6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

by **RDW** Wed 30 Nov 2016 - 11:13

First topic message reminder :

http://www.rbs6nations.com/en/news/30434.php#hlum6IDwQOvpZVgD.97

A very big change!

6 Nations wrote:The Six Nations Council today announced the introduction of a bonus points system in the RBS 6 Nations, The Women's Six Nations and the Under 20s Six Nations Championships.
Read more at http://www.rbs6nations.com/en/news/30434.php#4Yb3FfZqxK5XQ8cY.99

This system will be implemented on a trial basis in all three Championships in 2017 and will be reviewed post Championships.

As part of their review of the Championships, the Council took the decision to implement a bonus point system to encourage and reward try scoring and attacking play.

Competition points will be awarded in all matches on the following basis:

(i) 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.

(ii) 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.

(iii) 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.

(iv) A Union that wins all five of its Matches (a "Grand Slam") shall be awarded a further three Match Points.

Pat Whelan, Chairman of the Six Nations said: "We have been looking at the feasibility of a bonus point system for a while and examining what kind of bonus point system would work best, given the unique properties and format of our Championships.

"We needed to ensure that whatever bonus point system we selected would work with the already proven structure of the Championships and would serve to materially improve what is already there.

"We are happy that the system that we have decided to trial is the one best suited to our Championships and we are delighted to be going ahead with this new development.

"We believe that the initiative will enhance our competitions for fans, teams, broadcasters and all of those for whom the Championship means so much."

John Feehan, Chief Executive of Six Nations said: "The drama and excitement of the last weekend of the RBS 6 Nations Championship is unique and is, more often than not, driven by a number of teams on equal Championship points all competing for first place on the table.

"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.

"We are very excited about the potential that this new development will bring to the Championships and we look forward to trialling it next February and March."
Read more at http://www.rbs6nations.com/en/news/30434.php#4Yb3FfZqxK5XQ8cY.99

by SecretFly Thu 1 Dec 2016 - 14:52

Correct! My thoughts exactly. And thanks to England in advance for letting us score that final try next 6N to stop Wales getting their hands on the title! Yahoo

by Gooseberry Thu 1 Dec 2016 - 15:10

123456789 wrote:
LondonTiger wrote:
123456789 wrote:no doubt that the introduction of bonus points will not in any way shape or form prevent running rugby.

I am just being a touch pedantic, but I can imagine scenarios where a team would choose not to run the ball due to bonus points on offer.

For example - A side is 12 points up with two minutes to go and get a penalty in the opponents 22m perhaps 15m from touch - so one you expect to make. Previously they may have kicked to the corner as the win was secure and another try is always good, however with just two tries they opt to kick the penalty to absolutely ensure the opponents are unable to get an LBP

Yeah that's fair enough, I didn't think of that. It also begs the question of if there's five minutes to go and you are 8 points behind do you go for a try to set up a grandstand finish or do you take three and play for the losing bonus point.

For balance .. the same couldve happened under the old system if you just needed to lose by a certain amount to get a position in the table.

Ditto Flys consiracy theory

LBPs really dont change much at all, although I do prefer systems that make game result king rather than score. Really it should be the paper rock scissors method first follwoed by tries scored and then by phone vote to split. But meh, we have this now.

by SecretFly Thu 1 Dec 2016 - 15:14

Gooseberry wrote:

For balance .. the same couldve happened under the old system if you just needed to lose by a certain amount to get a position in the table.

Ditto Flys consiracy theory

Are you sure? If you lose, you lose. But could 'allowing' oneself to lose under the old system on a final weekend have the same impact as allowing oneself to let in a final try that one might have kept out had one put one's heart fully into it?

Maybe you do have the maths right, my conspiracy theory was just a hunch. But I still think the hunch has technical wheels Wink

by The Great Aukster Thu 1 Dec 2016 - 18:27

The try bonus point gimmick does not necessarily encourage tries. Points difference keeps teams trying to score more points, but once a side has secured the bonus point and won the game they sometimes switch off to preserve players.

by Guest Thu 1 Dec 2016 - 19:27

The Great Aukster wrote:The try bonus point gimmick does not necessarily encourage tries. Points difference keeps teams trying to score more points, but once a side has secured the bonus point and won the game they sometimes switch off to preserve players.

This is very true. Two seasons ago when we had that great super Saturday with Wales (v Italy), Ireland (v Scotland) and England (v France) all in with a shout of the title it was points difference that was key. Wales went all out first game and got a cricket score but stupidly went a bit too loose and let Italy score a couple of late tries and that (if memory serves) meant we finished 3rd instead of 2nd in the end. If we were just after a try bonus point we would probably have stopped playing at full whack much earlier in the game. Much less of a spectacle then for the fans. As it was it ended up a belter with the full 80 mins being used to try to get as much score as possible. The same then happened in the Ireland and England matches.

An another note, they talk about wanting to increase entertainment and spread the game. However, the BBC article quotes figures for attendance in the Tri Nations/4 Nations since bonus points came in. They've seen a fall of roughly 12% since bonus points while the 6N has stayed relatively stable with around a 1% fall in the same period. Yes there are other issues that affect attendance but thought that was rather telling. Where have all of these super entertained fans gone?

by No 7&1/2 Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 8:19

Over saturation of rugby, prices too high, the fact that some will follow rugby more when their team is winning rather than struggling? It's tv audiences they are after though.

by funnyExiledScot Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 10:38

I'm really pleased to see the 6 Nations introduce bonus points. I do think it can keep games alive that would otherwise go through the motions. There are two sides to this of course, but I do think the overall effect will be a positive one, not that Scotland have historically bothered with tries....

by R!skysports Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 11:12

I think there is a stat somewhere that actually shows it is the weather that determines how many tries are scored

Consistently the matches at the start there are fewer tries than at the end (When drier)

I for one, would like a global calendar and summer rugby...

by Barney McGrew did it Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 11:32

Interesting but not really important. As an out and out competition the 6N is obviously flawed: not home and away, unequal number of home games, fairly large range of weather conditions, the Italy effect… But that’s not what’s important to the spectacle. It’s a bit quirky and we love it. Winners tend to hold the NH bragging rights for a while but that often doesn’t affect the global situation too much. I’m not sure you can just tinker with it, if your logic is to totally level the playing field each series. Either leave it quirky or change it entirely.

by The Great Aukster Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 11:49

Griff wrote:
The Great Aukster wrote:The try bonus point gimmick does not necessarily encourage tries. Points difference keeps teams trying to score more points, but once a side has secured the bonus point and won the game they sometimes switch off to preserve players.

This is very true. Two seasons ago when we had that great super Saturday with Wales (v Italy), Ireland (v Scotland) and England (v France) all in with a shout of the title it was points difference that was key. Wales went all out first game and got a cricket score but stupidly went a bit too loose and let Italy score a couple of late tries and that (if memory serves) meant we finished 3rd instead of 2nd in the end. If we were just after a try bonus point we would probably have stopped playing at full whack much earlier in the game. Much less of a spectacle then for the fans. As it was it ended up a belter with the full 80 mins being used to try to get as much score as possible. The same then happened in the Ireland and England matches.

An another note, they talk about wanting to increase entertainment and spread the game. However, the BBC article quotes figures for attendance in the Tri Nations/4 Nations since bonus points came in. They've seen a fall of roughly 12% since bonus points while the 6N has stayed relatively stable with around a 1% fall in the same period. Yes there are other issues that affect attendance but thought that was rather telling. Where have all of these super entertained fans gone?

That fall in attendance could be attributed to other things, but a major reason could be the bonus point system. NZ didn't just win the championship - they annihilated the opposition. Having bonus points puts all the emphasis on the 'League' at the expense of individual encounters - each game is no longer a "Test" mano a mano but has the distraction of extra points affecting other teams who aren't even playing. The implication is that one-off Test matches are relegated to the status of 'friendlies' and it is only tournament games that are important (as in soccer).

If the motivation for the trial is about increasing entertainment, perhaps the 6N committee should define what entertainment is? How will they know if the system has been good, bad or indifferent? If this is an experiment, where is the science to judge success? The net effect will simply widen the gap between the best teams and the worst ones thus further damaging the romance of the championship.
The assertion might be that fans are entertained because there is a chance their team could cause an upset - on that day they were the better team (or the luckier one). When the value of that hope is crushed under the jackboot of a tournament, and a Test win is devalued as being just another result in a wider series, then perhaps fans lose some hope and therefore entertainment value. So how are the 6N committee going to measure the success of this trial?

by Guest Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 12:00

marty2086 wrote:Think the change is to address the so called gulf between the 6Ns/NH and the RC/SH as they are deemed to be more attacking and the NH teams less so

RWC failure over reaction

Gosh, the gap is closing so why change a good thing? Ireland beat the ABs. The poms beat Fiji and are the worlds best team. Italy beat SA. Scotland beat Australia pretty much. No need to jazz it up with cheap SH inspired gimmicks. 3 pts for a GS, please.

by SecretFly Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 13:07

Look, it's clear. Some side evidently started this ball rolling on this organisational change by first of all claiming/moaning they were the best side in any given year even though they didn't win..................... "The best side ain't getting a chance to win!"

There are perhaps two sides that would have the balls to make such a claim over the last six or seven years and kick up a behind the scenes boardroom storm about it. Wink

by Guest Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 13:33

Name and shame for the uninitiated

by Guest Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 21:37

SecretFly wrote:Look, it's clear. Some side evidently started this ball rolling on this organisational change by first of all claiming/moaning they were the best side in any given year even though they didn't win..................... "The best side ain't getting a chance to win!"

There are perhaps two sides that would have the balls to make such a claim over the last six or seven years and kick up a behind the scenes boardroom storm about it.

England and Ireland! Tell me it's true!

by Cyril Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 21:40

Griff wrote:
SecretFly wrote:Look, it's clear. Some side evidently started this ball rolling on this organisational change by first of all claiming/moaning they were the best side in any given year even though they didn't win..................... "The best side ain't getting a chance to win!"

There are perhaps two sides that would have the balls to make such a claim over the last six or seven years and kick up a behind the scenes boardroom storm about it.

England and Ireland! Tell me it's true!

I reckon one of them is Georgia...

by Guest Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 21:49

Cyril wrote:
Griff wrote:
SecretFly wrote:Look, it's clear. Some side evidently started this ball rolling on this organisational change by first of all claiming/moaning they were the best side in any given year even though they didn't win..................... "The best side ain't getting a chance to win!"

There are perhaps two sides that would have the balls to make such a claim over the last six or seven years and kick up a behind the scenes boardroom storm about it.

England and Ireland! Tell me it's true!
I reckon one of them is Georgia...

Sarcasm?!

by The Great Aukster Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 22:29

Griff wrote:Sarcasm?!

Are they part of the EU?

,,, sound like a good fit for Nicolas Sarkozy

by Guest Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 22:33

I meant more to do with Fly's claim that it was one of the current lot moaning over potentially winning it previously if we'd had bonus points (moral victories Wink

. So obviously not Georgia as they're not in it! Yet...

by Cyril Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 22:56

Griff wrote:I meant more to do with Fly's claim that it was one of the current lot moaning over potentially winning it previously if we'd had bonus points (moral victories . So obviously not Georgia as they're not in it! Yet...

Unless there are bonus points for claiming you should be in the tournament?

I'd remove Italy (and not promote Georgia) and go back to 5 Nations to improve quality.

by The Great Aukster Sun 4 Dec 2016 - 8:57

Bonus points should be awarded democratically.

After every game there should be a public vote (£1/min usual call charges apply) to award bonus points. There has to be room made for the Ash Splash again, and in this way the armchair fans can really have a say in supporting their team.

by Guest Sun 4 Dec 2016 - 9:10

Just read a good point online: if the 6N organisers are trying to encourage entertainment and try scoring why award the winner an extra 3 free points when they (potentially) win it with 5 standard borefest victories without picking up BPs?! It's a solution to a problem that is only a problem because of the bonus points they've brought in!

by The Great Aukster Sun 4 Dec 2016 - 9:19

Hilarious! Smile

by robbo277 Sun 4 Dec 2016 - 18:06

I hate the 3 bonus points for a grand slam. They should just only award the Grand Slam if you win both the Championship and all your games.

I firstly don't think you'd see an issue where a team won 5 games and lost the Championship, for a start.

Potential points if you win 5 games: 20-25
Potential points if you win 4 games: 16-22

If the first separator is wins, the team winning 4 would have to get more points than the team winning 5 to take the Championship, so that would be 21 or 22. That would be 5 or 6 bonus points, while the team winning 5 gets a maximum of 1.

Also, consider what would need to happen for this situation to occur. Bonus points aren't added as a surprise at the end of the tournament. They're added each week. So consider the possible scenarios where this could happen:

Scenario 1: Team A beats Team B in the first week
Team A beats Team B in week 1. Team B picks up 1 BP, Team A gets zero.
Week 1:
A - 4pts
B - 1pt

There after, Team A would have to win every game without a bonus point. Team B would have to win every game with a bonus point.

Week 2
A - 8 pts
B - 6 pts

Week 3
A - 12 pts
B - 11 pts

Week 4
A - 16 pts
B - 16 pts

Week 5
B - 21 pts
A - 20 pts

Surely at some point in the tournament, A realised they might need to get a bonus point, as B were coming back strongly? Possibly at Week 2, definitely by the end of Week 3 they should have been worried. And if they failed, that's on them.

Scenario 2: Team A beats Team B in the last week
Week 1
B - 5 pts
A - 4 pts

Week 2
B - 10 pts
A - 8 pts

Week 3
B - 15 pts
A - 12 pts

Week 4
B - 20 pts
A - 16 pts

Week 5
B - 21 pts
A - 20 pts

Again, Team A should have realised they were falling behind. Regardless of them realising that they had to get a TBP or deny B a LBP in Week 5, they should have been looking for bonus points much earlier in the piece.

And this kind of analysis works wherever you have the game between A and B take place, A should see the table and realise that the 5 wins might not be enough.

Also in 17 tournaments, with 9 Grand Slams and 5 instances where the team finishing second has won 4, there hasn't been one instance when bonus points would have overthrown the team winning the Grand Slam. In fact, no team with a worse W/D/L record would have overhauled a team above them with a retrospective application of bonus points - it will effectively replace points difference as the first separator - unless a team refuses to embrace the format - in which case they deserve everything they get.

So to sum up (!) I don't get the +3 points. I don't think it will ever be material, but I don't even like it as a hypothetical.

by SecretFly Sun 4 Dec 2016 - 20:52

Griff wrote:Just read a good point online: if the 6N organisers are trying to encourage entertainment and try scoring why award the winner an extra 3 free points when they (potentially) win it with 5 standard borefest victories without picking up BPs?! It's a solution to a problem that is only a problem because of the bonus points they've brought in!

Griff you're doing some good stuff on this topic.

by Cardiff Dave Sun 4 Dec 2016 - 21:01

Marvelous defending and preventing try scoring I find exciting and entertaining too.

by SecretFly Sun 4 Dec 2016 - 21:25

If you defend too much now in any game, and if you do it well, and because it's not televisual... it's a minus 2 points. So really, it's better all round for all sides just to let each other score 4 tries each and then start the real game after that.

by Cyril Sun 4 Dec 2016 - 21:29

Anyone seen the scores in the some of the Top14 this weekend? I think they're already looking out for those bonus points!

Pau 40 Clermont 35
Grenoble 37 Montpolier 51

Shocked

by Exiledinborders Sun 4 Dec 2016 - 21:30

SecretFly wrote:If you defend too much now in any game, and if you do it well, and because it's not televisual... it's a minus 2 points. So really, it's better all round for all sides just to let each other score 4 tries each and then start the real game after that.

I have never really understood why a game with poor defences and lots of tries is considered good.

by SecretFly Sun 4 Dec 2016 - 21:34

Cyril wrote:Anyone seen the scores in the some of the Top14 this weekend? I think they're already looking out for those bonus points!

Pau 40 Clermont 35
Grenoble 37 Montpolier 51

Well that's the danger. I didn't see either game but just going on the score, I'd say there was little or no defending done. It's a style. It can be entertaining now and again. But if rugby became too much like that every week, I'd begin to think I was watching League...and I've tried watching that on and off over the years but have never been able to get through even one full game. I find it too shallow a game. My brain turns off.

by Cyril Sun 4 Dec 2016 - 21:38

SecretFly wrote:
Cyril wrote:Anyone seen the scores in the some of the Top14 this weekend? I think they're already looking out for those bonus points!

Pau 40 Clermont 35
Grenoble 37 Montpolier 51

Well that's the danger. I didn't see either game but just going on the score, I'd say there was little or no defending done. It's a style. It can be entertaining now and again. But if rugby became too much like that every week, I'd begin to think I was watching League...and I've tried watching that on and off over the years but have never been able to get through even one full game. I find it too shallow a game. My brain turns off.

I like League too (for its difference as much as anything) but agree that too many tries (or too many 'soft' tries) dilutes the excitement. It's ok now and again but they need to hard-won and not like basketball.

I'm sure it was a blip ad the French sides will revert to type soon enough. Hmmm, with Europe coming up we'll see over the next couple of weekends.

by Cardiff Dave Sun 4 Dec 2016 - 21:49

Exiledinborders wrote:
SecretFly wrote:If you defend too much now in any game, and if you do it well, and because it's not televisual... it's a minus 2 points. So really, it's better all round for all sides just to let each other score 4 tries each and then start the real game after that.
I have never really understood why a game with poor defences and lots of tries is considered good.

All this sort of reminds me of USA '94 Footy World Cup when the Yanks wanted to widen the goalposts. Preferred a score every 30 secs like basketball, I guess.
Diana Ross would still have missed btw.
Crap comp overall, but big thanks to Charlton and Aldridge for making it memorable.

by Hammersmith harrier Sun 4 Dec 2016 - 22:07

I found the defensively astounding second test in Oz more exciting than the open free flowing 3rd test, there's somethings primal about seeing James Haskell make big tackle after big tackle that you don't get with an open game.

by Sponsored content

6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

Re: 6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

Re: 6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

Re: 6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

Re: 6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

Re: 6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

Re: 6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

Re: 6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

Re: 6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

Re: 6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

Re: 6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

Re: 6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

Re: 6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

Re: 6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

Re: 6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

Re: 6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

Re: 6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

Re: 6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

Re: 6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

Re: 6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

Re: 6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

Re: 6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

Re: 6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

Re: 6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

Re: 6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

Re: 6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

Re: 6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

Re: 6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

Re: 6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

Re: 6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

Re: 6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

Re: 6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

Re: 6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017

Re: 6 Nations to introduce bonus points in 2017