6N Table

So after the first couple of games and assuming Wales do lose today I see the final table as:

Fr
Eng
Ire
Italy
Wal
Sco

Final table?

What are the scores George doors?

The scoring system for your 6N table is much like the Shooting Stars version: random and amusing.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:What are the scores George doors?

The scoring system for your 6N table is much like the Shooting Stars version: random and amusing.

Is this a joke thread?

overlordofthewest wrote:Is this a joke thread?

maybe, maybe not

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:What are the scores George doors?

The scoring system for your 6N table is much like the Shooting Stars version: random and amusing.

What 4 points for a win, 2 for a draw?

Would you rather it was done by Simon Cowell and a phone vote?

The table would be no different with bonus points

Frankly I wouldn´t want anything done by Simon Cowell unless it was a written statement never to appear on public television again and to stop his circus act of programmes.

After all the results from the weekend what does the table actually look like out of interest. Is France top or Wales or are they joint leaders with England? Who is dead last or are Scotland, Italy and Ireland all at the bottom of the heap? Do you have bonus points for coming within 7 points of the winners or for 4 tries like in the now defunct 3N?

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:Frankly I wouldn´t want anything done by Simon Cowell unless it was a written statement never to appear on public television again and to stop his circus act of programmes.

After all the results from the weekend what does the table actually look like out of interest. Is France top or Wales or are they joint leaders with England? Who is dead last or are Scotland, Italy and Ireland all at the bottom of the heap? Do you have bonus points for coming within 7 points of the winners or for 4 tries like in the now defunct 3N?

Nope, because of the small number of fixtures and uneven home/away split.
There would also be a theoretcial possibility of winning a grand slam but finishing second, which is ludicrous.

Its match points difference, then tries scored that are used to seperate teams.

So even with bonus pionts the table would be as it is now. The only change any current system would make is putting tries scored ahead of points difference, which would lift Wales to second.

A theoretical possibility but a very unlikely one PSW. I just think the bonus points add another dimension although I see your point.

Sorry to harp on, but what is the current table. The OP´s table certainly doesn´t bear any resemblance to the real table.

Team P W D L F A PD TF Pts
1 France 1 1 0 0 30 12 18 4 2
2 England 1 1 0 0 13 6 7 1 2
3 Wales 1 1 0 0 23 21 2 3 2
4 Ireland 1 0 0 1 21 23 -2 2 0
5 Scotland 1 0 0 1 6 13 -7 0 0
6 Italy 1 0 0 1 12 30 -18 0 0

Cheers PSW. So France has a healthy points difference but only as they ran out winners against Italy but if it´s tight at the top, scoring lots of points and getting away from your opponent does help you in the long run and making a loss as small as possible has its motivation.

OK I´m warming to the idea. I did like though in the 3N, with 3 tries, you thought twice about shooting for goal to get the try bonus point or instead of going for the try you made sure you came within 7 of a team. It became tactical. But like you say, being Grand Slam winners and not overall winners is unacceptable.

There´s a big difference then between playing Italy away and at home because normally in the latter, they tend to do a more effective job of shutting up shop.

Surely bonus points could be introduced, that work like silver medals in the olympics. 5 silvers doesn't equal one and a half golds, but if you're tied for second it might make more sense to go to bonus points rather than purely rely on points difference.

"But like you say, being Grand Slam winners and not overall winners is unacceptable."

I like the point scoring from the world cup groups.

if you get the gs- you are awarded 5 bonus points therefore you cannot loose

so its not an issue, and i can sort out the 2nd , 3rd places out etc.

the benefit isnt just for a change in the way things are scored- it could also help make more exiting games

Again , as Kia addressed, you get to the problem of home away fixture imbalance which is already an issue with the 6Ns.

I do believe that if teams are tied at the top of the table the result should go to the head to head, other than that Id rather see games played as games than contests for bonus points.

BPs also discourage resting and rotation, which can influence other games later depending on the order of the draw.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:Again , as Kia addressed, you get to the problem of home away fixture imbalance which is already an issue with the 6Ns.

I do believe that if teams are tied at the top of the table the result should go to the head to head, other than that Id rather see games played as games than contests for bonus points.

it is a good point when we talk about the home and away argument, however bonus points or not its still a problem. I agree it could carry more weight with bonus points. However i thought the bonus point system did well and created some very interesting scenarios in reagrds to teams finsihing first, second or third in the RWC groups

miteyironpaw wrote:BPs also discourage resting and rotation, which can influence other games later depending on the order of the draw.

thats not a bad thing at all

I'm not for BPs, don't feel they're needed, and as pointed out, the home/away imbalance thing would only be worsened I think. If it aint broke...