Here is an initial stab at it. Just trying to rate the opposition and using 13-matches as the minimum. Please note that not all schools fixtures have been received yet.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Copyright © 2024 | WordPress Theme by MH Themes
Menlo 18 … dink Menlo bepalings 2023 is spot on … dan kom daar nog die Menlo 60 jaar festival ook. Sien uit na ‘n lekker seisoen!!
@beet: ?
@Tang: added to posts
@beet – Quick Question. Is there anyway to add a like button for a post or for user comments?
@beet: Beet, there was a great article about a better Youth Weeks selection process proposed last year. If you take HJS for example – they start 18 March and play 16 games the next 12 weeks, with no break. Then 6 weeks off, except for the Craven week selections, then 3 games in 3 weeks up to Interskole on 5 Aug. Some of those players are going to end up with 22 tough games, over a 21 week period.
Will selectors expect players to go through normal trials?
Looks like a fair list to me
@beet: I agree. No ranking is close to perfect, and gets worse the lower down you are. The best you can do is to be consistent on how you do the ranking, and allow for changes in the year as results start coming through.
Interesting for me is how schools like Stellenberg started playing more and tougher opposition, and then also started climbing up in the rankings.
How tough a schedule is, is for me an indication of where schools want to be going with their rugby, how well they planned (within their ability and existing obligations) and what impact injuries/fatigue could potentially have on performance.
This year is going to be brutal for a lot of teams, especially March to May. Hopefully player welfare will remain the priority.
Player depth will be the most important success factor in 2023.
@Kantman: I tend to agree with make or break scenarios brought on by playing stronger teams
I guess its an age old debate because most rankings favour schools that win, irrespective of who they play. In many cases as long as they win, the odds are that mid range schools will rank between 10 and 20 places higher than their true ranking worth.
The flip side how to rank the overambitious or unfortunate school due to the local system they are in, plays a disproportionately high number of good schools in relation to their own strength and ends up losing most matches, yet their level of competitiveness suggests they are better than the mid range school who won all its easy-ish fixtures.
@beet: Firstly, I am glad you are back in full force! We missed your articles. This site has the most valuable info going back more than 10 years, you can be proud.
I would keep it simple.
Number of games against strength of opposition, with a target of 15 games for the year. Then weight that a bit for number of games against Top6 (30%), Top20 (50%) and Top35 (20%). Since there is no way to predict strength across the board in year, I would base it on historic data from BHP ranking (2010-2022 data).
I am sure the other variables will come into play, but it is just to complicated to assess impact. And I do not have all the latest data.
Why Top6? Your games against these teams will make or break your season. If you play 5 out of six, I will give you 100% (Oakdale).
Why Top20? If you want to claim top spot, you should be winning against this level. Score is % of games, say 13 (Oakdale) out of 19 (not counting yourself) for 68%.
Why Top35? Tough if target of 15 games is against Top35. Oakdale has 15/15 for 100%.
Therefore Oakdale scores 84% on the Toughest Schedule Measure.
Next would be Grey, Gim, HJS, PRG – all in the high 70’s.
Then Affies, Monnas, Boland, Stellenberg, Helpmekaar – all in the 60’s.
Garsfontein, Rondebosch, Wynberg – all in the 50’s.
@Kantman: It would be nice to get a measurement going for toughest schedule.
It’s the quality of the opposition, venue, overnight stay vs day trip, rest time between matches, number of matches played and probably a few things I’m forgetting