The Five Nations table as it currently stands

Before the Six Nations, there was the Five Nations.

Each rugby weekend, one team was left out, the oval bridesmaid, whilst the other four teams went at it hammer and tongs.

Imagine, for a moment, that the 5 Nations was still running - no Italy involved.

Ireland didn't play on the opening weekend, and watched the comeback thriller in Cardiff, with England scoring two tries to one.  France and Scotland laboured manfully, with the Scots getting the only try of the match but losing.

England then sat it out in week 2 as Ireland got their first points on the board, but didn't score a try to match France's one.  Wales and Scotland went at it, dotting down 2 each, with Wales emerging the victors.

Round 3, Scotland sat out, whilst France played Wales, 1 try apiece, and Ireland played England, a solitary try to Ireland.

Round 4 saw Wales complete their Five Nations with a win over Ireland and scoring 1 try to make the difference.  England played Scotland in the Calcutta, with the English scoring 3 tries to 1 against the Scots.

And as the final weekend approaches, the table looks like this:

Team |	|P |	W |	L |	PF |	PA |	|PD |	TF |	TA |	|Pts
Wales	4	3	1	85	73	+12	5	6	6
Ireland	3	2	1	53	43	+10	2	2	4
England	3	2	1	55	48	+7	5	3	4
France	3	1	2	39	46	-7	2	2	2
Scotland	3	0	3	44	66	-22	4	5	0

Gatland and his troops have to sit on their hands and wonder if they'll be overtaken by Ireland and England.  Scotland looking to move off the bottom rung, and hope the English can do them a favour.

Ahhh, it's hard not to hark back to the good old days

In that scenario I think the reaction from Wales is that they're not happy Ireland got to sit out the first weekend. It gave us too much of a rest and now we can catch them. So pretty much very unfair on England and themselves.

SecretFly wrote:In that scenario I think the reaction from Wales is that they're not happy Ireland got to sit out the first weekend.  It gave us too much of a rest and now we can catch them.  So pretty much very unfair on England and themselves.

Strong banter.

Just allusory, Griff Just allusory. Keeping up with the news of our times......

I think Ireland would be giving out that Wales didn't play a match against some other team on the first weekend.

Like...say.. Italy for example.....

Ah the good old days.. I remember the 5 Nations and the "non-playing" weekend. But you miss one point.. In those days, there was NO points difference. There was NO championship decider, it was won outright, or shared..

So the table would look like you said, but for one change in outcome. That being Wales couldn't loose the title, only risk sharing it with Ireland and England..

No9 wrote:Ah the good old days.. I remember the 5 Nations and the "non-playing" weekend. But you miss one point.. In those days, there was NO points difference. There was NO championship decider, it was won outright, or shared..

So the table would look like you said, but for one change in outcome. That being Wales couldn't loose the title, only risk sharing it with Ireland and England..

Those amateurs knew nothing about greed, God love 'em. What a naïve bunch of twits.

Amateurs at the game and amateurs at Greed.  Christ, it's remarkable the B&W generation even invented the wheel they were so dumb.

Did I say the table was from black & white days?

Tsk, tsk.

No. Otherwise I'd have had to start changing the value of tries and results of matches n ev'rytin.

I'm merely demonstrating how the table would look today if Italy weren't in it.

And trying to make Welsh fans feel better about not playing Italy first instead of last....

Pot Hale wrote:Did I say the table was from black & white days?

Tsk, tsk.

No.   Otherwise I'd have had to start changing the value of tries and results of matches n ev'rytin.

I'm merely demonstrating how the table would look today if Italy weren't in it.  

And trying to make Welsh fans feel better about not playing Italy first instead of last....

Do you mean they're maybe getting something of an advantage over ourselves and England in playing Italy last, when we and all other sides have run the poor bug-gars into the ground for them??

SecretFly wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:Did I say the table was from black & white days?

Tsk, tsk.

No.   Otherwise I'd have had to start changing the value of tries and results of matches n ev'rytin.

I'm merely demonstrating how the table would look today if Italy weren't in it.  

And trying to make Welsh fans feel better about not playing Italy first instead of last....

Do you mean they're maybe getting something of an advantage over ourselves and England in playing Italy last, when we and all other sides have run the poor bug-gars into the ground for them??

You might say that. I couldn't possibly comment.

FU

Coming up to the end of the 5Ns era didn't we all end up playing Italy on our weekend off anyway?

Pot Hale wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:Did I say the table was from black & white days?

Tsk, tsk.

No.   Otherwise I'd have had to start changing the value of tries and results of matches n ev'rytin.

I'm merely demonstrating how the table would look today if Italy weren't in it.  

And trying to make Welsh fans feel better about not playing Italy first instead of last....

Do you mean they're maybe getting something of an advantage over ourselves and England in playing Italy last, when we and all other sides have run the poor bug-gars into the ground for them??

You might say that.  I couldn't possibly comment.

FU

Bit harsh!

Griff wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:Did I say the table was from black & white days?

Tsk, tsk.

No.   Otherwise I'd have had to start changing the value of tries and results of matches n ev'rytin.

I'm merely demonstrating how the table would look today if Italy weren't in it.  

And trying to make Welsh fans feel better about not playing Italy first instead of last....

Do you mean they're maybe getting something of an advantage over ourselves and England in playing Italy last, when we and all other sides have run the poor bug-gars into the ground for them??

You might say that.  I couldn't possibly comment.

FU

Bit harsh!

Not in the slightest.

No9 wrote:Ah the good old days.. I remember the 5 Nations and the "non-playing" weekend. But you miss one point.. In those days, there was NO points difference. There was NO championship decider, it was won outright, or shared..

So the table would look like you said, but for one change in outcome. That being Wales couldn't loose the title, only risk sharing it with Ireland and England..

I am pretty sure that the rules of the championship changed in the early nineties to points difference and an overall winner.

Pot Hale wrote:

Griff wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:Did I say the table was from black & white days?

Tsk, tsk.

No.   Otherwise I'd have had to start changing the value of tries and results of matches n ev'rytin.

I'm merely demonstrating how the table would look today if Italy weren't in it.  

And trying to make Welsh fans feel better about not playing Italy first instead of last....

Do you mean they're maybe getting something of an advantage over ourselves and England in playing Italy last, when we and all other sides have run the poor bug-gars into the ground for them??

You might say that.  I couldn't possibly comment.

FU

Bit harsh!

Not in the slightest.

Well FU too then!

I saw a decent suggestion somewhere about bringing in bonus points for the 6N but making it 5 points for a win so a Grand Slam with no bonus points would still guarantee winning the tournament.Might be worth thinking about in the future.

Griff wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

Griff wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:Did I say the table was from black & white days?

Tsk, tsk.

No.   Otherwise I'd have had to start changing the value of tries and results of matches n ev'rytin.

I'm merely demonstrating how the table would look today if Italy weren't in it.  

And trying to make Welsh fans feel better about not playing Italy first instead of last....

Do you mean they're maybe getting something of an advantage over ourselves and England in playing Italy last, when we and all other sides have run the poor bug-gars into the ground for them??

You might say that.  I couldn't possibly comment.

FU

Bit harsh!

Not in the slightest.

Well FU too then!

I presume you understand what FU means in this context?

asoreleftshoulder wrote:I saw a decent suggestion somewhere about bringing in bonus points for the 6N but making it 5 points for a win so a Grand Slam with no bonus points would still guarantee winning the tournament.Might be worth thinking about in the future.

Yeah 5 points for a win, 1 point for 4 tries or more, no losing bonus points and results between the two teams being the first determining factor if teams are tied on points would mean the Grand Slam winner couldn't be overhauled even by a team with four wins and four tries in every game. It's a good idea.

Having said that... and acknowledging that the current system is very unbalanced and flawed and points difference is a circumstantial crapshoot... isn't it basically really exciting thinking about what could happen today?

Would bonus point really open it up though? By nature the battles have generally always been tight afaires in this championship.

Pot Hale wrote:

Griff wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

Griff wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:Did I say the table was from black & white days?

Tsk, tsk.

No.   Otherwise I'd have had to start changing the value of tries and results of matches n ev'rytin.

I'm merely demonstrating how the table would look today if Italy weren't in it.  

And trying to make Welsh fans feel better about not playing Italy first instead of last....

Do you mean they're maybe getting something of an advantage over ourselves and England in playing Italy last, when we and all other sides have run the poor bug-gars into the ground for them??

You might say that.  I couldn't possibly comment.

FU

Bit harsh!

Not in the slightest.

Well FU too then!

I presume you understand what FU means in this context?

No, which is why I said 'bit harsh' with an exclamation mark.

Anyway, even if it meant F**k You, it was addressed to me, Griff ... not you.

Oh I know that Fly. I was joining in the FU fun. But apparently I've not understood the real and hidden meaning. Life sucks

maestegmafia wrote:Would bonus point really open it up though? By nature the battles have generally always been tight afaires in this championship.

That's kind of the point,if you have bonus points teams might try to look for tries a bit more and in doing so make it a more open game where the opposition then also have a better chance of scoring tries.

Griff wrote:Oh I know that Fly. I was joining in the FU fun. But apparently I've not understood the real and hidden meaning. Life sucks

Not hidden at all.

FU = Francis Urquart/Underwood - "You might say/think that, I couldn't possibly comment."