.

paul68

For some reason i don't know why but since the heineken cup rebranded has the european champions cup it just hasn't had the same appeal

awec

paul68 wrote: »

For some reason i don't know why but since the heineken cup rebranded has the european champions cup it just hasn't had the same appeal

Probably not helped by the Irish teams being rubbish in it and having little to look forward to. All provinces got handed some beatings, nobody really looked like getting out of a pool (Ulster flirted with the idea at best). None of our teams are capable of winning it right now, a feeling we are unaccustomed to for the past number of years. I don't know if any of them will be good enough in the next few years either.

Also not helped by the dual TV deal which splits the audience. I used to be able to watch every single game, now I can only watch half of them. This mess was caused by the English having their wee hissy fit and signing their own deal before anything was worked out. Needs to be resolved when the renewals come up.

Digifriendly

Saracens

awec wrote: »

If you're a fan of rugby league you'd have loved it cause that's effectively what it was. Pass, bosh, repeat. Pass, bosh, repeat.

Awful rugby to watch, but not unique to Saracens or Racing unfortunately.

To be fair the awful conditions (especially in the first half) did not lend themselves to running rugby. Saracens are worthy winners and first side to win the cup with a 100% record.

BBDBB

Saracens

awec wrote: »

Probably not helped by the Irish teams being rubbish in it and having little to look forward to. All provinces got handed some beatings, nobody really looked like getting out of a pool (Ulster flirted with the idea at best). None of our teams are capable of winning it right now, a feeling we are unaccustomed to for the past number of years. I don't know if any of them will be good enough in the next few years either.

Also not helped by the dual TV deal which splits the audience. I used to be able to watch every single game, now I can only watch half of them. This mess was caused by the English having their wee hissy fit and signing their own deal before anything was worked out. Needs to be resolved when the renewals come up.

THIS^^^ in spades


though I cant help wondering if Wray et al will consider it a masterstroke rather than a hissy fit in the circumstances

Bazzo

Saracens

Yeah_Right wrote: »

Can you expand on this? What sort of nasty streak are you talking about?

I dunno what he means about McCaw, he never came across as nasty in any way to me. Borderline with the rules a lot but basically any world class 7 could be described that way.

As for Farrell, he probably doesn't have any more of a "nasty streak" than Sexton does tbh. Competitiveness or whatever, but Sexton gets a pass from everyone(including me) because he's Irish.

Maguined

awec wrote: »

Probably not helped by the Irish teams being rubbish in it and having little to look forward to. All provinces got handed some beatings, nobody really looked like getting out of a pool (Ulster flirted with the idea at best). None of our teams are capable of winning it right now, a feeling we are unaccustomed to for the past number of years. I don't know if any of them will be good enough in the next few years either.

Also not helped by the dual TV deal which splits the audience. I used to be able to watch every single game, now I can only watch half of them. This mess was caused by the English having their wee hissy fit and signing their own deal before anything was worked out. Needs to be resolved when the renewals come up.

The TV deal is definitely the biggest factor to me for less interest. When it was all under Sky I looked forward to watching games that did not involve any Irish sides as I was very interested in the competition as a whole regardless of Irish involvement. Having the games split reduced my interest levels to only watching a handful of games not involving the Irish sides.

I am honest in my dislike of Saracens. I do not like them as a club but I will also say they deserved to win as they were the best team in the cup. The cup as a whole is definitely diminished and not as interesting as it was when it was the Heineken thanks to the split coverage.

Dave_The_Sheep

Saracens

Bazzo wrote: »

As for Farrell, he probably doesn't have any more of a "nasty streak" than Sexton does tbh. Competitiveness or whatever, but Sexton gets a pass from everyone(including me) because he's Irish.

I don't think that's what people refer to when they talk about Farrell having a nasty streak, at least I wouldn't. It's not competitiveness, it's a tendency to leave a shoulder in late, or hit players slightly high or similar that Farrell seems to do on a regular basis. There's nearly always something with him - or at least there was until this year, I haven't watched much of him this year so I can't comment.

Sexton doesn't have the same tendency. He's just a narky f*cker.

Awec wrote:

Also not helped by the dual TV deal which splits the audience. I used to be able to watch every single game, now I can only watch half of them. This mess was caused by the English having their wee hissy fit and signing their own deal before anything was worked out. Needs to be resolved when the renewals come up.

Facilitated ably by their Welsh lapdogs, who blinked and broke ranks.

Anyways, the past is that past, but HC group stage weekends used to be fantastic days with rugby on the TV pretty much all day. You could sit down and watch a game Friday evening, then another three each on Saturday/Sunday. There was a real sense of following the whole competition. Now you might get to see half the games, split up and fractured. There isn't the same sense of continuity.

Doesn't help that Irish teams aren't doing well, but sure we can't always be top of the pile, or near to it. Even French audience numbers for the European Cup are way down, their TV rights changed recently as well - Top 14 and ECC is split between channels, and they're all just watching the Top14.