JUNIOR WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP 2008

Transcription

1 JUNIOR WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP 2008 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS IRB GAME ANALYSIS

2 The attached report does 3 things: 1 it reflects the shape of the Under 20 game as played in Junior World Championship it provides a basis whereby each participating country can compare its performance in major areas of the game with the other teams that played in the competition as well as perhaps being used to establish benchmarks and performance indicators for future tournaments. 3 it incorporates a comparison with the men s game as seen in IRB Rugby World Cup 2007

3 CONTENTS Page Commentary 1 Final Standings & Results 3 Summary 7 Section 1 Summary of Constituent Game Elements 8 Section 2 Statistical Analysis and Match Summary Scoring 12 Try Scoring 14 Tries 18 Kicks at Goal 25 Ball in Play 26 Activity Cycles 29 Restarts 39 Lineouts 40 Scrums 41 Penalties 42 Cards 43 Section 3 Team Statistical Summaries (16 teams) Section 4 A statistical comparison between Junior World championship 2008 and Rugby World Cup

4 COMMENTARY The inaugural JWC 2008 was won by New Zealand. They had an impressive tournament. all 5 matches were won with ease - with points margins of 25, 35,39,55 and 60 respectively the fewest number of tries scored in any game was 4 giving an average number of points scored per game of 48 only one try was conceded in the entire tournament thereby resulting in the best defensive record in the 2 play off games, 8 tries were scored, none were conceded and the final match was won by 38 points to 3. Certain other teams however also had an impressive playing record; South Africa won 4 games out of 5 and averaged over 50 points per game Australia also won 4 games out of 5 and averaged 44 points per game. The result was that the 37 tries scored by South Africa and the 33 scored by both New Zealand and Australia put these three teams way ahead of any other team. In addition, these three teams had the best defensive records. The team that ended second in the tournament was however England a team that scored far fewer tries and conceded noticeably more tries than any of the above three teams. There is however a likely explanation for this. England s last three matches were against Australia, South Africa and New Zealand, the three teams with the most impressive attacking and defensive records. Further, those three teams did not play each other once. In looking at the data therefore, the pattern of fixtures and strength of opposition is always relevant. The format of such a tournament means that a team can average over 40 points a game, lose only once by a charge down try in the last minute or so of a game and end up 5 th in the table which is exactly what happened to Australia in JWC In any rugby world championship at whatever level, male or female, the relative strengths of the participating teams can vary enormously. Tournaments frequently contain matches with points margins of around 100. This is hardly surprising. Not only do playing numbers vary enormously from country to country but the level of professionalism will have an inevitable impact. When a team that contains players playing professionally at the highest level finds itself opposed by a team who are completely amateur, the amateur team is likely to struggle. The data contained in the following report identifies this. It shows that while many teams finishing in the bottom half of the table manage to obtain an acceptable level of possession (New Zealand and the USA had the same amount), they find it difficult break defences and therefore end up scoring most of their points through penalty goals. They also find it difficult to sustain passing movements under opponents pressure and frequently average more kicks per game than the more successful teams as well as kicking at a higher rate. This problem with distribution can also manifest itself in try scoring. When tries are scored, they are IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 1

5 frequently scored with very few passes and rucks included in the build up; they start relatively close to the opponents goalline and are more likely to be scored by forwards. There are of course frequent exceptions to the above characteristics - which is one of the reasons why the game of rugby has such an exciting appeal. An example of this concerns the Pacific Islands. Fiji, Samoa and Tonga scored 24 of their 36 tries from over 40 metres out. This was in complete contrast to USA, Canada, Argentina and Italy who, between them, scored only 7 out of 28 tries from such a distance. Similarly, while Italy scored twice as many penalty goals as tries, Fiji on the other hand scored 5 times as many tries as penalty goals. There were also a range of other different approaches to the game Fiji tapped their penalties and free kicks on 25 occasions New Zealand tapped just twice Fiji scored 8 of their 13 tries from such taps. New Zealand, South Africa and Australia scored 102 tries but did not score a single try from a tap penalty or free kick On restarts, Argentina kicked long 25 times and short 10. Ireland did the complete opposite 10 long, 25 short Only 11 of Australia s passing movements had more than 3 passes. New Zealand and Ireland, on the other hand, had 40 and 29 respectively With almost identical possession, New Zealand made 357 more passes than Argentina or twice as many Only one team scored fewer second half tries than England who scored 80% of their tries in the first half While the average number of kicks per game was less than 50, the Ireland v Italy game contained 110 in 80 minutes a figure way above anything seen at any level over many years. All these facts and many others - are contained in the following report where the performance of each country in every major constituent element of the game is recorded IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 2

6 FINAL STANDINGS 1 st NEW ZEALAND 2 nd ENGLAND 3 rd SOUTH AFRICA 4 th WALES 5 th AUSTRALIA 6 th FRANCE 7 th SAMOA 8 th ARGENTINA 9 th IRELAND 10 th SCOTLAND 11 th ITALY 12 th CANADA 13 th TONGA 14 th FIJI 15 th JAPAN 16 th USA IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 3

7 POOL STANDINGS P W D L F A TF TC BP PTS New Zealand Argentina Ireland Tonga P W D L F A TF TC BP PTS South Africa Samoa Scotland USA P W D L F A TF TC BP PTS England Australia Canada Fiji P W D L F A TF TC BP PTS Wales France Italy Japan P=Played W=Won D=Draw L=Lost PF=Points For PA=Points Against TF=Tries For TA=Tries Against BP=Bonus Points PTS=Points IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 4

8 POOL RESULTS ROUND ONE New Zealand 48 Tonga 9 Ireland 9 Argentina 17 South Africa 108 USA 18 Scotland 17 Samoa 29 England 41 Fiji 17 Australia 81 Canada 12 France 53 Japan 17 Wales 29 Italy 10 ROUND TWO New Zealand 65 Ireland 10 Tonga 10 Argentina 30 South Africa 72 Scotland 3 USA 6 Samoa 20 England 60 Canada 18 Australia 53 Fiji 17 France 32 Italy 14 Wales 33 Japan 10 ROUND THREE New Zealand 60 Argentina 0 Ireland 45 Tonga 27 South Africa 16 Samoa 11 Scotland 41 USA 14 England 18 Australia 13 Fiji 10 Canada 17 France 19 Wales 23 Japan 20 Italy IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 5

9 PLAY OFF RESULTS New Zealand 31 Wales 6 England 26 South Africa 18 Australia 32 Samoa 0 France 30 Argentina 6 Scotland 15 Canada 10 Ireland 9 Italy 6 Tonga 17 Japan 5 USA 22 Fiji 27 New Zealand 38 England 3 South Africa 43 Wales 18 Australia 42 France 21 Argentina 10 Samoa 30 Ireland 39 Scotland 12 Italy 33 Canada 10 Fiji 20 Tonga 28 USA 8 Japan IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 6

10 SUMMARY The following Report is divided into 4 sections Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 takes a brief look at constituent game elements in JWC2008 and gives certain core data for each team. comprises a detailed statistical analysis of all matches played in the tournament, together with all the match results. contains a one-page-per-team summary of key statistics relating to each of the 16 participating teams comprises a short statistical comparison with RWC IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 7

11 SECTION 1 SUMMARY OF CONSTITUENT GAME ELEMENTS SUMMARY This was the first Junior World Championship u20 tournament. As a result, there are no detailed comparatives. The following data comes from the detailed report that follows and reflects in summary form the shape of the current junior game as expressed through JWC JWC 2008 Av POINTS per game 50 % of points from TRIES 65% Av TRIES per game 6.4 Av PENALTY GOALS per game 3.1 Av DROP GOALS 1 every 8 games TRIES SCORED BY BACKS 66% TRIES SCORED BY FORWARDS 32% PENALTY TRIES 2% MATCHES with points margin of 20 or less 19 or 48% MATCHES won by team scoring most tries 37 or 92% MATCHES where tries were equal 2 MATCHES won by team scoring least tries 1 CONVERSION SUCCESS RATE 61% PENALTY GOAL SUCCESS RATE 68% DROP GOAL SUCCESS RATE 5 out of 26 or 19% % of TRIES FROM LINEOUT POSSESSION 24% % of TRIES FROM SCRUM POSSESSION 22% % of TRIES FROM PENALTY/FREE KICKS 10% % of TRIES FROM TURNOVER/ERROR 18% % of TRIES FROM OPPONENTS KICKS 16% % OTHER (opp scrum / opp l out / restarts) 10% Av PASSES per game 200 Av RUCKS/MAULS per game 132 Av KICKS per game 49 Av BALL IN PLAY TIME 42% - or 33min 40secs % of all PASSES MADE BY BACKS 39% % of all PASSES MADE BY SCRUM HALF 45% % of all PASSES MADE BY FORWARDS 17% Av LINEOUTS per game 30 % of LINEOUT POSSESSION RETAINED 78% Av SCRUMS per game 21 % of SCRUM POSSESSION RETAINED 87% Av PENALTIES per game 25 % of RUCK/MAUL POSSESSION RETAINED 91% Total YELLOW AND RED CARDS Yellow = 48 Red = IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 8

12 SECTION 1 SUMMARY OF CONSTITUENT GAME ELEMENTS THE TEAMS PERFORMANCES This section comprises some brief highlights of each team s activities and performances in certain critical areas of the game. Again, further and far more extensive analysis can be found in the main report as well as in appendices on each country. Meanwhile, the number of tries scored by each team, the number conceded by each team and the number of penalty goals kicked is shown in the following table TRIES SCORED 2008 TRIES CONCEDED 2008 PENALTY GOALS 2008 DROP GOALS 2008 SOUTH AFRICA NEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIA ENGLAND FRANCE FIJI JAPAN WALES SCOTLAND SAMOA IRELAND TONGA ARGENTINA ITALY CANADA USA IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 9

13 SECTION 1 SUMMARY OF CONSTITUENT GAME ELEMENTS The table below shows (a) how effective each team was in converting possession into tries and (b) how effective each team was in preventing opponents from converting possession into tries. Try scoring Rate Try conceding Rate SOUTH AFRICA 1 try scored every 2m 07secs NEW ZEALAND 1 try conceded every 72m 10secs AUSTRALIA 2m 34secs SOUTH AFRICA 10m 29secs NEW ZEALAND 2m 37secs SAMOA 9m 47secs ENGLAND 4m 43secs AUSTRALIA 9m 10secs FRANCE 5m 02secs ITALY 9m 05secs JAPAN 5m 22secs ENGLAND 6m 52secs FIJI 5m 25secs FRANCE 6m 25secs SAMOA 6m 31secs IRELAND 6m 22secs WALES 6m 34secs WALES 5m 22secs SCOTLAND 7m 25secs ARGENTINA 4m 46secs TONGA 7m 35secs JAPAN 4m 25secs IRELAND 7m 45secs TONGA 4m 23secs ARGENTINA 12m 13secs SCOTLAND 4m 18secs USA 12m 16secs FIJI 4m 05secs CANADA 13m 19secs CANADA 3m 08secs ITALY 12m 28secs USA 2m 04secs : Each teams overall kicking success rate is shown in the attached table: Kick success IRELAND 81% WALES 78% FRANCE 75% NEW ZEALAND 70% ITALY 69% ARGENTINA 67% SOUTH AFRICA 65% CANADA 63% ENGLAND 61% AUSTRALIA 61% USA 60% JAPAN 56% TONGA 54% SCOTLAND 53% FIJI 47% SAMOA 41% IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 10

14 SECTION 1 SUMMARY OF CONSTITUENT GAME ELEMENTS The average time in possession of the ball per game by each team is shown in the following table: JWC 2008 FRANCE ENGLAND SCOTLAND CANADA NEW ZEALAND USA ARGENTINA WALES AUSTRALIA ITALY IRELAND SAMOA SOUTH AFRICA FIJI TONGA JAPAN 19m 07s 18m 53s 18m 15s 17m 46s!7m 15s 17m 11s 17m 06s 17m 05s 16m 58s 16m 17s 15m 56s 15m 39s 15m 39s 15m 11s 15m 09s 15m 01s The above data and additional data - on comparative aspects of key areas of play are shown in the main body of the report which now follows IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 11

15 SECTION 2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND MATCH SUMMARY SCORING There were 1985 points scored in the 40 matches played, giving an average of 50 points per game. They were made up as follows: Type of Score % of points scored by Tries Total Points % Converted Tries Unconverted Tries Penalty Goals Drop Goals 5 15 Total 1985 Of the total points scored: 65% came from TRIES 19% came from PENALTY GOALS 16% came from CONVERSIONS >1% came from DROP GOALS Points Makeup Penalty Goals 19% Drop Goals 1% Unconverted Tries 26% Converted Tries 54% WINNING MARGINS The winning margins in each of the 40 matches fell into the following ranges Points Difference in JWC 2008 Points Difference No of matches Cumulative with 5 points or less with 10 points or less with 15 points or less with 20 points or less with 30 points or less with 40 points or less with 50 points or less over IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 12

16 SECTION 2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND MATCH SUMMARY Not surprisingly, points scored and conceded varied considerably - and the total and average points scored and conceded by each team are shown below. Points for/against per Team Points For Points Against TOTAL AVERAGE TOTAL AVERAGE SOUTH AFRICA NEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIA FRANCE ENGLAND IRELAND WALES JAPAN TONGA FIJI SAMOA SCOTLAND ITALY USA CANADA ARGENTINA PENALTY GOALS There were 125 penalty goals kicked in the tournament. Only five teams scored more penalty goals than tries USA, Tonga, Italy, Canada and Ireland. All 5 teams ended in the bottom half of the table. There were some noticeable contrasts. While Italy scored over twice as many penalty goals as tries, Fiji scored almost 5 times as many tries as penalty goals. Penalties Goals Kicked Ratio PGs : Tries SOUTH AFRICA 5 1 : 7.4 AUSTRALIA 6 1 : 5.5 FIJI 3 1 : 4.7 JAPAN 3 1 : 4.7 SCOTLAND 3 1 : 4.3 NEW ZEALAND 11 1 : 3.0 ENGLAND 8 1 : 2.5 FRANCE 9 1 ; 2.1 SAMOA 7 1 : 1.7 WALES 8 1 : 1.6 ARGENTINA 5 1 : 1.4 CANADA 8 1 ; 0.9 TONGA 11 1 : 0.9 IRELAND 13 1 : 0.8 USA 9 1 ; 0.8 ITALY 16 1 : IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 13

17 SECTION 2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND MATCH SUMMARY IMPACT OF THE PENALTY GOAL ON MATCH RESULTS Tries win matches - in the Junior World Championship 2008, the winning team scored the most tries in 37 of the 40 matches or in 93%. In two games, the tries were equal and in another, one team scored fewer tries than their opponents and won the game (Canada v Fiji) TRY SCORING Tries most in one game 18 South Africa v USA Tries least in one game 0 Ireland v Italy Tries average per game 6.4 The total number of tries, penalty goals and drop goals scored by each country in JWC 2008 was as follows: Total Tries/Penalty Goals/Drop goals per Team plus % of points from tries and kicks Tries Penalty Drop % of points % of points Goals Goals from Tries from Kicks SOUTH AFRICA % 25% NEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIA ENGLAND FRANCE FIJI JAPAN WALES SCOTLAND SAMOA IRELAND TONGA CANADA ARGENTINA ITALY USA IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 14

18 SECTION 2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND MATCH SUMMARY RATE OF TRY SCORING An earlier table shows the number of tries scored by each country.the table does not show however how effective each team was in scoring tries in relation to the possession that it obtained. A team may obtain little possession but still manage to score a significant number of tries. The following paragraphs consider this and attempt to show how successful each team was in converting possession into tries. This was done by adding together the time each team was in possession of the ball in each of the matches played and then dividing it by the number of tries scored. The result then gave a rate of try scoring or a measure of how effective each country was in converting possession into tries. Rate of try scoring per Team Individual matches (no of tries scored) Total Tries Scored Try scoring rate JWC 2008 SOUTH AFRICA 2,2,7,10, try every scored 2m 07secs AUSTRALIA 1,4,6,9, m 34secs NEW ZEALAND 4,4,7,9,9 33 2m 37secs ENGLAND 0,2,3,6,9 20 4m 43secs FRANCE 1,3,3,4,8, 19 5m 02secs JAPAN 1,2,2,3,6 14 5m 22secs FIJI 2,2,2,3,5 14 5m 25secs SAMOA 0,1,3,3,5 12 6m 31secs WALES 0,2,2,4,5 13 6m 34secs SCOTLAND 0,2,2,3,6 13 7m 25secs TONGA 0,1,2,3,4 10 7m 35secs IRELAND 0,0,1,5,5 11 7m 45secs ARGENTINA 0,0,1,2,4 7 12m 13secs USA 0,1,1,2,3 7 12m 16secs ITALY 0,1,1,2,3 7 12m 28secs CANADA 1,1,1,2,2 7 13m 19secs IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 15

19 SECTION 2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND MATCH SUMMARY RATE OF TRY CONCEDING Following the above exercise, the converse was looked at ie. how effective was each team in restricting tries in relation to the possession that their opponents obtained. The following paragraph tries to measure this by illustrating how successful each team was in preventing their opposition from converting possession into tries. This was done by adding together the total time the team s opponents were in possession of the ball - and then dividing it by the number of tries conceded. The result then gave a rate of try scoring by the opposition. As an illustration of this, France conceded a try for every 6m 25seconds possession obtained by their opponents. In USA s case, however, their opponents scored one try for every 2m 04seconds possession. Rate of try conceding per Team Individual matches (no of tries conceded) Total tries conceded Try conceding rate JWC 2008 NEW ZEALAND 0,0,0,0,1 1 1 try conceded every 72m 10secs SOUTH AFRICA 0,1,2,2,3 8 10m 29secs SAMOA 0,1,2,2,4 9 9m 47secs AUSTRALIA 0,2,2,2,3 9 9m 10secs ITALY 0,1,2,4,4 11 9m 05secs ENGLAND 1,2,2,3,4 12 6m 52secs FRANCE 0,1,2,3,6 12 6m 25secs IRELAND 0,2,2,2,9 15 6m 22secs WALES 1,1,2,4,7 15 5m 22secs ARGENTINA 0,1,3,5,9 18 4m 46secs JAPAN 1,2,3,5,8 19 4m 25secs TONGA 1,2,4,5,7 19 4m 23secs SCOTLAND 1,1,3,5, m 18secs FIJI 1,3,4,6,9 23 4m 05secs CANADA 2,3,3,9, m 08secs USA 3,5,6,6, m 04secs IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 16

20 SECTION 2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND MATCH SUMMARY PLAYERS AND TRIES It has been noted above that there were 257 tries scored in the 40 matches: Penalty Tries 2% 171 or 66% of tries were scored by Backs 82 or 32% of tries were scored by Forwards 4 or 2% were penalty tries Forw ards 32% Backs 66% The breakdown between the 16 competing teams is shown below: Tries scored by Backs and Forwards per Team Tries by Backs % by Backs Tries by Forwards % by Forwards Pen Tries % Pen Tries Total SOUTH AFRICA 22 59% 15 41% 37 NEW ZEALAND 25 76% 8 24% 33 AUSTRALIA 22 67% 10 30% 1 3% 33 ENGLAND 16 80% 4 20% 20 FRANCE 11 58% 8 42% 19 FIJI 10 71% 4 29% 14 JAPAN 6 43% 7 50% 1 7% 14 WALES 10 77% 2 15% 1 8% 13 SCOTLAND 9 69% 4 31% 13 SAMOA 8 67% 4 33% 12 IRELAND 9 81% 2 18% 11 TONGA 5 50% 5 50% 10 ITALY 4 57% 3 43% 7 ARGENTINA 7 100% 0 0% 7 USA 2 29% 4 57% 1 14% 7 CANADA 5 71% 2 29% 7 Of tries scored by the top 4 teams New Zealand, England, South Africa and Wales 72% were scored by backs. By contrast, the comparable figure for the bottom 4 teams USA, Japan, Fiji and Tonga - was 51% IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 17

21 SECTION 2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND MATCH SUMMARY 1. SOURCE OF TRIES There were 257 tries scored in JWC TRIES The teams scoring the tries obtained possession of the ball prior to the scoring of the try from a variety of sources. This is shown in the following table: The source of possession from which tries were scored was as follows: Possession source JWC 2008 Lineout Own 24% Scrum Own 22% Turnover/Handling Error 18% Opponents Kick 16% Penalty/Free Kick 10% Lineout - Opp 6% Restart Opp 2% Scrum Opp 2% The following table shows the possession source from which tries were scored by the 16 teams: Source of Tries Scored per Team Lineout Scrum Pen/ FK Kick Turnover Restart Total Scored SOUTH AFRICA NEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIA ENGLAND FRANCE JAPAN WALES SCOTLAND FIJI SAMOA IRELAND TONGA CANADA ITALY ARGENTINA USA An interesting statistic from the above schedule is that Fiji scored 8 of their 13 tries from tap penalties and free kicks. This contrasts with New Zealand, South Africa and Australia who, while scoring 102 tries did not score a single one from a quickly taken penalty IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 18

22 SECTION 2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND MATCH SUMMARY The next table shows the possession source from which their opponent s tries came: Source of Tries Conceded per Team Lineout Scrum Pen/ FK Kick Turnover Restart Total Conceded NEW ZEALAND SOUTH AFRICA SAMOA AUSTRALIA ENGLAND ITALY FRANCE WALES IRELAND ARGENTINA TONGA JAPAN SCOTLAND FIJI CANADA USA ORIGIN OF TRIES Tries originate from various parts of the pitch this is illustrated below: OWN HALF HW to 10m 10m to 22m 22m to TRY LINE 24% 12% 25% 39% 62 Tries 30 Tries 63 Tries 102 Tries The origin is that point on the pitch where the team scoring last obtained possession before scoring a try IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 19

23 SECTION 2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND MATCH SUMMARY Origin of Tries scored per team Own Halfway 10m to 22m to Total Half to 10m 22m Try-line Scored SOUTH AFRICA NEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIA ENGLAND FRANCE FIJI JAPAN WALES SCOTLAND SAMOA IRELAND TONGA CANADA ARGENTINA ITALY USA The following table provides the converse to the above ie. It shows for each team the origin of all tries conceded. This shows for example that Ireland, unlike any other team, conceded well over half their tries from 40 metres or more Origin of Tries conceded per team Opp Half Halfway to 10m 10m to 22m 22m to Try-line Total Conceded NEW ZEALAND SOUTH AFRICA AUSTRALIA SAMOA ITALY ENGLAND FRANCE WALES IRELAND ARGENTINA TONGA JAPAN SCOTLAND FIJI CANADA USA IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 20

24 SECTION 2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND MATCH SUMMARY 3. TRY LOCATIONS The chart below indicates where across the goal-line tries were scored. It shows that: 13% were scored under the posts 41% the left side of the posts, and 46% on the right side of the posts. Overall position of tries scored (%) 30 Tries 12% 43 Tries 17% 31 Tries 12% 32 Tries 13% 37 Tries 14% 51 Tries 20% 30 Tries 12% 4. BUILD-UP TO TRIES Possession of the ball that leads to tries is obtained from a number of sources and they are listed above. More often than not, other actions second phase, kicks and passes then take place before the try is scored. The first table below shows the number of rucks and mauls (2 nd phase) that preceded each of the 257tries scored in JWC Build Up to Tries - Ruck/Mauls Number % Cumulative % 0 R/Ms 94 37% 30% 1 R/Ms 73 28% 65% 2 R/Ms 34 13% 78% 3 R/Ms 20 8% 86% 4 R/Ms 13 5% 91% 5 R/Ms 10 4% 95% 6 R/Ms ) 2% 97% 7 R/Ms ) 13 8 R/Ms ) 1% 98% 9 R/Ms ) 10+ R/Ms ) 2% 100% Total % The table shows that 86% of tries were preceded by 3 or fewer second phases IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 21

25 SECTION 2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND MATCH SUMMARY The next table below shows the number of passes that preceded each of the 257 tries scored in JWC 2008 Build Up to Tries - Passes Number % Cumulative % 0 pass 55 21% 21% 1 pass 33 13% 34% 2 passes 39 15% 49% 3 passes 36 14% 63% 4 passes 31 12% 75% 5 passes 20 8% 83% 6 passes 9 4% 87% 7 passes 8 3% 90% 8 passes 7 3% 93% 9 passes 8 3% 96% 10 +passes 11 4% 100% Total % The table shows that 63% of tries were preceded by 3 or fewer passes. This was not a figure that was seen consistently throughout all teams. In Canada s case for example, 4 of their 7 tries contained no passes and only one had more than two and 5 of the 7 tries contained no rucks IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 22

26 SECTION 2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND MATCH SUMMARY TIMING OF SCORES - TRIES 47% of tries were scored in the first half - 53% in the second half. The following table breaks down these figures further and shows the halves in which teams scored tries and the halves which they conceded tries. 1st Half 47% 2nd Half 53% Timing of Tries Scored and Conceded per Team Tries scored 1st half Tries scored 2nd half Tries conceded 1st half Tries conceded 2nd half NEW ZEALAND ENGLAND SOUTH AFRICA WALES AUSTRALIA FRANCE SAMOA ARGENTINA IRELAND SCOTLAND (ET) 6 14 ITALY CANADA (ET) TONGA FIJI JAPAN USA Only 4 of the 16 teams scored the majority of their tries in the first half. One interesting point arose despite England reaching the final, only one team scored fewer second half tries than England and that was Argentina IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 23

27 SECTION 2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND MATCH SUMMARY TIMING OF SCORES - PENALTY GOALS There was a noticeable difference between the time when tries were scored and the time when penalties were kicked. While 47% of tries were scored in the first half, the equivalent first half penalty count was 69%. 2nd Half 31% The following chart shows the number of penalties kicked and conceded by each team divided into 1 st half and 2 nd half: 1st Half 69% Timings of Penalty Goals kicked and Conceded per Team PGs scored 1st half PGs scored 2nd half PGs conceded 1st half PGs conceded 2nd half NEW ZEALAND ENGLAND SOUTH AFRICA WALES AUSTRALIA FRANCE SAMOA ARGENTINA IRELAND (ET) 8 2 SCOTLAND ITALY (ET) CANADA TONGA FIJI JAPAN USA IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 24

28 SECTION 2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND MATCH SUMMARY KICKS AT GOAL Kicking success rates were as follows: Kicking success rates Conversions 61% Penalty goals 68% Drop goals 19% - 5 out of 26 Map of Conversion Success 32/73 44% 26/31 84% 32/32 100% 26/37 70% 39/80 The kicking success for penalty goals, conversions and drop kicks of each of the participating countries is shown below. The table gives the kicking success rate of each participating team. The percentages should however only be regarded as indicative since success depends on a number of factors. Some tries are scored near the touchline others under the post. Further, when few kicks at goal are taken, the success or failure of relatively few can have a disproportionate effect on percentages. Certain teams may take tap penalties, scrums and lineouts instead of eminently kickable penalties. Other teams may chose to kick for goal whenever 3 points are more or less guaranteed. The table should therefore be looked at within such potential constraints. Kicks at Goal Success 49% Penalty Success % Conversion Success % Overall Success % Drop goal Success IRELAND 81% 82% 81% 0 of 2 WALES of 2 FRANCE of 5 NEW ZEALAND of 1 ITALY of 1 ARGENTINA of 2 SOUTH AFRICA of 1 CANADA if 2 AUSTRALIA of 0 ENGLAND of 1 USA of 0 JAPAN of 1 TONGA of 2 SCOTLAND of 3 FIJI of 0 SAMOA of 3 There were just 5 successful drop goals from 26 attempts. 5 teams attempted none while France attempted 5 and succeeded once IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 25

29 SECTION 2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND MATCH SUMMARY BALL IN PLAY In percentage terms, JWC 2008 matches produced an average ball in play time of 33min 40secs or 42% The highest Ball in play figure was 51% or 40 mins 30 secs (Fiji v Canada) The lowest Ball in play figure was 34% or 27 mins 01 secs (NZ v Ireland) In percentage terms, the 2008 matches produced the following ball in play times Ball in Play % and Times per match MATCH BALL IN PLAY % BALL IN PLAY TIME FIJI v CANADA 51% 40min 30s AUSTRALIA v ENGLAND 49 39min 06s IRELAND v ITALY 47 37min 55s SCOTLAND v CANADA 47 37min 41s ARGENTINA v IRELAND 46 37min 01s ENGLAND v CANADA 45 36min 14s WALES v ITALY 45 36min 05s WALES v FRANCE 45 35min 56s NEW ZEALAND v ENGLAND 45 35min 52s ARGENTINA v FRANCE 44 35min 24s USA v FIJI 44 35min 19s SAMOA v SCOTLAND 44 35min 06s FRANCE v AUSTRALIA 44 34min 48s SOUTH AFRICA v SAMOA 43 34min 36s ENGLAND v SOUTH AFRICA 43 34min 23s NEW ZEALAND v WALES 43 34min 21s IRELAND v SCOTLAND 43 34min 20s ITALY v CANADA 43 34min 11s JAPAN v ITALY 42 33min 50s SCOTLAND v USA 42 33min 34s FRANCE v ITALY 42 33min 34s TONGA v JAPAN 42 33min 32s ARGENTINA v TONGA 42 33min 22s NEW ZEALAND v ARGENTINA 41 33min 01s IRELAND v TONGA 41 32min 57s FRANCE v JAPAN 41 32min 52s SAMOA v AUSTRALIA 41 32min 44s SAMOA v ARGENTINA 41 32min 36s SOUTH AFRICA v SCOTLAND 40 32min 13s AUSTRALIA v FIJI 40 31min 50s SOUTH AFRICA v USA 40 31min 36s SAMOA v USA 39 31min 17s ENGLAND v FIJI 39 31min 14s FIJI v TONGA 39 30min 57s WALES v JAPAN 38 30min 25s AUSTRALIA v CANADA 36 28min 53s JAPAN v USA 36 28min 37s WALES v SOUTH AFRICA 36 29min 11s NEW ZEALAND v TONGA 35 28min 10s NEW ZEALAND v IRELAND 34 27min 01s IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 26

30 SECTION 2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND MATCH SUMMARY The following tables show how much possession was obtained by each team in the 40 matches. There are some noticeable differences. At one extreme, in the Wales v Italy match, Wales had the ball in their possession twice as long as their opponents. Possession % and Times per team per match POOL A MATCH B-I-P % NZL TON ARG IRE NZL v TON 28min 10s 35% POOL B RSA v USA 31min 36s 40% 16m 59 60% 11m 11 40% ARG v IRE 37min 01s 46% 17m 31 19m 30 47% 53% ARG v TON 33min 22s 42% 14m 31 18m 51 44% 56% NZL v IRE 27min 01s 34% 15m 10 11m 51 56% 44% IRE v TON 32min 57s 41% 19m 12 13m 45 58% 42% NZL v ARG 33min 01s 41% 17m 16 15m 45 52% 48% MATCH B-I-P % RSA USA SAM SCO 14m 25 17m 11 46% 54% SAM v SCO 35min 06s 44% SAM v USA 31min 17s 39% POOL C AUS v CAN 28min 53s 36% 14m 39 47% 14m 35 42% 16m 38 53% 20m 31 58% RSA v SCO 32min 13s 40% 15m 54 16m 19 49% 51% SCO v USA 33min 34s 42% 18m 07 15m 46 54% 46% RSA v SAM 34min 36s 43% 19m 19 15m 17 56% 44% MATCH B-I-P % AUS CAN ENG FIJI 15m 06 13m 47 52% 48% ENG v FJI 31min 14s 39% ENG v CAN 36min 14s 45% 18m 39 51% 19m 27 62% 17m 35 49% 11m 47 38% AUS v FJI 31min 50s 40% 17m 15 14m 35 54% 46% AUS v ENG 39min 06s 49% 19m 14 19m 52 49% 51% FJI v CAN 40min 30s 51% 20m 45 19m 45 51% 49% MATCH B-I-P % FRA JAP WAL ITA POOL D FRA v JAP 32min 52s 41% 19m 45 13m 07 60% 40% WAL v ITA 36min 05s 45% 24m 03 12m 02 67% 33% FRA v ITA 33min 34s 42% 18m 39 14m 55 56% 44% WAL v JAP 30min 25s 38% 15m 47 14m 38 52% 48% JAP v ITA 33min 50s 42% 14m 24 19m 26 43% 57% WAL v FRA 35min 56s 45% 20m 02 15m 54 56% 44% IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 27

31 PLAY OFFS SECTION 2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND MATCH SUMMARY Possession % and Times per team per match MATCH B-I-P % TEAM TEAM TON v JAP 33min 32s 42% TON 18m 25 55% JAP SCO v CAN 37min 41s 47% SCO 20m 07 53% CAN ARG v FRA 35min 24s 44% ARG 17m 38 50% FRA SAM v AUS 32min 44s 41% SAM 14m 52 45% AUS USA v FJI 35min 19s 44% USA 24m 02 68% FJI IRE v ITA 37min 55s 47% IRE 19m 02 50% ITA NZL v WAL 34min 21s 43% NZL 19m 56 58% WAL ENG v RSA 34min 23s 45% ENG 18m 29 54% RSA MATCH B-I-P % TEAM TEAM 15 th /16 th JAP v USA 28min 37s 36% JAP 13 th /14 th FJI v TON 30min 57s 39% FJI 11 th /12 th ITA v CAN 34min 11s 43% ITA 9 th /10 th IRE v SCO 34min 20s 43% IRE 7 th /8 th SAM v ARG 32min 36s 41% SAM 5 th /6 th FRA v AUS 34min 48s 44% FRA 3 rd /4 th WAL v RSA 29min 11s 36% WAL 1 st /2 nd NZL v ENG 35min 52s 45% NZL 16m 40 58% 18m 29 60% 16m 08 47% 15m 30 45% 16m 51 52% 19m 25 56% 16m 27 56% 16m 54 47% 15m 07 45% 17m 34 47% 17m 46 50% 17m 52 55% 11m 17 32% 18m 53 50% 14m 25 42% 15m 54 44% USA 11m 57 42% TON 12m 28 40% CAN 18m 03 53% SCO 18m 50 55% ARG 15m 45 48% AUS 15m 23 44% RSA 12m 44 44% ENG 18m 58 53% As a formula for winning, having the most possession is not always a guarantee of success. In JWC 2008, the winning team had the most possession in 22 of the 40 games IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 28

32 SECTION 2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND MATCH SUMMARY The following table is a summary of the above, showing the overall average possession time obtained by all 16 teams: FRANCE ENGLAND SCOTLAND CANADA NEW ZEALAND USA ARGENTINA WALES AUSTRALIA ITALY IRELAND SOUTH AFRICA SAMOA FIJI TONGA JAPAN Average Possession 19m 07s 18m 53s 18m 15s 17m 46s 17m 15s 17m 11s 17m 06s 17m 05s 16m 58s 16m 17s 15m 56s 15m 39s 15m 39s 15m 11s 15m 09s 15m 01s ACTIVITY CYCLES Activity cycles comprise - ruck/mauls, passes, and kicks. The following paragraphs show the number of rucks/mauls, passes and kicks made in JWC Summary Average per match JWC 2008 Passes 200 Rucks/Mauls 132 Kicks IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 29

33 PASSING SECTION 2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND MATCH SUMMARY Games, on average, contained 200 passes The most in any game was 259 (Ireland v Scotland) the least was 136 (England v South Africa). The most by any team in a game was 182 the fewest, 51. The following table shows the average passes per game per team Average Passes per Team per game JWC 2008 NEW ZEALAND 144 FRANCE 114 SCOTLAND 112 IRELAND 107 SAMOA 105 AUSTRALIA 102 ITALY 102 TONGA 101 WALES 99 ENGLAND 97 USA 96 SOUTH AFRICA 91 JAPAN 90 FIJI 84 CANADA 81 ARGENTINA 73 Again, there were noticeable differences between the 16 teams with New Zealand making twice as many passes as Argentina despite having a similar level of possession. A team may also make more passes than another simply because it had more possession. When an adjustment is made to take account of this, then the above table changes albeit slightly. This next table now shows the average number of passes per minute s possession ie the rate of passing IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 30

34 SECTION 2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND MATCH SUMMARY Rate of Passing per Team (passes per minutes possession ) JWC 2008 NEW ZEALAND 8.4 TONGA 6.8 SAMOA 6.7 IRELAND 6.7 ITALY 6.3 SCOTLAND 6.1 AUSTRALIA 6.0 JAPAN 6.0 WALES 5.8 SOUTH AFRICA 5.8 USA 5.6 FIJI 5.5 ENGLAND 5.1 FRANCE 5.0 CANADA 4.6 ARGENTINA 4.3 Under this method of calculation, when passing is related to possession, then France, for example, while they made over 50% more passes than Argentina, passed at a rate that was only 16% higher. The number of passes made by a team can also vary considerably from match to match. The following table shows the average number of passes per country per game as shown above together with the most in a game and the least in a game Average, Most and Least per Team Average Most Least Difference NEW ZEALAND FRANCE SCOTLAND IRELAND SAMOA ITALY AUSTRALIA TONGA WALES ENGLAND USA SOUTH AFRICA JAPAN FIJI CANADA ARGENTINA IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 31

35 SECTION 2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND MATCH SUMMARY It can be seen from the table that there were noticeable contrasts between the highs and lows of certain teams. In Ireland s case, for example, they made 100 more passes in their highest passing game compared to their lowest. PLAYER PASSING Total passes made in the championship were broken down into 3 groups: Passes made by forwards Passes made by the scrum half Passes made by backs All the passes made in JWC 2008 have been allocated into these 3 groups, and are shown in the attached table: The percentages for each country in each of the categories are shown below: JWC 2008 Passing % by forwards 17% Passing % by scrum half 45% Passing % by backs 39% 100% Total number of passes made by Forwards/Scrum Half/Backs per Team Passes by Forwards Passes by Scrum half Passes by Backs NEW ZEALAND ENGLAND SOUTH AFRICA WALES AUSTRALIA FRANCE SAMOA ARGENTINA IRELAND SCOTLAND ITALY CANADA TONGA FIJI JAPAN USA What the above table shows is the number of passes made by the three groups of players. It simply shows how active they were in passing the ball. The following table takes this further. It shows the proportion of a team s passes made by each group. In other words of all the passes made by a team, what proportion were made by the forwards? what proportion by the scrum half? and what proportion by the backs. Such tables can show if certain teams use forwards more as suppliers of the ball for onward transmission by the backs, rather than the forwards themselves being more involved in the distribution process IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 32

36 SECTION 2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND MATCH SUMMARY This is what the table shows: Percentage of total passes made by forwards/scrum half /backs % by Forwards Ratio of Passes to Receipts by Forwards per Team The table shows the number of times each countries forwards had the ball in their hands and then notes the number of times they passed it. This is then expressed as a ratio so that if a team s forwards passed the ball 20 times having received it 100 times, the ratio would be expressed as 1 to 5 ie 1 pass for every 5 possessions. Again, the table shows major differences between the countries. What the table shows, for example, is that while Tonga and Scotland s forwards made a similar number of passes, Scotland s forwards were 25% less likely to pass the ball when they had it in their hands. % by Scrum Half % by Backs FIJI 24% 35% 41% SOUTH AFRICA 23% 42% 35% NEW ZEALAND 22% 40% 38% FRANCE 20% 43% 37% SAMOA 20% 43% 37% ARGENTINA 19% 46% 35% ENGLAND 18% 45% 37% TONGA 18% 47% 35% SCOTLAND 16% 42% 42% IRELAND 14% 42% 44% WALES 14% 47% 39% USA 14% 48% 38% AUSTRALIA 14% 48% 38% JAPAN 14% 50% 36% CANADA 12% 50% 38% ITALY 11% 49% 40% JWC 2008 NEW ZEALAND 1 in 2.4 TONGA 1 in 2.9 SAMOA 1 in 3.0 FRANCE 1 in 3.1 SOUTH AFRICA 1 in 3.2 FIJI 1 in 3.3 ENGLAND 1 in 3.3 JAPAN 1 in 3.5 ARGENTINA 1 in 3.6 SCOTLAND 1 in 3.6 IRELAND 1 in 3.7 AUSTRALIA 1 in 3.9 ITALY 1 in 4.1 WALES 1 in 4.2 CANADA 1 in 4.4 USA 1 in IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 33

37 SECTION 2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND MATCH SUMMARY PASSING MOVEMENTS Passes are grouped into passing movements i.e. one pass movement, two pass movements and so on. The data shows that some 83% of all passing movements contained two passes or less. There were however noticeable differences between the various countries as shown below: % of passing movements with 2 or fewer passes NEW ZEALAND 75% IRELAND 77% FIJI 78% SCOTLAND 80% WALES 84% JAPAN 84% FRANCE 84% SAMOA 84% USA 84% AUSTRALIA 85% TONGA 85% ARGENTINA 85% SOUTH AFRICA 86% ENGLAND 86% ITALY 87% CANADA 90% The data also shows that Australia had just 11 passing movements with more than 3 passes. This contrasts with New Zealand who had 40 and Ireland who had IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 34

38 SECTION 2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND MATCH SUMMARY RUCKS/MAULS (2nd PHASE) The average number per game was 132. The most in any game was 163 Fiji v Canada; the fewest was 98 Samoa v Australia The most by any team in a game was 113 (USA) the least, 35 (USA) The average for all countries is shown below: Average Ruck/Mauls per Team per Game JWC 2008 FRANCE 77 ENGLAND 76 SCOTLAND 74 USA 70 CANADA 69 AUSTRALIA 69 NEW ZEALAND 69 WALES 66 ITALY 65 FIJI 63 SOUTH AFRICA 63 ARGENTINA 61 TONGA 60 IRELAND 59 SAMOA 59 JAPAN 57 The above table indicates the total number of rucks/mauls created by each team in the competition expressed as average per game. However, and just as in the case of passes, the number of rucks and mauls made by one team may be constrained because it obtained only limited possession of the ball. In order to address this, an alternative calculation has been made which relates the number of rucks/mauls to the share of ball in play time won by each team. This is expressed in the number of rucks created for every minutes possession obtained by a team and shows, for example, that Wales rate of rucking exceeded that of the other 5 teams IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 35

39 SECTION 2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND MATCH SUMMARY. Rate of Rucks/Mauls per Team (rucks/mauls per minutes possession) JWC 2008 FIJI 4.2 AUSTRALIA 4.1 SCOTLAND 4.1 USA 4.1 ENGLAND 4.0 FRANCE 4.0 SOUTH AFRICA 4.0 ITALY 4.0 TONGA 4.0 NEW ZEALAND 4.0 CANADA 3.9 WALES 3.9 SAMOA 3.8 JAPAN 3.8 IRELAND 3.7 ARGENTINA 3.6 Again this table shows, for example, that while England made over 25% more rucks than Tonga, both teams made the same number of rucks per minute s possession. BREAKDOWN RETENTION Rucks/Mauls success per Team At the breakdown the team taking in the ball retained possession by either winning the ball or being awarded a penalty on 91% of occasions. The percentage success rate for each team was very similar and is shown in the attached table: JWC 2008 NEW ZEALAND 93% SOUTH AFRICA 93% ITALY 93% TONGA 92% SCOTLAND 91% WALES 91% SAMOA 91% JAPAN 91% USA 91% FRANCE 90% ARGENTINA 90% IRELAND 90% AUSTRALIA 90% FIJI 90% CANADA 89% ENGLAND 88% IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 36

40 KICKING SECTION 2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND MATCH SUMMARY The average number per game was 49 The most open play kicks in a game was 110 Ireland v Italy (normal time); the fewest 24 (Australia v Fiji) The most by a team was 58 the least 10 It should be noted that the 110 kicks that were made in normal time in the Ireland v Italy game were greater than any figure recorded at any international level over recent years. There average number of kicks per team per game are shown in the table below: Average Kicks per Team per Game JWC 2008 ITALY 32 IRELAND 29 ARGENTINA 27 JAPAN 27 SAMOA 26 SCOTLAND 26 WALES 25 AUSTRALIA 24 NEW ZEALAND 24 CANADA 24 ENGLAND 23 TONGA 23 SOUTH AFRICA 23 FRANCE 22 FIJI 19 USA 18 When an adjustment is made to take account of possession obtained, by each team, then the kicking table changes slightly. It shows that Italy kicked at a higher rate than the other teams as well as making most kicks. The table below shows the average number of kicks per team per minute s possession: IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 37

41 SECTION 2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND MATCH SUMMARY Rate of Kicking per Team (kicks per minutes possession) JWC2008 ITALY 1.9 IRELAND 1.8 JAPAN 1.8 SAMOA 1.7 ARGENTINA 1.6 TONGA 1.5 WALES 1.5 AUSTRALIA 1.4 SOUTH AFRICA 1.4 SCOTLAND 1.4 NEW ZEALAND 1.4 CANADA 1.4 FIJI 1.2 ENGLAND 1.2 FRANCE 1.1 SUMMARY USA 1.0 A summary of previous tables is shown below it shows the average number of rucks, passes, and kicks per game and the rate for each per minute possession. Activity Cycle Summary Average per game and Rate per minute possession Rucks/Mauls Passes Kicks Average Rate Average Rate Average Rate NEW ZEALAND ` 1.4 ENGLAND SOUTH AFRICA WALES AUSTRALIA FRANCE SAMOA ARGENTINA IRELAND SCOTLAND ITALY CANADA TONGA FIJI JAPAN USA IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 38

42 SECTION 2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND MATCH SUMMARY RESTARTS Of 50m restarts, 56% were kicked long 44% were kicked short and were contestable. When restarts were kicked short, the kicking team regained possession on 1 in 4 occasions. The table shows the type of restart kicked by each team at 50m and 22m and retention rates of all short restarts. It can be seen that there was a major contrast between many of the teams. While some kicked short far more often than long, other countries kicked long on the majority of occasions. Further, success rate and restart type varied between the 16 teams. The most effective teams in retaining short restarts can be seen. Restart Success per Team 50m Restarts 22m Restarts Retention rate Short Long Short Long Short ARGENTINA in 1.7 IRELAND in 2.3 TONGA in 2.8 NEW ZEALAND in 3.0 USA in 3.0 FRANCE in 3.7 SAMOA in 4.5 AUSTRALIA in 4.5 CANADA in 4.5 FIJI in 5.0 SCOTLAND in 5.0 JAPAN in 5.3 ITALY in 7.0 SOUTH AFRICA in 7.0 ENGLAND in 13.0 WALES in IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 39

43 SECTION 2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND MATCH SUMMARY LINEOUTS The average number of lineouts per game was 30 The most line outs in a game was 48 the least 15. JWC 2008 Average no per game 30 Percentage competed 70% Possession retained 78% All teams had high success rates on their own throw while rates of success on opponents throw-ins showed more variation. Lineout success on own throw and opposition throw are shown below. It also highlights lineout steals won and lost: Lineout Success (Own Throw and Opposition Throw) Own Throw Success % Lineout Steals Not straight / Pen/FK / Knock-on Opposition Own Throw Throw Lost on Own Throw Won on Opposition Throw Opposition Throw NEW ZEALAND 88% 18% SOUTH AFRICA 88% 29% AUSTRALIA 87% 34% ENGLAND 86% 26% WALES 83% 14% JAPAN 82% 24% FRANCE 80% 21% TONGA 79% 14% ARGENTINA 77% 26% ITALY 76% 12% IRELAND 75% 26% CANADA 73% 27% SCOTLAND 71% 22% SAMOA 67% 19% USA 68% 22% FIJI 65% 18% IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 40

44 SECTION 2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND MATCH SUMMARY SCRUMS The average number of scrums per game was 21 The most scrums in a game was 30 the least 11 JWC 2008 Average no per game 21 Possession retained 87% The Scrum success on own feed and opposition feed are shown below: Scrum Success (Own feed and Opposition feed) Own Feed Scrum Success % Opposition Feed Heels against the head Own Feed Opposition Feed ENGLAND 98% 15% 0 3 NEW ZEALAND 96% 15% 0 4 IRELAND 95% 15% 0 2 AUSTRALIA 93% 17% 0 5 SAMOA 91% 10% 3 1 SCOTLAND 89% 7% 2 0 USA 89% 7% 0 0 WALES 88% 23% 1 1 TONGA 87% 14% 3 1 FRANCE 86% 10% 3 0 JAPAN 85% 19% 2 1 SOUTH AFRICA 82% 13% 2 2 ARGENTINA 82% 7% 2 1 CANADA 81% 7% 5 1 FIJI 81% 6% 2 2 ITALY 76% 14% 1 2 Again, ball retention was relatively high for all teams. With such high percentage of possession retained, it is no surprise that heels against the head were few and far between. In total there were just 26 in 824 scrums or 1 scrum in 32.The table above shows the tight heads won and lost by each country IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 41

45 SECTION 2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND MATCH SUMMARY PENALTIES In JWC 2008, the average number of penalties and free kicks awarded in a game was 25. There was a wide spread between the matches. The most awarded in a single game was 35 the least, 15. The most conceded by a team in one match was 23: the least 5. The following table comprises the total penalties awarded to and conceded by each team. However, because the number of penalties can vary from match to match, a better measure is the proportion of penalties conceded by a team in all their matches compared with their opponents. This shows that Ireland were the least penalised team in relation to their opponents. Penalties For and Against Proportion of Penalties per Team per Game For and Against per Team Pen/FK Pen/FK % Pen/FK % Pen/FK For Against For Against ITALY % 44% WALES % 44% TONGA % 44% USA % 46% ARGENTINA % 46% CANADA % 47% ENGLAND % 48% JAPAN % 50% SAMOA % 50% AUSTRALIA % 50% SOUTH AFRICA % 52% SCOTLAND % 52% FIJI % 53% IRELAND % 55% NEW ZEALAND % 55% FRANCE % 59% Of the penalties and free kicks awarded, teams took around 25% as tap penalties. The differences between the teams however showed major differences. While overall, teams took an average of 16 tap penalties in the tournament, Fiji tapped on 25 occasions while New Zealand tapped on just 2 occasions IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 42

46 SECTION 2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND MATCH SUMMARY CATEGORIES OF OFFENCES PENALISED The following table groups the penalties awarded into 9 categories these are as follows. % of Offences Penalised % Ruck/tackle on ground 45% Offside 21% Scrum 10% Dangerous tackle 6% Other 6% Lineout 4% Obstruction 4% Maul pulling down 2% Foul play 2% 100% CARDS YELLOW & RED The following paragraphs examine the circumstances and effects of the issue of red and yellow cards during JWC RED CARDS There were four red cards issued against players from Fiji, France, England and Scotland. The offences were: 2 x Dangerous Tackles, Head-butting and Kicking. YELLOW CARDS There were 48 yellow cards issued during the championship. Of the 40 matches, there were 30 which contained at least one yellow card, meaning 10 (or 25%) of all matches did not contain a single yellow card. The most yellow cards in one match was 3 this happened on 6 occasions (Ireland v Scotland, Japan v USA, Wales v France, Japan v Italy, Wales v Japan and Argentina v Ireland) The table attached shows the breakdown of yellow cards per team. Yellow cards conceded JWC 2008 SOUTH AFRICA 5 JAPAN 5 SAMOA 5 WALES 4 SCOTLAND 4 ARGENTINA 3 FRANCE 3 IRELAND 3 ITALY 3 FIJI 3 ENGLAND 2 NEW ZEALAND 2 CANADA 2 USA 2 TONGA 1 AUSTRALIA IRB ANALYSIS JWC 2008 REPORT PAGE 43