Six Nations bonus point system in 2017

thomond2006

http://www.independent.ie/sport/rugby/six-nations/six-nations-to-introduce-unique-bonus-point-system-in-2017-35256866.html

Competition points will be awarded in all matches on the following basis:
The Union that wins the Match shall be awarded four Match Points or (if it scores four tries or more in the process) five Match Points.
The Union that loses the Match shall be awarded no Match Points or (if it scores four tries or more in the process or loses by a margin of seven points or fewer) one Match Point or (if it scores four tries or more in the process and loses by a margin of seven points or fewer) two Match Points.
Unions that draw a Match shall each be awarded two Match Points and any of them that scores four tries or more in the process shall be awarded a further one Match Point.
A Union that wins all five of its Matches (a "Grand Slam”) shall be awarded a further three Match Points.

If it ain't broke, fix it?

wp_rathead

BPs are great when a) home and away fixtures or b) neutral venue

Rather unfair when some teams be playing at home twice and away 3 times, while other way around for other teams

thomond2006

"It is important for us to ensure that any bonus point system which is implemented would not, in any way, take away from this unique dynamic. At the same time, we are also conscious that we must reward try scoring and an attacking style of play that will deliver more tries and greater rewards for fans and players alike.

Points difference already rewards an attacking style of play.

The only difference is you eliminate the possibility of a title win due to a team putting up a cricket score in one match while having small margins in others.

awec

This is dumb without home and away fixtures.

.ak

FFS this won't work, there's no return leg in this championship. This will revert back in 2018, no doubt.

aloooof

Looks like that last point:
"A Union that wins all five of its Matches (a "Grand Slam”) shall be awarded a further three Match Points."
is to prevent a team winning a slam but potentially finishing on fewer points than another team.

I'm not sure I'm a fan of bringing in bonus points at all....

thomond2006

I wouldn't mind seeing a move to a tournament over two years with home and away fixtures. Then bonus points make sense and there's a carrot of a Grand Slam over two years which would be a phenomenal achievement.

Buer

The Rugby Championship/Tri-Nations has done it multiple times with uneven home/away fixtures without issues.

I'm happy enough to see it trialled anyway before we call for it to be scrapped.

death1234567

thomond2006 wrote: »

If it ain't broke, fix it?

+1. Team's already know how important points difference is and try to run up the score as much as possible.

irishbucsfan

Don't knock it until we've tried it I guess

awec

Going to be incredibly difficult for Ireland to win a six nations in the years they have France and England at home now.

Buer

.ak wrote: »

FFS this won't work, there's no return leg in this championship. This will revert back in 2018, no doubt.

There was an uneven number of games in the Tri Nations for multiple seasons with one team playing another twice away and once at home.

In RWC seasons, there's no home and away either.

Lets at least see how it pans out. The competition could do with a little shake up. We've had some thrilling days but there have been some utterly dour kick fests too where it's an automatic decision to point at the posts.

aloooof

awec wrote: »

Going to be incredibly difficult for Ireland to win a six nations in the years they have France and England at home now.

Agreed. Theoretically easier in the years we have them away tho?

Dave_The_Sheep

I wonder when the coaches\heads of rugby\whatever were told, and if it'll affect their approach in terms of who they might have blooded during Autumn games, etc.

Assuming anything changes at all in their approach, that is.

wp_rathead

Buer wrote: »

The Rugby Championship/Tri-Nations has done it multiple times with uneven home/away fixtures without issues.

I'm happy enough to see it trialled anyway before we call for it to be scrapped.

Has it? In rugby championship they play 6 games, home and away against each team once

In Tri Nations I think they'd play home and away and then have 1 extra home and 1 extra away game against a side, ie NZ play Australia away and then SA home, Australia play SA away and NZ home, SA play NZ away and Australia home - so was still 3 home 3 away (could be mistaken)

irishbucsfan

A few people out there on twitter haven't quite done the maths before jumping to the auld "you could win the grand slam and not win the championship"...

I don't personally think it's a great idea, but let's see how it goes. Of course I've never been wrong about anything in my life but Chicago taught me anything can happen.

Risteard

What a shame.

Shefwedfan

They had to change it from a marketing point of view. They are not able to currently sell the 6 nations to the southern Hemp. This is a huge market they are losing. The 4 nations are able to sell to northern hemp so they are happy

They are trying to push the teams into a more attacking style of play to try and get more running rugby and make the 6 nations more atractive to sell to other countries.

Will it work? No idea. The biggest problem is the time of year when the competition is played, a pissing wet day in Feb will never see a running game of rugby.

lunarhog

has anyone ever rejigged the final table over last number of seasons if bonus points had been in play?

Buer

wp_rathead wrote: »

Has it? In rugby championship they play 6 games, home and away against each team once

In Tri Nations I think they'd play home and away and then have 1 extra home and 1 extra away game against a side, ie NZ play Australia away and then SA home, Australia play SA away and NZ home, SA play NZ away and Australia home - so was still 3 home 3 away (could be mistaken)

It was but if one of the nations was weaker it would be advantageous for a country to have them at home twice.

Also, in a RWC year they just play 3 games as they did last year. Australia won the tournament with two tight wins at home to NZ and SA before getting their one handy away game to Argentina.

They just get on with it. It's not ideal but it balances out and it makes for more enjoyable matches.

Shefwedfan

lunarhog wrote: »

has anyone ever rejigged the final table over last number of seasons if bonus points had been in play?

This was done on a previous thread, I think Ireland where the biggest losers and england would have won a couple of our 6 nations

It is a pointless exercise anyway, Joe played a specific way to win the championship and this was based on how the points system rewarded a team. If they got more points for more tries I am sure he would change the system to reflect that

Podge_irl

Shefwedfan wrote: »

They had to change it from a marketing point of view. They are not able to currently sell the 6 nations to the southern Hemp. This is a huge market they are losing. The 4 nations are able to sell to northern hemp so they are happy

I don't think an inability to sell it in the SH has anything to do with bonus points. Nor for that matter do I think the NH overly care about the Rugby Championship.

Anyway, absolutely hate the idea but I suppose we should see how it works itself out.

aloooof

Shefwedfan wrote: »

This was done on a previous thread, I think Ireland where the biggest losers and england would have won a couple of our 6 nations

It is a pointless exercise anyway, Joe played a specific way to win the championship and this was based on how the points system rewarded a team. If they got more points for more tries I am sure he would change the system to reflect that

Agree with this, case in point being 2015 when we have to put up a score.

Richard Hillman

It's a load of beeswax. Conditions are extremely variable in our part of Europe between early February and late March.

Murrayfield in February in driving rain is a lot different to Murrayfield in late March. The 6N isn't a level playing field as it is with the difference between home and away fixtures but it is accepted because it works on a rota basis. Now with the weather, it completely throws up a disadvantage.

Then there is the Wales question. Wales will never play with the roof open again. Why would they? They want perfect conditions for every game. Except if there is a title decider when a team arrives in Cardiff in terrible weather and needing 5 points and Wales only need 4. No guesses needed for if the roof will be open or closed then.

It is ridiculous. If we had our championship during the summer I could somewhat accept it but not in February and March.

Buer

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Will it work? No idea. The biggest problem is the time of year when the competition is played, a pissing wet day in Feb will never see a running game of rugby.

There have been plenty of dry days or games under the closed roof in Cardiff where teams have had little interest in running it either.

The rugby being played has been becoming less exciting over the past decade with some notable exceptions. We had results last year like 15-9, 16-16, 10-9, 19-10 and 21-10. It seems teams only open up and go for it on the final day when they realise points difference could be a deciding factor on where they finish.

Miley Byrne

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Then there is the Wales question. Wales will never play with the roof open again. Why would they? They want perfect conditions for every game. Except if there is a title decider when a team arrives in Cardiff in terrible weather and needing 5 points and Wales only need 4. No guesses needed for if the roof will be open or closed then. .

I thought both Unions had to be in agreement to close the roof, if no agreement, then the roof stays open?

LeinsterDub

This has been suggested for years. I can't see the harm in giving it a go. At least it will keep games entertaining for longer.

thomond2006

"LeinsterDub wrote: »

At least it will keep games entertaining for longer.

The Top14 version of 3 tries more than the opposition would be better for this.

WeleaseWoderick

Really not happy about this at all. It will completely unbalance the competition with the lack of home & away fixtures.

Placing more value on say beating Italy at home with 4 tries over beating England away by a point doesn't sit well with me at all.

lunarhog

I think it will be a good idea and is definitely worth trying, we need to play a more expansive game in the 6N to get used to it and avoid the embarrassing scenario of all SH semi in the world cup again. People may moan about imbalance in home/away fixtures, weather etc but everything should even out over time.  I for one am embracing this change

lunarhog

good news for Ireland, England and Scotland for the way they are all playing now.  Maybe not so good for the rest, could be the death of Warrenball !!

phog

I normally wouldn't be in favour of BPs in the 6Ns but the additional 3 BPs for 5 wins at least makes it easier to accept the trial.

molloyjh

Thinking about the bonus point idea further I think this puts the outcome of the tournament even more in the hands of the scheduling.

As it stood scheduling impacted in terms of points difference which meant that teams with 3 home games had an advantage. So it has always been a bit of a lob sided tournament in that regard. However the PD thing will still stand in the new format. So this remains regardless.

What they are now introducing is a system that weights the outcome in favour of certain teams even more. Wales and Ireland would have an advantage in the even years with Scotland and Italy at home as well as 1 of the other 3 at home. England would have that advantage on the odd years. France on the other hand don't have any year with both Scotland and Italy at home so would never have that advantage. So the way the tournament schedules the home and away fixture element leads to an even greater unbalance than ever before.

Now take Wales for example. They tend to start slow and get better as the tournament progresses. Italy on the other had are the polar opposite. In 2015 Italy were at home to Wales in Round 1. In 2017 they'll be at home to Wales in Round 5. You would expect Wales to win that fixture regardless of when it was on, however in the above examples you would imagine they'd get the TBP in Round 5, but not Round 1. Therefore the very same fixture would see 4 points in 2015 and 5 in 2017. So now the actual order of the fixtures in a given year can have a fairly large impact on the outcome too.

For me this gives the actual scheduling far too much of an impact on the overall outcome of each individual tournament. As others have said, let's see how it goes, but I don't think it's a great idea tbh.

y0ssar1an22

you could end up with a situation that a team A loses all matches and gets 5 x 2 bonus points = 10 points.

team B that wins 2 matches with no bonus points would end with 8 points.

doesn't seem fair to me. they need to put more thought into this before implementation.

Edit: team b would need to get a try bonus for beating team team a, allowing team A their loosing bonus point. Team B then ends up with 9 points.
Team A still finished ahead of Team B, even though its 0 wins vs 2 wins

ClanofLams

Awful idea. Most entertaining day of 6N rugby I can remember was last day in 2014 with Wales, Ireland & England all gunning for the title. Will never happen again were this system implemented permanently.

Along with the scheduling issues already mentioned.

swiwi_

The next step is to move the start of the tournament to March. Change is at snails pace for the auld home unions but at least it's a start.

CMOTDibbler

Just ran the numbers past the last couple of years' 6N and it makes no difference at all to the winner, but reverses the last two positions from 2015.

2016|W|D|L|Pts|New|BP|Tot
England|5|0|0|10|20|4|24
Wales|3|1|1|7|14|2|16
Ireland|2|1|2|5|10|3|13
Scotland|2|0|3|4|8|2|10
France|2|0|3|4|8|0|8
Italy|0|0|5|0|0|1|1


2015|W|D|L|Pts|New|BP|Tot
Ireland|4|0|1|8|16|2|18
England|4|0|1|8|16|2|18
Wales|4|0|1|8|16|2|18
France|2|0|3|4|8|2|10
Italy|1|0|4|2|4|0|6
Scotland|0|0|5|0|0|3|3

ClanofLams

I don't even get what aim it is meant to further. Any team with designs on winning the championship is already well aware of the importance of points difference and is scoring as much as possible.

swiwi_

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

Just ran the numbers past the last couple of years' 6N and it makes no difference at all to the winner, but reverses the last two positions from 2015.

2016|W|D|L|Pts|BP|Tot
England|5|0|0|10|4|14
Wales|3|1|1|7|2|9
Ireland|2|1|2|5|3|8
Scotland|2|0|3|4|2|6
France|2|0|3|4|0|4
Italy|0|0|5|0|1|1


2015|W|D|L|Pts|BP|Tot
Ireland|4|0|1|8|2|10
England|4|0|1|8|2|10
Wales|4|0|1|8|2|10
France|2|0|3|4|2|6
Italy|1|0|4|2|0|2
Scotland|0|0|5|0|3|3

This assumes teams would have played the same way whichever of the 2 systems in place. Just saying.

irishbucsfan

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

Just ran the numbers past the last couple of years' 6N and it makes no difference at all to the winner, but reverses the last two positions from 2015.

2016|W|D|L|Pts|BP|Tot
England|5|0|0|10|4|14
Wales|3|1|1|7|2|9
Ireland|2|1|2|5|3|8
Scotland|2|0|3|4|2|6
France|2|0|3|4|0|4
Italy|0|0|5|0|1|1


2015|W|D|L|Pts|BP|Tot
Ireland|4|0|1|8|2|10
England|4|0|1|8|2|10
Wales|4|0|1|8|2|10
France|2|0|3|4|2|6
Italy|1|0|4|2|0|2
Scotland|0|0|5|0|3|3

Surely that's incorrect... 4 points for winning a match now?

Buer

ClanofLams wrote: »

I don't even get what aim it is meant to further. Any team with designs on winning the championship is already well aware of the importance of points difference and is scoring as much as possible.

I'd disagree. The approach is extremely conservative. You saw Ireland kicking to the corner repeatedly in the past month to try and score tries to get a good tally up on the board against NZ because they knew they'd need to score at least 25 points to beat them.

In the 6N, we'd never do that. We scored one try against Wales this year, none against France and one against England. It was as cagey as possible, trying to pick off points and get our noses in front. I've no problem with that and it's smart play but it's not enjoyable for the neutral just like England beating Scotland 15-9 was painful watching for us.

ClanofLams

Buer wrote: »

I'd disagree. The approach is extremely conservative. You saw Ireland kicking to the corner repeatedly in the past month to try and score tries to get a good tally up on the board against NZ because they knew they'd need to score at least 25 points to beat them.

In the 6N, we'd never do that. We scored one try against Wales this year, none against France and one against England. It was as cagey as possible, trying to pick off points and get our noses in front. I've no problem with that and it's smart play but it's not enjoyable for the neutral just like England beating Scotland 15-9 was painful watching for us.

It's the nature of the teams rather than the structure of the tournament. You still see 12-9/9-6 on a regular basis in the European Cup. Teams are still going to prioritise wins. This just imbalances the tournament further.

CMOTDibbler

ClanofLams wrote: »

I don't even get what aim it is meant to further. Any team with designs on winning the championship is already well aware of the importance of points difference and is scoring as much as possible.

I don't know if that's always the case. Everyone knows that the only sure way of winning is to slam it. Now that's not always acheivable and if you lose an early game, you're then chasing points. But keeping the wins going is the primary objective and winning pretty or ugly won't matter as long as you win.

vienne86

Silly idea, I think, because of the home/away business. I think it would only work with Thomond's idea of running the points gathering over two years.

I'm not convinced that it will encourage try scoring - points difference already encourages that.

ClanofLams

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

Just ran the numbers past the last couple of years' 6N and it makes no difference at all to the winner, but reverses the last two positions from 2015.

2016|W|D|L|Pts|BP|Tot
England|5|0|0|10|4|14
Wales|3|1|1|7|2|9
Ireland|2|1|2|5|3|8
Scotland|2|0|3|4|2|6
France|2|0|3|4|0|4
Italy|0|0|5|0|1|1


2015|W|D|L|Pts|BP|Tot
Ireland|4|0|1|8|2|10
England|4|0|1|8|2|10
Wales|4|0|1|8|2|10
France|2|0|3|4|2|6
Italy|1|0|4|2|0|2
Scotland|0|0|5|0|3|3

For the sake of correctness, England would have finished on 17 last year with three point bonus for grand slam.

ArmaniJeanss

awec wrote: »

Going to be incredibly difficult for Ireland to win a six nations in the years they have France and England at home now.

No-one has ever explained to me why all 6 teams have to be on the current rotation for ever.
Surely it should be redrawn every two years such that next time we could be on something novel like England and Wales at home with Scotland, France and Italy away, reversed the following year obviously. And then redrawn again for the next two years.

Riskymove

phog wrote: »

I normally wouldn't be in favour of BPs in the 6Ns but the additional 3 BPs for 5 wins at least makes it easier to accept the trial.

same here

I couldn't agree to a system that meant you could win a grand slam yet not be champions

CMOTDibbler

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Surely that's incorrect... 4 points for winning a match now?

There's always a pedant

Revised table now carries a revised points column and now it makes no difference at all. At all. At all...

I don't know if teams would play differently. Certainly in leagues and tournaments, the BP becomes a factor when the win is looking likely and there are already a couple of tries in the bag with time on the clock.

But tighter games will just not yield them. The real effect would be on the losing team fighting to get the losing bonus point imo. And with a win being worth 4 and only five games in the championship, I'm not sure what value it actually would have. Theoretically, you could generate an extra 5 points by winning four matches with TBPs and lose one with a LBP, but how likely is that?

CMOTDibbler

ClanofLams wrote: »

For the sake of correctness, England would have finished on 17 last year with three point bonus for grand slam.

That's added in there in the BPs.

THe table has been revised again anyway because I didn't include the new points for wins and draws.

awec

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

No-one has ever explained to me why all 6 teams have to be on the current rotation for ever.
Surely it should be redrawn every two years such that next time we could be on something novel like England and Wales at home with Scotland, France and Italy away, reversed the following year obviously. And then redrawn again for the next two years.

I guess the unions don't want the situation where they play the same team away two years in a row.

The IRFU might be miffed for example if they don't have England ticket income for two years running.

PTH2009

Ah let's see how it goes in 2017, really think it should of been introduced in 2018 so they could research it more ??

Could be the making of sum classic games