Talk:2007 Super 14 season

New Zealand Low‑importance

	New Zealand portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Rugby union B‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rugby union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of rugby union on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Rugby unionWikipedia:WikiProject Rugby unionTemplate:WikiProject Rugby unionrugby union articles
B	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Man of the match?

Why is there no mention on man of the match for any of the matches? Surely this is important information to have? - —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 41.241.225.236 (talk)

Southern Spears

Latest comment: 18 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Wow- the spears have been included. At least for now, according to this article from planet rugby http://www.rugbyheaven.smh.com.au/articles/2006/08/07/1154802818624.html. Could someone make the appropriate changes to this article?Ronan.evans

- Wow, thanks for the tip, its now added.--Hamedog_Talk|^@ 13:29, 8 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, Would have added it myself but was wondering how to go about it. I think yout Cats/Spears listing on ladder works well for now.Ronan.evans 09:30, 9 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

Yeah I did that because there still may be an appeal or an other twist in the is farce.--Hamedog_Talk|^@ 11:41, 9 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hope no-one minds but I put it as Spears/Cats intstead of Cats/Spears because right now the Spears, not the Cats, are the team who have the Spot. Ronan.evans 08:26, 26 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

Kickoff times

Latest comment: 17 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Should we included UTC times or not?--Hamedog_Talk|^@ 07:45, 14 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

To be honest I would think that they should be the only times included. Local times mean very little in a competion across three countrys- one of which has 3 different time zones across the teams (Australia). Besdies almost all matched start at 7:30 ish local time. toenail 07:54, 30 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

Okay, so I will put in UTC times.--Hamedog_Talk|^@ 08:16, 30 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

External links

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

There is no need to have references for where the pre-season games where at (eg Pretoria etc). and for crowd references, simply use an external link, otherwise the references will be too huge, the page is big enough as it is. The references for cities, and referees can be excluded in my view. Rugger81 10:50, 2 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Odds Table

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Anyone willing to kick-start an Odd's table like we had last year?ronan.evans 12:02, 2 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Point's table/Weekly Scores

Latest comment: 17 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hey everyone. If no one minds i'd like to take charge of keeping the table updated after each match. Perhaps someone else can put their hand up for keeping the Weekly scores section updated after each match. Oc course if anyone see's the table isn't updated by all means go for it. Try to keep it neat though (no-one will bite your head off if you make a mistake- the WikiRugby community is very supportive as I found when I was new last year). It's a new season guys and it will take a lot of work to finish the season with an article as good as we had last year! I want this to be feature quality at the end of the year. Cheers! ronan.evans 12:10, 2 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

I have one thing to say about the table - just because a team is one 5 points doesn't mean they are a equal with an other team on 5 points. Please use for and against for seperating teams on the table rather than putting them in second equal.--Hamedog_Talk|^@ 00:04, 10 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Updated as per suggestion..ø~Cometstyles~ø^{^(talk)}--

Hi, first off, thanks for keeping the table up to date. The points differential had a huge bearing last season, and it's a useful addition. I've noticed a mistake in the table as it stands though: the Force are recorded as having 2 bonus points - they have one. Also, since there are two types of bonus point - one for scoring more than 4 tries in a match, and one for losing by less than 7 points in a match - I think it'll be useful to reflect that with another column in the table. The columns could be called BP1 and BP2. I'd do it myself, but I'm new here, and don't know how. Cheers.

Corrected the error in the table. Any thoughts on the introduction of two columns for bonus points?

Lol- don't thank me- I have been hopelessly behind on updating the table recently and someone always seems to beat me to it! I think the idea of two columns is great. I will try to do it myself if I find the time- no promises though! ronan.evans 10:35, 24 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

break this article up?

Latest comment: 17 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

should we break this article up for rounds guys or what? It seems rather long already.--Hamedog_Talk|^@ 08:22, 18 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

I think the player withdrawl section + the Spears Saga section and the Pre-season section to be broken up and shifted but everything else seems fine..--Cometstyles 09:42, 18 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

anybody willing to do this?----Hamedog_Talk|^@ 01:14, 25 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

I just added a summary of Week 4 to keep it consitent with the first few weeks. While I think these are valuable they could take up a bit too much space. Maybe at the end of the season we should create an article on each round? ronan.evans 23:23, 2 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Update match comments

Latest comment: 17 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Can somebody update what has happened so far since week 8 because I was around and Iam a bit rusty about what eventuated in the last 3-4 weeks or so..Thanx..--Cometstyles 11:18, 10 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

I just put in an overview for each week - someone might want to look over it for errors. ronan.evans 23:17, 14 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Name Change

Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi Guys, just putting this on the table. How about changing the name of this article from "2007 Super 14 season" to simply "2007 Super 14" OR "Super 14 2007"? Obviously the same would have to be done with the other articles concerning various years of the Super 12/14. 58.178.32.126 22:48, 14 April 2007 (UTC)ronan.evans 22:48, 14 April 2007 (UTC) (Wasnt signed in)Reply

The following statement on the 2007 Super 14 grand final is, to the best of my knowledge, not correct: "The match had four tries - two by each team, and the last of which was scored by Bulls' wing Bryan Habana in the 82nd minute to give his team the trophy." I believe that Derick Hougaard's conversion of Habana's 82nd-minute try gave the Bulls a one-point victory. Please check and correct, if required. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.14.214.122 (talk) 15:46, 30 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

standings

Latest comment: 17 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Can we colour the table to show who has been eliminated from a semi-final spot?

Not yet but after round 12, I'll do it myself...--Cometstyles 11:59, 19 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

I have no idea how this tournament works, but the Sharks record of 9 wins, 5 bonus points, and 40 total points sounds impossible to me. -- Jao 13:42, 29 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

It should be 4 b.p. - 9*4 + 4 = 40.----Hamedog_Talk|^@ 05:57, 1 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Sorry for the mistake but I calculate the points right after the matches without waiting for the Official points table to be released..--Cometstyles 10:43, 1 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

How many matches?

Latest comment: 17 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion

The lead says 94, the box says 84 -- which is it? Mikker ^(...) 14:12, 29 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Clearly it must be (14*13)/2 = 91 for the round-robin, so 94 total. I've changed it. -- Jao 14:27, 29 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Oops, I just realized the box said "matches played". The remaining matches have not yet been played. I have reverted myself. Sorry. -- Jao 14:28, 29 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

84 played..7 to be played this week>>91 total +2 semifinals and +1 final =94 matches altogether..--Cometstyles 04:11, 1 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Ahhh... I see... 'Matches played' as in how many matches have so far been played... not as in how many maches are played in the tournament as a whole. Thanks, Mikker ^(...) 20:51, 5 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Table

Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Where has the final standings table gone to? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.208.164.83 (talk) 06:07, 19 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Image copyright problem with Image:Super 14 logo.png

Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The image Image:Super 14 logo.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --01:21, 1 November 2008 (UTC)Reply