Scotland and Italy continue to drift into the definite T2 nations

by Portnoy's Complaint Mon 17 Jun 2013, 12:47 pm

1(1)	NEW ZEALAND	90.08
2(2)	SOUTH AFRICA	86.94
3(3)	AUSTRALIA	86.87
4(4)	ENGLAND	85.76
5(6)	FRANCE	81.59
6(5)	WALES	81.36
7(7)	SAMOA	80.50
8(8)	IRELAND	79.58
9(9)	ARGENTINA	76.67
10(12)	TONGA	76.17
11(11)	SCOTLAND	76.05
12(10)	ITALY	75.08
13(13)	CANADA	72.40
14(14)	FIJI	71.29
15(15)	JAPAN	70.91
16(16)	GEORGIA	67.66
17(17)	USA	67.14
18(18)	ROMANIA	66.18
19(19)	RUSSIA	61.99
20(20)	SPAIN	60.44

by sirBiggles Mon 17 Jun 2013, 1:05 pm

So does that mean we wont have TMOs at Murrayfield or Rome in the next 6 Nations.

Apprarantly T2 nations dont have to have TMOs, which is why there wasnt one at the Japan v Wales games...

I know they'll have them ... but an interesting point...

by funnyExiledScot Mon 17 Jun 2013, 1:06 pm

Those rankings don't look right. Why are Wales higher than Japan?

by Captain_Sensible Mon 17 Jun 2013, 1:08 pm

Obvious troll is obvious.

A Scotland B side just gave a full SA side a proper run for their money. Ridiculous to consider us a 'Tier 2' side.

by Exiledinborders Mon 17 Jun 2013, 1:10 pm

Looking at the numbers the groups look like:
Tier 1 NZ out on their own
Tier 2 SA, Aus & England
Tier 3 France, Wales, Samoa, Ireland
Tier 4 Arg, Tonga, Scotland, Italy
Tier 6 Canada, Fiji, Japan
Tier 7 georgia, USA, Romania

by Portnoy's Complaint Mon 17 Jun 2013, 1:12 pm

Capt Sensible wrote:
Obvious troll is obvious.

A Scotland B side just gave a full SA side a proper run for their money. Ridiculous to consider us a 'Tier 2' side.

Except Scotland weren't affected by last weekend's results.

by red_stag Mon 17 Jun 2013, 1:16 pm

Here's a question. Is it that Scotland and Italy are drifting downwards or are the previous Tier 2 nations climbing upwards.

Samoa, Argentina and to a lesser extent Tonga have showed marked improvements in the last few years and have really come a long way.

by Guest Mon 17 Jun 2013, 1:17 pm

funnyExiledScot wrote:Those rankings don't look right. Why are Wales higher than Japan?

Why are you bringing us into this???

by Captain_Sensible Mon 17 Jun 2013, 1:17 pm

greytiger wrote:
Capt Sensible wrote:
Obvious troll is obvious.

A Scotland B side just gave a full SA side a proper run for their money. Ridiculous to consider us a 'Tier 2' side.
Except Scotland weren't affected by last weekend's results.

That's irrelevant to the point I was making. In terms of quality, Scotland are not a Tier 2 side. The game vs SA showed that.

Incidentally, Scotland are less than a ranking point away from 9th place.

by GLove39 Mon 17 Jun 2013, 1:23 pm

The rankings really are stupid though, France (who so far this year have lost 6/7 games played) get thumped 30-0 and overtake the 6 Nations champions? chin

by Cyril Mon 17 Jun 2013, 1:24 pm

I've never taken much notice of this Tier 1, Tier 2 thingamajig.

Where are the cut-off points in terms of rankings for each tier?

by Guest Mon 17 Jun 2013, 1:26 pm

I think the IRB have stopped using the 'tier' word to be honest.

by Guest Mon 17 Jun 2013, 1:28 pm

GLove39 wrote:The rankings really are stupid though, France (who so far this year have lost 6/7 games played) get thumped 30-0 and overtake the 6 Nations champions?

I think it was more Wales dropping below France than France over taking Wales, from a ranking points point of view.

by thomh Mon 17 Jun 2013, 1:28 pm

GLove39 wrote:The rankings really are stupid though, France (who so far this year have lost 6/7 games played) get thumped 30-0 and overtake the 6 Nations champions?

Because losing to Japan costs more points than losing to New Zealand. It's not that France's ranking has gone up.

Rankings will never tell the whole story - Wales are clearly stronger than France right now, but their form in the second half of 2012 and the second/third string's loss to Japan cost them a lot of points - but as a broad picture they're pretty accurate.

by GunsGerms Mon 17 Jun 2013, 1:30 pm

Exiledinborders wrote:Looking at the numbers the groups look like:
Tier 1 NZ out on their own
Tier 2 SA, Aus & England
Tier 3 France, Wales, Samoa, Ireland
Tier 4 Arg, Tonga, Scotland, Italy
Tier 6 Canada, Fiji, Japan
Tier 7 georgia, USA, Romania

Not sure how you could consider England to be better than Wales when they were thumped by Wales.

Not sure they are much better than ireland or France either to be honest. For me:

1. NZ
2. SA, ENG, AUS, Ire, Wal, Fra.
3. Samoa, Italy, Scotland, Argentina
4. Fiji, Canada
5. Everyone else.

by thomh Mon 17 Jun 2013, 1:32 pm

GunsGerms wrote:
Exiledinborders wrote:Looking at the numbers the groups look like:
Tier 1 NZ out on their own
Tier 2 SA, Aus & England
Tier 3 France, Wales, Samoa, Ireland
Tier 4 Arg, Tonga, Scotland, Italy
Tier 6 Canada, Fiji, Japan
Tier 7 georgia, USA, Romania

Not sure how you could consider England to be better than Wales when they were thumped by Wales.

Not sure they are much better than ireland or France either to be honest. For me:

1. NZ
2. SA, ENG, AUS, Ire, Wal, Fra.
3. Samoa, Italy, Scotland, Argentina
4. Fiji, Canada
5. Everyone else.

Because luckily the rankings aren't calculated based on one game. You might as well ask how New Zealand are ranked ahead of England considering that England thumped them last time.

by Portnoy's Complaint Mon 17 Jun 2013, 1:52 pm

It's quite possible (probable even?) that NZ and RSA could install England in third spot without England stepping a foot on a playing surface come the new season.

by Bathman_in_London Mon 17 Jun 2013, 1:52 pm

I posed this question on a thread about Samoa, but again, at what stage do the like of Samoa (effectively no voting rights-lumped in with other PI's) and Argentina (1 vote) get the same rights as the established powers (who have 2), if as in Scotlands case, they are ranked above them and have been for a while?

by Pete C (Kiwireddevil) Mon 17 Jun 2013, 1:56 pm

GunsGerms wrote:
Exiledinborders wrote:Looking at the numbers the groups look like:
Tier 1 NZ out on their own
Tier 2 SA, Aus & England
Tier 3 France, Wales, Samoa, Ireland
Tier 4 Arg, Tonga, Scotland, Italy
Tier 6 Canada, Fiji, Japan
Tier 7 georgia, USA, Romania

Not sure how you could consider England to be better than Wales when they were thumped by Wales.

Not sure they are much better than ireland or France either to be honest. For me:

1. NZ
2. SA, ENG, AUS, Ire, Wal, Fra.
3. Samoa, Italy, Scotland, Argentina
4. Fiji, Canada
5. Everyone else.

But the gap in terms of ranking points between England and France (4.17 rankings points) is bigger than the gap between NZ and SA (3.14* points). Granted that's due to (a) NZ's loss to England, (b) France's woeful 2013 and (c) Wales' struggles outside the 6N but it's still a big gap. The next decent gap between clusters is from Ireland to Argentina (2.9 points), hence EIB's classification.

*3.14? That's pi. Mmmmm pie Smile

(sorry, feeble attempt at humour on a Monday. I'll get me coat).

by aitchw Mon 17 Jun 2013, 2:17 pm

Is that custard or apple pi. There's a world of difference you know.

by offload Mon 17 Jun 2013, 2:49 pm

Cyril on 606v2 wrote:Where are the cut-off points in terms of rankings for each tier?

Alway one below Wales Cyril - always. Wink

by 123456789 Mon 17 Jun 2013, 2:59 pm

I'd say the tiers were:

1. NZ
2. SA, Australia, England, Wales
3. Scotland, Ireland, Samoa, Argentina
4. Tonga, Italy, Fiji

by MMaaxx Mon 17 Jun 2013, 3:02 pm

NZ
SA, AUS
England, Ireland, Wales
Samoa, Argentina, Scotland, France
Italy, Tonga, Fiji

by SecretFly Mon 17 Jun 2013, 3:08 pm

France continue to be number 1 in the sneeky Rankings.

Last in 6N, two defeats to New Zealand and they go up in the latest rankings. Actually and ironically, their lowly place in the 6N table helped them there.

No I don't find it controversal. I like the rankings - they have no opinions and no bias, just rules and number crunching reason. But I just find it funny to witness France's constant downward trend get an upward blue arrow. Even the colour of the arrow salutes them.

by Cyril Mon 17 Jun 2013, 3:10 pm

France managed to lose to Tonga before beating England in the World Cup quarters ensuring England lost more (double WC bully bonus) points in defeat.

I'm sure they did all that on purpose.

I blame the Welsh archers.

by R!skysports Mon 17 Jun 2013, 3:15 pm

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:
GunsGerms wrote:
Exiledinborders wrote:Looking at the numbers the groups look like:
Tier 1 NZ out on their own
Tier 2 SA, Aus & England
Tier 3 France, Wales, Samoa, Ireland
Tier 4 Arg, Tonga, Scotland, Italy
Tier 6 Canada, Fiji, Japan
Tier 7 georgia, USA, Romania

Not sure how you could consider England to be better than Wales when they were thumped by Wales.

Not sure they are much better than ireland or France either to be honest. For me:

1. NZ
2. SA, ENG, AUS, Ire, Wal, Fra.
3. Samoa, Italy, Scotland, Argentina
4. Fiji, Canada
5. Everyone else.

But the gap in terms of ranking points between England and France (4.17 rankings points) is bigger than the gap between NZ and SA (3.14* points). Granted that's due to (a) NZ's loss to England, (b) France's woeful 2013 and (c) Wales' struggles outside the 6N but it's still a big gap. The next decent gap between clusters is from Ireland to Argentina (2.9 points), hence EIB's classification.

*3.14? That's pi. Mmmmm pie (sorry, feeble attempt at humour on a Monday. I'll get me coat).

Is that a pie, or a stew with a lid?

by Cyril Mon 17 Jun 2013, 3:22 pm

offload wrote:
Cyril on 606v2 wrote:Where are the cut-off points in terms of rankings for each tier?

Alway one below Wales Cyril - always.

Sneaky

by whocares Mon 17 Jun 2013, 3:23 pm

SecretFly wrote:France continue to be number 1 in the sneeky Rankings.

Last in 6N, two defeats to New Zealand and they go up in the latest rankings. Actually and ironically, their lowly place in the 6N table helped them there.

No I don't find it controversal. I like the rankings - they have no opinions and no bias, just rules and number crunching reason. But I just find it funny to witness France's constant downward trend get an upward blue arrow. Even the colour of the arrow salutes them.

I find it weird that France is still 5th despite only winning against Scotland this year. good news is that by playing SA and NZ in the AIs the only way is up Smile

by thomh Mon 17 Jun 2013, 3:27 pm

Their win against Australia by more than 16 probably had them on a higher mark than they should have been on, so they haven't slid as far.

by Cyril Mon 17 Jun 2013, 3:29 pm

It just goes to show it's probably better to beat one of the top 3 than win the 6 Nations.

I. Am. Joking. Smile

by whocares Mon 17 Jun 2013, 3:49 pm

Cyril on 606v2 wrote:It just goes to show it's probably better to beat one of the top 3 than win the 6 Nations.

I. Am. Joking.

dunno if its better or not but maybe more difficult ... as Wales Wink

EDIT : in case my emoticons dont show up...this was a joke as well

by SecretFly Mon 17 Jun 2013, 4:30 pm

Cyril on 606v2 wrote:It just goes to show it's probably better to beat one of the top 3 than win the 6 Nations.

I. Am. Joking.

It's a joke but................ it ain't. Beating the top three is the cream as your points go up like the bloomin' blaziz...especially if you're useless in the 6N. That's only a theory, BTW, as it hasn't happened that much in practice to be able to give a more solid opinion on it Whistle

France have one more chance to try it out.

by Portnoy's Complaint Mon 17 Jun 2013, 4:43 pm

Fly wrote:
Cyril on 606v2 wrote:It just goes to show it's probably better to beat one of the top 3 than win the 6 Nations.

I. Am. Joking.

It's a joke but................ it ain't. Beating the top three is the cream as your points go up like the bloomin' blaziz...especially if you're useless in the 6N. That's only a theory, BTW, as it hasn't happened that much in practice to be able to give a more solid opinion on it
France have one more chance to try it out.

You don't have to beat any of the top three to gain a big points exchange bonus.
Just some team beyond a dream.
Whilst not losing to weaker oppos.
Hard arithmetic vs subjective 'feel'.

by SecretFly Mon 17 Jun 2013, 4:48 pm

greytiger wrote:

You don't have to beat any of the top three to gain a big points exchange bonus.
Just some team beyond a dream.
Whilst not losing to weaker oppos.
Hard arithmetic vs subjective 'feel'.

I know, but let's face it, most often in a ten year period, the SH are the teams beyond a dream. For now.....................

by Portnoy's Complaint Mon 17 Jun 2013, 4:55 pm

Nah. Lose to anyone ~10 pts behind you in the rankings and you are going to take a pts exchange hammering. Same for the small fry as it is for the giant salmon.

by SecretFly Mon 17 Jun 2013, 5:45 pm

greytiger wrote:Nah. Lose to anyone ~10 pts behind you in the rankings and you are going to take a pts exchange hammering. Same for the small fry as it is for the giant salmon.

Yeah,well it's still more realistic that a SA or AUS might lose to a scotland or Italy than the outlandish idea that Wales could lose to a side like...em, Japan.

by **Rugby Fan** Mon 17 Jun 2013, 5:53 pm

In case anyone hasn't played with the point exchange calculator before:

http://www.lassen.co.nz/pagmisc.php

by dragonbreath Mon 17 Jun 2013, 6:19 pm

funnyExiledScot wrote:Those rankings don't look right. Why are Wales higher than Japan?

Yeh I know what you mean. How are England above Wales?

by Portnoy's Complaint Mon 17 Jun 2013, 6:34 pm

I'd still expect England to smarm their way into the top three on the efforts of SA and NZ.

Gonna be a shoite summer of sport for Oz innit? Very Happy

by Exiledinborders Mon 17 Jun 2013, 8:21 pm

dragonbreath wrote:
funnyExiledScot wrote:Those rankings don't look right. Why are Wales higher than Japan?

Yeh I know what you mean. How are England above Wales?

Something to do with winning the same number of matches in 6N as Wales but not losing virtually every other match .

by Sponsored content