Sorry, this story is unavailable
What planet are you talking about?
""With regard to the rankings and RWC. It is extra weighted because this is the only time most of these teams play each other in genuine competition. IMO I believe a more genuine ranking would be reached if friendly matches were not involved in calculation.""
Are you saying that test matches outside the World Cup are not "genuine competition"? Rubbish! Tell that to the 80,000 who turn up at Twickenham, the 100,000-odd who have turned up in Sydney and Soweto.
What are these "friendly" matches you are talking about? I never heard of a "friendly" test match.
The world you are writing about simply isn't the world of rugby. Head back to Planet Soccer or wherever you come from; people there might know what you are talking about.
Ever since I was a wee lad back in the 60s, I have been hearing from the Welsh what a marvellous rugby team they have. It seems that nothing has changed. The rest of us should just agree with you and ignore any evidence to the contrary.
Well, it happens that at the moment I do think you have a rather marvellous rugby team. But till they win more and lose less they aren't going to climb the IRB rankings. The IRB doesn't hand out ranking points for support.
Posted 03:00 14th March 2012
Look the world rankings are done on a game by game basis, not on where you finished in a tournement. Getting to the semi is better than only reaching the quarters but then winning 4 out of 4 in the the group stage is better than only winning 3 out of 4. The fact is, as far as the rankings are concerned, Englands World Cup record was played 5, won4, lost 1. Where as Wales' World Cup record was played 7, won 4, lost 3. So Wales will have picked up roughly the same amonut of points for winning the same number of matches, but then they'll have lost more points for losing 2 extra games. You may say it seems unfair but to award points for wins and to deduct points for defeats is the only way the rankings can work. Wales are not being screwed by this system as its the same for everyone involved. If you really want to shoot up the ranking you have to win more games against the best, and up to now Wales have only really beaten teams around them and below them.
Posted 15:27 13th March 2012
Whether we agree with the rules or not, they are the rules. And whether we want the RWC to be worth double is also not important. If you want to be #1 in the IRB rankings, beat everyone else every time you play. At the moment, NZ have that mantle and are likely to hold onto it for some time.
Posted 14:13 13th March 2012
Whatever ranking system we have it will never be completly fair unless somehow every team plays every team home and away all equall ammounts within a certain timespan. That's not going to happen and I suppose the IRB have tried to make it as fair as possible.
What I think is harsh is that the seedings for the World Cup are decided and based on the rankings 3 years before the event itself. A lot can change in 3 years.
I guess it must have something to do with travel arrangements and so on.
Posted 12:15 13th March 2012
@westywales et al
Upon re-reading my post it does seem a bit trollish. Apologies to all. You gave fair comment.
With regard to the rankings and RWC. It is extra weighted because this is the only time most of these teams play each other in genuine competition.
IMO I believe a more genuine ranking would be reached if friendly matches were not involved in calculation.
Wales only beat one team that was ranked higher than them in the RWC(Ireland).. but definitely did not deserve to finish 8th in the rankings
Posted 10:58 13th March 2012
That seems hard on Wales, and Ireland, for sure. But no system will please everyone...
As to "worst 6N ever" people seem to say that a lot in recent years but the fact is a tournament that used to be the "France or English show" has been enriched (and I say that as an Englishman...) by Ireland then Wales achieving and maintaining a higher standard of Rugby. Now any of those four can beat any of the others on their day and it tends to magnify the importance of single results in the standings.
Despite their inconsistency in recent years France and England still hold one major trump card over Wales and Ireland - they are both more capable of beating the tri nations sides, even occasionally away from home - no other NH sides do that. Wales probably suffer in the IRB rankings for being pretty inconsistent away from the 6N.
Posted 09:52 13th March 2012
I can't hear about "how many games Wales lost in the World Cup" as an excuse for this ranking system. The World cup is a knock out competition,... the ranking pionts awarded should and MUST reflect that, or is going out in the last eight, to be considered a higher acheivement than finishing in the last four. That is what the Welsh are complaning about... and it seems that while teams benefit from the system,.. the fans don't complain. If it were the other way around I'm sure it wouldn't be excused and seen as so clean cut, some are making it out to be.
Posted 09:45 13th March 2012
The rankings are a joke. For example:
1. Wales entered the RWC ranked 6th
2. Wales finished in 4th place but were ranked 8th
3. Wales are unbeaten in 6N and have beaten England the last twice we have played.
England are ranked higher than Wales. Therefore rankings have zero credibility.
Yes NZ are the best in the world
Posted 06:37 13th March 2012
I agree that it is a bit silly that the IRB should double ranking points for World Cup matches. It runs counter to the very ethos of international test matches -- that all matches matter. There are no "friendlies", as such, with experimental rules on replacements and whatnot. Leave that to soccer.
Dear god, why does the IRB have to be told that all test matches matter? Usually it is just fans trying to make light of their team's defeats who argue otherwise.
As for France and Wales's rankings after the World Cup, yes France were runners-up and Wales did finish fourth, BUT: both teams had a record of won four, lost three. Losing three games at the World Cup takes some doing. England lost only one and look what a bashing they have taken from their fans and the media. Meanwhile many people here seem to think France and Wales are bloody wonderful.
Furthermore, Wales lost again to Australia, at home, after the World Cup.
If I were Welsh I would just worry about winning this weekend.
Posted 06:14 13th March 2012
what. how does this actually work? you win a game and you go up the rankings? its such a joke, its just playing into crap teams hands that are terrible for 98% of a given time period then one week they win a game then suddenly whats happened before that is irrelevant. dont even get me started on how badly wales are being screwed by this "system". even england fans like APV1 must be wondering what the hell is going on. fiji behind georgia, canada and scotland is also a giggler. but at the end of the day it doesnt matter because we all know more or less where everyone stands- NZ... Aus..........SA.................................................................................................................................................................................................................the rest
Posted 03:38 13th March 2012
After the weekend England will be 7th, France 6th, Ireland 5th and Wales 4th
Posted 23:24 12th March 2012
The problem for Wales is this, yes they have won 4 from 4 so far in the 6N but before that they lost 3 in a row. Wales may have finished 4th at the World Cup but if you look at the games that they played, the only team that they beat of any note really was Irleand ( No disrespect but you don't pick up many ranking points for wins against Fiji, Samoa and Namibia). It does seem slightly unfair on the face of it but you win points for victories and lose them when you lose and thats the only way it can work.
Posted 19:08 12th March 2012
The boks should be the easiest target for the rising NH sides, no-one will even touch nz as usual and I'd expect Wales or England or France (mayhaps even Ireland) to claim a win over one of the top 3 nations over the coming summer series even if it is down south.
Posted 17:38 12th March 2012
Not the same person who used to be on 606 is it?
Still peddling dreams to over paid executives?
Investco wasn't it?
Still bitter and twisted I see.
You have to play what is in front of you.
When did your team last win a grand slam???
Silince is golden isn't it?
Posted 17:33 12th March 2012
I personally think the rankings work fine apart from the WC idea of doubling points. There's no good reason for it and it renders the system inaccurate for a good 6 months after the competition. Not that it really matters much anyway apart from the seeding business.
What really matters is the nice, shiny Triple Crown trophy in the WRU cabinet and, hopefully, the even nicer, shinier one we'll add to it on Saturday...
As for this season's comp being the worst for a decade, I'll partly agree that it hasn't been vintage by any stretch but the France/England, Ireland/Wales and England/Wales matches were all pretty exciting I'd say.
Posted 17:19 12th March 2012
@J_HDK What a kind thought, but I feel the congratulations are somewhat premature. Feel free to pop in next monday in the that event Wales do win to express your admiration.
Posted 16:32 12th March 2012
@... all welsh whingers
France were the team to finish second at the RWC yet were still ranked behind SA and AUS.
England were lucky enough to beat them in Paris so they shoot up the rankings.
Now that they don't have anything to play for, don't worry I'm sure they won't be too bothered making an effort in the Millenium and you will claim the grand slam in the worst 6N tournament of the past 10 years. CONGRATULATIONS
Posted 16:12 12th March 2012
@jamesliveinhope "4th in the world cup is irrelevant" if this is so then lets dispense with the waste of time game that is the third place game at a world cup. As it stands Wales have been effectively punnished for losing what was a dead rubber game that is in your words "irrelevant". this is emphasised by the doubling of points at the WC.
Posted 14:46 12th March 2012
@ Greenstone & Jamesliveinhope
I find myself saying this over and over but Wales' curse in terms of World Rankings over the last 6 months has been that WC ranking points are inexplicably doubled, win or lose, which is why the team that came fourth in the tournament ended up 8th in the rankings and since then we have been playing catch-up to get back to where we realistically should be in the top 4 or 5 which, I believe, is about right at the moment. If we manage to clinch the Grand Slam we may secure 4th which will be pretty satisfying all round...
Posted 14:29 12th March 2012
Dont forget Wales this time last year where ranked 7-8 th so they have risen in the rankings and clsed the rather big gap in points that was between them and England / France this time last year .Also given the rather large gap in points between Australia and England /Wales i would be very surprised if a NH team finished 2nd in the rankings by the time of the RWC seedings /draw .But then SA and Australia might have a terriable Rugby Championship and both lose thier summer test series so there is hope lol.SA are atm the target nation for the NH teams and it is possible for both England and Wales to be 3rd and 4th come the RWC seedings ect
Posted 14:24 12th March 2012