Wales are the 4th best team in the world.

First topic message reminder :

DON'T LOCK MY TOPIC BECAUSE SOME BETTER ENGLISH FANS AREN'T HAPPY WITH WALES' PROGRESS. I HAVE SAID NOTHING WRONG.

Lovely position to be in for such a small country with over 3 years till the next RWC.

World cup semi final.
Great coach (lions coach too).
Best stadium.
Grand slam champions too.
Under 20's first team to ever beat NZ.
Pro 12 champions are Welsh.

Things are looking rosy.

I just hope Wales can win the epic 2nd vs 4th tussle in Sydney on Saturday.

LordDowlais wrote:oh well 4th best is about right, best in Europe, but not quite as good as the big three in the Southern Hemisphere, I think we can all agree with that.

Well the only conclusion to be drawn I would suggest is that Wales have fallen short against the current worst team of the big three.
I think SA and the ABs would put away the injury ravaged Australian team something which most Welsh fans, if they were honest, would have wanted/expected as a bare minimum prior to the tour.

How are Australia the worst ? They are the curren tri nations champions are they not.

Better English ? keep on rocking Wales

Also, just in case nobody noticed, I was being sarcastic, although I do believe 4th is about right.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

dogtooth wrote:how did wales climb the rankings? i thought only wins over higher placed opponants gave you ranking points.

has there been a change in the ranking system?

Loses also impact the rankings, with you losing less points for a lesser loss (not sure what the score brackets are though). Seeing as the only teams that have been winning are the top three then I guess the rest of us shuffle about on how badly we lose.

Thanks, but all honesty I would not call Scotland a top 3 team - yet

Maybe we should take the 4th place instead

Although fair play to Wales, they have earnt that 4th place

Riskysports wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

dogtooth wrote:how did wales climb the rankings? i thought only wins over higher placed opponants gave you ranking points.

has there been a change in the ranking system?

Loses also impact the rankings, with you losing less points for a lesser loss (not sure what the score brackets are though). Seeing as the only teams that have been winning are the top three then I guess the rest of us shuffle about on how badly we lose.

Thanks, but all honesty I would not call Scotland a top 3 team - yet

Maybe we should take the 4th place instead

Although fair play to Wales, they have earnt that 4th place

There is only two categories for points loss, less than 15 and more than 15.

If Argentina do better than expected in the 4N/AIs they may surge towards the spot and beat ENG, WAL, FRA & IRE to it.

fa0019 wrote:If Argentina do better than expected in the 4N/AIs they may surge towards the spot and beat ENG, WAL, FRA & IRE to it.

Or they could be more accuratley represented in the rankings by the fact they are playing more games outside of the world cup when points do not count as double.

LordDowlais wrote:

fa0019 wrote:If Argentina do better than expected in the 4N/AIs they may surge towards the spot and beat ENG, WAL, FRA & IRE to it.

Or they could be more accuratley represented in the rankings by the fact they are playing more games outside of the world cup when points do not count as double.

The number of games you play has no impact, if you lose more games then sure.

Argentina is also in the same boat as Ireland, their ranking is more than 10 points adrift of NZ, so those losses won't penalise them

biltongbek wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

fa0019 wrote:If Argentina do better than expected in the 4N/AIs they may surge towards the spot and beat ENG, WAL, FRA & IRE to it.

Or they could be more accuratley represented in the rankings by the fact they are playing more games outside of the world cup when points do not count as double.

The number of games you play has no impact, if you lose more games then sure.

And that is exactly that, they are still living off their good world cup in 2007, how many games have they played outside of world cups compared to others ? I know it is not their fault, but the only top tear nation they have beaten recently are France a few weeks ago, I think. Thier points do not move or change from their own results, only from the results of teams around them.

Considering that the SH tournament only starts in August and the NH has already had the Six Nations that is an unfair statement to make, you might as well then lump SA, NZ and OZ with the same question.

biltongbek wrote:Considering that the SH tournament only starts in August and the NH has already had the Six Nations that is an unfair statement to make, you might as well then lump SA, NZ and OZ with the same question.

I do not mean know at this time, I am looking from the 2007 world cup up until now. There are teir two tournements that the likes of Canad, Tonga, Fiji, Samoa, and Japan play in there is a tier two six nations for the likes of Georgia, Russia, Romania, then there is a six nations for us then there is the tri nations for you, Argentina have never been in any other competition rather than the world cup. They get the odd AI so their standing is mostly reflected by other results around them as they are still living off a good world cup in 2007. Perhaps now that they have got another comp outside the world cup their standings might become more accurate.

I understand.

BigTrevsbigmac wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:oh well 4th best is about right, best in Europe, but not quite as good as the big three in the Southern Hemisphere, I think we can all agree with that.

Well the only conclusion to be drawn I would suggest is that Wales have fallen short against the current worst team of the big three.
I think SA and the ABs would put away the injury ravaged Australian team something which most Welsh fans, if they were honest, would have wanted/expected as a bare minimum prior to the tour.

The current worst team of the big 3 is ranked 2, have beaten the Boks 6 or 7 of their last 7 or 8 encounters and the only side to have beaten the AB's last year and the year before.

They've also lost to Ireland at the WC and Scotland at home.I'd conclude that Oz have an excellent 1st team but their depth is weak.

Rob B wrote:

BigTrevsbigmac wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:oh well 4th best is about right, best in Europe, but not quite as good as the big three in the Southern Hemisphere, I think we can all agree with that.

Well the only conclusion to be drawn I would suggest is that Wales have fallen short against the current worst team of the big three.
I think SA and the ABs would put away the injury ravaged Australian team something which most Welsh fans, if they were honest, would have wanted/expected as a bare minimum prior to the tour.

The current worst team of the big 3 is ranked 2, have beaten the Boks 6 or 7 of their last 7 or 8 encounters and the only side to have beaten the AB's last year and the year before.

and theyve beaten the 4th best team in the world 5 times in the last year

Well 4th for a week anyway.

It's amazing how quickly some articles look really out of date.

er not anymore but it was fun while it lasted

mowgli wrote:er not anymore but it was fun while it lasted

No it wasn't, we didn't play well at all!

If we keep losing (when) we should just charge up those rankings, 1st by Chrisymas!!!