World Cup seedings revisited

Just had a bit of a light bulb moment thought I'd go to the boards for some  coroborry.

I don't want to start a spitting fight here, so please take this in the inquisitive vein its intended!

The Pool of Death is suddenly looking less deadly. A lot of Welsh posters here and elsewhere seem a bit dejected after appearing to lose two world class players in the warmup.

But, If a Wales team denuded of a bunch of front liners goes out of this pool limply,  then were the seedings actually valid?

Is the big Welsh problem a lack of a bit of depth?  Undoubted world beaters at full strength, but maybe the drop to the dirt trackers is a bit precipitous?

Wasnt it the lack of depth which led to the pool in the 1st place? They remain a top quality outfit.

Fanster wouldn't be happy with this. Where is he?

No the seedings are nonsense IMO as they were a snapshot from years ago after a non representative run of results - there is no way England, Wales and Australia should be in the same pool.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Wasnt it the lack of depth which led  to the pool in the 1st place? They remain a top quality outfit.

No was WRU greed and in ability to beat Australia bar a few players.

donglewood wrote:I don't want to start a spitting fight here

Hmmm. Sure.

I thought this was going to be a thread about the trees the RWC are planting as a carbon offset measure.

Yawn.

No? Alright then, I'll nip back in my cave!

Coroborry.........Love it.

Corobbery : Two sydney taxi drivers having a chat.

bah I preferred seedlings

The Pool of Death is suddenly looking less deadly. A lot of Welsh posters here and elsewhere seem a bit dejected after appearing to lose two world class players in the warmup.


Are the Welsh posters more dejected because they lost two world class players.?

Or are they more dejected because of the performance of the Welsh team today?

majesticimperialman wrote:The Pool of Death is suddenly looking less deadly. A lot of Welsh posters here and elsewhere seem a bit dejected after appearing to lose two world class players in the warmup.


Are the Welsh posters more dejected because they lost two world class players.?

Or are they more dejected because of the performance of the Welsh team today?

rt

I suspect the two things might be different ends of the same stick. It's bad karma to indulge in self interested schadenfreude, so I wholeheartedly wish a speedie recovery to both players, condolences if they miss this great chance to represent their country at the World Cup and my sincere belief that Wales will maybe unearth a World Cup gem who might not have got a spot otherwise should the worst be realised

majesticimperialman wrote:The Pool of Death is suddenly looking less deadly. A lot of Welsh posters here and elsewhere seem a bit dejected after appearing to lose two world class players in the warmup.


Are the Welsh posters more dejected because they lost two world class players.?

Or are they more dejected because of the performance of the Welsh team today?

Pretty classless of you.

The way the seedings should be done is to average the rankings over a period of Jan 2012 to Dec 2014 and seed the teams according to those averages, any snapshot taken is allowing for anomolies.

But that is not necessarily the problem, it is the draw that is wrong.

If you look at tennis or any other knock out sport then your seeding allows potentislly for 1 and 4 to meet in one semi final, 2 and 3 to meet in another semi final

Taking it to a QF 1 should meet 8, 2 should meet 7, 3 should meet 6 and 4 should meet 5.

The pools should reflect that.

The IRB however puts 1-4 in a bag, 5-8 in a bag, 9-12 in a bag, then randomly draws out of each bag one for pool A, B, C , and D

So you can basically land up in any pool

World rugby agree that the draw was silly and said they will look to change how the draw is run for the next world cup

Biltong wrote:The way the seedings should be done is to average the rankings over a period of Jan 2012 to Dec 2014 and seed the teams according to those averages, any snapshot taken is allowing for anomolies.

But that is not necessarily the problem, it is the draw that is wrong.

If you look at tennis or any other knock out sport then your seeding allows potentislly for 1 and 4 to meet in one semi final, 2 and 3 to meet in another semi final

Taking it to a QF 1 should meet 8, 2 should meet 7, 3 should meet 6 and 4 should meet 5.

The pools should reflect that.

The IRB however puts 1-4 in a bag, 5-8 in a bag, 9-12 in a bag, then randomly draws out of each bag one for pool A, B, C , and D

So you can basically land up in any pool

I like the idea of an average spread over say three interim years as a seeding decider.

maestegmafia wrote:

Biltong wrote:The way the seedings should be done is to average the rankings over a period of Jan 2012 to Dec 2014 and seed the teams according to those averages, any snapshot taken is allowing for anomolies.

But that is not necessarily the problem, it is the draw that is wrong.

If you look at tennis or any other knock out sport then your seeding allows potentislly for 1 and 4 to meet in one semi final, 2 and 3 to meet in another semi final

Taking it to a QF 1 should meet 8, 2 should meet 7, 3 should meet 6 and 4 should meet 5.

The pools should reflect that.

The IRB however puts 1-4 in a bag, 5-8 in a bag, 9-12 in a bag, then randomly draws out of each bag one for pool A, B, C , and D

So you can basically land up in any pool

I like the idea of an average spread over say three interim years as a seeding decider.

Yes, but then they need to apply those seedings to how they set up the pools, seedings still mean nothing if you draw the pools randomly.

That is how Australia, England and Wales drew the same pool

Biltong wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

Biltong wrote:The way the seedings should be done is to average the rankings over a period of Jan 2012 to Dec 2014 and seed the teams according to those averages, any snapshot taken is allowing for anomolies.

But that is not necessarily the problem, it is the draw that is wrong.

If you look at tennis or any other knock out sport then your seeding allows potentislly for 1 and 4 to meet in one semi final, 2 and 3 to meet in another semi final

Taking it to a QF 1 should meet 8, 2 should meet 7, 3 should meet 6 and 4 should meet 5.

The pools should reflect that.

The IRB however puts 1-4 in a bag, 5-8 in a bag, 9-12 in a bag, then randomly draws out of each bag one for pool A, B, C , and D

So you can basically land up in any pool

I like the idea of an average spread over say three interim years as a seeding decider.

Yes, but then they need to apply those seedings to how they set up the pools, seedings still mean nothing if you draw the pools randomly.

That is how Australia, England and Wales drew the same pool

So no random selection?

maestegmafia wrote:

Biltong wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

Biltong wrote:The way the seedings should be done is to average the rankings over a period of Jan 2012 to Dec 2014 and seed the teams according to those averages, any snapshot taken is allowing for anomolies.

But that is not necessarily the problem, it is the draw that is wrong.

If you look at tennis or any other knock out sport then your seeding allows potentislly for 1 and 4 to meet in one semi final, 2 and 3 to meet in another semi final

Taking it to a QF 1 should meet 8, 2 should meet 7, 3 should meet 6 and 4 should meet 5.

The pools should reflect that.

The IRB however puts 1-4 in a bag, 5-8 in a bag, 9-12 in a bag, then randomly draws out of each bag one for pool A, B, C , and D

So you can basically land up in any pool

I like the idea of an average spread over say three interim years as a seeding decider.

Yes, but then they need to apply those seedings to how they set up the pools, seedings still mean nothing if you draw the pools randomly.

That is how Australia, England and Wales drew the same pool

So no random selection?

No, why have seeing pots of 1-4, 5-8 and 9-12 if you select them randomly?

Teams are supposed to benefit from consistent performances, regardless of whether they rank them at a specific window, or on an averagem that is the whole reason why tennis players for example get seedings.

Here is how this RWC should have looked.

Rankings used for this world cup.

NZ 1
SA 2
OZ 3
FRA 4
ENG 5
IRE 6
SAM 7
ARG 8
WAL 9
ITA 10
TON 11
SCO 12

How the finals should play out according to seedings
Final
1 vs 2

Semi finals
1 vs 4
2 vs 3

Quarters
1 vs 8
2 vs 7
3 vs 6
4 vs 5

So your pools

Pool A
New Zealand
England
Scotland

Pool B
France
Argentina
Wales

Pool C
Australia
Samoa
Italy

Pool D
South Africa
Ireland
Tonga

But, now if you used average ranking from Jan 2012 to Dec 2014 there is no way the rankings would have looked like that.

The anomoly with taking rankings at a specific period is just a window in time, not a true refelction of where teams were throughout a sustained period.

I think the Aussies would back your idea looking at their pool.

My shout is that everyone knew the rules. Climbing the greasy pole was the thing to do, not whinging on about the process after the fact, that's wasting your breath.

Risca Rev wrote:

majesticimperialman wrote:The Pool of Death is suddenly looking less deadly. A lot of Welsh posters here and elsewhere seem a bit dejected after appearing to lose two world class players in the warmup.


Are the Welsh posters more dejected because they lost two world class players.?

Or are they more dejected because of the performance of the Welsh team today?

Pretty classless of you.

I thought the same thing. After a few days of 'debating' with this 'rugby fan' I can clearly see that is all he has to offer. Poor poor.

donglewood wrote:My shout is that everyone knew the rules. Climbing the greasy pole was the thing to do, not whinging on about the process after the fact, that's wasting your breath.

I imagine that the aim of th OP was to discuss the possible improvements in the competition for the future, certainly do not get any impression of whinging about the current process.

Deffo back bless her

The thing with Wales is, if they didn't arrange test matches outside the WR-sanctioned windows they would have been second seeds not third.

Base on this week ends game's have the world ranking made any difference to 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, place?

Or is the raking still the same as it was before this week end?

Someone is in need of a good rake, yeah.

aucklandlaurie wrote:
Coroborry.........Love it.

Corobbery : Two sydney taxi drivers having a chat.

A corroboree is an event where Australian Aborigines interact with the Dreamtime through dance, music and costume. "Their bodies painted in different ways, and they wore various adornments, which were not used every day." The word corroboree was coined by the European settlers of Australia in imitation of an east coast local Aboriginal Australian word caribberie

Or

Co-robbery: Two robbers breaking into the same house at the same time. <The depths people will go to to steal condoms>

majesticimperialman wrote:Base on this week ends game's have the world ranking made any difference to 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, place?

Or is the raking still the same as it was before this week end?

Yes and 6th place as well.
No.

As is well known I don`t "DO RWC`s or SEEDINGS" BUT 4 years before the event is a bit much.Two years maximum IF you must have them also seedings/ratings don`t take
into account Tier2 sides ONLY being at full strength in a RWC.
Perhaps seeds should be the last RWC SF lists for next.

majesticimperialman wrote:Base on this week ends game's have the world ranking made any difference to 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, place?

Or is the raking still the same as it was before this week end?

Why are you bothered? Do you want to take joy in England going back above Wales, much like you did over our injuries yesterday?

Risca Rev wrote:

majesticimperialman wrote:Base on this week ends game's have the world ranking made any difference to 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, place?

Or is the raking still the same as it was before this week end?

Why are you bothered? Do you want to take joy in England going back above Wales, much like you did over our injuries yesterday?

England drop to 4th. Ireland move up to 6th. Wales stay still.

Top 3 - normal service has resumed.

Seedings valid? Yes and no - Wales are a better side than when the draw was made but they shouldn't have got themselves in that position in the first place.

The big Welsh problem has been strength in depth yes. It has got so dire that one of Wales' key players is newly recruited Englishman,Tomas Francis from Exeter Chiefs. Not the first Englishman and probably won't be the last either.

In the pool of death I expect the issue of strength of depth will be amplified.

Risca Rev wrote:

majesticimperialman wrote:Base on this week ends game's have the world ranking made any difference to 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, place?

Or is the raking still the same as it was before this week end?

Why are you bothered? Do you want to take joy in England going back above Wales, much like you did over our injuries yesterday?

Explain please when i took any joy on the injuries to Welsh players on Saturday?

I already did quote your pretty classless post thanks.

The pool of death is suddenly looking less deadly guff, remember?

beshocked wrote:Seedings valid? Yes and no - Wales are a better side than when the draw was made but they shouldn't have got themselves in that position in the first place.

The big Welsh problem has been strength in depth yes. It has got so dire that one of Wales' key players is newly recruited Englishman,Tomas Francis from Exeter Chiefs. Not the first Englishman and probably won't be the last either.

In the pool of death I expect the issue of strength of depth will be amplified.

Same old poo from the same people. If they play for Wales THEY WANT TO AND HAVE THE RIGHT TO.

Mauritz Botha and Brad Barritt.

Risca Rev wrote:I already did quote your pretty classless post thanks.

The pool of death is suddenly looking less deadly guff, remember?

WherE did i take (JOY) in the WELSH PLAYERS INJURIES?

majesticimperialman wrote:

Risca Rev wrote:I already did quote your pretty classless post thanks.

The pool of death is suddenly looking less deadly guff, remember?

WherE did i take (JOY) in the WELSH PLAYERS INJURIES?

Within your classless post he quoted you on. If you have forgotten it, then I suggest scrolling up.

rainbow-warrior wrote:

beshocked wrote:Seedings valid? Yes and no - Wales are a better side than when the draw was made but they shouldn't have got themselves in that position in the first place.

The big Welsh problem has been strength in depth yes. It has got so dire that one of Wales' key players is newly recruited Englishman,Tomas Francis from Exeter Chiefs. Not the first Englishman and probably won't be the last either.

In the pool of death I expect the issue of strength of depth will be amplified.

Same old poo from the same people.  If they play for Wales THEY WANT TO AND HAVE THE RIGHT TO.

rainbow warrior

Francis is playing for Wales because he wants to play international rugby now (if he wanted to play for England he would have had to work harder), Wales desperately needed a TH prop.

Wales have recruited numerous players with English connections, it's no surprise there is no objection to another Englishman.

Mouritz Botha and Brad Barritt are slightly different because they qualified on residency, play for English clubs and Barritt has more connections with England than Francis does to Wales.

Plus neither player is Welsh.

Barritt qualified through grandparents I believe so they same as Francis.

I think all the European Six Nations teams have benefited from players from other nations, so any comparison of who recruits the most foreigners for their teams is a moot point.

In fact the only Six Nation Team that does not have a South Africa this World Cup is Wales.

What connections are these that make them English? Zero I would guess. They do however get to play for different nations under the current criteria. Before you reply Beshocked I know Francis is English and Lewsey is Welsh...

As ever the rules need tightening up a little but no one is currently cheating or pushing the rules at the minute. Annoying when you lose a prospect but hey ho.

Yes 7.5 I can only imagine. I don't get why Beshocked seems to regularly mention some apparent 'English connections' for certain players though, or what he's referring to exactly.

Brad Barritt didn't parachute in. He made a choice to go, would have been capped by the boks... if meisiekind got 30 odd caps, Barritt would have had easily the same. He came from a very English family so its no surprise really. He was SA SR player of the year in 2008 if I recall.

The home nations have very strong ties with SA in terms of movement of people especially in the past. Its natural for many saffas to see Europe as a possibility for test rugby although Strauss, Strauss, Nel, Botha, Fourie are another thing altogether... their granddaddies will be spitting out their strawberry pops at the very thought!!!!

mikey dragon you can name one player who has retired who wouldn't call himself Welsh - born in England,lived in England, played for an English club, played for England.

Warburton,North,Cuthbert,Francis,Lydiate,Charteris,Moriarty,Davies all could have played for England.

Wales tried to poach Morgan too. To be fair at least played in Welsh club rugby.

Just admit you've heavily relied on England for your player base and for recruitment in general.

Shaun Edwards - English coach, Josh Lewsey - English too.

Biltong perhaps but Wales have significant amount of players with connections to England.

Do you have an issue with that though beshocked? Just one of those things having 2 countries that are a united kingdom. Bound to happen.

mikey_dragon wrote:What connections are these that make them English? Zero I would guess. They do however get to play for different nations under the current criteria. Before you reply Beshocked I know Francis is English and Lewsey is Welsh...

Oh jaysus (as the Irish would say)
JD born in Birmingham
Lydiate in Manchester English dad Welsh mum
Cuthbert residency
Warburton English roots
North born Kings Lyn English dad Welsh mum

Thats just off the top of my head