England-Wales THIS WEEK END! ! !

Both England and Wales play this week, and i am sure you all know that.

But am i right in thinking/ believeing that because this game fall's out of the IRB international week end. That even if one team or Both teams "WIN" this week end.

It will not effect the rankins for the IRB World Rankins for the 2015 Rugby World Cup draw.

Or am i wrong in thinking that?

No, you are wrong. Sorry.

That's to say there are ranking points.

England are safe, but Wales are likely to be in pot 3 I am afraid !

These tests do have ranking points at stake.

As fair as I recall, neither side can break the top 4 (regardless of results) but Wales could slip out of the top 8.

I might be wrong too

Warthog wrote:No, you are wrong. Sorry.

So if either teams wins. They can still climb in the rankins, is that what you mean?

majesticimperialman wrote:

Warthog wrote:No, you are wrong. Sorry.

So if either teams wins. They can still climb in the rankins, is that what you mean?

If England beat NZ by 16+ points they will go up to 80.86 points on the rankings, not enough to pass France. If they lose by 16+ they drop to 81.76 points, not enough to drop below Ireland. So they're guaranteed to finish the year in 5th.

A Wales win by 16+ will leave them on 81.10, while a win by 1-15 will given them 80.39. So a win for them will boost them past Ireland into 6th.

Any loss for Wales will drop them below Samoa and Argentina into 9th, and the 3rd tier pot for the RWC draw (Samoa and Arg are both on 78.71, a 1-15 loss drops Wales to 78.39).

winning will see either team gain rankings points, losing will see them lose point.

Win or lose england are too far behind to climb to 4th, too far ahead of Ireland to drop to 6th.


Wales stay where they are if they win, but drop to 9th if they lose.


But in the end it is all completely irrelevant, meaningless and pointless.

Thank you that info chaps.

Can anyone tell me how the pools are decided ?

obviously the top 4 are in separate pools but how are they chosen after that ?

Does :
4th go in the same pool as 5th
3rd with 6th
2nd with 7th
1st with 8th

or are they completely chosen at random ?

EnginAuck,

Random after the 1st tier. It's anyone from tier 1, then anyone from tier 2, then anyone from tier 3, anyone from 4, anyone from 5th.

LondonTiger wrote:winning will see either team gain rankings points, losing will see them lose point.

Win or lose england are too far behind to climb to 4th, too far ahead of Ireland to drop to 6th.


Wales stay where they are if they win, but drop to 9th if they lose.


But in the end it is all completely irrelevant, meaningless and pointless.

Not wuite true from a Welsh perspective, anything other than a win could financially be a real flick up. Seeing as these tests count, ironically the WRU in their desire to screw the regional fans and make more money of the cowboy hats have shot themselves in the foot.

We would have been in the top 8 if we only played the three games, but those money grabbers wanted an extra game and now we could end up in the third teir.

Also this could mean that there is a fair change (25%) that we could end up inteh same pool as England. This could cos the WRU even more, as the RFU looked likely to agree to Wales playing their 'home' games in the Millenium Stadium, however that is really not likely to happen if we are drawn in the same pool as England. And that would cost he WRU a heap as they can pretty much write off three MS sell outs.

All of this because they wanted to squeeze an extra match in to milk the pink cowboy hat/suit bridage.

That would be a real c0ck up SS, also presumably the tournament as a whole would be badly effected in terms of profitability.

From an England point of view whether we finish 4th or 5th we do in fact have exactly the same chance of playing France of course.

Wales in the 3rd pot could make for a very hard pool for someone!

Spiderman, not necessarily true what you say either. Firstly, Wales have been told that if they do get any home games in the MS they will only be against the smaller nations. We will not be allowed to face the top nations at home even if it's not England.

Secondly, dropping out of the top 8 is not that bad in these circumstances. As I posted elsehwere, if we were in the top 8 then we could quite easily get a group of New Zealand (top seed), us (second seeds), Samoa/Argentina (3rd seeds). If we were 9th in the world we could just as easily get France (1st seed), Ireland (2nd seed) and us (3rd seed). Being outside the top 8 in that scenario would actually be an advantage, IMO. My point is that being top 8 doesn't guarantee anything because there are teams (like us) lurking on the tier 2/3 border that you wouldn't really want to face. Gone are the days of the top 8 and then the rest; it's more like the top 10, so you're likely to get 3 good teams in the group regardless of your position.

I do agree that the WRU are money grabbing, but if they start to release more of that money to the regions then that can only help the game.

Bathman_in_London wrote:That would be a real c0ck up SS, also presumably the tournament as a whole would be badly effected in terms of profitability.

From an England point of view whether we finish 4th or 5th we do in fact have exactly the same chance of playing France of course.

Wales in the 3rd pot could make for a very hard pool for someone!

Well to be fair it would hopefully teach the WRU a lessson about doing number twos on the real fans in order to please those with bigger wallets. But reallistically it doesn't make any difference in the playing side.

Argentina and Samoa are viewed as teir three sides by most the NH sides, so a group could be NZ, Samoa, Scotland, Namibia or SA, Argentina, Wales, Chinese Taipei. In the end for the day people will be predicitng NZ and Soctland/Samoa, or SA and Wales, unless Argentina sneak in.

Imagine a France, England, Wales group though.....a tasty prospect for a home world cup

mr_stonelea wrote:Imagine a France, England, Wales group though.....a tasty prospect for a home world cup

mr_stonelea wrote:Imagine a France, England, Wales group though.....a tasty prospect for a home world cup

I think the Welsh would definitaly be very happy with that, we beat England and France on a regular basis at the moment.

maestegmafia wrote:

mr_stonelea wrote:Imagine a France, England, Wales group though.....a tasty prospect for a home world cup

I think the Welsh would definitaly be very happy with that, we beat England and France on a regular basis at the moment.

France and England would like it too. They all beat each other on a regular basis.

Well Wales are bound to be the best side in pot 3 if that's where they end up, so I don't think any first or second seeds would be too happy with having them in the group.

thomh wrote:Well Wales are bound to be the best side in pot 3 if that's where they end up, so I don't think any first or second seeds would be too happy with having them in the group.

Samoa might argue with that. Given that they've just beaten Wales and almost beat them in the last World Cup they would be a very strong pot 3 side too.

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:

majesticimperialman wrote:

Warthog wrote:No, you are wrong. Sorry.

So if either teams wins. They can still climb in the rankins, is that what you mean?

If England beat NZ by 16+ points they will go up to 80.86 points on the rankings, not enough to pass France. If they lose by 16+ they drop to 81.76 points, not enough to drop below Ireland. So they're guaranteed to finish the year in 5th.

So if England beat NZ by 16+ they end up on a lower ranking than if they lose? May need to check those numbers Pete.

Either way, we stay in pot 2 though, so makes no difference.

..."at the moment" is the bit that's having a tough season so far.

Cyril on 606v2 wrote:

thomh wrote:Well Wales are bound to be the best side in pot 3 if that's where they end up, so I don't think any first or second seeds would be too happy with having them in the group.

Samoa might argue with that. Given that they've just beaten Wales and almost beat them in the last World Cup they would be a very strong pot 3 side too.

Only one of Samoa or Wales will be in pot 3 though, so my point "Wales will be the strongest side in pot 3 IF that's where they end up" is still true.

thomh wrote:

Cyril on 606v2 wrote:

thomh wrote:Well Wales are bound to be the best side in pot 3 if that's where they end up, so I don't think any first or second seeds would be too happy with having them in the group.

Samoa might argue with that. Given that they've just beaten Wales and almost beat them in the last World Cup they would be a very strong pot 3 side too.

Only one of Samoa or Wales will be in pot 3 though, so my point "Wales will be the strongest side in pot 3 IF that's where they end up" is still true.

No it is Wales or Argentina. Samoa are something like 0.0001 ranking point above Argentina.

Gawd, these rankings are complicated

Like I said in another post, doesn't matter what pot you're in. A group is a group and you have to fight your way through it - and not always will it be the expected sides giving you the hard time!
So if any of the pot 1 or 2 sides have to meet a Wales that has dropped to pot 3, then so be it. They won't overly enjoy the prospect and neither will Wales. Meeting Russia, Canada or USA etc might be more than enough to worry about for some of us by the time we get there.

thomh wrote:

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:

majesticimperialman wrote:

Warthog wrote:No, you are wrong. Sorry.

So if either teams wins. They can still climb in the rankins, is that what you mean?

If England beat NZ by 16+ points they will go up to 80.86 points on the rankings, not enough to pass France. If they lose by 16+ they drop to 81.76 points, not enough to drop below Ireland. So they're guaranteed to finish the year in 5th.

So if England beat NZ by 16+ they end up on a lower ranking than if they lose? May need to check those numbers Pete.

Either way, we stay in pot 2 though, so makes no difference.

Oops! Try 82.86 if England win

I hope the ABs draw Wales/Argentina out of the tier 3 pot and one of the stronger tier 2 sides, a tougher pool is better preparation for the knock out stages IMO.

No, we need to break up the NH star teams in the pools, so we don't all knock out each other waaay too soon.
Separate Eng Wales Ire Fra if at all possible.

gregor...are you suggesting we nobble the draw balls????

Yes, I am !

Why not change the world cup around a bit and have it dubbed unofficially
"The Battle Of The Hemispheres"?!

One side of the draw (so 2 pools) are NH, the other side is SH (2 pools) - based on last world cup:

Pool 1: England, France, Russia, Italy, Canada
Pool 2: Wales, Ireland, Scotland, Georgia, US of A
Pool 3: New Zealand, South Africa, Argentina, Samoa, Kenya (enjoy!)
Pool 4: Australia, Tonga, Fiji, Namibia, Japan (yeah, I know it's NH!)

1/4s: Wales v England (Wales win, obv.), Ireland v France (Ireland), NZ v Tonga (NZ), Aus v SA (SA)
Semis: Wales v Ireland (Wales win, obv.), NZ v SA (NZ)
Final: Wales v NZ (draw) - Priestland with a penalty kick from his own 22 in extra time.
Winners: Wales.

My only flaw is that I can't find space for Romania, and I had to pretend that Kenya were there. Damn you uneven split in the hemispheres. That's the only flaw though.

Apart from that: awesome!

This could work. It gives Wales a novel way to avoid getting beaten by Namibia, Fiji, Tonga, Samoa in first round.

"Priestland with a penalty kick from his own 22 in extra time."

Was he aiming for touch though?

He would probably get his psychologist to kick it for him

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

thomh wrote:

Cyril on 606v2 wrote:

thomh wrote:Well Wales are bound to be the best side in pot 3 if that's where they end up, so I don't think any first or second seeds would be too happy with having them in the group.

Samoa might argue with that. Given that they've just beaten Wales and almost beat them in the last World Cup they would be a very strong pot 3 side too.

Only one of Samoa or Wales will be in pot 3 though, so my point "Wales will be the strongest side in pot 3 IF that's where they end up" is still true.

No it is Wales or Argentina. Samoa are something like 0.0001 ranking point above Argentina.

Fair enough. Still makes no difference to my point though. Samoa can't even be in pot 3, so saying that "they would be a very strong pot 3 side too" isn't relevant.

Honestly without sounding bitter (which I am a little) I kinda wanna see Wales drop to 9th, then next world cup could see Wales England and France in the same group...

Tell me we all don't want to see that!!!

Regardless of who is in pit 2 and 3 we all know Wales are going to be paired with Samoa anyway we always get them so who cares who's in what pot?

The last world cup Wales were second seeds but still had to play Fiji and Samoa, who were seeds 3 and qualifiers.

Knowing our luck we'll get Fiji from the qualifiers also...

There is always one team who is going to qualify, and the runner up will always have one very dodgy game to play. Last world cup Scotland and Argentina had to play each other, does it really mater which is in pot 2 and pot 3?

No I don't think so!

1(1) NEW ZEALAND 92.91
2(2) SOUTH AFRICA 86.94
3(3) AUSTRALIA 86.31
4(4) FRANCE 85.07

5(5) ENGLAND 81.07
6(7) IRELAND 80.22
7(9) SAMOA 78.71
8(6) ARGENTINA 78.71

9(8) WALES 78.95
10(11) ITALY 76.24
11(12) TONGA 76.10
12(10) SCOTLAND 75.83

even in band 3 I'd still fancy Wales to beat Ireland, England, Argentina or Samoa provided we turn up on the day and show a bit of willingness to get stuck in!

Shifty wrote:

even in band 3 I'd still fancy Wales to beat Ireland, England, Argentina or Samoa provided we turn up on the day and show a bit of willingness to get stuck in!

In recent games Vs England we have won three in a row same vs Ireland, Argies and Samoa are good sides, we are one a piece with them.

Yep same teams just different schedule, every team in each group will play on a 5-7 day turn around this coming world cup which in my eyes is fair for the bottom team in each group.

Also why so early to seed the groups? oh wait this is in the NH! hotels ,Airlines and ticket agencies want full control and maximum marketing from as early as possible.

No group is easy anymore if you want to be the best you still have to beat the best! simple as.

maestegmafia wrote:

Shifty wrote:

even in band 3 I'd still fancy Wales to beat Ireland, England, Argentina or Samoa provided we turn up on the day and show a bit of willingness to get stuck in!

In recent games Vs England we have won three in a row same vs Ireland, Argies and Samoa are good sides, we are one a piece with them.

Two in a row, and England won the two before that.

They'll both be very different sides by then anyway, so recent form wont be particularly relevant.

maestegmafia wrote:

Shifty wrote:

even in band 3 I'd still fancy Wales to beat Ireland, England, Argentina or Samoa provided we turn up on the day and show a bit of willingness to get stuck in!

In recent games Vs England we have won three in a row same vs Ireland, Argies and Samoa are good sides, we are one a piece with them.

Incorrect. It's two (and one of those was a warm up game). England won the two before that. It's pretty evens really.

Oh, I see thomh has already got there first!

Yep cyril England won the two before, lets not forget one of them was a warm up game

Also moral victory must go to Wales for that game because we out scored England on tries ! FACT true strory

viewtothegym wrote:Yep cyril England won the two before, lets not forget one of them was a warm up game

Also moral victory must go to Wales for that game because we out scored England on tries ! FACT true strory

Aye true One day the moral victory will be ours

viewtothegym wrote:Yep cyril England won the two before, lets not forget one of them was a warm up game

Also moral victory must go to Wales for that game because we out scored England on tries ! FACT true strory

Also we had a broken leg and Preistland in the team, by the next RWC Gatland may come to the conclusion that Preisland is rubbish by then and drop him.