Dashboard
Live & Results
Upcoming
To-do
Tourns
Invites
Captains
News
The Superbru Herald - Superbru News

Super Rugby: Team of Round 5

As you will all know, this week's Super Rugby round was overshadowed by a situation that is of far greater importance than sport and Superbru. The cancelled fixture between the Highlanders and the Crusaders was an understandable consequence of a tragic circumstance and whilst the effect on our fantasy game is relatively insignificant in this context, here’s a quick explanation of why this round has been finalised as normal with Highlanders and Crusaders players scoring 0 points. The usual look at this week's top performers will follow.

Many of you have been getting in touch to question how we'll be dealing with this fixture cancellation and the simple answer is that nothing will change. We know this may feel harsh, and we completely understand the impact, but there is no solution which does not have knock-on effects elsewhere (see more below). This decision also falls in line with the approach we took in our European Champions Cup fantasy game in 2016 when a Munster match was abandoned following the passing of Anthony Foley.

Fundamentally what has happened here is that some players who were expected to play did not play. Superbru has a mechanism to handle this, because from time to time, players who are picked don't take to the field. Sometimes a player pulls a hamstring in the warm-up, or a couple of guys can't play due to food poisoning. The game mechanism for dealing with this is the bench, which can afford you some recompense if your reserve plays (and yes, the bench doubles as a squad management tool, but it is partly there to cater for no-play events).

When you get down to it, on a per-player, individual basis, is there a difference between this weekend's situation and a player pulling his hamstring while running onto the field? The only real difference is in scale - 9 of every 10 brus had at least one Highlander or Crusader in their XV.

Are there any fair solutions to solve the problem at scale?

We've been communicating with lots of you throughout the weekend about this situation and two suggested approaches have come up more than once - award an 'average' number of points to those that were expected to have started in the HIG v CRU fixture or, simply cancel Round 5. Here's why we have opted against doing either of those things.

Average points idea: There is obviously no way of telling how this match would have played out and it therefore seems unfair to award artificial points. Doing this would prevent brus from receiving a higher number of points from a substitute in some cases and is certainly unfair on brus who have selected a player that did feature in this round but end up scoring less than a Crusader or Highlander who never actually played. The General picked Maddocks on the wing as he’s had a strong season, but he ended up scoring just 2.5 points. How fair would it feel if someone else in his pool had George Bridge and scored 5 points, when Bridge didn’t even play?

Round cancellation idea: This feels like a very extreme solution and another option that does not solve the problem without creating a sense of injustice elsewhere. 5 of the 6 scheduled games did take place and points have been awarded for those performances - cancelling the whole round could be deemed unfair by those people that made shrewd selections in other matches.

The overall point here is that the disruption that has been caused by this fixture cancellation - which is nobody's fault - can only be 'fixed' by creating knock-on effects that cause more disruption. Disruption that would be less fair as we actually have a choice in the matter.

Here is this week's best possible Super Rugby fantasy team along with some stats on how this round went for the Superbru community:



Most represented teams in this week's TOTR: Lions (4 players), Hurricanes (3 players).

This week's ideal captain was Wes Goosen who as you can see is a player that you are able to capitalise on when starting/out of position. With Ben Lam rested, Goosen (who can play in midfield or on the wing) started at 11 and picked up some serious ball carry points against the Chiefs. Another notable inclusion in this TOTR for a similar reason is Damien McKenzie who has returned to 15 after beginning this season at Fly Half. Both McKenzie and the Chiefs as a team looked far more dangerous following this positional change.

In terms of the Forwards, Kwagga Smith makes this TOTR once again as he continues his great start to the campaign while his teammate and heavily selected Hooker Malcolm Marx also makes the XV thanks to his performance in that fantastic Lions comeback victory over the Rebels.

Moving on to look at the best score actually managed in this tricky week at Superbru and this week's best performing player in the whole of our SR fantasy game was Dirk Van Schalkwyk from South Africa! Dirk managed 224 points in Round 5 with Barrett and Franks the Crusaders players he had auto-subbed:



As you can see in the above graphic, Dirk selected 4 of the TOTR players and made Goosen his captain!

In our daily Super Rugby fantasy game - a different kind of test as you select five players you believe will perform best on each day of the Super Rugby season from lists we provide - the best possible selections were as follows:

Friday: Faingaa, Hooper, Lienert-Brown, Rona, D. McKenzie (88 points)
Saturday: Marx, Smith, Meakes, Coetzee, Stewart (103 points)

We hope you can understand the above. Thank you for taking the time to read through this (longer than usual) round-up and we look forward to Round 6!
32,766 caps
Hi Jack. Yes this is all rather trivial in the light of the appaling events in Christchurch. I appreciate how difficult it was for you decide the best compromise or solution. In the end it became a 'Bench Lottery'. I don't think that many Brus would have quibbled at cancelling the Full Fantasy round & the Saturday Daily Fantasy round. The Predictor played out as though there was an actual draw in Dunedin rather than an agreed sharing of points, so is fine to keep as is.

I do feel for the many who had Daily Fantasy pick AND backups from eithier South Island team though. One person in my Club's pool only got 2 points as a result.

With the Full Fantasy there was a chance for those awake before the deadline to alter their choices, as some may have correctly assumed the High v Cru game would not go ahead. So this in itself has tainted the round. I myself moved up in both fantasies (I had Marx & Kwagga in both but only had DNP Lam to replace Bridge) but I feel a bit 'uneasy' about accept
18 Mar 13:17
60,563 caps
this is not Superbru fault , but that being said i think that those who have 'saders and 'landers players in there fantasy team are losing out big time , those players should be given an average from the last 4 games points that those players , otherwise come end of season a lot of people will lose out , i think put it to the Vote Superbru and shows that you are not a dictatorship but that you take your members thoughts into consideration
18 Mar 13:32
43,366 caps
Two of my 5-a-side picks scored zero, but even if all 5 scored zero Superbru would still have my backing of the chosen solution. Having a referendum every time there's an anomaly is impractical.
18 Mar 14:29
37,349 caps
I don't get what the big fuss is about anyway. . .im just estimating the average points gained was like 30/40 more than those that suffered from not having a full squad. To me it was a low scoring round, any fantasy player worth thier salt can make this up as its still early stages in the game.
18 Mar 14:58
83,972 caps
Round should have been cancelled. I don't agree with the bench system. Not only because of this situation, but in general. I would prefer that my player who is not playing, be replaced with his actual replacement. If I pick the Waratah flyhalf and Foley is not playing I want his replacement and not another team's flyhalf.
18 Mar 16:57
81,806 caps
I think the SuperBru logic is spot on. I had three zero score players in my Fantasy team but we take it on the chin and move on. Why you would select two players from the same team in the same position in the daily fantasy game is beyond me. There were plenty of other players to choose from.
18 Mar 18:20
61,541 caps
Strongly agree 19 Mar 07:47
43,073 caps
Agree. Good decision. 19 Mar 09:55
20,954 caps
Wholeheartedly agree. I suffered badly, but there's no point whining about. it. The options offered by detractors seem unfair and silly. Games get called off. It may be rain, snow, natural disasters or something as despicable as happened in Christchurch. Put your head down and move on to the next round. Man up.
This isn't football.
19 Mar 12:55
32,766 caps
It could sort itself out during the next round. Anyone who missed out on Bench Points with Bulls, Sharks or Blues players might benefit? Plus having a high number of Crusaders and certain Highlanders in your 23 is a good idea too. We shall see? The luckiest pickers were those who had McKenzie as a Back-up kicker in for Mo'unga - 25.5 unexpected points! Moving him back to Fullback of course helped.
19 Mar 13:36
2,980 caps
The notion that the bench could be remedy the loss of points does not wash. Becuas with only 4 transfers and because of injuries, team selection etc one does not have 23 eligible players and to lose points on 5 or 6 players is not leveling the playing filed. Your fairest solution is to scrap the round
19 Mar 19:37
8,291 caps
Fully agree.Scrap the round. 20 Mar 12:24
6,771 caps
I also say scrap the round. I mean heck. What about a player with Mo'unga at FH and kicker and Pollard (bye) on the bench???
22 Mar 00:11