by Kimball Kjar

I’ve been perplexed in media coverage, particularly here in the US, to see a rampant case of what I call “Apples to Oranges Reporting.”

A number of notable bloggers and reporters of rugby here in the US use a method of comparative analysis to assess a team’s strength and their related performances.

For example, with Team A beating Team B by 15 points and Team B beating Team C by 10 points, it stands to judgment that Team A should beat Team C handily in a possible fixture.

Rhetorically, if Team C beats Team A, how do we settle this break down in logic?

For decades the majority of reporting rugby here in the US has only been scores and short summaries with little to no actual video footage for people to assess.

And as such, I can hardly blame them for using this “Apples to Oranges Reporting” method. They’ve had little else to rationally measure the total competitive landscape of rugby here in the US.

The problem with this brand of reporting, besides it obvious lack of effort and research, is that the general rugby public, coaches, players and fans alike, seem to have fallen into this same pitfall of assessing the game of rugby and the teams they coach or play for or against.

All too often I talk to coaches who compare their performance in a game against the performances of a future opponent, whether supposedly superior or not. And most of the time, because of scheduling, those coaches haven’t even seen their future opponent play and only have past scores on offer.

And from these scores it seems the coaches then not only discuss how they will do against their future opponent, but more surprisingly, begin to build game plans around what they’re going to do in that respective game.

Why is this harmful?

Well, I don’t believe I need much column space to explain the answer, but please it to say evaluation of one’s self or another shouldn’t ever be done in context of a third party. It’s like deciding if you’re fat or skinny by looking into the appearance-warping circus fun-house mirrors.

The analysis of a team, one’s own or another, should use the following basic method:

1. Use of video analysis—either a simple camera review or detailed video analysis software. The more complete the video the better. Highlights and snippets are for ESPN and the general sports fan, but to see the ebbs and flows of a game is just as important in analysis as the actual execution of the players.
2. Metrics—in order to be consistent at anything the use of measurable data should be drawn. What that data can be is variable based on the coach, his or her team and the objectives they’re trying to achieve. But it should be a matter of import and consistency when used.
3. Principles of the Game of Rugby—We reviewed these in our last post. Please it to say, a break down in any one area will lead to issues. The easy part is identifying the problem, but the hard part is coming up with the best solution.
4. For Self/Own Team Analysis: Review in terms of goals previously set. Whether the goals were for a specific measurable in a game or overall in the season, despite wins or losses, a team will hold to goals and the relative performance in connection with those goals.
5. For Opposition Analysis: The use of #2 & #3 speak to a team’s overall strength, while a more in depth review of personnel will speak to the team’s “engine men” or the players that make things work. Building a game plan will then be relatively easy once this opposition report is built.

This is a very high level view on the use of reading a game.

The point is that coaches and players a like fall into the “Apples & Oranges Reporting” method by just looking at scores without really looking in depth at the performance of a team.

Looking at the performance with a critical eye, rather than as a fan, requires focus and consistency.

To help me do this when I was a player, I’d keep a personal stat sheet of any game I watched, whether my own or of another set of teams. This forced me to keep track of the true happenings within a game—set piece won or lost, line breaks, turn overs, poaches, etc.

After doing this the subtle strategies and tactics of the game came to view for me, and more importantly, the execution of the players and how well their performances were on the day, were more readily noticeable.

Reading a game is a talent that can be developed and honed with practice, just like any other rugby-related skill.

And for a coach of the rising generation of rugby players, the better we can read a game, then the better they will be able to read a game as well.

Get away from reading scores on websites and even the PR spin from coaches or players on how a game was won or lost. With the game growing at its current pace and with the onset of greater video and social media technologies, this is becoming more and more available to coaches, players and even fans.

Approach any game you’ve not seen in person with skepticism. Not only will you save yourself the chance of losing a game before it’s even played, but you’ll also become more aware of the issues that need attending within your own team.

As the mantra goes: “Seeing is believing.” Especially in the game of rugby.