IRB Sevens 2009/10
IRB SEVENS WORLD SERIES 2009/10
STATISTICAL REVIEW HONG KONG 2010
IRB GAME ANALYSIS
CONTENTS
This is a report on the HONG KONG leg of the IRB Sevens World Series 2009/10. It comprises a quantitative analysis of all elements of play together with the approach to, and performance of, all participating teams in various aspects of the game. The report looks, therefore, at such areas as: • • • • • • • •
Scoring and the effectiveness of each team in attack and defence The source, origin and build up of tries Each team’s possession times and percentages Each team’s passes and rate of passing Each team’s rucks and rate of rucking Each team’s success and approach at rucks Each team’s performance at Set Piece - Restarts, Scrums and Lineouts Plus data on Penalties, Free Kicks and Cards
CURRENT STANDINGS PLAYER STATISTICS & MATCH RESULTS OVERALL STATISTICAL SUMMARY
STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS PAGE 1
SCORING & CONCEDING
PAGE 3
TRY SCORING
PAGE 7
BALL IN PLAY & POSSESSION
PAGE 8
ACTIVITY
PAGE 12
SET PIECE
PAGE 14
PENALTIES & FREE KICKS
PAGE 16
CARDS
Hong Kong 7s 2010 was all about Tries – there was a try every 65 seconds of play, the average tries per match was the highest this series, with 45% of tries originating in the try scoring teams own half. Hong Kong 7s 2010 Cup Winners, Samoa, produced the following statistics: • • •
• • •
•
• • • •
Samoa’s average match score was 27 pts to 15 pts Fiji had the best scoring rate, scoring a try every 38 secs of possession, however Samoa did score a try every 56 secs of possession. South Africa had the best defence, conceding a try every 126 secs of opposition possession, with Samoa conceding a try every 92 secs of opposition possession. Samoa scored 25 tries and conceded 14 in 6 matches. The current overall top try scorer, Samoan Mikaele Pesamino scored 8 tries of them. Samoa were clinical in attack as 64% of their tries contained no rucks in the build up and 52% of their tries contained 3 or fewer passes in the build up. Samoa were difficult to stop as they achieved the highest passing rate – the made 11.7 passes per minutes possession and made a 5+ passing movements one in every 4.3 passing movements. They avoided physical contact as they only had 1.7 rucks per minutes possession, only averaging 7 rucks per game in attack. Samoa kicked short contestable restarts every single time and regained possession one in every 2.2 contestable restarts. Interestingly, Samoa didn’t mind kicking possession as they were one of the highest kicking teams, kicking 18 kicks in 6 matches (7 of which were punt kicks). Finally, they were well disciplined as they were awarded more penalties/free kicks than their opposition.
2009/10 2009 IRB SEVENS CURRENT STANDINGS DUB
GEO
NZL
USA
AUS
HKG
LON
SCO
TOT
SAM
20
6
20
24
24
30
124
NZL
24
24
16
20
12
25
121
FJI
16
20
24
8
6
20
94
AUS
12
6
12
16
16
16
78
ENG
16
12
16
6
4
20
74
RSA
8
8
8
12
8
10
54
KEN
6
16
6
16
0
8
52
ARG
6
16
0
0
16
0
38
USA
0
0
0
4
20
8
32
WAL
4
4
4
6
6
0
24
CAN
0
0
6
0
0
5
11
2009/10 IRB SEVENS CURRENT PLAYER STATISTICS
POINTS SCORED OVERALL 2009/10
TRIES SCORED OVERALL 2009/10
Ben Gollings
ENG
280
Mikaele Pesamino
SAM
47
Mikaele Pesamino
SAM
237
Collins Injera
KEN
28
Lolo Lui
SAM
208
Renaud Delmas
FRA
25
Tomasi Cama
NZL
174
Humphrey Kayange
KEN
23
Cecil Afrika
RSA
171
Ben Gollings
ENG
22
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS
HONG KONG 2010 MATCH RESULTS POOL
TEAM
SCORE
TEAM
KNOCKOUT
TEAM
SCORE
TEAM
Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool
KENYA ENGLAND AUSTRALIA FIJI NEW ZEALAND SAMOA ZIMBABWE JAPAN TONGA PORTUGAL FRANCE RUSSIA KENYA ENGLAND AUSTRALIA FIJI NEW ZEALAND SAMOA SOUTH AFRICA WALES CANADA USA SCOTLAND ARGENTINA SOUTH AFRICA WALES CANADA USA SCOTLAND ARGENTINA KENYA ENGLAND AUSTRALIA FIJI NEW ZEALAND SAMOA
7 - 21 26 - 5 36 - 12 38 - 12 22 - 5 21 - 14 31 - 24 40 - 7 41 - 12 50 - 0 63 - 12 12 - 14 24 - 0 45 - 0 33 - 12 45 - 7 36 - 0 24 - 12 40 - 7 19 - 21 12 - 7 62 - 0 42 - 5 42 - 0 28 - 15 12 - 10 12 - 10 17 - 10 7 - 12 19 - 12 51 - 7 45 - 0 45 - 12 82 - 7 59 - 5 40 - 12
SOUTH AFRICA WALES CANADA USA SCOTLAND ARGENTINA KOREA HONG KONG CHINA THAILAND CHI TAIPEI ITALY ZIMBABWE JAPAN TONGA PORTUGAL FRANCE RUSSIA KOREA HONG KONG CHINA THAILAND CHI TAIPEI ITALY ZIMBABWE JAPAN TONGA PORTUGAL FRANCE RUSSIA KOREA HONG KONG CHINA THAILAND CHI TAIPEI ITALY
Cup Final Plate Final Bowl Final Shield Final Cup S/F Cup S/F Plate S/F Plate S/F Bowl S/F Bowl S/F Shield S/F Shield S/F Cup Q/F Cup Q/F Cup Q/F Cup Q/F Bowl Q/F Bowl Q/F Bowl Q/F Bowl Q/F Shield Q/F Shield Q/F Shield Q/F Shield Q/F
SAMOA AUSTRALIA WALES RUSSIA FIJI SAMOA SOUTH AFRICA USA CANADA WALES HONG KONG ZIMBABWE KENYA FIJI ENGLAND SAMOA PORTUGAL CANADA SCOTLAND ARGENTINA CHI TAIPEI HONG KONG CHINA ZIMBABWE
24 - 21 12 - 5 19 - 35 17 - 19 28 - 33 28 - 24 19 - 12 12 - 21 26 - 24 26 - 7 26 - 19 14 - 17 12 - 21 14 - 12 26 - 19 24 - 7 17 - 7 26 - 0 12 - 10 12 - 17 12 - 45 31 - 14 17 - 31 43 - 12
NEW ZEALAND SOUTH AFRICA CANADA HONG KONG NEW ZEALAND ENGLAND KENYA AUSTRALIA PORTUGAL SCOTLAND ITALY RUSSIA NEW ZEALAND SOUTH AFRICA AUSTRALIA USA FRANCE TONGA JAPAN WALES ITALY KOREA RUSSIA THAILAND
HONG KONG 2010 PLAYER STATISTICS POINTS SCORED HONG KONG 2010
TRIES SCORED HONG KONG 2010
Kurt Baker
NZL
61
Kurt Baker
NZL
9
Gardener Nechironga
ZIM
48
Gardener Nechironga
ZIM
8
James Stannard
AUS
44
Mikaele Pesamino
SAM
8
Cecil Afrika
RSA
41
Kevin Swiryn
USA
8
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS
IRB SEVENS 2009/10 - STATISTICAL SUMMARY DUB 2009 44
GEO 2009 44
NZL 2010 44
USA 2010 44
AUS 2010 44
HKG 2010 60
OVERALL 2008/09 365
POINTS (average per game)
37
36
36
32
37
41
36
TRIES (average per game)
6.0
5.7
5.8
5.2
6.0
6.5
5.7
CONVERSION SUCCESS (%)
63%
62%
58%
62%
60%
67%
62%
PENALTY GOALS (total)
0/1
0/0
0/0
0/1
0/0
0/1
6
DROP GOALS (total)
0/0
1/2
0/0
0/2
0/0
0/0
2
TRY SCORING MATCHES WON by team scoring most tries (%)
91%
91%
91%
89%
86%
85%
90%
SOURCE OF TRIES - pens/fks (%)
29%
27%
38%
27%
34%
28%
29%
ORIGIN OF TRIES - own Half (%)
42%
44%
45%
40%
37%
45%
42%
BUILD UP TO TRIES – no rucks/mauls (%) BUILD UP TO TRIES - 3 Or fewer passes (%)
61%
69%
69%
58%
60%
62%
63%
57%
58%
56%
54%
56%
55%
59%
BALL IN PLAY (%)
51%
52%
49%
49%
49%
50%
50%
PASSES (average per game)
68
72
67
68
68
71
67
5+ PASSING MOVENTS (rate)
1 in 7.2
1 in 8.0
1 in 7.5
1 in 9.7
1 in 8.0
1 in 7.4
1 in 7.9
RUCKS/MAULS (average per game)
17
18
15
17
16
17
16
RUCK/MAUL RETENTION (%)
79%
80%
83%
82%
86%
85%
79%
KICKS (average per game)
3.7
3.8
3.5
4.8
3.0
2.9
4
CONTESTABLE RESTARTS (%)
75%
79%
72%
38%
85%
85%
74%
CONTESTABLE RESTARTS REGAINED (%)
37% or 1 in 2.7 17 or 1 in 19
31% or 1 in 3.2 17 or 1 in 18
38% or 1 in 2.7 27 or 1 in 11
39% or 1 in 2.6 19 or 1 in 15
43% or 1 in 2.3 10 or 1 in 30
38% or 1 in 2.7 16 or 1 in 27
35% or 1 in 2.8 156 or 1 in 15
SCRUMS (average per game)
4
4
4
4
5
4
4
SCRUMS possession retained (%)
79%
85%
84%
82%
81%
89%
85%
LINEOUTS (average per game)
2
3
2
4
2
2
3
LINEOUTS possession retained (%)
82%
76%
72%
80%
71%
80%
75%
QUICK THROWS (total)
12 or 1 in 8
9 or 1 in 8
12 or 1 in 7
18 or 1 in 10
11 or 1 in 9
14 or 1 in 9.5
106 or 1 in 8
PENALTIES (average per game)
5.0
5.3
6.6
5.6
6.2
5.5
6
CARDS (total)
3+0
16 + 1
12 + 0
8+1
17 + 0
25 + 0
108 + 3
MATCHES SCORING
ACTIVITY
SET PIECE
RESTART ERRORS (total)
PENALTIES/FREE KICKS & CARDS
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS
1. SCORING & CONCEDING CEDING The average e number of points scored in a game was 41. The average number of points scored/conceded by a team was 20.5 but, not surprisingly, there were major variations around this average. Fiji averaged 41 points per game while Thailand managed just 5. With regard to points conceded, England only conceded an average of 10 points per game while Chinese Taipei conceded 52. Winners Samoa averaged a score of 27 points to 15. The figures do not show, however, how effective each team was in scoring points in relation to the possession that it obtained and also, the figures do not show, how effective each team was in restricting points in relation to the possession that their opponents obtained. A team may, for example, obtain little possession but still manage to score a significant number of tries conversely a team may concede very few tries in the face of considerable opposition possession. Overall, in Hong Kong a try was scored every 65 seconds of play (Dubai every 72 secs, George every 77 secs, Wellington every 71 secs, s Las Vegas every 79 secs and Adelaide every 67secs)). Scoring rates are calculated (a) by dividing the total possession obtained by a team by the number of tries scored (b) by dividing the total possession obtained by a team opponents by the total num number of tries conceded. The following table gives the relevant figures for each participating team. Fiji had the best try scoring rate, scoring a try every 41 seconds in attack and South Africa had the best try conceding rate, conceding a try every 126 seconds nds in defence. In the Fiji v Thailand match, Fiji scored a try every 20 seconds. MATCHES PLAYED
Av POINTS SCORED
Av POINTS CONCEDED
FJI
5
41
14
FJI
38 secs
RSA
126 secs
ENG
5
33
10
AUS
43 secs
NZ NZL
124 secs
NZL
6
32
12
ENG
44 secs
ARG
107 secs
AUS
6
28
13
NZL
46 secs
KEN
105 secs
SAM
6
27
15
SAM
56 secs
ENG
102 secs
ARG
4
22
13
FRA
62 secs
AUS
100 secs
KEN
5
22
14
ARG
63 secs
FJI
96 secs
USA
5
22
19
USA
63 secs
SAM
92 secs
RSA
6
21
11
KEN
75 secs
FRA
86 secs
FRA
4
21
18
RSA
76 secs
WAL
75 secs
WAL
6
16
19
WAL
80 secs
SCO
69 secs
SCO
5
15
15
SCO
106 secs
USA
55 secs
IRB GAME ANALYSIS
TRY SCORING RATE
TRY CONCEDING RATE
PAGE 1
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS MATCHES PLAYED
Av POINTS SCORED
Av POINTS CONCEDED
TRY SCORING RATE
TRY CONCEDING RATE
POR
5
22
19
ITA
50 secs
CAN
84 secs
CAN
6
21
16
POR
61 secs
ZIM
75 secs
ZIM
5
21
21
ZIM
63 secs
ITA
69 secs
ITA
5
18
26
CAN
65 secs
RUS
68 secs
RUS
6
17
18
JAP
71 secs
POR
65 secs
HKG
6
17
26
HKG
73 secs
JAP
60 secs
TON
4
16
21
TON
79 secs
TON
58 secs
JAP
4
15
19
RUS
80 secs
HKG
47 secs
KOR
4
13
39
CHI
84 secs
CHI
42 secs
CHI
4
12
32
KOR
104 secs
KOR
35 secs
TAI
4
9
52
TAI
170 secs
TAI
25 secs
THA
4
5
59
THA
187 secs
THA
25 secs
1.1 KICKS AT GOAL There was 1 penalty goal attempt but no penalty goals or drop goals were kicked.. The overall conversion success rate was 67% - the highest success rate so far this series. There were noticeable variations in the percentage success rates as seen in the attached table: Because of the relatively few tries scored, applying percentages can, at this stage, only be regarded as indicative. In addition, the e location of the score can be a significant factor in achieving a successful conversion. This is the reason that the attached table has assigned a percentage success rate only to those teams that scored 16 tries or more. Fiji had the highest success rate - 84%
IRB GAME ANALYSIS
CONVERSION SUCCESS
CONVERSION SUCCESS
FJI
84%
HKG
75%
RSA
79%
CAN
74%
SAM
72%
ZIM
59%
NZL
70%
POR
50%
ENG
69%
RUS
47%
AUS
69%
ITA
10/14
WAL
56%
TON
4/11
USA
56%
JAP
5/10
KEN
50%
KOR
6/8
ARG
11/13
CHI
4/8
FRA
11/12
TAI
2/6
SCO
9/11
THA
2/3
PAGE 2
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS
2. TRY SCORING There were 392 tries scored in Hong Kong giving an average of 6.5 per game. (Dubai = 6.0 tries, George = 5.7 tries, Wellington = 5.8 tries, Las Vegas = 5.2 and Adelaide 6.0) In the Pool stage there were 245 tries scored (average – 6.8) and in the knockout stage there were 147 tries scored (average – 6.1) 2.1 IMPACT OF TRIES With no penalty goals or drop goals and a conversion success rate of 67%, it was inevitable that tries would determine the winning team in the vast majority of cases – and this proved to be the case. Of the 60 matches, 51 (or 85%) were won by the team scoring the most tries. There were 9 matches won because of conversions (Canada v Tonga, Wales v Japan, Wales v Hong Kong, Russia v Italy, Scotland v Japan, Fiji v South Africa, Canada v Portugal, Samoa v England and Russia v Hong Kong).
2.2 ORIGIN & LOCATION OF TRIES Tries originate from various parts of the pitch and are scored all across the try line. The following diagram shows the location on the pitch of where the attacking team obtained possession from which they eventually scored and where they were scored along try line. 45% of all tries originated in the try scoring team’s own half and 36% were scored under the posts. LEFT OF POSTS
33% or 128 tries OWN HALF
45% or 176 tries
HW to 10m
10m to 22m
22m to TRY
9% or 33 tries
28% or 111 tries
18% or 72 tries
UNDER POSTS TRIES
36% or 141 tries RIGHT OF POSTS TRIES
31% or 123 tries
The table on the next page shows the origin of tries scored (own) and tries conceded (opp) by each team. The teams which scored a high percentage of their tries from their own half were New Zealand, Kenya and Zimbabwe. The teams which had a low percentage of their tries from their own half were USA and Portugal.
IRB GAME ANALYSIS
PAGE 3
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS
OWN HALF
HW – 10m
10m – 22m
22m - TRY
OWN
OPP
OWN
OPP
OWN
OPP
OWN
FJI
10
5
5
1
14
5
2
NZL
17
10
10
1
3
AUS
11
6
8
6
ENG
14
4
2
OWN
OPP
31
11
1
30
12
7
1
26
13
7
1
3
2
26
8
SAM
10
7
3
5
4
7
3
25
14
CAN
9
8
2
5
6
3
2
19
16
RSA
7
8
4
4
1
4
1
19
11
KEN
10
4
4
2
2
2
4
18
10
POR
5
3
1
2
7
6
5
4
18
15
USA
3
6
1
1
9
8
5
18
15
RUS
9
7
1
5
5
3
4
17
17
ZIM
10
8
3
3
3
1
6
17
17
HKG
7
12
1
WAL
9
8
ITA
6
7
ARG
4
4
FRA
5
SCO
1
1
OPP
TOT
5
7
3
5
16
24
2
5
4
2
3
16
17
3
2
5
6
5
14
20
1
6
1
2
3
13
8
4
1
2
2
4
6
12
12
6
10
2
1
2
2
1
11
13
TON
5
4
1
3
5
2
4
11
13
JAP
4
6
1
1
2
2
3
10
12
CHI
3
11
1
1
4
7
2
8
21
KOR
5
11
5
8
3
1
8
25
TAI
4
15
3
7
2
6
6
31
THA
3
8
5
19
5
3
37
3
2.3 POSSESSION SOURCE OF TRIES The teams scoring oring the tries obtained possession of the ball prior to the scoring of the try from a variety of sources. This is shown: It can be seen that the most fruitful source of tries is penalties/free kicks (28%).
PENALTY/FREE KICK TURNOVER & ERROR RESTART SCRUM LINEOUT KICK RECEIPT
IRB GAME ANALYSIS
HONG KONG 2010
OVERALL 2008/09
28% 20% 24% 16% 8% 4%
29% 18% 22% 14% 11% 6% PAGE 4
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS
The following table shows the possession source source of tries scored (own) and tries conceded (opp) by each team: PEN & FK
T/OVER & ERROR
OWN
OPP
OWN
FJI
2
5
8
NZL
10
2
7
AUS
10
6
6
ENG
5
3
5
SAM
11
5
CAN
5
RSA
OPP
RESTART
SCRUM
LINEOUT
OWN
OPP
OWN
9
5
6
6
2
4
6
1
1
6
3
7
3
1
6
2
4
3
6
5
2
4
5
2
2
5
3
3
5
6
4
KEN
2
4
7
1
5
2
POR
6
5
5
1
4
USA
6
2
7
RUS
6
7
ZIM
6
6
HKG
7
WAL
5
OPP
KICK
OWN
OPP
OWN
4
1
TOTAL OPP
OWN
OPP
2
31
11
1
30
12
3
2
4
2
2
2
26
13
2
1
1
26
8
2
1
25
14
2
1
1
19
16
1
1
1
19
11
2
3
1
18
10
5
3
1
18
15
7
3
3
2
2
1
18
15
2
5
1
4
5
1
1
1
17
17
4
2
7
2
1
17
17
3
2
2
2
7
16
24
5
7
2
5
7
1
ITA
3
7
5
2
2
6
ARG
5
4
2
2
3
FRA
4
5
3
3
1
SCO
3
4
3
3
1
TON
3
2
1
4
JAP
1
3
1
CHI
1
5
KOR
2
4
TAI
2
7
THA
1
6
2
1
1 1
2
5
1
7
5
1
1
3
1
2
2
1
16
17
2
1
2
1
3
14
20
2
1
2
13
8
4
3
12
12
2
4
1
11
13
3
2
2
2
2
2
11
13
2
3
1
4
6
1
10
12
4
6
5
1
1
3
3
7
11
2
2
2
14
2
5
4
1
17
1
1 3
4
1
8
1
1
1
2
8
21
1
1
8
25
6
31
3
37
1
Of the 31 tries Fiji scored,, only 2 began from a penalty or a free kick, whereas Australia, Samoa and New Zealand scored 10 or more from this try source. From restarts, overall Fiji scored 9 tries and Thailand conceded 17 tries.
IRB GAME ANALYSIS
PAGE 5
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS
2.4 BUILD UP TO TRIES The table shows how many rucks/mauls preceded each try scored in the tournament.
None 1 rucks/mauls
The table shows that 62% of tries were preceded by not one ruck or maul.
2 rucks/mauls 3 + rucks/mauls
%
CUMULATIVE %
OVERALL 2008/09
62% 23% 9% 6%
62% 85% 94% 100%
63% 86% 95% 100%
CUMULATIVE %
OVERALL 2008/09
It shows the total number of passes that preceded each try scored in the tournament.
% No passes
The table shows that 55% of tries were preceded by 3 or fewer passes.
1 - 3 passes 4 - 6 passes 7 - 9 passes 10+ passes
9% 46% 25% 14% 6%
9% 55% 80% 94% 100%
12% 58% 83% 94% 100%
When the build up to tries in the pool is compared to the knockout stage, stage, the percentages show that teams had to work harder to score tries during the knockout stage as there were more passes es and more rucks in the build up to tries. % of tries had no r/ms & 59% < 3 passes Pool: 65% Knockout: 56% 56 of tries had no r/ms & 47% < 3 passes In the table below are the figures for each team. The figures in the table include the % of tries scored and conceded with no rucks in the build up and the % of tries scored with 3 or fewer passes. Because of the relatively few tries scored, applying percentages can, at this stage, only be regarded as indicative. This is the reason that the attached ttached table has assigned a percentage success rate only to those teams that scored or conceded 16 tries or more. It can be seen that 87% of Fiji’s tries scored contained no rucks in the build up and 67% of USA’s tries scored contained 3 or fewer passes in i the build up. % OF TRIES WITH NO RUCKS
% OF TRIES WITH 3 OR FEWER PASSES
TRIES SCORED
TRIES CONCEDED
TRIES SCORED
FJI
87%
10/12
48%
AUS
73%
6/13
SAM
64%
ENG
% OF TRIES WITH NO RUCKS
% OF TRIES WITH 3 OR FEWER PASSES
TRIES SCORED
TRIES CONCEDED
TRIES SCORED
POR
56%
7/15
61%
50%
RUS
53%
59%
41%
8/14
52%
ZIM
53%
59%
24%
62%
4/8
58%
CAN
47%
38%
84%
NZL
60%
10/12
53%
HKG
44%
67%
50%
KEN
50%
6/10
67%
ITA
12/14
50%
10/14
WAL
50%
59%
25%
TON
6/11
7/13
6/11
USA
44%
13/15
67%
JAP
8/10
7/12
7/10
RSA
42%
8/11
42%
KOR
5/8
52%
3/8
ARG
5/13
3/8
7/13
CHI
6/8
71%
4/8
FRA
10/12
7/12
10/12
TAI
5/6
87%
4/6
SCO
9/11
10/13
8/11
THA
3/3
73%
1/3
IRB GAME ANALYSIS
PAGE 6
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS
3. BALL IN PLAY & POSESSION There was a considerable variation between the ball in play figures achieved by the various teams. This is shown in the following table which gives the average possession times achieved by each team throughout the tournament in attack and defence:
AVERAGE BALL-IN-PLAY HIGHEST BALL-IN-PLAY MATCH
HONG KONG 2010
OVERALL 2008/09
3m 32s or 50% 9m 23s
6m 58s or 50%
(Kenya v Zimbabwe)
5m 32s
LOWEST BALL-IN- PLAY MATCH
(Japan v Hong Kong)
HIGHEST POSSESSION TIME BY A TEAM LOWEST POSSESSION TIME BY A TEAM
9m 28s or 68% 4m 53s or 35%
6m 15s
7m 18s
(Samoa v Italy)
1m 26s
1m 06s
(Samoa v Italy Italy)
As seen in the table, there were some noticeable differences. Kenya averaged the highest, averaging well over 4 minutes possession per game, with Italy only averaged 2m 20s. Hong Kong, USA, England, Scotland, Chinese Taipei and China dominated possession in their matches, all averaging 55% or more of total possession. Italy on average, only had 34% % of possession in their matches – in one match they only had 1m 26ss of possession. OWN AVERAGE POSSESSION
%
OPPONENTS AVERAGE AVERA POSSESSION
%
OWN AVERAGE POSSESSION
%
OPPONENTS AVERAGE POSSESSION
%
ENG
3m 49s
59%
2m 42s
41%
HKG
3m 15s
61%
3m 06s
39%
USA
3m 48s
58%
2m 45s
42%
TAI
4m 15s
57%
3m 15s
43%
SCO
3m 52s
56%
3m 00s
44%
CHI
2m 47s
55%
3m 39s
45%
KEN
4m 29s
56%
3m 29s
44%
RUS
3m 46s
54%
3m 12s
46%
FJI
3m 53s
53%
3m 30s
47%
POR
3m 40s
53%
3m 14s
47%
SAM
3m 55s
52%
3m 35s
48%
TON
3m 37s
53%
3m 09s
47%
RSA
3m 59s
51%
3m 50s
49%
JAP
2m 58s
50%
2m 59s
50%
WAL
3m 33s
50%
3m 33s
50%
KOR
3m 27s
48%
3m 40s
52%
ARG
3m 24s
49%
3m 33s
51%
CAN
3m 24s
48%
3m 43s
52%
NZL
3m 48s
48%
4m 08s
52%
ZIM
3m 35s
46%
4m 16s
54%
AUS
3m 04s
46%
3m 35s
54%
THA
2m 20s
38%
3m 47s
62%
FRA
3m 06s
42%
4m 18s
58%
ITA
2m 20s
34%
4m 35s
66%
IRB GAME ANALYSIS
PAGE 7
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS
4. ACTIVITY
HONG KONG 2010
OVERALL 2008/09
71 102
67
AVERAGE PASSES
4.1 PASSING The average number of passes in a game was 71. The average number of passes ses by a team was 35.5 but, not surprisingly, there were major variations around this average.
HIGHEST PASSING MATCH LOWEST PASSING MATCH
115
(New Zealand v Scotland)
43
35
(Japan v Hong Kong)
PASSING RATE
AVERAGE PASSES
SAM
11.7
46
FJI
1 in 2.4
CHI
11.4
32
ZIM
1 in 3.8
RUS
11.4
43
CHI
1 in 3.8
FJI
11.3
44
THA
1 in 4.0
ZIM
11.3
41
SAM
1 in 4.3
TAI
11.1
47
RUS
1 in 5.3
ARG
11.0
37
TON
1 in 6.8
RSA
10.8
43
ENG
1 in 7.0
TON
10.8
39
SCO
1 in 7.3
HKG
10.7
35
TAI
1 in 7.3
PASSING MOVEMENTS
KEN
10.3
46
ARG
1 in 7.4
Passes came in passing movements of which there were just over 1000.
THA
10.2
24
NZL
1 in 7.9
SCO
10.1
39
HKG
1 in 8.5
JAP
9.6
29
JAP
1 in 9.0
NZL
9.9
38
KOR
1 in 9.6
AUS
9.8
30
KEN
1 in 10.6
KOR
9.4
33
CAN
1 in 10.8
ENG
9.4
36
POR
1 in 10.8
POR
9.4
35
USA
1 in 14.2
USA
9.2
35
WAL
1 in 14.3
WAL
9.3
33
AUS
1 in 17.0
FRA
8.7
27
RSA
1 in 17.5
ITA
7.5
18
ITA
1 in 19.5
CAN
7.4
25
FRA
1 in 22.5
RATES & AVERAGES The table shows major differences between the teams. Such differences can however partly be explained by the amount of possession obtained by each eac team – more possession means more passes. If possession is taken into account, therefore the rate at which each country passed the ball is far closer. Samoa, China, and Russia had the highest passing rate and Canada, Italy and France had the lowest. Kenya on average passed nearly 50% more than Thailand,, but it can be seen that they passed at the same rate when possession is taken into account.
Around 50% of all passing movements contained 2 or fewer passes. Where major differences arose, these were seen in the more lengthy passing movements. Of all passing movements, 1 in 7.4 contained 5+ passes (Dubai 1 in 7.2, George 1 in 8.0, Wellington 1 in 7.5, Las Vegas 1 in 9.7 and Adelaide 1 in 8.0). Certain teams were far more inclined to continue passing than others. This is shown in the above table which notes the proportion of 5+ pass movements to total number of passing movements made by each country. Fiji were the most likely to make a 5+ passing movement, they made 1 in every 2.4 passing movements, whereas Italy and France were least likely.
IRB GAME ANALYSIS
5+ PASSING
PAGE 8
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS
4.2 RUCKS & MAULS
HONG KONG 2010
OVERALL 2008/09
17 34
16
AVERAGE RUCKS
The average number of passes in a game was 17. The average number of passes by a team was 8.5 but, not surprisingly, there were major variations around this average.
HIGHEST RUCKING MATCH LOWEST RUCKING MATCH SUCCESS %
RATES & AVERAGES The table below shows major differences in the average number of rucks/mauls created by each team. Some of this can be explained by the amount of possession obtained by each team. If this is taken into account, the rate at which each country rucked and mauled is far closer, as also shown in the table. This expresses rucks/mauls as ‘rucks/mauls per minute possession ‘. South Africa had the highest rucking rate and Fiji had the lowest. Kenya on average rucked more than USA, but it can be seen that they rucked at the same rate when possession is taken into account. RUCK SUCCESS At the breakdown, the team taking in the ball retained possession by either winning the ball or being awarded a penalty on 85% of occasions. The percentage success rate of each team in attack and defence are shown in the above table. In Attack, New Zealand and USA achieved high retention rates at rucks while Fiji, Japan and Thailand had low retention rates. In Defence, Japan, Portugal and New Zealand won ruck possession from opponents on a number of occasions, while Australia and Thailand won little, if any possession at any opposition rucks.
IRB GAME ANALYSIS
(Kenya v South Africa) Africa
4
31 4
(Fiji v Thailand Thailand)
85%
79%
RUCKING RATE
AVERAGE RUCKS
RETENTION % SUCCESS % OWN RUCKS OPP RUCKS
RSA
3.4
14
NZL
96%
23%
TAI
3.1
13
USA
94%
14%
HKG
3.0
10
AUS
93%
3%
KEN
2.9
13
CHI
93%
13%
SCO
2.8
11
ARG
92%
12%
USA
2.8
11
CAN
90%
18%
ARG
2.8
10
POR
90%
24%
WAL
2.7
10
SAM
90%
11%
KOR
2.5
9
WAL
89%
19%
CAN
2.4
8
KEN
88%
18%
JAP
2.4
7
RUS
88%
11%
THA
2.4
6
TON
88%
7%
AUS
2.3
7
ZIM
85%
17%
TON
2.3
8
RSA
84%
18%
FRA
2.3
7
ENG
83%
16%
RUS
2.3
9
HKG
83%
15%
POR
2.2
8
KOR
80%
11%
ZIM
2.2
8
SCO
80%
16%
ENG
2.1
8
FRA
79%
20%
NZL
2.0
8
TAI
77%
7%
ITA
1.9
4
ITA
77%
7%
SAM
1.7
7
JAP
66%
25%
CHI
1.3
4
FJI
61%
18%
FJI
0.9
4
THA
61%
0%
PAGE 9
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS
NUMBER OF PLAYERS COMMITTED TO RUCKS – ATTACK & DEFENCE There are over 500 breakdowns in a tournament - and a breakdown occurs when at least one player from each side is on his is feet at or over the ball. When the tackler is on his feet and an opponent joins in, then there is a breakdown. When the tackler is not on his feet, a breakdown occurs when at least one player from each side joins in. What became immediately noticeable was that there were clear differences in the approach of the various countries in committing players to the breakdown. While certain teams frequently committed few additional players, other countries consistently committed more. The extent of the differences rences between each team’s approach is illustrated by an exercise that looked at how many players were re committed to the breakdown in attack and in defence. Overall on average, the attacking team committed only 1 extra player on 75 75% of occasions and defending teams committed d only 1 extra player on 55% of occasions. It can be seen that in the table below, in attack, Wales committed only one player on 91% % of occasions while France committed 2 or more players 55% 55 of the time. In defence, Fiji committed no extra players on 49% of occasions, whereas Samoa committed ommitted 2 or more players in defence on 22% of occasions.
ATTACK
DEFENCE
1 PLAYER
2+ PLAYERS
NO PLAYER
1 PLAYER
2+ PLAYERS
WAL
91%
9%
FJI
49%
41%
10%
SAM
90%
10%
SCO
48%
39%
13%
ARG
89%
11%
FRA
47%
49%
4%
USA
89%
11%
KEN
43%
45%
12%
AUS
86%
14%
SAM
42%
36%
22%
FJI
83%
17%
NZL
32%
51%
17%
NZL
76%
24%
AUS
30%
61%
9%
RSA
73%
27%
ARG
29%
59%
12%
SCO
69%
31%
WAL
28%
57%
16%
KEN
63%
37%
RSA
27%
52%
21%
ENG
56%
44%
USA
19%
76%
5%
FRA
45%
55%
ENG
18%
76%
5%
IRB GAME ANALYSIS
PAGE 10
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS
ATTACK
DEFENCE
1 PLAYER
2+ PLAYERS
NO PLAYER
1 PLAYER
2+ PLAYERS
POR
95%
5%
THA
57%
36%
7%
TON
88%
12%
KOR
43%
40%
17%
RUS
83%
17%
CAN
38%
56%
5%
CAN
82%
18%
RUS
38%
62%
0%
ZIM
74%
26%
ITA
35%
59%
6%
HKG
72%
28%
HKG
27%
67%
6%
ITA
68%
32%
ZIM
26%
63%
11%
THA
65%
35%
CHI
22%
56%
22%
CHI
64%
36%
JAP
21%
46%
32%
TAI
63%
37%
TON
21%
64%
14%
JAP
62%
38%
POR
15%
74%
12%
KOR
51%
49%
TAI
7%
67%
27%
4.3 KICKS Kicks cks include all kicks made in general play inc. punts, chips, ground (i.e. football kick) and grubber kicks. The average number of kicks in a game was 3.0 (Dubai Dubai was 3.7, George was 3.8, Wellington was 3.5, Las Vegas was 4.8 and Adelaide was 3.0).
AVERAGE KICKS HIGHEST KICKING MATCH LOWEST KICKING MATCH KICK REGAIN RATE
HONG KONG 2010
OVERALL 2008/09
3 10
4
(Samoa v Italy)
0 (6 matches)
1 in 3.1
16 0 1 in 3
Samoa and Italy kicked far more often than any other team while USA, Thailand and Korea on the other hand, kicked very little. Of the total kicks made by teams in open play, the attached table shows how many were regained. The overall kick regain rate was 1 in 3.1 (Dubai = 1 in 2.6, George = 1 in 3.0, Wellington = 1 in 3.4, Las Vegas = 1 in 6.1 and Adelaide = 1 in 2.4) There were a wide variety of kicks as of o all the kicks, 27% were chip kicks, 31% % were punt kicks kicks, 24% were ground kicks and 18% were grubber kicks.
IRB GAME ANALYSIS
PAGE 11
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS
5. SET PIECE RESTARTS HONG KONG 2010
SCRUMS HONG KONG 2010
LINEOUTS HONG KONG 2010
RESTARTS OVERALL 2008/09
SCRUMS OVERALL 2008/09
LINEOUTS OVERALL 2008/09
AVERAGE
7
4
2
7
4
3
HIGHEST IN A MATCH
13
8
5
11
10
7
LOWEST IN A MATCH
4
1
0
3
0 7 matches
0 30 matches
SUCCESS %
38% or 1 in 2.7
89%
80%
35%
85%
75%
Restarts were classified into 2 types:
85% of restarts were kicked contestable 15% of restarts were kicked not contestable (Dubai = 75%, George rge = 79%, Wellington = 72%, Las Vegas = 38% and Adelaide = 85%)
Retention rates reflect the number of times that possession was retained at contestable restarts – they varied considerably. Off all contestable restarts, the kicking team regained 38% or 1 in 2.7 (Dubai - 37%, George 31%, Wellington – 38%, Las Vegas – 39% and Adelaide – 43%) OWN RESTARTS REGAIN SUCCESS
OPP RESTARTS RECEIVE SUCCESS
OWN RESTARTS CONTESTABLE
NOT CONTESTABLE
ENG
1 in 1.6
FRA
1 in 1.0
ENG
100%
0%
USA
1 in 1.6
RSA
1 in 1.2
SCO
100%
0%
SAM
1 in 2.2
ENG
1 in 1.3
SAM
100%
0%
SCO
1 in 2.3
AUS
1 in 1.4
ARG
100%
0%
WAL
1 in 2.4
NZL
1 in 1.4
KEN
95%
5%
KEN
1 in 2.6
USA
1 in 1.4
FRA
93%
7%
RSA
1 in 2.6
FJI
1 in 1.5
RSA
90%
10%
AUS
1 in 2.7
KEN
1 in 1.8
AUS
89%
11%
FJI
1 in 2.9
SCO
1 in 1.8
USA
84%
16%
ARG
1 in 3.2
WAL
1 in 1.8
FJI
82%
18%
NZL
1 in 4.8
SAM
1 in 2.0
NZL
68%
32%
FRA
1 in 7.0
ARG
1 in 6.0
WAL
63%
37%
As can be seen in the tables, England and USA were the most successful essful in regaining own short restarts and France and South outh Africa the most successful in receiving opposition short restarts. France was the least successful at regaining own contestable restarts, however they receive every opposition contestable restarts. There were 7 teams that always kicked contestable restarts, whereas Italy kicked contestable only 18% of the time. There were only 16 restart errors or 1 in every 27 restarts. restarts. This is the lowest number and best rate so far this series. (Dubai = 17 or 1 in 14.0, George = 17 or 1 in 17.7, Wellington = 27 or 1 in 11.4, Las Vegas = 19 or 1 in 14.6 and Adelaide = 10 or 1 in 30) IRB GAME ANALYSIS
PAGE 12
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS OWN RESTARTS REGAIN SUCCESS
OPP RESTARTS RECEIVE SUCCESS
OWN RESTARTS CONTESTABLE
NOT CONTESTABLE
THA
1 in 2.0
TAI
1 in 1.3
JAP
100%
0%
JAP
1 in 2.2
RUS
1 in 1.3
HKG
100%
0%
TAI
1 in 2.5
TON
1 in 1.3
TON
100%
0%
POR
1 in 2.7
HKG
1 in 1.6
CAN
96%
4%
CAN
1 in 2.9
CAN
1 in 1.7
RUS
90%
10%
RUS
1 in 3.0
ITA
1 in 1.7
POR
89%
11%
HKG
1 in 3.3
KOR
1 in 1.7
THA
86%
14%
TON
1 in 3.7
POR
1 in 1.7
TAI
83%
17%
KOR
1 in 4.0
ZIM
1 in 1.7
KOR
80%
20%
ZIM
1 in 4.3
CHI
1 in 1.8
ZIM
68%
32%
CHI
1 in 8.0
JAP
1 in 2.0
CHI
67%
33%
ITA
0 in 3
THA
1 in 2.1
ITA
18%
82%
Overall Scrum success was 89% and overall Lineout success was 80%.. The following table shows the success rate for each team on own put/throw in and opposition put/throw in: SCRUM
LINEOUT
OWN
OPP
OWN
OWN
OPP
ENG
12/12
0/7
FJI
5/5
1/3
ARG
10/10
2/8
FRA
2/2
0/2
FJI
7/7
1/8
ENG
2/2
2/5
KEN
7/7
0/8
WAL
8/9
1/9
FRA
5/5
3/14
RSA
7/8
1/6
WAL
5/5
1/10
NZL
7/8
2/6
SAM
15/16
1/13
KEN
6/7
0/5
SCO
14/15
1/7
SAM
3/4
3/10
RSA
12/14
2/12
USA
6/8
1/2
USA
9/10
2/12
SCO
5/7
1/8
AUS
6/10
1/12
ARG
5/7
1/5
NZL
6/8
0/14
AUS
3/5
0/6
IRB GAME ANALYSIS
PAGE 13
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS
SCRUM
LINEOUT
OWN
OPP
OWN
OWN
OPP
CHI
11/11
0/4
TAI
3/3
1/2
POR
10/10
0/8
ZIM
2/2
1/4
KOR
8/8
0/5
KOR
2/2
0/0
HKG
8/9
0/7
ITA
8/9
1/6
RUS
8/9
3/17
TON
4/5
2/7
TAI
8/9
2/7
POR
1/2
0/5
TON
7/8
2/8
HKG
1/2
0/11
JAP
7/8
0/9
THA
0/1
0/3
ZIM
5/6
2/14
JAP
10/12
1/5
THA
9/11
0/9
RUS
7/9
2/7
CAN
9/11
1/12
CHI
2/4
2/5
ITA
5/8
0/2
CAN
7/10
4/11
9 teams won n possession on everyone of their own scrum put in’s and 6 teams won everyone of their lineouts. France won 3 of the 14 opposition scrum put in’s and Canada managed to steal 4 of the 11 opposition lineouts. There were 14 quick throws or 1 in every 9.5 lineouts.
6. PENALTIES & FREE KICKS The average number of penalties and free kicks ki per game (not inc restart free kicks) was 5.5 (Dubai 2009 = 5.0, George = 5.3,, Wellington = 6.6, Las Vegas = 5.6 and Adelaide = 6.2). What needs to be noted that absolute statistics and averages do not necessarily reflect the true degree of discipline or illdiscipline of a particular team.
AVERAGE PENS/FKs HIGHEST IN A MATCH
HONG KONG 2010
OVERALL 2008/09
5.5 12
6
(Wales v Argentina)
14
0 (2 matches) The number of penalties can, for example, vary from match to match. Some referees penalise more than others. A better and probably more accurate indicator, therefore, is the proportion of penalties conceded by a team in all their matches compared with their opponents. Each team’s proportion % for and against can be seen in the following table together with the t totals and averages per game. It can be seen that USA were awarded more penalties than they conceded and Fiji conceded more.
IRB GAME ANALYSIS
LOWEST IN A MATCH
0
(Fiji v Thailand)
PAGE 14
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS
PENS & FKS FOR
PENS & FKS AGAINST
TOTAL
AVERAGE
%
TOTAL
AVERAGE
%
USA
17
3.4
65%
9
1.8
35%
SAM
23
3.8
61%
15
2.5
39%
NZL
15
2.5
60%
10
1.7
40%
ARG
16
4
53%
14
3.5
47%
SCO
17
3.4
50%
17
3.4
50%
KEN
15
3
50%
15
3
50%
WAL
23
3.8
50%
23
3.8
50%
AUS
16
2.7
47%
18
3
53%
RSA
14
2.3
47%
16
2.7
53%
FRA
12
3
46%
14
3.5
54%
ENG
15
3
45%
18
3.6
55%
FJI
4
0.8
29%
10
2
71%
Of the penalties awarded 59% were awarded at the breakdown (Dubai = 68%, George = 61%, Wellington = 56%, Las Vegas = 61% and Adelaide = 54% 54%). There were 194 breakdown penalties awarded, 59% were FOR the attacking team and 41% were AGAINST the attacking team (Dubai = 57% & 43%, George = 55% & 45%, Wellington = 74% & 26%, Las Vegas as = 63% & 37% and Adelaide = 68% & 32%). PENS & FKS FOR
PENS & FKS AGAINST
TOTAL
AVERAGE
%
TOTAL
AVERAGE
%
TAI
13
3.3
59%
9
2.3
41%
KOR
8
2.0
57%
6
1.5
43%
CHI
9
2.3
56%
7
1.8
44%
TON
12
3.0
55%
10
2.5
45%
HKG
18
3.0
53%
16
2.7
47%
RUS
13
2.2
50%
13
2.2
50%
ZIM
12
2.4
50%
12
2.4
50%
JAP
12
3.0
48%
13
3.3
52%
CAN
16
2.7
46%
19
3.2
54%
POR
15
3.0
43%
20
4.0
57%
THA
5
1.3
42%
7
1.8
58%
ITA
7
1.4
30%
16
3.2
70%
IRB GAME ANALYSIS
PAGE 15
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS
Of all penalty decisions, 81% of Penalties Penaltie and Free kicks were tap kicks and 19% were kicks icks to touch – there were no Penalty Goal attempts. (Dubai = 83% & 17%, George = 84% & 16%, Wellington = 87% & 13%, Las Vegas = 71% & 29% and Adelaide 85% & 15%) The average number of penalties and the total number of cards awarded by the 8 participating referees was as follows:
ASO BOLABIU BRIANT FRASER HIRABAYASHI LEES PASTRANA SMORTCHEVSKY MASON
MATCHES
AVERAGE PENS & FKS PER GAME
TOTAL YELLOW/ RED CARDS
6 6 8 7 6 8 7 6 6
6.0 6.3 7.4 4.1 5.8 5.6 4.3 4.0 5.2
3 6 1 2 4 4 2 1 2
7. CARDS There were 25 yellow cards and 0 red card issued. This year, 16 of the 24 teams conceded at least one card, card as seen in the table. Argentina and Zimbabwe conceded 3 each. The offences for which yellow cards were awarded were as follows: HONG KONG 2010
HONG KONG 2010 YELLOW CARDS ARG
3
ZIM
3
FJI
2
FRA
2
ITA
2
NZL
2
Dangerous Tackle/Charge
16
Ruck Offence
3
Foul Play
4
Time Wasting
1
SAM
2
Deliberate Knockon
1
AUS
1
CAN
1
HKG
1
JAP
1
KEN
1
The following table shows the number of yellow and red cards awarded at each leg of the IRB Sevens: OVERALL YELLOW + RED CARDS 2009/10
OVERALL CITING SUSPENSIONS 2009/10
OVERALL YELLOW + RED CARDS 2008/09
DUBAI
3+0
2
12 + 0
GEORGE
16 + 1
1
18 + 1
KOR
1
WELLINGTON
12 + 0
4
23 + 1
RUS
1
USA
8+1
3
15 + 0
SCO
1
ADELAIDE
17 + 0
1
9+0
WAL
1
HONG KONG
25 + 0
3
14 + 0 TOTAL
25
LONDON
6+0
SCOTLAND
11 + 1
OVERALL
108 + 3
IRB GAME ANALYSIS
HONG KONG 2010 RED CARDS
0
PAGE 16
STATISTICAL REVIEW HONG KONG 2010
IRB GAME ANALYSIS
CONTENTS
This is a report on the HONG KONG leg of the IRB Sevens World Series 2009/10. It comprises a quantitative analysis of all elements of play together with the approach to, and performance of, all participating teams in various aspects of the game. The report looks, therefore, at such areas as: • • • • • • • •
Scoring and the effectiveness of each team in attack and defence The source, origin and build up of tries Each team’s possession times and percentages Each team’s passes and rate of passing Each team’s rucks and rate of rucking Each team’s success and approach at rucks Each team’s performance at Set Piece - Restarts, Scrums and Lineouts Plus data on Penalties, Free Kicks and Cards
CURRENT STANDINGS PLAYER STATISTICS & MATCH RESULTS OVERALL STATISTICAL SUMMARY
STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS PAGE 1
SCORING & CONCEDING
PAGE 3
TRY SCORING
PAGE 7
BALL IN PLAY & POSSESSION
PAGE 8
ACTIVITY
PAGE 12
SET PIECE
PAGE 14
PENALTIES & FREE KICKS
PAGE 16
CARDS
Hong Kong 7s 2010 was all about Tries – there was a try every 65 seconds of play, the average tries per match was the highest this series, with 45% of tries originating in the try scoring teams own half. Hong Kong 7s 2010 Cup Winners, Samoa, produced the following statistics: • • •
• • •
•
• • • •
Samoa’s average match score was 27 pts to 15 pts Fiji had the best scoring rate, scoring a try every 38 secs of possession, however Samoa did score a try every 56 secs of possession. South Africa had the best defence, conceding a try every 126 secs of opposition possession, with Samoa conceding a try every 92 secs of opposition possession. Samoa scored 25 tries and conceded 14 in 6 matches. The current overall top try scorer, Samoan Mikaele Pesamino scored 8 tries of them. Samoa were clinical in attack as 64% of their tries contained no rucks in the build up and 52% of their tries contained 3 or fewer passes in the build up. Samoa were difficult to stop as they achieved the highest passing rate – the made 11.7 passes per minutes possession and made a 5+ passing movements one in every 4.3 passing movements. They avoided physical contact as they only had 1.7 rucks per minutes possession, only averaging 7 rucks per game in attack. Samoa kicked short contestable restarts every single time and regained possession one in every 2.2 contestable restarts. Interestingly, Samoa didn’t mind kicking possession as they were one of the highest kicking teams, kicking 18 kicks in 6 matches (7 of which were punt kicks). Finally, they were well disciplined as they were awarded more penalties/free kicks than their opposition.
2009/10 2009 IRB SEVENS CURRENT STANDINGS DUB
GEO
NZL
USA
AUS
HKG
LON
SCO
TOT
SAM
20
6
20
24
24
30
124
NZL
24
24
16
20
12
25
121
FJI
16
20
24
8
6
20
94
AUS
12
6
12
16
16
16
78
ENG
16
12
16
6
4
20
74
RSA
8
8
8
12
8
10
54
KEN
6
16
6
16
0
8
52
ARG
6
16
0
0
16
0
38
USA
0
0
0
4
20
8
32
WAL
4
4
4
6
6
0
24
CAN
0
0
6
0
0
5
11
2009/10 IRB SEVENS CURRENT PLAYER STATISTICS
POINTS SCORED OVERALL 2009/10
TRIES SCORED OVERALL 2009/10
Ben Gollings
ENG
280
Mikaele Pesamino
SAM
47
Mikaele Pesamino
SAM
237
Collins Injera
KEN
28
Lolo Lui
SAM
208
Renaud Delmas
FRA
25
Tomasi Cama
NZL
174
Humphrey Kayange
KEN
23
Cecil Afrika
RSA
171
Ben Gollings
ENG
22
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS
HONG KONG 2010 MATCH RESULTS POOL
TEAM
SCORE
TEAM
KNOCKOUT
TEAM
SCORE
TEAM
Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool Pool
KENYA ENGLAND AUSTRALIA FIJI NEW ZEALAND SAMOA ZIMBABWE JAPAN TONGA PORTUGAL FRANCE RUSSIA KENYA ENGLAND AUSTRALIA FIJI NEW ZEALAND SAMOA SOUTH AFRICA WALES CANADA USA SCOTLAND ARGENTINA SOUTH AFRICA WALES CANADA USA SCOTLAND ARGENTINA KENYA ENGLAND AUSTRALIA FIJI NEW ZEALAND SAMOA
7 - 21 26 - 5 36 - 12 38 - 12 22 - 5 21 - 14 31 - 24 40 - 7 41 - 12 50 - 0 63 - 12 12 - 14 24 - 0 45 - 0 33 - 12 45 - 7 36 - 0 24 - 12 40 - 7 19 - 21 12 - 7 62 - 0 42 - 5 42 - 0 28 - 15 12 - 10 12 - 10 17 - 10 7 - 12 19 - 12 51 - 7 45 - 0 45 - 12 82 - 7 59 - 5 40 - 12
SOUTH AFRICA WALES CANADA USA SCOTLAND ARGENTINA KOREA HONG KONG CHINA THAILAND CHI TAIPEI ITALY ZIMBABWE JAPAN TONGA PORTUGAL FRANCE RUSSIA KOREA HONG KONG CHINA THAILAND CHI TAIPEI ITALY ZIMBABWE JAPAN TONGA PORTUGAL FRANCE RUSSIA KOREA HONG KONG CHINA THAILAND CHI TAIPEI ITALY
Cup Final Plate Final Bowl Final Shield Final Cup S/F Cup S/F Plate S/F Plate S/F Bowl S/F Bowl S/F Shield S/F Shield S/F Cup Q/F Cup Q/F Cup Q/F Cup Q/F Bowl Q/F Bowl Q/F Bowl Q/F Bowl Q/F Shield Q/F Shield Q/F Shield Q/F Shield Q/F
SAMOA AUSTRALIA WALES RUSSIA FIJI SAMOA SOUTH AFRICA USA CANADA WALES HONG KONG ZIMBABWE KENYA FIJI ENGLAND SAMOA PORTUGAL CANADA SCOTLAND ARGENTINA CHI TAIPEI HONG KONG CHINA ZIMBABWE
24 - 21 12 - 5 19 - 35 17 - 19 28 - 33 28 - 24 19 - 12 12 - 21 26 - 24 26 - 7 26 - 19 14 - 17 12 - 21 14 - 12 26 - 19 24 - 7 17 - 7 26 - 0 12 - 10 12 - 17 12 - 45 31 - 14 17 - 31 43 - 12
NEW ZEALAND SOUTH AFRICA CANADA HONG KONG NEW ZEALAND ENGLAND KENYA AUSTRALIA PORTUGAL SCOTLAND ITALY RUSSIA NEW ZEALAND SOUTH AFRICA AUSTRALIA USA FRANCE TONGA JAPAN WALES ITALY KOREA RUSSIA THAILAND
HONG KONG 2010 PLAYER STATISTICS POINTS SCORED HONG KONG 2010
TRIES SCORED HONG KONG 2010
Kurt Baker
NZL
61
Kurt Baker
NZL
9
Gardener Nechironga
ZIM
48
Gardener Nechironga
ZIM
8
James Stannard
AUS
44
Mikaele Pesamino
SAM
8
Cecil Afrika
RSA
41
Kevin Swiryn
USA
8
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS
IRB SEVENS 2009/10 - STATISTICAL SUMMARY DUB 2009 44
GEO 2009 44
NZL 2010 44
USA 2010 44
AUS 2010 44
HKG 2010 60
OVERALL 2008/09 365
POINTS (average per game)
37
36
36
32
37
41
36
TRIES (average per game)
6.0
5.7
5.8
5.2
6.0
6.5
5.7
CONVERSION SUCCESS (%)
63%
62%
58%
62%
60%
67%
62%
PENALTY GOALS (total)
0/1
0/0
0/0
0/1
0/0
0/1
6
DROP GOALS (total)
0/0
1/2
0/0
0/2
0/0
0/0
2
TRY SCORING MATCHES WON by team scoring most tries (%)
91%
91%
91%
89%
86%
85%
90%
SOURCE OF TRIES - pens/fks (%)
29%
27%
38%
27%
34%
28%
29%
ORIGIN OF TRIES - own Half (%)
42%
44%
45%
40%
37%
45%
42%
BUILD UP TO TRIES – no rucks/mauls (%) BUILD UP TO TRIES - 3 Or fewer passes (%)
61%
69%
69%
58%
60%
62%
63%
57%
58%
56%
54%
56%
55%
59%
BALL IN PLAY (%)
51%
52%
49%
49%
49%
50%
50%
PASSES (average per game)
68
72
67
68
68
71
67
5+ PASSING MOVENTS (rate)
1 in 7.2
1 in 8.0
1 in 7.5
1 in 9.7
1 in 8.0
1 in 7.4
1 in 7.9
RUCKS/MAULS (average per game)
17
18
15
17
16
17
16
RUCK/MAUL RETENTION (%)
79%
80%
83%
82%
86%
85%
79%
KICKS (average per game)
3.7
3.8
3.5
4.8
3.0
2.9
4
CONTESTABLE RESTARTS (%)
75%
79%
72%
38%
85%
85%
74%
CONTESTABLE RESTARTS REGAINED (%)
37% or 1 in 2.7 17 or 1 in 19
31% or 1 in 3.2 17 or 1 in 18
38% or 1 in 2.7 27 or 1 in 11
39% or 1 in 2.6 19 or 1 in 15
43% or 1 in 2.3 10 or 1 in 30
38% or 1 in 2.7 16 or 1 in 27
35% or 1 in 2.8 156 or 1 in 15
SCRUMS (average per game)
4
4
4
4
5
4
4
SCRUMS possession retained (%)
79%
85%
84%
82%
81%
89%
85%
LINEOUTS (average per game)
2
3
2
4
2
2
3
LINEOUTS possession retained (%)
82%
76%
72%
80%
71%
80%
75%
QUICK THROWS (total)
12 or 1 in 8
9 or 1 in 8
12 or 1 in 7
18 or 1 in 10
11 or 1 in 9
14 or 1 in 9.5
106 or 1 in 8
PENALTIES (average per game)
5.0
5.3
6.6
5.6
6.2
5.5
6
CARDS (total)
3+0
16 + 1
12 + 0
8+1
17 + 0
25 + 0
108 + 3
MATCHES SCORING
ACTIVITY
SET PIECE
RESTART ERRORS (total)
PENALTIES/FREE KICKS & CARDS
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS
1. SCORING & CONCEDING CEDING The average e number of points scored in a game was 41. The average number of points scored/conceded by a team was 20.5 but, not surprisingly, there were major variations around this average. Fiji averaged 41 points per game while Thailand managed just 5. With regard to points conceded, England only conceded an average of 10 points per game while Chinese Taipei conceded 52. Winners Samoa averaged a score of 27 points to 15. The figures do not show, however, how effective each team was in scoring points in relation to the possession that it obtained and also, the figures do not show, how effective each team was in restricting points in relation to the possession that their opponents obtained. A team may, for example, obtain little possession but still manage to score a significant number of tries conversely a team may concede very few tries in the face of considerable opposition possession. Overall, in Hong Kong a try was scored every 65 seconds of play (Dubai every 72 secs, George every 77 secs, Wellington every 71 secs, s Las Vegas every 79 secs and Adelaide every 67secs)). Scoring rates are calculated (a) by dividing the total possession obtained by a team by the number of tries scored (b) by dividing the total possession obtained by a team opponents by the total num number of tries conceded. The following table gives the relevant figures for each participating team. Fiji had the best try scoring rate, scoring a try every 41 seconds in attack and South Africa had the best try conceding rate, conceding a try every 126 seconds nds in defence. In the Fiji v Thailand match, Fiji scored a try every 20 seconds. MATCHES PLAYED
Av POINTS SCORED
Av POINTS CONCEDED
FJI
5
41
14
FJI
38 secs
RSA
126 secs
ENG
5
33
10
AUS
43 secs
NZ NZL
124 secs
NZL
6
32
12
ENG
44 secs
ARG
107 secs
AUS
6
28
13
NZL
46 secs
KEN
105 secs
SAM
6
27
15
SAM
56 secs
ENG
102 secs
ARG
4
22
13
FRA
62 secs
AUS
100 secs
KEN
5
22
14
ARG
63 secs
FJI
96 secs
USA
5
22
19
USA
63 secs
SAM
92 secs
RSA
6
21
11
KEN
75 secs
FRA
86 secs
FRA
4
21
18
RSA
76 secs
WAL
75 secs
WAL
6
16
19
WAL
80 secs
SCO
69 secs
SCO
5
15
15
SCO
106 secs
USA
55 secs
IRB GAME ANALYSIS
TRY SCORING RATE
TRY CONCEDING RATE
PAGE 1
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS MATCHES PLAYED
Av POINTS SCORED
Av POINTS CONCEDED
TRY SCORING RATE
TRY CONCEDING RATE
POR
5
22
19
ITA
50 secs
CAN
84 secs
CAN
6
21
16
POR
61 secs
ZIM
75 secs
ZIM
5
21
21
ZIM
63 secs
ITA
69 secs
ITA
5
18
26
CAN
65 secs
RUS
68 secs
RUS
6
17
18
JAP
71 secs
POR
65 secs
HKG
6
17
26
HKG
73 secs
JAP
60 secs
TON
4
16
21
TON
79 secs
TON
58 secs
JAP
4
15
19
RUS
80 secs
HKG
47 secs
KOR
4
13
39
CHI
84 secs
CHI
42 secs
CHI
4
12
32
KOR
104 secs
KOR
35 secs
TAI
4
9
52
TAI
170 secs
TAI
25 secs
THA
4
5
59
THA
187 secs
THA
25 secs
1.1 KICKS AT GOAL There was 1 penalty goal attempt but no penalty goals or drop goals were kicked.. The overall conversion success rate was 67% - the highest success rate so far this series. There were noticeable variations in the percentage success rates as seen in the attached table: Because of the relatively few tries scored, applying percentages can, at this stage, only be regarded as indicative. In addition, the e location of the score can be a significant factor in achieving a successful conversion. This is the reason that the attached table has assigned a percentage success rate only to those teams that scored 16 tries or more. Fiji had the highest success rate - 84%
IRB GAME ANALYSIS
CONVERSION SUCCESS
CONVERSION SUCCESS
FJI
84%
HKG
75%
RSA
79%
CAN
74%
SAM
72%
ZIM
59%
NZL
70%
POR
50%
ENG
69%
RUS
47%
AUS
69%
ITA
10/14
WAL
56%
TON
4/11
USA
56%
JAP
5/10
KEN
50%
KOR
6/8
ARG
11/13
CHI
4/8
FRA
11/12
TAI
2/6
SCO
9/11
THA
2/3
PAGE 2
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS
2. TRY SCORING There were 392 tries scored in Hong Kong giving an average of 6.5 per game. (Dubai = 6.0 tries, George = 5.7 tries, Wellington = 5.8 tries, Las Vegas = 5.2 and Adelaide 6.0) In the Pool stage there were 245 tries scored (average – 6.8) and in the knockout stage there were 147 tries scored (average – 6.1) 2.1 IMPACT OF TRIES With no penalty goals or drop goals and a conversion success rate of 67%, it was inevitable that tries would determine the winning team in the vast majority of cases – and this proved to be the case. Of the 60 matches, 51 (or 85%) were won by the team scoring the most tries. There were 9 matches won because of conversions (Canada v Tonga, Wales v Japan, Wales v Hong Kong, Russia v Italy, Scotland v Japan, Fiji v South Africa, Canada v Portugal, Samoa v England and Russia v Hong Kong).
2.2 ORIGIN & LOCATION OF TRIES Tries originate from various parts of the pitch and are scored all across the try line. The following diagram shows the location on the pitch of where the attacking team obtained possession from which they eventually scored and where they were scored along try line. 45% of all tries originated in the try scoring team’s own half and 36% were scored under the posts. LEFT OF POSTS
33% or 128 tries OWN HALF
45% or 176 tries
HW to 10m
10m to 22m
22m to TRY
9% or 33 tries
28% or 111 tries
18% or 72 tries
UNDER POSTS TRIES
36% or 141 tries RIGHT OF POSTS TRIES
31% or 123 tries
The table on the next page shows the origin of tries scored (own) and tries conceded (opp) by each team. The teams which scored a high percentage of their tries from their own half were New Zealand, Kenya and Zimbabwe. The teams which had a low percentage of their tries from their own half were USA and Portugal.
IRB GAME ANALYSIS
PAGE 3
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS
OWN HALF
HW – 10m
10m – 22m
22m - TRY
OWN
OPP
OWN
OPP
OWN
OPP
OWN
FJI
10
5
5
1
14
5
2
NZL
17
10
10
1
3
AUS
11
6
8
6
ENG
14
4
2
OWN
OPP
31
11
1
30
12
7
1
26
13
7
1
3
2
26
8
SAM
10
7
3
5
4
7
3
25
14
CAN
9
8
2
5
6
3
2
19
16
RSA
7
8
4
4
1
4
1
19
11
KEN
10
4
4
2
2
2
4
18
10
POR
5
3
1
2
7
6
5
4
18
15
USA
3
6
1
1
9
8
5
18
15
RUS
9
7
1
5
5
3
4
17
17
ZIM
10
8
3
3
3
1
6
17
17
HKG
7
12
1
WAL
9
8
ITA
6
7
ARG
4
4
FRA
5
SCO
1
1
OPP
TOT
5
7
3
5
16
24
2
5
4
2
3
16
17
3
2
5
6
5
14
20
1
6
1
2
3
13
8
4
1
2
2
4
6
12
12
6
10
2
1
2
2
1
11
13
TON
5
4
1
3
5
2
4
11
13
JAP
4
6
1
1
2
2
3
10
12
CHI
3
11
1
1
4
7
2
8
21
KOR
5
11
5
8
3
1
8
25
TAI
4
15
3
7
2
6
6
31
THA
3
8
5
19
5
3
37
3
2.3 POSSESSION SOURCE OF TRIES The teams scoring oring the tries obtained possession of the ball prior to the scoring of the try from a variety of sources. This is shown: It can be seen that the most fruitful source of tries is penalties/free kicks (28%).
PENALTY/FREE KICK TURNOVER & ERROR RESTART SCRUM LINEOUT KICK RECEIPT
IRB GAME ANALYSIS
HONG KONG 2010
OVERALL 2008/09
28% 20% 24% 16% 8% 4%
29% 18% 22% 14% 11% 6% PAGE 4
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS
The following table shows the possession source source of tries scored (own) and tries conceded (opp) by each team: PEN & FK
T/OVER & ERROR
OWN
OPP
OWN
FJI
2
5
8
NZL
10
2
7
AUS
10
6
6
ENG
5
3
5
SAM
11
5
CAN
5
RSA
OPP
RESTART
SCRUM
LINEOUT
OWN
OPP
OWN
9
5
6
6
2
4
6
1
1
6
3
7
3
1
6
2
4
3
6
5
2
4
5
2
2
5
3
3
5
6
4
KEN
2
4
7
1
5
2
POR
6
5
5
1
4
USA
6
2
7
RUS
6
7
ZIM
6
6
HKG
7
WAL
5
OPP
KICK
OWN
OPP
OWN
4
1
TOTAL OPP
OWN
OPP
2
31
11
1
30
12
3
2
4
2
2
2
26
13
2
1
1
26
8
2
1
25
14
2
1
1
19
16
1
1
1
19
11
2
3
1
18
10
5
3
1
18
15
7
3
3
2
2
1
18
15
2
5
1
4
5
1
1
1
17
17
4
2
7
2
1
17
17
3
2
2
2
7
16
24
5
7
2
5
7
1
ITA
3
7
5
2
2
6
ARG
5
4
2
2
3
FRA
4
5
3
3
1
SCO
3
4
3
3
1
TON
3
2
1
4
JAP
1
3
1
CHI
1
5
KOR
2
4
TAI
2
7
THA
1
6
2
1
1 1
2
5
1
7
5
1
1
3
1
2
2
1
16
17
2
1
2
1
3
14
20
2
1
2
13
8
4
3
12
12
2
4
1
11
13
3
2
2
2
2
2
11
13
2
3
1
4
6
1
10
12
4
6
5
1
1
3
3
7
11
2
2
2
14
2
5
4
1
17
1
1 3
4
1
8
1
1
1
2
8
21
1
1
8
25
6
31
3
37
1
Of the 31 tries Fiji scored,, only 2 began from a penalty or a free kick, whereas Australia, Samoa and New Zealand scored 10 or more from this try source. From restarts, overall Fiji scored 9 tries and Thailand conceded 17 tries.
IRB GAME ANALYSIS
PAGE 5
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS
2.4 BUILD UP TO TRIES The table shows how many rucks/mauls preceded each try scored in the tournament.
None 1 rucks/mauls
The table shows that 62% of tries were preceded by not one ruck or maul.
2 rucks/mauls 3 + rucks/mauls
%
CUMULATIVE %
OVERALL 2008/09
62% 23% 9% 6%
62% 85% 94% 100%
63% 86% 95% 100%
CUMULATIVE %
OVERALL 2008/09
It shows the total number of passes that preceded each try scored in the tournament.
% No passes
The table shows that 55% of tries were preceded by 3 or fewer passes.
1 - 3 passes 4 - 6 passes 7 - 9 passes 10+ passes
9% 46% 25% 14% 6%
9% 55% 80% 94% 100%
12% 58% 83% 94% 100%
When the build up to tries in the pool is compared to the knockout stage, stage, the percentages show that teams had to work harder to score tries during the knockout stage as there were more passes es and more rucks in the build up to tries. % of tries had no r/ms & 59% < 3 passes Pool: 65% Knockout: 56% 56 of tries had no r/ms & 47% < 3 passes In the table below are the figures for each team. The figures in the table include the % of tries scored and conceded with no rucks in the build up and the % of tries scored with 3 or fewer passes. Because of the relatively few tries scored, applying percentages can, at this stage, only be regarded as indicative. This is the reason that the attached ttached table has assigned a percentage success rate only to those teams that scored or conceded 16 tries or more. It can be seen that 87% of Fiji’s tries scored contained no rucks in the build up and 67% of USA’s tries scored contained 3 or fewer passes in i the build up. % OF TRIES WITH NO RUCKS
% OF TRIES WITH 3 OR FEWER PASSES
TRIES SCORED
TRIES CONCEDED
TRIES SCORED
FJI
87%
10/12
48%
AUS
73%
6/13
SAM
64%
ENG
% OF TRIES WITH NO RUCKS
% OF TRIES WITH 3 OR FEWER PASSES
TRIES SCORED
TRIES CONCEDED
TRIES SCORED
POR
56%
7/15
61%
50%
RUS
53%
59%
41%
8/14
52%
ZIM
53%
59%
24%
62%
4/8
58%
CAN
47%
38%
84%
NZL
60%
10/12
53%
HKG
44%
67%
50%
KEN
50%
6/10
67%
ITA
12/14
50%
10/14
WAL
50%
59%
25%
TON
6/11
7/13
6/11
USA
44%
13/15
67%
JAP
8/10
7/12
7/10
RSA
42%
8/11
42%
KOR
5/8
52%
3/8
ARG
5/13
3/8
7/13
CHI
6/8
71%
4/8
FRA
10/12
7/12
10/12
TAI
5/6
87%
4/6
SCO
9/11
10/13
8/11
THA
3/3
73%
1/3
IRB GAME ANALYSIS
PAGE 6
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS
3. BALL IN PLAY & POSESSION There was a considerable variation between the ball in play figures achieved by the various teams. This is shown in the following table which gives the average possession times achieved by each team throughout the tournament in attack and defence:
AVERAGE BALL-IN-PLAY HIGHEST BALL-IN-PLAY MATCH
HONG KONG 2010
OVERALL 2008/09
3m 32s or 50% 9m 23s
6m 58s or 50%
(Kenya v Zimbabwe)
5m 32s
LOWEST BALL-IN- PLAY MATCH
(Japan v Hong Kong)
HIGHEST POSSESSION TIME BY A TEAM LOWEST POSSESSION TIME BY A TEAM
9m 28s or 68% 4m 53s or 35%
6m 15s
7m 18s
(Samoa v Italy)
1m 26s
1m 06s
(Samoa v Italy Italy)
As seen in the table, there were some noticeable differences. Kenya averaged the highest, averaging well over 4 minutes possession per game, with Italy only averaged 2m 20s. Hong Kong, USA, England, Scotland, Chinese Taipei and China dominated possession in their matches, all averaging 55% or more of total possession. Italy on average, only had 34% % of possession in their matches – in one match they only had 1m 26ss of possession. OWN AVERAGE POSSESSION
%
OPPONENTS AVERAGE AVERA POSSESSION
%
OWN AVERAGE POSSESSION
%
OPPONENTS AVERAGE POSSESSION
%
ENG
3m 49s
59%
2m 42s
41%
HKG
3m 15s
61%
3m 06s
39%
USA
3m 48s
58%
2m 45s
42%
TAI
4m 15s
57%
3m 15s
43%
SCO
3m 52s
56%
3m 00s
44%
CHI
2m 47s
55%
3m 39s
45%
KEN
4m 29s
56%
3m 29s
44%
RUS
3m 46s
54%
3m 12s
46%
FJI
3m 53s
53%
3m 30s
47%
POR
3m 40s
53%
3m 14s
47%
SAM
3m 55s
52%
3m 35s
48%
TON
3m 37s
53%
3m 09s
47%
RSA
3m 59s
51%
3m 50s
49%
JAP
2m 58s
50%
2m 59s
50%
WAL
3m 33s
50%
3m 33s
50%
KOR
3m 27s
48%
3m 40s
52%
ARG
3m 24s
49%
3m 33s
51%
CAN
3m 24s
48%
3m 43s
52%
NZL
3m 48s
48%
4m 08s
52%
ZIM
3m 35s
46%
4m 16s
54%
AUS
3m 04s
46%
3m 35s
54%
THA
2m 20s
38%
3m 47s
62%
FRA
3m 06s
42%
4m 18s
58%
ITA
2m 20s
34%
4m 35s
66%
IRB GAME ANALYSIS
PAGE 7
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS
4. ACTIVITY
HONG KONG 2010
OVERALL 2008/09
71 102
67
AVERAGE PASSES
4.1 PASSING The average number of passes in a game was 71. The average number of passes ses by a team was 35.5 but, not surprisingly, there were major variations around this average.
HIGHEST PASSING MATCH LOWEST PASSING MATCH
115
(New Zealand v Scotland)
43
35
(Japan v Hong Kong)
PASSING RATE
AVERAGE PASSES
SAM
11.7
46
FJI
1 in 2.4
CHI
11.4
32
ZIM
1 in 3.8
RUS
11.4
43
CHI
1 in 3.8
FJI
11.3
44
THA
1 in 4.0
ZIM
11.3
41
SAM
1 in 4.3
TAI
11.1
47
RUS
1 in 5.3
ARG
11.0
37
TON
1 in 6.8
RSA
10.8
43
ENG
1 in 7.0
TON
10.8
39
SCO
1 in 7.3
HKG
10.7
35
TAI
1 in 7.3
PASSING MOVEMENTS
KEN
10.3
46
ARG
1 in 7.4
Passes came in passing movements of which there were just over 1000.
THA
10.2
24
NZL
1 in 7.9
SCO
10.1
39
HKG
1 in 8.5
JAP
9.6
29
JAP
1 in 9.0
NZL
9.9
38
KOR
1 in 9.6
AUS
9.8
30
KEN
1 in 10.6
KOR
9.4
33
CAN
1 in 10.8
ENG
9.4
36
POR
1 in 10.8
POR
9.4
35
USA
1 in 14.2
USA
9.2
35
WAL
1 in 14.3
WAL
9.3
33
AUS
1 in 17.0
FRA
8.7
27
RSA
1 in 17.5
ITA
7.5
18
ITA
1 in 19.5
CAN
7.4
25
FRA
1 in 22.5
RATES & AVERAGES The table shows major differences between the teams. Such differences can however partly be explained by the amount of possession obtained by each eac team – more possession means more passes. If possession is taken into account, therefore the rate at which each country passed the ball is far closer. Samoa, China, and Russia had the highest passing rate and Canada, Italy and France had the lowest. Kenya on average passed nearly 50% more than Thailand,, but it can be seen that they passed at the same rate when possession is taken into account.
Around 50% of all passing movements contained 2 or fewer passes. Where major differences arose, these were seen in the more lengthy passing movements. Of all passing movements, 1 in 7.4 contained 5+ passes (Dubai 1 in 7.2, George 1 in 8.0, Wellington 1 in 7.5, Las Vegas 1 in 9.7 and Adelaide 1 in 8.0). Certain teams were far more inclined to continue passing than others. This is shown in the above table which notes the proportion of 5+ pass movements to total number of passing movements made by each country. Fiji were the most likely to make a 5+ passing movement, they made 1 in every 2.4 passing movements, whereas Italy and France were least likely.
IRB GAME ANALYSIS
5+ PASSING
PAGE 8
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS
4.2 RUCKS & MAULS
HONG KONG 2010
OVERALL 2008/09
17 34
16
AVERAGE RUCKS
The average number of passes in a game was 17. The average number of passes by a team was 8.5 but, not surprisingly, there were major variations around this average.
HIGHEST RUCKING MATCH LOWEST RUCKING MATCH SUCCESS %
RATES & AVERAGES The table below shows major differences in the average number of rucks/mauls created by each team. Some of this can be explained by the amount of possession obtained by each team. If this is taken into account, the rate at which each country rucked and mauled is far closer, as also shown in the table. This expresses rucks/mauls as ‘rucks/mauls per minute possession ‘. South Africa had the highest rucking rate and Fiji had the lowest. Kenya on average rucked more than USA, but it can be seen that they rucked at the same rate when possession is taken into account. RUCK SUCCESS At the breakdown, the team taking in the ball retained possession by either winning the ball or being awarded a penalty on 85% of occasions. The percentage success rate of each team in attack and defence are shown in the above table. In Attack, New Zealand and USA achieved high retention rates at rucks while Fiji, Japan and Thailand had low retention rates. In Defence, Japan, Portugal and New Zealand won ruck possession from opponents on a number of occasions, while Australia and Thailand won little, if any possession at any opposition rucks.
IRB GAME ANALYSIS
(Kenya v South Africa) Africa
4
31 4
(Fiji v Thailand Thailand)
85%
79%
RUCKING RATE
AVERAGE RUCKS
RETENTION % SUCCESS % OWN RUCKS OPP RUCKS
RSA
3.4
14
NZL
96%
23%
TAI
3.1
13
USA
94%
14%
HKG
3.0
10
AUS
93%
3%
KEN
2.9
13
CHI
93%
13%
SCO
2.8
11
ARG
92%
12%
USA
2.8
11
CAN
90%
18%
ARG
2.8
10
POR
90%
24%
WAL
2.7
10
SAM
90%
11%
KOR
2.5
9
WAL
89%
19%
CAN
2.4
8
KEN
88%
18%
JAP
2.4
7
RUS
88%
11%
THA
2.4
6
TON
88%
7%
AUS
2.3
7
ZIM
85%
17%
TON
2.3
8
RSA
84%
18%
FRA
2.3
7
ENG
83%
16%
RUS
2.3
9
HKG
83%
15%
POR
2.2
8
KOR
80%
11%
ZIM
2.2
8
SCO
80%
16%
ENG
2.1
8
FRA
79%
20%
NZL
2.0
8
TAI
77%
7%
ITA
1.9
4
ITA
77%
7%
SAM
1.7
7
JAP
66%
25%
CHI
1.3
4
FJI
61%
18%
FJI
0.9
4
THA
61%
0%
PAGE 9
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS
NUMBER OF PLAYERS COMMITTED TO RUCKS – ATTACK & DEFENCE There are over 500 breakdowns in a tournament - and a breakdown occurs when at least one player from each side is on his is feet at or over the ball. When the tackler is on his feet and an opponent joins in, then there is a breakdown. When the tackler is not on his feet, a breakdown occurs when at least one player from each side joins in. What became immediately noticeable was that there were clear differences in the approach of the various countries in committing players to the breakdown. While certain teams frequently committed few additional players, other countries consistently committed more. The extent of the differences rences between each team’s approach is illustrated by an exercise that looked at how many players were re committed to the breakdown in attack and in defence. Overall on average, the attacking team committed only 1 extra player on 75 75% of occasions and defending teams committed d only 1 extra player on 55% of occasions. It can be seen that in the table below, in attack, Wales committed only one player on 91% % of occasions while France committed 2 or more players 55% 55 of the time. In defence, Fiji committed no extra players on 49% of occasions, whereas Samoa committed ommitted 2 or more players in defence on 22% of occasions.
ATTACK
DEFENCE
1 PLAYER
2+ PLAYERS
NO PLAYER
1 PLAYER
2+ PLAYERS
WAL
91%
9%
FJI
49%
41%
10%
SAM
90%
10%
SCO
48%
39%
13%
ARG
89%
11%
FRA
47%
49%
4%
USA
89%
11%
KEN
43%
45%
12%
AUS
86%
14%
SAM
42%
36%
22%
FJI
83%
17%
NZL
32%
51%
17%
NZL
76%
24%
AUS
30%
61%
9%
RSA
73%
27%
ARG
29%
59%
12%
SCO
69%
31%
WAL
28%
57%
16%
KEN
63%
37%
RSA
27%
52%
21%
ENG
56%
44%
USA
19%
76%
5%
FRA
45%
55%
ENG
18%
76%
5%
IRB GAME ANALYSIS
PAGE 10
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS
ATTACK
DEFENCE
1 PLAYER
2+ PLAYERS
NO PLAYER
1 PLAYER
2+ PLAYERS
POR
95%
5%
THA
57%
36%
7%
TON
88%
12%
KOR
43%
40%
17%
RUS
83%
17%
CAN
38%
56%
5%
CAN
82%
18%
RUS
38%
62%
0%
ZIM
74%
26%
ITA
35%
59%
6%
HKG
72%
28%
HKG
27%
67%
6%
ITA
68%
32%
ZIM
26%
63%
11%
THA
65%
35%
CHI
22%
56%
22%
CHI
64%
36%
JAP
21%
46%
32%
TAI
63%
37%
TON
21%
64%
14%
JAP
62%
38%
POR
15%
74%
12%
KOR
51%
49%
TAI
7%
67%
27%
4.3 KICKS Kicks cks include all kicks made in general play inc. punts, chips, ground (i.e. football kick) and grubber kicks. The average number of kicks in a game was 3.0 (Dubai Dubai was 3.7, George was 3.8, Wellington was 3.5, Las Vegas was 4.8 and Adelaide was 3.0).
AVERAGE KICKS HIGHEST KICKING MATCH LOWEST KICKING MATCH KICK REGAIN RATE
HONG KONG 2010
OVERALL 2008/09
3 10
4
(Samoa v Italy)
0 (6 matches)
1 in 3.1
16 0 1 in 3
Samoa and Italy kicked far more often than any other team while USA, Thailand and Korea on the other hand, kicked very little. Of the total kicks made by teams in open play, the attached table shows how many were regained. The overall kick regain rate was 1 in 3.1 (Dubai = 1 in 2.6, George = 1 in 3.0, Wellington = 1 in 3.4, Las Vegas = 1 in 6.1 and Adelaide = 1 in 2.4) There were a wide variety of kicks as of o all the kicks, 27% were chip kicks, 31% % were punt kicks kicks, 24% were ground kicks and 18% were grubber kicks.
IRB GAME ANALYSIS
PAGE 11
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS
5. SET PIECE RESTARTS HONG KONG 2010
SCRUMS HONG KONG 2010
LINEOUTS HONG KONG 2010
RESTARTS OVERALL 2008/09
SCRUMS OVERALL 2008/09
LINEOUTS OVERALL 2008/09
AVERAGE
7
4
2
7
4
3
HIGHEST IN A MATCH
13
8
5
11
10
7
LOWEST IN A MATCH
4
1
0
3
0 7 matches
0 30 matches
SUCCESS %
38% or 1 in 2.7
89%
80%
35%
85%
75%
Restarts were classified into 2 types:
85% of restarts were kicked contestable 15% of restarts were kicked not contestable (Dubai = 75%, George rge = 79%, Wellington = 72%, Las Vegas = 38% and Adelaide = 85%)
Retention rates reflect the number of times that possession was retained at contestable restarts – they varied considerably. Off all contestable restarts, the kicking team regained 38% or 1 in 2.7 (Dubai - 37%, George 31%, Wellington – 38%, Las Vegas – 39% and Adelaide – 43%) OWN RESTARTS REGAIN SUCCESS
OPP RESTARTS RECEIVE SUCCESS
OWN RESTARTS CONTESTABLE
NOT CONTESTABLE
ENG
1 in 1.6
FRA
1 in 1.0
ENG
100%
0%
USA
1 in 1.6
RSA
1 in 1.2
SCO
100%
0%
SAM
1 in 2.2
ENG
1 in 1.3
SAM
100%
0%
SCO
1 in 2.3
AUS
1 in 1.4
ARG
100%
0%
WAL
1 in 2.4
NZL
1 in 1.4
KEN
95%
5%
KEN
1 in 2.6
USA
1 in 1.4
FRA
93%
7%
RSA
1 in 2.6
FJI
1 in 1.5
RSA
90%
10%
AUS
1 in 2.7
KEN
1 in 1.8
AUS
89%
11%
FJI
1 in 2.9
SCO
1 in 1.8
USA
84%
16%
ARG
1 in 3.2
WAL
1 in 1.8
FJI
82%
18%
NZL
1 in 4.8
SAM
1 in 2.0
NZL
68%
32%
FRA
1 in 7.0
ARG
1 in 6.0
WAL
63%
37%
As can be seen in the tables, England and USA were the most successful essful in regaining own short restarts and France and South outh Africa the most successful in receiving opposition short restarts. France was the least successful at regaining own contestable restarts, however they receive every opposition contestable restarts. There were 7 teams that always kicked contestable restarts, whereas Italy kicked contestable only 18% of the time. There were only 16 restart errors or 1 in every 27 restarts. restarts. This is the lowest number and best rate so far this series. (Dubai = 17 or 1 in 14.0, George = 17 or 1 in 17.7, Wellington = 27 or 1 in 11.4, Las Vegas = 19 or 1 in 14.6 and Adelaide = 10 or 1 in 30) IRB GAME ANALYSIS
PAGE 12
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS OWN RESTARTS REGAIN SUCCESS
OPP RESTARTS RECEIVE SUCCESS
OWN RESTARTS CONTESTABLE
NOT CONTESTABLE
THA
1 in 2.0
TAI
1 in 1.3
JAP
100%
0%
JAP
1 in 2.2
RUS
1 in 1.3
HKG
100%
0%
TAI
1 in 2.5
TON
1 in 1.3
TON
100%
0%
POR
1 in 2.7
HKG
1 in 1.6
CAN
96%
4%
CAN
1 in 2.9
CAN
1 in 1.7
RUS
90%
10%
RUS
1 in 3.0
ITA
1 in 1.7
POR
89%
11%
HKG
1 in 3.3
KOR
1 in 1.7
THA
86%
14%
TON
1 in 3.7
POR
1 in 1.7
TAI
83%
17%
KOR
1 in 4.0
ZIM
1 in 1.7
KOR
80%
20%
ZIM
1 in 4.3
CHI
1 in 1.8
ZIM
68%
32%
CHI
1 in 8.0
JAP
1 in 2.0
CHI
67%
33%
ITA
0 in 3
THA
1 in 2.1
ITA
18%
82%
Overall Scrum success was 89% and overall Lineout success was 80%.. The following table shows the success rate for each team on own put/throw in and opposition put/throw in: SCRUM
LINEOUT
OWN
OPP
OWN
OWN
OPP
ENG
12/12
0/7
FJI
5/5
1/3
ARG
10/10
2/8
FRA
2/2
0/2
FJI
7/7
1/8
ENG
2/2
2/5
KEN
7/7
0/8
WAL
8/9
1/9
FRA
5/5
3/14
RSA
7/8
1/6
WAL
5/5
1/10
NZL
7/8
2/6
SAM
15/16
1/13
KEN
6/7
0/5
SCO
14/15
1/7
SAM
3/4
3/10
RSA
12/14
2/12
USA
6/8
1/2
USA
9/10
2/12
SCO
5/7
1/8
AUS
6/10
1/12
ARG
5/7
1/5
NZL
6/8
0/14
AUS
3/5
0/6
IRB GAME ANALYSIS
PAGE 13
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS
SCRUM
LINEOUT
OWN
OPP
OWN
OWN
OPP
CHI
11/11
0/4
TAI
3/3
1/2
POR
10/10
0/8
ZIM
2/2
1/4
KOR
8/8
0/5
KOR
2/2
0/0
HKG
8/9
0/7
ITA
8/9
1/6
RUS
8/9
3/17
TON
4/5
2/7
TAI
8/9
2/7
POR
1/2
0/5
TON
7/8
2/8
HKG
1/2
0/11
JAP
7/8
0/9
THA
0/1
0/3
ZIM
5/6
2/14
JAP
10/12
1/5
THA
9/11
0/9
RUS
7/9
2/7
CAN
9/11
1/12
CHI
2/4
2/5
ITA
5/8
0/2
CAN
7/10
4/11
9 teams won n possession on everyone of their own scrum put in’s and 6 teams won everyone of their lineouts. France won 3 of the 14 opposition scrum put in’s and Canada managed to steal 4 of the 11 opposition lineouts. There were 14 quick throws or 1 in every 9.5 lineouts.
6. PENALTIES & FREE KICKS The average number of penalties and free kicks ki per game (not inc restart free kicks) was 5.5 (Dubai 2009 = 5.0, George = 5.3,, Wellington = 6.6, Las Vegas = 5.6 and Adelaide = 6.2). What needs to be noted that absolute statistics and averages do not necessarily reflect the true degree of discipline or illdiscipline of a particular team.
AVERAGE PENS/FKs HIGHEST IN A MATCH
HONG KONG 2010
OVERALL 2008/09
5.5 12
6
(Wales v Argentina)
14
0 (2 matches) The number of penalties can, for example, vary from match to match. Some referees penalise more than others. A better and probably more accurate indicator, therefore, is the proportion of penalties conceded by a team in all their matches compared with their opponents. Each team’s proportion % for and against can be seen in the following table together with the t totals and averages per game. It can be seen that USA were awarded more penalties than they conceded and Fiji conceded more.
IRB GAME ANALYSIS
LOWEST IN A MATCH
0
(Fiji v Thailand)
PAGE 14
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS
PENS & FKS FOR
PENS & FKS AGAINST
TOTAL
AVERAGE
%
TOTAL
AVERAGE
%
USA
17
3.4
65%
9
1.8
35%
SAM
23
3.8
61%
15
2.5
39%
NZL
15
2.5
60%
10
1.7
40%
ARG
16
4
53%
14
3.5
47%
SCO
17
3.4
50%
17
3.4
50%
KEN
15
3
50%
15
3
50%
WAL
23
3.8
50%
23
3.8
50%
AUS
16
2.7
47%
18
3
53%
RSA
14
2.3
47%
16
2.7
53%
FRA
12
3
46%
14
3.5
54%
ENG
15
3
45%
18
3.6
55%
FJI
4
0.8
29%
10
2
71%
Of the penalties awarded 59% were awarded at the breakdown (Dubai = 68%, George = 61%, Wellington = 56%, Las Vegas = 61% and Adelaide = 54% 54%). There were 194 breakdown penalties awarded, 59% were FOR the attacking team and 41% were AGAINST the attacking team (Dubai = 57% & 43%, George = 55% & 45%, Wellington = 74% & 26%, Las Vegas as = 63% & 37% and Adelaide = 68% & 32%). PENS & FKS FOR
PENS & FKS AGAINST
TOTAL
AVERAGE
%
TOTAL
AVERAGE
%
TAI
13
3.3
59%
9
2.3
41%
KOR
8
2.0
57%
6
1.5
43%
CHI
9
2.3
56%
7
1.8
44%
TON
12
3.0
55%
10
2.5
45%
HKG
18
3.0
53%
16
2.7
47%
RUS
13
2.2
50%
13
2.2
50%
ZIM
12
2.4
50%
12
2.4
50%
JAP
12
3.0
48%
13
3.3
52%
CAN
16
2.7
46%
19
3.2
54%
POR
15
3.0
43%
20
4.0
57%
THA
5
1.3
42%
7
1.8
58%
ITA
7
1.4
30%
16
3.2
70%
IRB GAME ANALYSIS
PAGE 15
HONG KONG 2010 STATISTICAL REVIEW & MATCH ANALYSIS
Of all penalty decisions, 81% of Penalties Penaltie and Free kicks were tap kicks and 19% were kicks icks to touch – there were no Penalty Goal attempts. (Dubai = 83% & 17%, George = 84% & 16%, Wellington = 87% & 13%, Las Vegas = 71% & 29% and Adelaide 85% & 15%) The average number of penalties and the total number of cards awarded by the 8 participating referees was as follows:
ASO BOLABIU BRIANT FRASER HIRABAYASHI LEES PASTRANA SMORTCHEVSKY MASON
MATCHES
AVERAGE PENS & FKS PER GAME
TOTAL YELLOW/ RED CARDS
6 6 8 7 6 8 7 6 6
6.0 6.3 7.4 4.1 5.8 5.6 4.3 4.0 5.2
3 6 1 2 4 4 2 1 2
7. CARDS There were 25 yellow cards and 0 red card issued. This year, 16 of the 24 teams conceded at least one card, card as seen in the table. Argentina and Zimbabwe conceded 3 each. The offences for which yellow cards were awarded were as follows: HONG KONG 2010
HONG KONG 2010 YELLOW CARDS ARG
3
ZIM
3
FJI
2
FRA
2
ITA
2
NZL
2
Dangerous Tackle/Charge
16
Ruck Offence
3
Foul Play
4
Time Wasting
1
SAM
2
Deliberate Knockon
1
AUS
1
CAN
1
HKG
1
JAP
1
KEN
1
The following table shows the number of yellow and red cards awarded at each leg of the IRB Sevens: OVERALL YELLOW + RED CARDS 2009/10
OVERALL CITING SUSPENSIONS 2009/10
OVERALL YELLOW + RED CARDS 2008/09
DUBAI
3+0
2
12 + 0
GEORGE
16 + 1
1
18 + 1
KOR
1
WELLINGTON
12 + 0
4
23 + 1
RUS
1
USA
8+1
3
15 + 0
SCO
1
ADELAIDE
17 + 0
1
9+0
WAL
1
HONG KONG
25 + 0
3
14 + 0 TOTAL
25
LONDON
6+0
SCOTLAND
11 + 1
OVERALL
108 + 3
IRB GAME ANALYSIS
HONG KONG 2010 RED CARDS
0
PAGE 16
