Reader Comments on Sports News

Story LinkReader CommentComment Link

Not just Brad Weber needed. . . . You got those guys from Canterbury sniffing around Otago boys looking for a centre.  Thompkinson should have been included.




Not just Brad Weber needed

Thanks for taking the time to reply and explain your ratings system. Before the explanation I would have thought 5 to be an average or pass mark so only seeing one player under this mark on a 3 and 7 team was confusing. I still don't necessarily agree with these scores but everybody is entitled to their opinion.

I do however agree on your comments regarding too much of the same. The team on a whole appears very limited. The Otago forwards got enough possession to win more games but the lack of physicality and ball runners as well as having a very average halves combination is meaning we are not placing enough pressure on other teams defensive systems.

Hopefully next season things improve but I think that whoever the new coach may be has a real challenge on their hands.




Thanks for taking the time

This young fella has quality in all aspects of his game!


We are happy to see you back and look foward to you dominating the NZ cricket scene.


Welcome back Jesse

"How do you come up with this garbage?"

Answer: Hi ballmunger, thanks for your comment, happy to answer your question. There is a different formula for these ratings than the game player ratings. Firstly I decide on a scale. In general, six is a pass, seven is good with maybe a few average games, eight you were consistently very good, nine you pretty much carried the team. Five you were probably not overly flash, a bit below average, but were not necessarily bad either; just not really doing things well and a bit non-existent. Below five you were consistently poor and having a negative impact.

For each individual I went through and looked at what they did well, what they didn't, where they were lacking etc. and also how consistent they were, how many games they played well in and how many they didn't. Got to give players credit for what they did well, as well as take marks off for what they didn't do well. Some were quite hard given the range of performances they had. Someone like Charlie O'Connell, very good early on, but then really exposed later on in the season. You cannot just ignore his good early performances, so had to meet somewhere in the middle. After fitting everyone into the scale, I then averaged out my game player ratings for everyone for the season and looked at how they stacked up and made adjustments where necessary (there was only one adjustment made).

I would agree that they do not reflect the performances of the second half of the season. However, I believe that this is more a limitation of Player Ratings. They rate players based on how they played individually. Many of Otago's problems were selection issues or that they did not act well as a collective. Too much of the same. The forwards were all good as individuals, but there was no impact there. Had there been another strong running-type player, they probably would have been fine doing what they were doing. Doesn't mean they have played any better. It is hard to reflect this in player ratings, which is why a team analysis - which is coming - is needed to complement them.

Also keep in mind that there were only four games where Otago really were awful and at times they were actually very good.

Hope this at least sheds some light on how these ratings were come up with.

In reply

Look on this team as a product in the entertainment sector.  No different to a group of people putting on a show at the Regent.  There is a major difference though.  This rugby product is being subsidised by all ratepayers by a variety of means - some open and some hidden.  Unlike the show at the Regent which not only has to meet actual costs but it then needs to show a profit.  Ticket prices need to substantially increase for Otago matches at the rugby stadium, and based on the woeful performances of this semi-professional team along with their ratepayer subsidised operation floundering round the bottom of the second tier, it is clear that if this were to happen then attendances would move from pathetic to almost non-existent.  Is it not time to pull the plug on this product which is no longer meeting customer expectations?  Use their ORFU "profit" to pay back the City what it is owed and concentrate on providing services to amateur rugby which deserves some encouragement.

Is it time?

Let's hope most of the current bunch can work on their game and improve for 2015.  Renton did seem to be improving towards the end of the season (although still not up to NPC standard). Renata was a huge disapointment, he was solid without doing anything special for the Highlanders - in the last few NPC games he s been on automatic pilot sleepwalking through games. He should go unless the new coach thinks he ll put in a decent effort.

Still, I'm a fan of picking home-grown talent or making players that come south play the club season.  Forking out the dosh to import players has failed before and doesn't do anything for the long term health of the game in Otago.  Let's hope the new coach can get more out the team in 2015.

Improve what we ve got

Not saying we need to buy in a heap of players but 2-3 positions actually cost us matches this year -

- Trent Renata must go
- New halfback
- Some solid midfiled backs not those two there now that cant tackle and dont have size to make a break
- A decent number 8 with some skills and go forward.

Lastly the ORFU should remember that ifthe team continues to perform so badly people will stop spending hard earned money to see a team languish at the bottom of the second tier year after year, and that will then affect cash which will affect the operation. It's a bad cycle and a fine balancing act which I don't think they have quite right. Why pay to watch a bunch of club level players be bashed around each week when you can go watch it for free any Saturday at parks all across Otago?


Not saying we need to buy in

The ORFU need to look up the definition of insanity. It is along the lines of "doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result".

I see nothing changing in Otago Rugby and this could be the end of my support for a once great team. 


The talent to choose the team from is nt great. True enough though a disappointing season.  Lets hope the players can step it up next year. 

Be fair
Syndicate content