Interesting tri-nations stats

[Parra]

No lie. I forgot the "per card" bit.

There you go jumping to incorrect conclusions and then making poor judgments as a result. That is a crap habit to develop.

Neither these figures or myself will convince you. And your petty sledges aren't going to sway me. We'll just have to keep watching the footy.

 

[Te Kaha]

No lie. I forgot the "per card" bit.

There you go jumping to incorrect conclusions and then making poor judgments as a result. That is a crap habit to develop.

Neither these figures or myself will convince you. And your petty sledges aren't going to sway me. We'll just have to keep watching the footy.

the entire thread you have been trying to showthat NZ are the "beneficiaries of refereeing bias" based on the amount of cards per penalties... however to do so you need to remove the cards awarded for foul play. Why? because a card awarded for foul play is given for a single action... not repeated infringing.. you refuse to do so because if you take those cards out it shows your argument is baseless... to further prove how baseless look at the two cards not given for foul play.

Botha... killed the ball when NZ was right on their tryline it was the third infringment in a row in the same "play" the previous two wernt awarded as advantage was played.

Mitchell... BOTH teams were warned against throwing the ball away to slow down the game, the ref CLEARLY said to both captains that the next player to do so would be bined.. one team listened, the other didnt... had an NZ player done so and the card not awarded you would have an argument... it didnt... you dont.

There are no other cards awarded for "constant infringing"... and since NZ conceed on average ONLY 3 more penalties per game it shows your claim of bias is completly baseless.

 

[Parra]

I didn't remove the foul play cards. You wanted the split and you got it.

Cards per penalties is valid. But lets takes out the foul play cards & penalties.

NZ 42 penalties / 0 cards
SA 21 penalties / 1 card
AUS 22 / 1 card

Regardless of how many games are played, on a penalty-per-card basis you could expect NZ to have received at least 2 . But they have none.

The AB's have conceded twice as many penalties, yet receive the benefit of playing against only 14 men for large parts of their matches.

A team with such poor discipline would expect to see more players carded, not less. Certainly not none at all, which is the case here.

 

[Te Kaha]

I didn't remove the foul play cards. You wanted the split and you got it.

Cards per penalties is valid. But lets takes out the foul play cards & penalties.

NZ 42 penalties / 0 cards
SA 21 penalties / 1 card
AUS 22 / 1 card

Regardless of how many games are played, on a penalty-per-card basis you could expect NZ to have received at least 2 . But they have none.

The AB's have conceded twice as many penalties, yet receive the benefit of playing against only 14 men for large parts of their matches.

A team with such poor discipline would expect to see more players carded, not less. Certainly not none at all, which is the case here.

FFS... you have not taken out the foul play penalties, only the penalties resulting in cards!!! what about the penalties for illegal takles that didnt result in cards???

And why would NZ have at least two??? how many of those penalties were for offside while in the opposing half? or obstruction on attack? do they deserve yellow cards??? what about scrum penalties when on the opposing tryline??? do they deserve cards???

against Aus, NZ only conceded 4 extra penalties per game... only 4... and for that you say they should have got 2 yellow cards... thats bullsh*t and sour grapes... how many infringements did the NZ team concede on their tryline in quick succesion to recieve a card like botha??? how many times did an NZ player throw the ball away after getting a general warning like Mitchell??? heres a hint... ZERO.

You take a figure like penalties conceded, include the extra game that NZ played for visual effect, divide it by the cards awarded, incuding of course the foul play one offs, and come up with a pathetic excuse for a hypothosis that refs favour the NZ team.... its not even a good attempt at deflecting away from the fact your team sucks.