Unofficial European rankings - based on latest form.

http://www.eurorugby.com/modules.php?name=Rcurrent

See link above.

To be there I don't think they are too far from the truth. Remember they are based on current form.

The top 4 - have all picked up the big trophies.

Saracens have won 13 matches in a row which is why they are 2nd.

It really shows the dominance of the Irish in the ML.

Also shows the current good form of sides not really seen as European heavyweights like Castres and Montpellier.

It also shows how the mighty have fallen like Stade Francais and Wasps.

What do you all think?

Hi Beshocked,

These tables do need to be taken with a slight pinch of salt. As whilst they reflect form it does not neccessarily reflect how good a side is (I sound like an England selector!!). Even with my cherry & white one eye, I'd find it hard to state we're better than Clermont Auvergne, equally we're a lot better than twice as good as Bath!

Sarries are definitely the best side in England at the moment, but are they the 2nd best side in Europe? At this stage I'd say no as you didn't perform well in last year's HC. However, with the signings you've made I'm sure you'll be a force to be reckoned with next season

I think there are some errors in the data input eg

Gloucester cannot be ranked above Northampton (Hieneken Finalist) and Quins (Euro Sheild Winners)!

Exeter and Gwent Dragons both above Scarlets (who have had a very good season in both Europe and Magners).

But similarly Scarlets cannot be ranked above Wasps and Stade Francais!

Load of rubbish!

Seagultaf, the table is based on form and Glaws won more games than Saints & Quins from January. anyway, we won the LV cup which I'm surprised didn't put us higher in the table!

Its based on the last 30 competitive games for each team.

You may think its rubbish but it is based upon an accurately applied statistical formula.
For example Northampton record after Christmas wasn't that good.

Quins are better then any other team in England, we just don't bother to show it 3 matches in 5 or there wouldn't be a competition. In fact we're so good at hiding it that half the time we've convinced our selves we're not, but we are.

Hongkong just remind me, how did that Quins-Gloucester match go last season?

I'd have us in 5th behind:
HC winners
T14 winners
AP winners
ML winners

Do you mean the one we won at Kingsholm, or the one where we were still drunk from success?

What it doesn't take into account is the variety of opposition in different competitions and as such is an imprecise way of measuring the relative abilities of teams in different leagues.

It is purely a form guide, simple as.

Gloucester had a 11 winning streak at one point.

Remember latest matches have the biggest weight. Saints lost their last 2 games.

Also Saints lost to Gloucester twice.

HongKongCherry wrote:Do you mean the one we won at Kingsholm, or the one where we were still drunk from success?

I don't remember a match ever happening at Kingsholm.
I mean the game at the Stoop which is the only one that counts and should be used as a form guide instead of any others.

beshocked wrote:Gloucester had a 11 winning streak at one point.

Remember latest matches have the biggest weight. Saints lost their last 2 games.
Also Saints lost to Gloucester twice.

In our last few games we beat Munster and Stade HC champions and finalists so really that makes us one of the best teams going, maybe i should bump us up to second place on that list.

Last 30 competitive games...so does that include comeptitions no-one takes seriously like the EDF, ECC and AP playoffs?

This table is suposed to be based on last 30 games. This is effectively a whole season. So how can Gwent Dragons be above Scarlets who won 4 more Heineken cup matches and finished considerably above them in the Magners?

There are other examples. Something is not right!

Yappysnap the problem is Quin's form has been erratic.

The highs - beating Munster away,winning the Amlin and hammering Gloucester.

The lows - your away form, losing to Newcastle in consecutive matches. Narrowly losing a lot of games.

Peter seabiscuit wheeler you only don't take the AP playoffs seriously when you lose.

Seagultaf I don't think it really matters. 24/25th aren't great either way.

In the last 15 matches Scarlets have won 6 times. In comparison Dragons have 7 wins and a draw.

beshocked wrote:Peter seabiscuit wheeler you only don't take the AP playoffs when you lose.

.

thoight I might sneak that one past you!

But you get the point, theres some games that mean a lot more than others.

In general though aside form a few oddities the general picture there is about right. Saracens have a lot to prove in Europe next season though, especially in a world cup year when they wont be suffering from callups and hangovers as badly as most other big european clubs.

Yappy, I am a selective amnesiac and cannot remember Glaws losing at all last season, especially the "hammering" that beshocked eludes to!

As LDC points out the table does not take into account who the oppossiton were, but purely games won. But as the old adage goes, you can only beat what is in front of you.

Remember this rankings list is based on current form of all games.

Not European form or European pedigree etc.

Which games mean a lot to you then?

We'll still lose Chris Wyles,Hayden Smith,Jacques Burger,Matt Stevens,Michael Tagicakibau,Kameli Ratuvou,Kelly Brown and possibly Charlie Hodgson,Richard Wigglesworth and Mouritz Botha for the world cup.

That's 10.

The quality of opposition is a factor in the calculation - exactly as it is with the International rankings

it looks to be fairly accurate, taken into account that no ranking system is ever going to meet universal approval.

but you could say it's a bit pointless this time of year as it's emphise is on recent form, who knows in what form teams will start the leagues this year, ie a bad start of losing 3 games will see a side tumble way down., After about 5 or 6 games in th true form of the team should come out again.

Is there a International list including the Euro Nations teams etc?

3 provinces in the top 10, looks pretty good from our point of view.

Artful_Dodger wrote:3 provinces in the top 10, looks pretty good from our point of view.

Dodge, Surely that means you'll at least make the RWC semis?!?!

I wouldn't take those rankings too serious. They seem ok for the top four or five but a bit sketchy after that.

Scarletspiderman I take them deadly seriously. I wonder why.

I don't think we'll ever be ranked above the likes of Leicester,Toulouse and Munster in the official European rankings so might as well revel in the highly accurate unofficial rankings!

beshocked - the only reason I think they are a touch iffy is that the Scarlets finished second place out of the regions, and trounced the Blues in the final game of the season (also did as good as the rest in europe), yet we are rated below the lot of them. And worse than Exiter cheifs?

It looks like quite a good approach to figure out a rankings system. Because the only interaction between ML (soon to be Pro12), Aviva and Top14 is HC competition, comparing between leagues will be very tricky and susceptible to anamolies. But it is a good attempt.

My gut feel would be that Toulouse lost a HC semi to the eventual winners and also won the Top 14. In the run from Christmas they had to manage a squad against both competitions. So they may have lost some Top14 games sending out slightly weakened teams to maintain stronger XVs for HC knockout. I would have thought they should be 2nd. I would also compare the Saracens v Leinster games (a tight Wembley win for Leinster and a high scoring victory for Leinster at the RDS) to Toulouse narrow defeat to Leinster at Lansdowne and to me it would bring Toulouse up against Saracens. But that is my personal subjective view.

The rankings on the site are a little more objective, but never the less someone in the calculation has to decide how much to discount a Toulouse loss to a team trying to get into the top14 playoffs when they are safe in their own table position versus full intensity games.

thebandwagonsociety makes absolute sense and I would probably agree.

On the other hand Saracens won 13 games in a row - beating Leicester home and away,Saints away,Gloucester twice etc. This is based on latest form remember.

It's a real tough one.

These are pure stats which don't take into account the things you mention.

Scarletspiderman if it makes you feel better here are the official rankings.

http://www.ercrugby.com/eng/ranking.php

Still weird for you being behind Glasgow but I personally find the official rankings seriously messed up.

Beshocked - hell the official ones are even worse!!!

beshocked wrote:thebandwagonsociety makes absolute sense and I would probably agree.

On the other hand Saracens won 13 games in a row - beating Leicester home and away,Saints away,Gloucester twice etc. This is based on latest form remember.

It's a real tough one.

These are pure stats which don't take into account the things you mention.

Scarletspiderman if it makes you feel better here are the official rankings.

http://www.ercrugby.com/eng/ranking.php

Still weird for you being behind Glasgow but I personally find the official rankings seriously messed up.

Saracens were out of the HC at that stage so were fully focused on AP. Some of those games also went through the 6N break didn't they (or did they) and Leicester/Saints would get depleted more during that time. Don't get me wrong, I'm not dishing a fabulous run by Saracens, but I do wonder if the adjustments for teams that are at the business end of both HC and their domestic league is strong enough. I usually use my own sense check on ranking by trying to work out who would the bookies have as favourites if the game was on a neutral venue. And for Saracens v Toulouse, in say the Millenium, I'd have Toulouse as 3-5 points favourites to get the win. But I would also have Clermont as 3-5 points favourites over Gloucester. Again, I'm subjective in this....... and don't go to the effort of figuring out my own rankings formula.

thebandwagonsociety if you want to have a shot at your own rankings list go for it!

I agree to a certain extent but it's really tough and subjective. E.g. if Clermont are so good why didn't they win the Amlin? Munster got beaten by Quins at home.

Still beat a full strength Leicester side (close anyway) in the final. You can only beat what is in front of you,

Someone queried why Exeter are above Scarlets.

A few facts:

In the last 13 games Exeter have won 6, Scarlets 4
In that time Exeter have beaten Northampton, Leicester and Harequins
The best team Scarlets have beaten over the same period is Cardiff.
In fact it gets worse in all 30 matches, other than a win against Perpignan, Scarlets have beaten no one of note.
Scarlets are where they are because they always lose to the top teams - simple.

Geoff - Fair enough I guess. Figures do point it that way.

By way of 'comfort' ? I actually think Scarlets could be a very decent team, and have the talent to be the best Welsh region; but they are simply underpowered in the front 5.

Along with Edinburgh the worse Front 5 in the Pro12.

beshocked wrote:
Which games mean a lot to you then?

We'll still lose Chris Wyles,Hayden Smith,Jacques Burger,Matt Stevens,Michael Tagicakibau,Kameli Ratuvou,Kelly Brown and possibly Charlie Hodgson,Richard Wigglesworth and Mouritz Botha for the world cup.

That's 10.

The ones we win.

Yeah to be fair Id forgotten Saracens had recruited Hodgson and just how many foreigners you have that actually play for their own national teams. OK so we can all use the world cup as an excuse for flumping europe again.

geoff - by way of comfort the Scarlets went for a few months without their first, second, or third choice tightheads and had to turn to a teenager (or just out of his teens if not) to step up against he likes of Leicester and the Ospreys. Also your being harsh on Edinburgh, on out right scrummaging power we have the worst tight five.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

beshocked wrote:
Which games mean a lot to you then?

We'll still lose Chris Wyles,Hayden Smith,Jacques Burger,Matt Stevens,Michael Tagicakibau,Kameli Ratuvou,Kelly Brown and possibly Charlie Hodgson,Richard Wigglesworth and Mouritz Botha for the world cup.

That's 10.

The ones we win.

Yeah to be fair Id forgotten Saracens had recruited Hodgson and just how many foreigners you have that actually play for their own national teams. OK so we can all use the world cup as an excuse for flumping europe again.

Fair enough

I believe we have the strength in depth to absorb those missing though. Might be a little light in the backrow and 2nd row though.

I actually think the English teams in general will do well in the HC. Saracens have a favourable group in the HC which we are certainly capable of topping. I have a sneaky feeling Quins and Gloucester will give Toulouse a hard time. If Bath click they could do well. I expect Saints to do well again. You at Leicester are good at arm wrestles. London Irish might shock too.

I think Tigers should be able to cope with the call ups for the RWC quite well. Ok we will certainly miss the props Ayerza, Castro and Cole but Stanko, White and Brookes are able replacements. Might not be as good but will still be strong at the set piece. Waldrom can take Croft's dynamic flanker role in the backrow and Kitchener will have to show what he's got in Deacon's absence. Fly half and OC might be an issue but with Geordan no looking unlikely to make the Irish squad he can inject some creativity from full back.

The HEC will be tough but all the players should be back by then and as long as their in one piece everything should be alright. Just need to get a decent start in the league (which Tigers rarely have anyway).

How will Sarries line up during the RWC Beshocked?

Tigers only had a poor start to the league because you had tough games at the beginning - Gloucester,Saracens,Wasps and Northampton away.

1.Du Plessis
2.Brits
3.Nieto
4.Borthwick
5.Vyvan
6.Melck
7.Saull
8.Joubert
9.Wigglesworth/De Kock
10.Hodgson/Farrell
11.Strettle
12.Barritt
13.Powell
14.Short
15.Goode

16.Vunipola
17.Gill
18.George
19.Kruis
20.Wray
21.Baldwin
22.Hougaard
23.Maddock

Botha too if he doesn't get into England final 30.

Tigers generally start badly, it's almost tradition.

That's a pretty strong team, Tigers will suffer similarly;

Stanko, Chuter, White
Kitchener, Skivington
Waldrom, Crane, Salvi
Young, Staunton
Allen, Twelvetrees
Smith, Murphy, Hamilton

Subs; Bucknall, Hawkins, Brookes, Slater, Woods, Grindall/Harrison, Ford, Tait.

That's how it looks to be panning out at the minute. Tait may well nick Smith's spot and Parling will only miss the first couple of weeks. Ayerza, Castro, Cole, Deacon, Mafi, Croft, Youngs, Flood, Manu, Tuilagi, Agulla all to be on international duty.

That's quite strong Sam. Not sure about your fly half,wings and outside centre though.

Decent pack though.

Hamilton is an excellent winger but an average full back. I expect his form to return when he's back to running off his wing, he's very good at being at the right place at the right time. Smith is a bit average but if Tait slots in he could do more damage. Smith will maintain the crash winger option though, he certainly isn't small. Fly half is a weakness but we knew it could be, Billy isn't in his favourite position but he is big and quick and if he settles could do some damage with ball in hand as well as offering a great distributer to the outer backs.

The big ask is on Kitchener.

Hamilton and Smith aren't exactly pacy though are they?

Both are considerabley faster than you'd give them credit for but neither have that raw acceleration that the top wingers have. Give them a bit of space and they'll shift but from a standing start they can't hit top speed within a couple of metres. Give Hamilton a run to the corner from the 22 and he won't miss. They get away with it a bit because the Welford Rd pitch isn't very wide, last season Smith played on the wing at home but away games saw Cockers favour Agulla who has less physicality but much more speed.

Tigers have a couple of youngsters coming through the academy with a bit of pace and have signed up Tait.

I can't believe Leinster are only first..

Both lists look about right to me. The first is a fair reflection of form. Dissapointed to see the Scarlets down in 25th but it's a fair reflection overall (would have been far worse a year ago!). The ERC rankins speak for themselves. Based on European results, who can argue?

totallybiasedscarlet Cardiff,Stade Francais and Wasps are the howlers in my opinion.

The problem with the official rankings is that they discount groups of death.

My team Saracens have had two rock hard groups in two seasons - an Amlin challenge cup group with Castres,Saracens and Toulon ( only one team qualified) and HC group - Saracens,Racing Metro,Clermont and Leinster.

We won 5 games out of 6 in that Amlin challenge group yet got 0 points that season. We beat Castres twice and Toulon once.

Biarritz in particular have exploited easy groups.

Toulouse are currently the second best team in Europe IMO. They would beat both Munster and Saracens in a knock out game in a neutral ground. They might even beat Leinster.

leinterbaby you are probably right but we'll have to see what happens in the HC next season.

Didn't Toulouse lose to Wasps? It shows you upsets can happen.

Yeah they did in London. Most teams lose one or two away games each year. Was a very costly loss however they still won their away quarter so when they are on form they are virtually unstoppable.

HongKongCherry wrote:Hi Beshocked,

These tables do need to be taken with a slight pinch of salt. As whilst they reflect form it does not neccessarily reflect how good a side is (I sound like an England selector!!). Even with my cherry & white one eye, I'd find it hard to state we're better than Clermont Auvergne, equally we're a lot better than twice as good as Bath!

Sarries are definitely the best side in England at the moment, but are they the 2nd best side in Europe? At this stage I'd say no as you didn't perform well in last year's HC. However, with the signings you've made I'm sure you'll be a force to be reckoned with next season

Nasty little shedder. Put 'em up.