World Champios Elect V Wales - Page 2 - Rugby - Tartan Army Message Board Jump to content

World Champios Elect V Wales


Brassrubber

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Those 2 bonus points that RSA got against Japan could be crucial. They probably mean that RSA are still favorites to win the group even though they have already lost a game. Getting 2 bonus points in one game is pretty unusual. It's not often that a team scores 4 tries and gets beaten.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now, i think about it, I think RSA would go through even if they lost to us. In the unlikely event that we were to beat RSA, chances are that it wouldn't be by much and RSA would get another bonus point for being within 7 points. That would put them on 8 points. They will beat USA and get a bonus point, so they would finish on 13 points. For Japan to catch them they would need to win both their last 2 games AND get a bonus point. For Samoa to catch them they would need to win both their last 2 games AND get 2 bonus points. Not impossible but certainly not guaranteed either.

To me, it looks like RSA will win the group and we will need to beat Samoa to get 2nd place. Right back to where we started, and all that excitement about Japan beating RSA was for nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes rules are screwed up

I was discussing last night with a saffer

RSA could get beat by a similar score by Scotland as Japan

Consequence is 2 more bonus points

So in a hypothetical situaition they lose twice and get 4 points whilst Japan won once and lost once, and have 4 points

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now, i think about it, I think RSA would go through even if they lost to us. In the unlikely event that we were to beat RSA, chances are that it wouldn't be by much and RSA would get another bonus point for being within 7 points. That would put them on 8 points. They will beat USA and get a bonus point, so they would finish on 13 points. For Japan to catch them they would need to win both their last 2 games AND get a bonus point. For Samoa to catch them they would need to win both their last 2 games AND get 2 bonus points. Not impossible but certainly not guaranteed either.

To me, it looks like RSA will win the group and we will need to beat Samoa to get 2nd place. Right back to where we started, and all that excitement about Japan beating RSA was for nothing.

makes no sense awarding a point for coming within a certain amount of points, so what

understand the try count bonus point but the other is pointless, so to speak

Link to comment
Share on other sites

makes no sense awarding a point for coming within a certain amount of points, so what

understand the try count bonus point but the other is pointless, so to speak

it could bring about a situation where both teams 'allow' each other to score 4 tries, and then they really play to see who wins the game... meaning either team would be guaranteed at least a point......

I think it was brought in to give the wee teams an incentive to keep playing against the big teams... the Japan/ SA scenario is/will be pretty rare,,,,,,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it could bring about a situation where both teams 'allow' each other to score 4 tries, and then they really play to see who wins the game... meaning either team would be guaranteed at least a point......

I think it was brought in to give the wee teams an incentive to keep playing against the big teams... the Japan/ SA scenario is/will be pretty rare,,,,,,

It was brought in to encourage attacking rugby where people score tries rather than penalties. And it has worked - f it hadn't been for try bonus points Glasgow wouldn't have been top of the Pro12 last year; Ospreys won / lost same number of games and had a better points difference, but Glasgow get the reward for scoring more tries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was brought in to encourage attacking rugby where people score tries rather than penalties. And it has worked - f it hadn't been for try bonus points Glasgow wouldn't have been top of the Pro12 last year; Ospreys won / lost same number of games and had a better points difference, but Glasgow get the reward for scoring more tries.

ok, i stand educated and corrected. :ok::ok:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

makes no sense awarding a point for coming within a certain amount of points, so what

understand the try count bonus point but the other is pointless, so to speak

What happens when it's a draw then?

Do both teams get a bonus point for being within 7 points?

Genuine question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. You can't get a losing bonus point if you don't lose.

Aye, 2 points each.

I was trying to explain this to a couple of mates who were also confused by the points system. One of them said "So, England only dropped one point by not kicking that penalty? It was worth taking the risk". I then pointed out that he was missing the important part that Wales would have got 2 points less. Wales and England would have been on equal points instead of Wales being 3 points ahead. I am not convinced they were any less confused after the conversation.

It's dead simple really, it's just that non rugby folk aren't used to that points system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RSA could get beat by a similar score by Scotland as Japan

Consequence is 2 more bonus points

So in a hypothetical situaition they lose twice and get 4 points whilst Japan won once and lost once, and have 4 points

Although Japan would be above South Africa on head to head so their victory wouldn't be in vain....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although Japan would be above South Africa on head to head so their victory wouldn't be in vain....

Aye, but Japan would need to get bonus points against both Samoa and USA to match the 14 points that RSA would have, assuming RSA get 5 points off USA (which they will). Japan are capable of winning both games but I can't see them getting 4 tries in both of them? Could be wrong though. I think RSA will go through even if we beat them and to be honest I don't think we will anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aye, 2 points each.

I was trying to explain this to a couple of mates who were also confused by the points system. One of them said "So, England only dropped one point by not kicking that penalty? It was worth taking the risk". I then pointed out that he was missing the important part that Wales would have got 2 points less. Wales and England would have been on equal points instead of Wales being 3 points ahead. I am not convinced they were any less confused after the conversation.

It's dead simple really, it's just that non rugby folk aren't used to that points system.

It is quite a stupid system though and still rewards defeat. I can understand trying to attract attacking rugby but I'd be happy if there was just 1 losing bonus point for either being within 7 points or scoring 4 but not 1 for each.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is quite a stupid system though and still rewards defeat. I can understand trying to attract attacking rugby but I'd be happy if there was just 1 losing bonus point for either being within 7 points or scoring 4 but not 1 for each.

I'm not sure what the reasoning behind the "within 7 points" bonus point is. Maybe somebody else on here knows? But whatever the intention was, it just seems to work as a kind of safety net for the "big" nations. They are always capable of losing a game here or there, but when they do it's not usually by much so they seem to benefit from the bonus points more than the smaller nations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The think the losing Bon s point came in because in rugby, if you're twelve points behind with five minutes to play, you're not going to get anything out of the game as there isn't time to score two tries and kick the conversions and restart. That was part of it anyway. Youve also got to appreciate how much rarer draws are in rugby. There's a difference between losing 34-32 and 34-6 in terms of performance; you could almost equate a narrow loss to be somewhat like a draw in football.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was to keep teams honest/ make more of a spectacle of teams getting spanked. To take the above example. If you're 15 down in a league match with ten to go, you'll probably not win the match, but you might be able to get a point or two if you keep attacking. Similarly, teams who have scored 3 tries and are in no danger of losing will keep trying for the extra point for 4 tries, rather than shut up shop and grind it out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing I don't get is the way it works with separators in the table. Points, then score difference/head-to-head, then tries scored, I think it is. If teams are getting bonus points for scoring tries, seems wrong to potentially re-reward them for it. Or have I got my elbows at the tops of my leagues, and arses in the middle of my arms?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing I don't get is the way it works with separators in the table. Points, then score difference/head-to-head, then tries scored, I think it is. If teams are getting bonus points for scoring tries, seems wrong to potentially re-reward them for it. Or have I got my elbows at the tops of my leagues, and arses in the middle of my arms?

Here are the rules. It will never go as far as try difference to separate teams. It's head to head first then total points difference. I am convinced that no two teams will ever have identical points difference.

"At the completion of the pool phase, the Teams in a pool are ranked one through five based on their cumulative Match points, and identified respectively as winner, runner-up, third, fourth and fifth.

If at the completion of the pool phase two or more Teams are level on Match points, then the following criteria shall be used in the following order until one of the Teams can be determined as the higher ranked:

  • The winner of the Match in which the two tied Teams have played each other shall be the higher ranked;
  • The Team which has the best difference between points scored for and points scored against in all its pool Matches shall be the higher ranked;
  • The Team which has the best difference between tries scored for and tries scored against in all its pool Matches shall be the higher ranked;
  • The Team which has scored most points in all its pool Matches shall be the higher ranked;
  • The Team which has scored most tries in all its pool Matches shall be the higher ranked;
  • Should the tie be unresolved at the conclusion of steps 1 through 5, the rankings as per the updated Official World Rugby World Rankings on October 12, 2015 will determine the higher ranked Team."
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here are the rules. It will never go as far as try difference to separate teams. It's head to head first then total points difference. I am convinced that no two teams will ever have identical points difference.

"At the completion of the pool phase, the Teams in a pool are ranked one through five based on their cumulative Match points, and identified respectively as winner, runner-up, third, fourth and fifth.

If at the completion of the pool phase two or more Teams are level on Match points, then the following criteria shall be used in the following order until one of the Teams can be determined as the higher ranked:

  • The winner of the Match in which the two tied Teams have played each other shall be the higher ranked;
  • The Team which has the best difference between points scored for and points scored against in all its pool Matches shall be the higher ranked;
  • The Team which has the best difference between tries scored for and tries scored against in all its pool Matches shall be the higher ranked;
  • The Team which has scored most points in all its pool Matches shall be the higher ranked;
  • The Team which has scored most tries in all its pool Matches shall be the higher ranked;
  • Should the tie be unresolved at the conclusion of steps 1 through 5, the rankings as per the updated Official World Rugby World Rankings on October 12, 2015 will determine the higher ranked Team."

Aye, very unlikely as you say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Assuming my maths is correct, if England lose on Saturday even if Australia score no bonus points and England get two (unlikely but possible) then they are out no matter what?

If they lose they're out, definitely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thought as much. Australia would be on 13 minimum and Wales already on 13. Two losing bonus points plus assume a bonus point win over Uruguay would put England also on 13 but could catch neither on the head to head.

That would leave it clear for Wales to fight it out with Australia for the right to (probably) meet us in the quarters.

Gulp ?

Edited by DaveyDenoon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thought as much. Australia would be on 13 minimum and Wales already on 13. Two losing bonus points plus assume a bonus point win over Uruguay would put England also on 13 but could catch neither on the head to head.

That would leave it clear for Wales to fight it out with Australia for the right to (probably) meet us in the quarters.

Gulp

we can take Wales, they are losing about 2 good players a game just now... so thats cool, who will we get in the Semis? LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites




×
×
  • Create New...