Rugby

All Blacks: Team of the Decade

2009-12-24 09:09
Email | Print
All Blacks skipper Richie McCaw (File)

Cape Town - South Africa are the reigning World Cup and the Tri-Nations champions, and they were voted the 2009 IRB Team of the Year, but there can be little doubt New Zealand were the Team of the Decade - despite missing out on two World Cups won by England (2003) and South Africa (2007).

In fact, the Boks are ranked only fifth in terms of their winning percentage during this time period, despite having the next best number of wins after New Zealand.

The Springboks' low winning percentage stems from the lean years between 2000 and 2003, when they won just 23 and drew one of their 46 Tests.

And in 2006, when Jake White forfeited wins in order not to expose his top players before the World Cup, South Africa won five Tests only and lost a massive seven.

During the past decade, the All Blacks won have 24 more games than the Springboks. The Boks played the most Tests (125); winning 76 for a 60.8 percent win ratio. New Zealand played 122 Tests and won exactly 100 for an 82 percent win ratio.

(That equates to 10 Tests won per year from an average total of 12,2 Tests played in each of the 10 years. The Boks on average won 7.6 percent of their 12.5 Tests every year.)

The All Blacks underlined their supremacy over the period by also scoring 133 more tries than the next best attacking side, Australia.

New Zealand scored 526 tries (4.31 per Test) compared to the 393 of Australia (3.20 per Test) and South Africa's 384 (3.1 per Test). Argentina, with only 85 Tests played, averaged 3,7 tries per Test.

The All Blacks beat the Springboks in 16 of the 24 Tests played during the decade. Four of those eight Bok wins have come under new coach Peter de Villiers; three of them this year.

It is interesting to note De Villiers has the second best winning ration of any Bok coach after Nick Mallett (1997-2000). During the decade, New Zealand averaged Test scores of 36-16 with the Boks on 28-21.

Yes, the All Blacks were the best and most consistent over the decade - and they won two-thirds of their matches against the Boks.

But they still don't have the World Cup, and interestingly Ireland, second on winning percentages, also have an inferior competition record to France, who are only fourth on the list.

Stats during the period 2000 - 2009:

World Cup winners: England (2003). South Africa (2007)

Tri-Nations winners: New Zealand 6, South Africa 2, Australia 2

Six Nations winners: France 4, England 3, Wales 2, Ireland 1

Most Tests (players):
110: George Smith (Australia)
99: John Hayes (Ireland/Lions)
97: Chris Paterson (Scotland)
95: Brian O'Driscoll (Ireland/Lions), Ronan O'Gara (Ireland/Lions)
93: John Smit (South Africa)
92: Victor Matfield (South Africa)
82: Mils Muliaina (New Zealand

Most wins:
70: Richie McCaw (New Zealand)
68: Mils Muliaina (New Zealand)
65: George Smith (Australia)
63: John Hayes (Ireland)
 
Most points:
994: Daniel Carter (New Zealand)
954: Jonny Wilkinson (England/Lions)
929: Ronan O'Gara (Ireland/Lions)
784: Stephen Jones (Wales/Lions)
741: Chris Paterson (Scotland/)
703: Percy Montgomery (South Africa)

Most tries:
50: Shane Williams (Wales/Lions)
49: Doug Howlett (New Zealand)
45: Joe Rokocoko (New Zealand)
38: Chris Latham (Australia), Brian O'Driscoll (Ireland/Lions)

 

Your Comments

@bokkie1/2/2010 11:34 AM
The bokke are the Cry babies of the decade for wearing armbands.
Rasta SA12/29/2009 12:09 PM
So all these 'patriots' on here, to which side(other than the AB's) would you rather give the title to? Boks, for winning 1 World Cup(against a mediocre England side & nearly falling flat on their fact against Tonga & Fiji - if that in fact is your measuring stick?? England with probably the most convincing WC performance to date, but post Clive Woodward has capitulated quite stupendously and their form of late has been embarrassing. Maybe it should go to the Poms, they made 2 consecutive finals, which no-one else has done...oh, besides the Aussies who won 1999 & failed to defend their title in 2003. btw, the only reason I backed the Boks in the final is because I really didn't want England to win it again cos their fans are unbearable...but I quickly realised the Bok supporter is as obnoxious as the islanders. So anyway, what other candidates are there? & what should be the deciding criteria?
Bokkie12/29/2009 9:12 AM
....All Blacks, ....... "world-cup-choker-team" of the decade..... .... he he he...!!
Gav12/26/2009 4:39 PM
Interesting. The next decade should be interesting aswell, now that the Boks are performing better. Remember though that during the WC teams still plays Tests against each other. Although the AB have won less WC's they are probably still increasing their Test record against all Nations. As much as it hurts Boksupporters to KNOW that the AB have a better Testrecord than us, just as much it hurts them knowing we have won more WC's
@All Black12/26/2009 11:46 AM
Calm down idiot! If the Boks,not Box like your pathetic spelling, won the 2007 WC against pathetic teams where were the AB’s then in 2007,nevermind since 1991.So,you stupid sheep shagger,go f....yourself. Maybe you should start by going back to school and learn to spell. You are just another useless, gutless Kiwi with no backbone who ALWAYS blames something else but yourself.
KK12/26/2009 10:54 AM
It looks like there are two views: 1: Supporters who don't care that their team (Boks) have the biggest losing percentage in 100 years as long as they have the big trophies. 2: Supporters who like to see their team win consistently regardless of the trophies. I think we can all agree on that.
@Jaco12/26/2009 4:38 AM
Please mate what are ye smoking? We are busy discussing RUGBY TEAMS not a bunch of blue idiots! If you want to look at the provincial team of the decade look at the Crusaders not at a team who have won twice simply because Crusaders was without their stars. BB still holds the record for most successive losses in superrugby so go play with yourself!
Rob12/25/2009 8:37 AM
Forget about the stats etc guys, in general NZ play good entertaining rugby.
Paul D12/25/2009 1:46 AM
People must recognize the AB team of the noughties as cosistently average. A team that picked off easy meat between world cups while teams are recovering / rebuilding and in WC years is not at the races. Vulchers of the decade may be a better title.
All Blacks.12/24/2009 9:08 PM
You bunch of stupid box supporters always play the WC - card.Just like I know you,STUPID. But I bet you won't talk about how many times the AB have won the Tri series,or how many years have the AB have been no.1 in the world. You box make me sick to say the least.
All Blacks.12/24/2009 8:59 PM
Listen all you dum,stupid numnuts,the ALL BLACKS are THE BEST this decade,like it or not.You box think you are so good,good in nothing yes.You won the last WC against alot of no names,go suck on it.NO BETTER TEAM THAN THE ALL BLACKS.
ImpartialCanuck12/24/2009 2:51 PM
Had a good laugh at this nonsense - stats are just that and credit should be given where it is due - the Kiwis did not win a World Cup in the decade and still have not won a World Cup with ALL nations participating! Their decade record is truly sound, but periods of rebuilding/injury need to be factored in, including periods where young teams are emerging and might get beaten frequently. The Kiwis should certainly be regarded as the most consistent team of the decade, but surely you would have to decide between the two World Cup winners for the 'Team of the Decade' - records, leadership, competency of the players and the ability to beat the best on the day. Please find some new rugby journalists, so we don't have to be subjected to these speculative pieces of diatribe!!
Bokbef*k12/24/2009 12:14 PM
Stats are there to make people feel better about something that is actually a stuff up. The All blacks are a great team, but as a previous comment mentioned, they do not have the silverware that reflects on the decade ! Stats alone cannot make you the best team over a 10 year period. The sport is played to win trophies and there the Boks are the greatest. No matter what the Kiwi press want's the world to think, i think they are pretty damn desperate to win the 2011 World cup and chances are they will choke again !!
KK (SA) @ Speed, Rugby fan, Burtfred12/24/2009 12:02 PM
Ok guys, lets put this decade in perspective using the facts... 2001 - 2009 IS THE SPRINGBOKS' MOST UNSUCCESSFUL DECADE IN THE HISTORY OF RUGBY, barring 1891 - 1900!!!
KK (SA)12/24/2009 11:26 AM
@ Houston: Yes, you're right it must hurt them like hell about not winning the RWC but in terms of the most consistent team, the All Blacks win comfortably. @ Rugby fan: So if Tiger takes a year off next year he won't be golfer of the decade??? What a joke!!! @ Burtfred: At least the All Blacks have high standards and would never ever let themselves lose to Leister or Saracens or get smashed in a UK tour. If the All Blacks and the Boks did a world tour right now most SA rugby fans would put their houses on the All Blacks coming out top. We had our years where we were undisputedly the number 1 side but wow we know how to drop our standards. Following your logic Leister should be world champions!
Raj12/24/2009 11:21 AM
ALL CHOKERS is what they should be called....the perception that the current ALL Black and BOK Teams are the same as they were 3, 5 or 8 years ago is rediculous....maybe the ALL BLACKS were great but not anymore....therefore how can the current ALL BLACK team be complimented like this????
Boks are best12/24/2009 11:16 AM
@ rugby fan. You are a real prat! Did the 21st century start in 2000 or 2001? 1+1 does not equal 3 dimwit, if the century started in 2000 so did the decade. It is idiots like you that give a bad name to the supporters of the best team in the world.
OJ12/24/2009 11:11 AM
Drive for show, put for dough. Where's the World Cup? Chances are that France will do it again, followed by Aus and that the Boks plays Aus in the final.
Matt Nel @ Mr New Zealand12/24/2009 11:08 AM
Prove it - where are your trophies??? You cant make such statements and dont have anything to back it up with. You clearly living in a sheep fantasy land mate!
@jaco12/24/2009 10:57 AM
you dumb schmuck. This article has got buggerall to do with provincial rugby. Take your head out of your @**!!!
Petrus S. Martens12/24/2009 10:56 AM
It is like kissing your sister. Best number of wins during tests. More tries than anyone. But poor All Blacks, no world cups. But I agree, they are the best team of the decade, if not of all times! But the Boks will get there, mark my words. De Villiers will be crowned as the best coach eva!! Merry Christmas to all!!
Sam Roy12/24/2009 10:51 AM
How does one label a team "Team of The Decade" when they haven't won the World Cup in that time-frame? Maybe "Chokers of The Decade" might be more applicable.
lew12/24/2009 10:48 AM
The problem with New Zealand rugby is that they peak between world cups plus they choke in semi-finals 1991,1999,2003,2007.The world cup is the crowning glory in rugby union so, I agree, how the hell can they be team of the decade. Go Bokke.
yeti12/24/2009 10:46 AM
@rugby fan. Hello, go ask someone outside your immediate family when the decade ends - maybe your doctor or plumber or someone with half a brain - if your reasoning is correct then the 20th century ended on 31 Dec 2000. And yes we are now in the 21st century not the 20th since we do start counting centuries and decades at zero. Dare I ask your nationality? Kiwi I'd bet.
TheGreenMan12/24/2009 10:46 AM
@ Rugby fan. Mate, you're wrong. The decade definitely ends now. The starts of the 90s was 1990, not 1991. The first year of this decade was 2000, now add them up 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09 plus that year 2000 equals ten years! Duh! To the article, can't argue with the stats. The Kiwis have dominated but I predict a riot! Boks to trump them for the next decade.
Greg De Villiers12/24/2009 10:44 AM
"The Boks on average won 7.6 percent of their 12.5 Tests every year" According to my Maths (which is rather good) this means we won 0.95 (under 1) tests per year. Surely that should be 7.6 out of 12.5?
yeti12/24/2009 10:38 AM
rugby journalists can't right to save there lives. I suppose it IS rations when you're playing the All Blacks...
Poor All Blacks12/24/2009 10:25 AM
It's rather like golf stats. Drive for show, put for dough. Where's the World Cup since 1987, a year which the Boks would have ran riot! Gerber, Du Plessis, Du Plessis, Botha, Mordt, Heunis...
Houston12/24/2009 10:15 AM
excellant, they will have to move those world cup trophies out the way in the cabinet for the "team of the decade" trophy - should not take long to move though, considering their is only 1 :-) good decade yes, but must hurt being that good with no WC
Rugby fan12/24/2009 9:59 AM
Get real. The decade ends next year. You start counting at 1 not at 0. Give us another year and then redo the assessment.
Burtfred12/24/2009 9:59 AM
Only a Kiwi could have written this load of codswallop. How on earth can the All blacks be the "team of the decade" if they never won the world cup. The rugby world cup is not everything in rugby, its the only thing. The All blacks problem is that their kiwi press always award them the trophy before the tournament starts, which makes them so cock-sure of themselves that it becomes easier to beat them "a ce moment critique"
Mr New Zealand12/24/2009 9:48 AM
well they are the best team ever and still are the best team today. the untouchables the team for men.
Speed12/24/2009 9:42 AM
You don't have the most important stat here. Number of chokes. NZ wins that hands down.
JACO12/24/2009 9:34 AM
WHAT ABOUT MY MIGHTY BLUE BULLS?? 4 CURRIE CUPS,2 SUPER 14 TITLES AND THE CORE OF THE BOK TEAM THROUGHOUT!!!
imboriako12/24/2009 9:34 AM
Semantics...what counts is the trophys in the cabinet. obviously the content of the article was concocted around a klippies and coke braai and the fact that the author had to write something about rugby to get paid. who cares who did what...as long as the silverware is in our SARFU cabinets... desperate journalism.. go get a real job
filkile12/24/2009 9:21 AM
Jip..as you said...they stil dont have the worl cup ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha !!!
Your Name
*
Email
*
Comment
*
 
Please enter the text below:

*
 
 

The lighter side of Francois Hougaard

Best goal celebration ever?

Best penalty ever?

 Front Row Grunt - Tank's blog

Info on the op Bismarck is recovering from

Featured Blog

Lobo salutes Muttiah Muralidaran's genius. He developed the doosra into an art form and terrorised batsmen with his cunning and his wily ways. Although his career was overshadowed by the "chucking" controversy, no-one will ever beat his mark of 800 Test wickets.

Latest blogs

Overhaul in Formula 1 7/29/2010 3:47:49 PM

Knowledge Musona is SA's Jet Club Rookie of the Year. 7/29/2010 3:44:19 PM

Currie cup predictions 7/29/2010 3:17:15 PM

Vote

If current Springbok coach Peter de Villiers were to be fired, who would you like to see take over?

Who is your Hero?

Nominate your hero and win R10 000!

RSS Feeds

RSS Feeds Sport news delivered really simply.

Mobile

Mobile Sport24 on your mobile phone - WAP, alerts, downloads, services

Free Email

Free Email Get a free 24.com e-mail account and stay in touch

Blogs

Blogs Yes your opinion counts. Get it out there

TV

TV schedule Plan your couch time with our searchable sport TV guide