World Rankings - things just got interesting

With the World Cup still a few weeks away, it's nice to try and apply some context to the week's matches.

When the official rankings come out on Monday, New Zealand will be top with 89.04, Wales will be second with 88.89 then Ireland (88.69), England (87.34), South Africa (86.83) and Australia (84.41).

Ireland don't play next week and South Africa play Argentina at home next week. Argentina are ranked so low now that a win would not allow South Africa up the rankings, and they can only lose points if they fail to win. The other two games of note are NZ at home to Australia and Wales at home to England.

There's a miniscule gap between NZ and Wales, and as Wales are playing a higher ranked team, any Wales win will see them officially ranked number 1 in the published rankings. Conversely if England beat Wales by 16+ points, England will be ranked number 1. Both these outcomes exist outside of NZ's sphere of influence.

If NZ beat Australia they'll be on 89.28 points. If they thrash Australia, they'll be on 89.40 points.

A Wales win would take them up to 89.43 points and a thrashing of England would take them to 89.71. Either of these would be more than NZ could muster against Australia.

An England win would see England up to 88.79, which is less than NZ after any kiwi win. However, an England thrashing of Wales would see them up to 89.52, and therefore above anything NZ could achieve.

England could also top the rankings with any win, if NZ fail to win against Australia. A draw against Australia would see NZ drop to 88.28 points and a loss would see them fall further. A narrow England win and an NZ draw or loss would see England top the rankings therefore.

The eagle-eyed amongst you might have noticed that "NZ fail to win - 88.28" would see NZ drop below Ireland, who would therefore rise to second. Ireland could even top the rankings if Wales and England then drew, as England would take enough points from Wales to drag them below Ireland but not enough to themselves get above Ireland.

If NZ lose at home to Australia, they would drop to third with a Wales win or 4th with a draw or an England win. If they suffered a second successive thrashing, they'd fall to 6th below Australia and South Africa. You can file that last scenario in "unlikely", but that would probably be their worst ever position.

Below the top 6 you've got Scotland and France in 7th and 8th. The winner of their game will be ranked higher at the end of the week, although neither can catch the top 6 or drop below those below them.

Good work on the calculations Robbo..! It certainly is interesting as any of a number of teams could now be ranked top of the pile going into this RWC, though I think we all know that not every team has played their final hand, that many will not really show their full strength until it counts.

Thabks for working that through. It shows how close the teams are going into the RWC - though there is quite a lot of powder still being kept dry at this stage. I don't think we have seen any of the teams at full strength and readiness yet.

Just shows what can happen when NZ drop their standards... the vultures are circling.

Interesting that NZ are not clear on important positions such as 10 and 15. Add in a backrow that does not frighten the rest of the world and it brings NZ closer to the chasing pack. Hopefully a Northern Hemisphere team can take the win this time. 3 in a row would be just plain greedy.

NZ need to hit the panic button and sack Hanson now.

Taylorman wrote:Just shows what can happen when NZ drop their standards... the vultures are circling.

Yep. You look at the rankings a couple of years back (14th August 2017 is the date I chose) and New Zealand were on 94.78, England on 90.14 and Ireland on 85.39 in third.

It's not that another team has got to that 94-95 mark, just NZ are no longer head and shoulders better than anyone. Doesn't mean they won't win the World Cup, but does suggest it may be tighter.

hugehandoff wrote:Interesting that NZ are not clear on important positions such as 10 and 15. Add in a backrow that does not frighten the rest of the world and it brings NZ closer to the chasing pack. Hopefully a Northern Hemisphere team can take the win this time. 3 in a row would be just plain greedy.  

I think an equally large problem is Retallick being injured - if you look at NZ's losses in this RWC cycle, nearly all of them have come with him off the field. They rely heavily on carrying from their locks to get front foot ball, and without him they are too easily stopped on the gainline.

Poorfour wrote:

hugehandoff wrote:Interesting that NZ are not clear on important positions such as 10 and 15. Add in a backrow that does not frighten the rest of the world and it brings NZ closer to the chasing pack. Hopefully a Northern Hemisphere team can take the win this time. 3 in a row would be just plain greedy.  

I think an equally large problem is Retallick being injured - if you look at NZ's losses in this RWC cycle, nearly all of them have come with him off the field. They rely heavily on carrying from their locks to get front foot ball, and without him they are too easily stopped on the gainline.

The Mo’unga experiment stems from Hansen wanting to play Damian McKenzie at 10 and 15 at this World Cup. That’s his way of trying to negate the rush defence more— by having two playmakers to mix things up across the park. When Dmac went down and out he dropped the idea until Mo’unga showed a very high consistency for the Crusaders. So he’s trialled that last two matches, without success.

Logic is he’ll drop it and revert to tried and true for Eden park. Barrett back to 10, mo’unga to bench.

Given that leaves Barrett under pressure as the only playmaker he might just decide to back Mo’unga after all.

That would be a big call. A clearly flawed setup sees the Bledisloe Cup go west.

For me you need your best possible ten at ten at a World Cup and Mo’unga hasn’t had the matchplay at ten let alone take up a tandem playmaker role.

Gets even moer interesting if you factor in the fact that England play Ireland a week later - an Ireland win puts them in first place regardless of other results.

poissonrouge wrote:Gets even moer interesting if you factor in the fact that England play Ireland a week later - an Ireland win puts them in first place regardless of other results.

I only did one week at a time, or the permutations would get quite messy.

But yes, even if NZ take maximum points of Australia and Wales take maximum points off England, any Ireland win would see them go top.

From an England perspective, any win against Wales coupled with any win against Ireland would take England top, regardless of NZ results.

So unless a draw comes into play, NZ are losing top spot either this week with a Wales win or next week with either an Ireland win or England completing consecutive wins. The only thing that could save NZ's ranking would be if:

Wales vs England finishes in a draw and England beat Ireland
OR
England beat Wales and England vs Ireland finishes a draw

As New Zealand's last warm-up game is against Tonga, they won't be able to further impact their ranking before the World Cup.

Looking at the entire run of fixtures then:

If Wales vs England, England vs Ireland, Wales vs Ireland and Ireland vs Wales all go with the home team and no team takes a 16+ point win, then NZ will go into the tournament ranked number 1.

For Wales, they need to win their home games and draw or win their away game against Ireland. Or lose to England and beat Ireland in both tests.

For Ireland, they need to win their home game and either win one of their away games or draw both.

For England, they need to win both their games and hope neither Wales nor Ireland win back to back tests.

Maybe no one wants the number 1 position. What happens then?

Collapse2005 wrote:Maybe no one wants the number 1 position. What happens then?

Its been like that for a decade or so, so we look after it until someone bothers.

To be honest - world ranking going into World Cup means little as whoever wins World Cup will be no 1 as the top places are so close. Would take a lot of calculation to definitely prove it, but double points for WC wins means that prob anyone in top 6 - maybe even 8 would be top

Definitely demonstrates how tight it is at the top. And all teams have ares to improve in the next month.

poissonrouge wrote:To be honest - world ranking going into World Cup means little as whoever wins World Cup will be no 1 as the top places are so close. Would take a lot of calculation to definitely prove it, but double points for WC wins means that prob anyone in top 6 - maybe even 8 would be top

So When Scotland win the World Cup Final we'll go to Number one in the ranking too!

Thats just win win

poissonrouge wrote:To be honest - world ranking going into World Cup means little as whoever wins World Cup will be no 1 as the top places are so close. Would take a lot of calculation to definitely prove it, but double points for WC wins means that prob anyone in top 6 - maybe even 8 would be top

Yes, all the points should funnel to the eventual winner.

E.g. if all 8 quarter-finalists were evenly ranked on 80 points, all games were close and no-one had home advantage, by the end of the tournament:

Winner: 86 points
Runner up: 82 points
Third placed: 82 points
4th placed: 78 points
Losing quarter-finalists: 78 points

If you start the QFs as a lower ranked team although you have further to climb, you can win more points each game. E.g. if NZ (89.04) played Scotland (80.17) in the World Cup quarter-final now and Scotland won, they'd gain closer to 4 points, as opposed to the 2 points you'd gain for beating someone evenly ranked in the World Cup. So Scotland would finish that match around 84 and NZ would be down around 85.2, which is a huge swing.

As the WR Rankings stand today before this last weekends matches. I guess France will rise for beating a team above them.

1 (1)NZL 89.04

2 (2)WAL 88.89

3 (3)IRE 88.69

4 (5) ENG 87.34

5 (4) RSA 86.83

6 (6) AUS 84.41

7 (7) SCO 80.17

8 (8) FRA 79.42

9 (11) JPN 77.21

10 (9) FIJ 76.98

Big enough between the top three and 4th and 5th.

Any win for Ireland on Saturday would see them go to No1. 

Any win for England moves them to 4th and sees Ireland fall to almost 2 points lower than NZ. 

A big win for England sees England go 3rd and Ireland drop to 4th.

I predict an England win especially in Twickers.

What do Scotland need to do to get to No 1?

tigertattie wrote:What do Scotland need to do to get to No 1?

tigertattie wrote:What do Scotland need to do to get to No 1?

Beat France and convince the top 6 to withdraw from World Rugby.

Any Scotland win will see them back above France. Even the biggest win wouldn't see them catch 6th, even the biggest loss wouldn't see them fall below Japan in 9th.

England can't get to number 1 before the World Cup starts - there is no permutation of results that would see them there. The best they can manage is third, unless New Zealand lose to Tonga. As LT said, a big win will see us third, a narrow win 4th. A draw or any loss we stay 5th but fall further off the pace.

Just the two games this week makes it much simpler to analyse the possibilities.

Maybe World Rugby will do the following:

A: Ban NZ for cheating
B: Ban SA for "poisoning" NZ in 95
C: Ban Wales for playing Gatlandball
D: Ban Oz for religious intollerence
E: Ban Ireland because of Sexton's ref moaning/arm waving
F: Ban England because of the dude who wears the St George's Flag as a long coat
G: Ban France for their Cest la vie approach to international rugby

Then we'd be top and could win the World Cup (not if Argentina and Japan have anything to say about it)

Ban Scotland! ..... for beating the bejaysus out of that poor Dark Horse over the years. Animal cruelty!

SecretFly wrote:Ban Scotland!  ..... for beating the bejaysus out of that poor Dark Horse over the years.  Animal cruelty!

See, I dont even think we can class ourselves as "Dark Horses" anymore. We're just rank ousiders who every now and then have a decent run when the other horses are a bit meh!

We're not even the world elephant polo champions anymore

tigertattie wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Ban Scotland!  ..... for beating the bejaysus out of that poor Dark Horse over the years.  Animal cruelty!

See, I dont even think we can class ourselves as "Dark Horses" anymore. We're just rank ousiders who every now and then have a decent run when the other horses are a bit meh!

We're not even the world elephant polo champions anymore

France were dramatically improved on their six nations form. They could well top their pool. C is starting to look like the toughest pool to get out of.

didnt see either Eng-Wal game, just read the reports. Family holidays dont go well with RWC warm-ups...

however would just like to say that i think Wales fully deserve their time at number 1. There is little to separate the top several teams at the moment IMO, and Wales have just been that bit more consistent. Magic welsh rugby of the 70s and 80s it is not. But blame that on the way the game has gone, not Wales.

looking forwards to Japan!

maestegmafia wrote:

tigertattie wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Ban Scotland!  ..... for beating the bejaysus out of that poor Dark Horse over the years.  Animal cruelty!

See, I dont even think we can class ourselves as "Dark Horses" anymore. We're just rank ousiders who every now and then have a decent run when the other horses are a bit meh!

We're not even the world elephant polo champions anymore

France were dramatically improved on their six nations form. They could well top their pool. C is starting to look like the toughest pool to get out of.

I doubt it very much. France have been very poor for years now. It would take more than a world cup warm up win over Scotland to convince me otherwise.

Collapse2005 wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

tigertattie wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Ban Scotland!  ..... for beating the bejaysus out of that poor Dark Horse over the years.  Animal cruelty!

See, I dont even think we can class ourselves as "Dark Horses" anymore. We're just rank ousiders who every now and then have a decent run when the other horses are a bit meh!

We're not even the world elephant polo champions anymore

France were dramatically improved on their six nations form. They could well top their pool. C is starting to look like the toughest pool to get out of.

I doubt it very much. France have been very poor for years now. It would take more than a world cup warm up win over Scotland to convince me otherwise.

It’s only once every four years that the squad in France get some decent time to train together. There were plenty of signs of their ability, but floored silly mistakes.

Pool C might not be the toughest but it is starting to look like the most physical.

mikey_dragon wrote:Pool C might not be the toughest but it is starting to look like the most physical.

we know Argentina and England have the ability to top the group but France have been showing their potential in fits and spats all year. This should be a hell of a pool to watch. So little between the top teams.

Got bored on here, so I went over the conversations I have had over the years on here, and found something interesting, and it really sums this place up at times, and the hypocrisy of a lot of members on here. I will put it on this thread as its the world rankings thread, but a lot of members on here have rubbished the world rankings and have said that they are not a true reflection on the world standings, which I kind of agree with, but please read this topic, especially pages from about 4 to 7:-

https://www.606v2.com/t66008p250-66-minutes


A lot of members on that thread using the world rankings to justify their outrage over Wales having more representation than Scotland on the Lions tour. Yes Scotland were ranked higher than Wales, but I think a lot of members who were on their soap box on that thread must now feel a little silly.

LordDowlais wrote:
A lot of members on that thread using the world rankings to justify their outrage over Wales having more representation than Scotland on the Lions tour. Yes Scotland were ranked higher than Wales, but I think a lot of members who were on their soap box on that thread must now feel a little silly.

Why?

There has been a consensus on twitter that a lot of people are now "off" the rankings because Wales are top, but I haven't seen too much of it on here?

Don't buy into it. It's people trying to and apparently succeeding in winding you up. The World Rankings are what they are, a method of ranking teams on past performance where there is no set league structure. They are by their nature reactive and don't act as a predictor of future success, but they are an impartial system and the probably the best measure we have.

Wales have won 15 of their last 16 tests and I don't believe anyone has as good a record as that over the past 18 months or so.

LordDowlais wrote:Got bored on here, so I went over the conversations I have had over the years on here, and found something interesting, and it really sums this place up at times, and the hypocrisy of a lot of members on here. I will put it on this thread as its the world rankings thread, but a lot of members on here have rubbished the world rankings and have said that they are not a true reflection on the world standings, which I kind of agree with, but please read this topic, especially pages from about 4 to 7:-

https://www.606v2.com/t66008p250-66-minutes


A lot of members on that thread using the world rankings to justify their outrage over Wales having more representation than Scotland on the Lions tour. Yes Scotland were ranked higher than Wales, but I think a lot of members who were on their soap box on that thread must now feel a little silly.

You got it bad, Lord.  Whatever it is, you got it bad.

Try to enjoy Numero Uno.  It's a big achievement.  Great Welsh squad currently.

Enjoy.  Don't go looking for historic trouble, it's bad for the digestion, I hear.... *hiccup... belch*. Oh excuse me....

LondonTiger wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:
A lot of members on that thread using the world rankings to justify their outrage over Wales having more representation than Scotland on the Lions tour. Yes Scotland were ranked higher than Wales, but I think a lot of members who were on their soap box on that thread must now feel a little silly.

Why?

You know why, and I know what you are trying to do.

Poor form for a MOD.

LordDowlais wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:
A lot of members on that thread using the world rankings to justify their outrage over Wales having more representation than Scotland on the Lions tour. Yes Scotland were ranked higher than Wales, but I think a lot of members who were on their soap box on that thread must now feel a little silly.

Why?

You know why, and I know what you are trying to do.

Poor form for a MOD.

This guy

Colour me shocked LD doesn't want to make clear what he means.

He's surpassed himself even by his own standards this time

Flying visit while out celebrating Daughter's GCSE results. 

I truly do not understand why people should be ashamed, as no-one on here is trying to denigrate Wales position at No1. They got there fairly and it is a reflection of their form. If the lions were selected today Wales would have a big representation which would be deserved based on ranking and status as GS champs. 

So please if there is hypocrisy explain to me where it has occurred. Educate me rather than sagging me off. 

Hasta la vista babies, back to the party.

Yeah they do deserve the ranking, their record over the last two years speaks for itself and no other team comes close, well Ireland and NZ come quite close but have lost two more games so Wales are unquestionably numero uno in my view. That said things change quickly in rugby so batten down the hatches.

Collapse2005 wrote:Yeah they do deserve the ranking, their record over the last two years speaks for itself and no other team comes close, well Ireland and NZ come quite close but have lost two more games so Wales are unquestionably numero uno in my view. That said things change quickly in rugby so batten down the hatches.

Considering how close in ability the top ten in rugby are, let alone the top three or five everyone knows the top spot is going to change like a game of hot potato over the next few months. Consistent results are key. Let’s see who can be most consistent.

Ireland could go top this weekend.

LondonTiger wrote:Flying visit while out celebrating Daughter's GCSE results. 

I truly do not understand why people should be ashamed, as no-one on here is trying to denigrate Wales position at No1. They got there fairly and it is a reflection of their form. If the lions were selected today Wales would have a big representation which would be deserved based on ranking and status as GS champs. 

So please if there is hypocrisy explain to me where it has occurred. Educate me rather than sagging me off. 

Hasta la vista babies, back to the party.

Nobody said anything about being ashamed. Also, nobody is slagging you off either.

You could answer the question.

Please can you not derail another thread with pedantry...!

Discus rugby for a change.

LordDowlais wrote:Ireland could go top this weekend.

Indeed they could. 

That we could have 3 different number 1 teams on consecutive weeks, with a 4th in the running last week, shows just how tight things at the top are.

LondonTiger wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:Ireland could go top this weekend.

Indeed they could. 

That we could have 3 different number 1 teams on consecutive weeks, with a 4th in the running last week, shows just how tight things at the top are.

Fantastic going into the RWC..! To be fair there is so little between the top six that writhing the pool stages we could possible see any of the top six in first..!