Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

The IRB ranking system.

  • 02-12-2012 2:22am
    #1
    Tin Foil Hat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,665 ✭✭✭


    I think that the IRB ranking system is badly flawed.

    Case study - Wales
    In October 2011 Wales played in a rugby world cup semi final. They lost by a single point. A few months later they won a grand slam in the six nations.
    Yet, they still find themselves in 9th position, the 3rd pot, in the upcoming world cup draw. This doesn't seem fair to me.

    There are three things that need looking at, imo.
    1) The double ranking points exchange in operation for RWC matches. There's no need for it. Rugby is not soccer. There is no such thing as a 'friendly' in rugby. Every game is played to win - be it a summer or autumn international, a six nations game or a world cup game. There is no reason for a greater, or lesser, points exchange for any of them.
    2) (related) The RWC Third place playoff. Because of the third place playoff, Wales lost three games in the last world cup (Ireland only lost one). This, combined with my first point, means that Wales probably fared worse in the IRB rankings during the WC than teams that got knocked out before them.
    3) The 3 point IRB ranking point handicap given against home teams. As the rankings stand today it's enough to move a home Argentinian side from 9th in the world to 5th in the world; a home Italian side from 10th to 7th; or a home French side from 4th to 2nd. It's too much.

    Any thoughts?


Comments

  • #2
    Deano7788
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,693 ✭✭✭Deano7788


    Tin Foil Hat wrote: »
    I think that the IRB ranking system is badly flawed.

    Case study - Wales
    In October 2011 Wales played in a rugby world cup semi final. They lost by a single point. A few months later they won a grand slam in the six nations.
    Yet, they still find themselves in 9th position, the 3rd pot, in the upcoming world cup draw. This doesn't seem fair to me.

    There are three things that need looking at, imo.
    1) The double ranking points exchange in operation for RWC matches. There's no need for it. Rugby is not soccer. There is no such thing as a 'friendly' in rugby. Every game is played to win - be it a summer or autumn international, a six nations game or a world cup game. There is no reason for a greater, or lesser, points exchange for any of them.
    2) (related) The RWC Third place playoff. Because of the third place playoff, Wales lost three games in the last world cup (Ireland only lost one). This, combined with my first point, means that Wales probably fared worse in the IRB rankings during the WC than teams that got knocked out before them.
    3) The 3 point IRB ranking point handicap given against home teams. As the rankings stand today it's enough to move a home Argentinian side from 9th in the world to 5th in the world; a home Italian side from 10th to 7th; or a home French side from 4th to 2nd. It's too much.

    Any thoughts?

    I don't think Wales are the best example to use in this case. Yes, they did well in these tournaments but if you look at their overall record, in their last 23 games, they've won 11, lost 12. That's a pretty poor record. Also since their Grandslam, they've lost every match they've played: 4 times to Australia, once to NZ, Samoa and Argentina. That's bound to have a big negative impact on their rankings, especially Samoa.

    While it's obviously not perfect, I'm reasonably happy with the current system


  • #3
    rrpc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,244 ✭✭✭rrpc


    Deano7788 wrote: »
    I don't think Wales are the best example to use in this case. Yes, they did well in these tournaments but if you look at their overall record, in their last 23 games, they've won 11, lost 12. That's a pretty poor record. Also since their Grandslam, they've lost every match they've played: 4 times to Australia, once to NZ, Samoa and Argentina. That's bound to have a big negative impact on their rankings, especially Samoa.

    While it's obviously not perfect, I'm reasonably happy with the current system
    +1. Wales' ranking dip is completely due to their performances since the 6N. After their GS they were fifth, only 0.3 ranking points behind England in 4th and 1 point behind SA in third. A win in the summer or the Autumn would have been enough to keep them in that position or thereabouts, but they lost every game they played.


Advertisement