6 Nations 2017 General Discussion Thread

Podge_irl wrote: »

You absolutely can lose ranking points by losing to those ranked above - particularly at home.

Italy losing all their 6N matches by >15 points would result in them losing 0.96 ranking points. Georgia winning all their ENC matches by >15 would result in them gaining 0.98 ranking points (this is based on current rankings).

So a swing of 2 full ranking points that is no way reflective of the relative strength of either team. Georgia are ranked ahead of Italy because they play easier matches. Italy are a bad team, but they are better than Georgia.

So we agree

My post is probably a bit unclear. The only way you can't lose points is by winning. Everything else can gain you or lose you points. However, if results go as expected, you often gain or lose very little. NZ thrashing Italy at home (or in Rome) is worth nothing to NZ. NZ narrowly defeating Italy is worth a lot to Italy, but IIRC doesn't lose NZ any points.

I really don't think that Georgia beating Spain and Germany explains why they are ahead of Italy (who did beat SA remember...). Georgia may actually narrowly be a better side. Way way more room to imrpiove than Italy though who are constantly regressing.

Let's be honest there is only one way to sort this out:

Italy vs Georgia home and away.

I'm sure Italy would love that opportunity to show who's better.

swiwi_ wrote: »

The logic doesn't work: it's like saying that if Scotland keep beating Italy or the Pacific Nations they will move ahead of Wales, who keep losing to Australia or NZ.

Prior to the 6 Nations last year Italy were on 72.74 points and ahead of Georgia in the rankings (who were on 71.45). By the end of the 6 Nations Italy had fallen to 70.78 while Georgia went ahead of them on 72.62. So it's actually demonstrable that the opposition both are facing has a direct impact on their rankings.

Italy started 2016 on 72.74 and ended it on 72.47 playing 8 games against Tier 1 opposition and 3 games against Tier 2 countries. Georgia started 2016 on 71.45 and ended it on 74.14 playing just 1 game against Tier 1 opposition and 9 games against Tier 2 opposition. They got to play generally inferior opposition all year which allowed them to build their ranking points. Italy had to try and spend the summer and autumn games clawing back what they lost in the 6 Nations.

Already this year Italy started on 72.47 but have fallen to 71.81 while Georgia started on 74.14 and haven't moved from there due to the fact that they are playing poorer opposition. So Italy fell behind Georgia because of the relative strengths of the 6 Nations vs the ENC. They then managed to regain the points they lost by the end of the year only to take yet another hit now that the 6 Nations has kicked off again.

Georgia don't ever have to take the annual hit that Italy do. They take a hit in the RWC generally, but even that doesn't compare to Italy in the 6 Nations. They dropped 0.71 points in the RWC 2015 while Italy gained 2.2 points (only to lose 1.96 in the 2016 6 Nations).

TL;DR
Italy spend their year running to stand still due to the losses in the 6 Nations. Georgia get to build their position without ever having to worry about large drops in points.

Vakatawa reported to be out injured and replaced by Huget.
http://www.rugbyrama.fr/rugby/6-nations/2017/6-nations-xv-de-france-virimi-vakatawa-vers-le-forfait_sto6069096/story.shtml

Ok ok.

Molloy and Podge I concede.

I haven't had the time or energy to do all the calculations and it looks like there are demonstrable errors in my suppositions.

Both sides are firmly tier 2.

Bring back the 5N...

I also think it is too soon to bring Georgia in to the six nations and its a bit disrespectful to Italy.

In 97 and 98 Italy beat Ireland twice Scotland, France and Argentina. Georgia aren't at that level yet.

sydthebeat wrote: »

at the end of the day Italy have had a very privileged position for the last 17 years and dont seem to be able to profit from it.
The italian teams in the pro 12 are regressing, the national team is regressing and the standard of player they are producing is regressing. Their best players have been Argentinian imports. You could argue the Italian team with troncon and domingez at the helm was better than anything theyve produced since. Between 95 and 99 they beat france, ireland (x2), argentina (x2), scotland and played out much tighter games against the english and welsh.

How much longer can we allow this privilege to continue, or is it good enough to say we like a day out in rome every two years so it wont change.

Treviso had been making some ground a few years back until that internal row between them and FIR. It's been all negative since then. However they've started looking at dealing with their off field issues now, albeit very late in the day. I think it would be incredibly harsh to tell them now to get lost.

What should happen is that the 6 Nations committee should sit down with FIR and set out realistic milestones over the next 3-5 years that will show that they are developing in some way. If Italy reach those goals then we keep them in and go through a second round of that process if need be. We need to try and work with them if we can. If they are failing to reach those goals then we need to consider their position.

Barclay captains Scotland, great comeback for him after repeatedly being over looked by Cotter.

Scotland: Stuart Hogg, Tim Visser, Huw Jones, Alex Dunbar, Tommy Seymour, Finn Russell, Alistair Price; Gordon Reid, Fraser Brown, Zander Fagerson, Richie Gray, Jonny Gray, John Barclay, John Hardie, Ryan Wilson.

Replacements: Allan Dell, Ross Ford, Simon Berghan, Tim Swinson, Hamish Watson, Henry Pyrgos, Duncan Weir, Mark Bennett.

Scrum could still be in trouble.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

https://twitter.com/foychris/status/83440820103459635

With this sort of progressive forward thinking it's no wonder Feehan led the Pro 12 into such incredible success.

Was the tweet deleted?

irishbucsfan wrote: »

https://twitter.com/foychris/status/834408201034596353

With this sort of progressive forward thinking it's no wonder Feehan led the Pro 12 into such incredible success.

It's an understandable yet ****ty attitude at the same time.

Buer wrote: »

Yes and no. It's an interesting situation. France joined the tournament in 1910. They weren't particularly successful but that's not a surprise. The male population of France was utterly decimated by the first world war. Over 4% of the population was killed and twice that was wounded in some capacity. The vast majority of those would have been young men of rugby playing age. The country was on its knees.

Then they were booted out in the early thirties for trying to establish professionalism which didn't sit well with the other nations.

So rugby league took hold and rapidly grew to the point where France were a serious RL nation. Never fear, come WW2, the rugby union officials cut a deal with the Vichy government and stole all of the assets and facilities that RL had developed over the decade. It killed RL as a sport and it still hasn't recovered.

So, when France were readmitted to the 5 Nations after the war, they hit the ground running. They took 5 or 6 years to get back up to speed but then won the title 5 or 6 times in a 10 year period.

In closing, Italy just need to seize all the assets of their soccer federation and force their citizens to play rugby. In a decade, they'll be flying.

I for one am glad we have posters like yourself who were around at the time to witness such events.

England could still win the championship even if they dont beat ireland

England get 2 bps wins over Italy and Scotland leaves them on 18pts going into Round 5. Ireland get non bps wins over France and Wales leaves them on 14pts going into Round 5, by that time possibly Wales/Scotland and France would be out of the running for the championship

Round 5 Ireland vs England-
Any English win would mean there Grand Slam champs
A Irish non bp win with england getting a losing bp will mean England win the Championship (top of the table England 19, 2nd Ireland 18)
An Irish Bonus point win (with England not getting a LBP) means Ireland win the championship
Ireland win with no BP and England lose by +8, both teams will finish on 18pts would mean it goes down to point difference ????

France beating Ireland this weekend will put them back on the road for the title and knock Ireland out of the title race. France NBP win over ireland and BP win over Italy will leave them on 14pts going into Round 5. Irish win would end Frances title race

Wales beating Scotland or vice versa dis weekend will keep one teams hopes of the title alive while ending the others

this could all change if Italy win a game or Scotland beat England in R4

I grown to like this Bonus Point system, everything will become clearer sunday afternoon

Te'o stars at 13 for England.