World Rankings

Anything rugby not covered by the other forums.

Moderators: Puja, Misc Forum Mod

User avatar
rowan
Posts: 7756
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 11:21 pm
Location: Istanbul

World Rankings

Post by rowan »

Out today with the usual Southern Hemisphere strangulation of the top end interrupted only by former world champions England at #2. New Zealand are proving more difficult to depose than a Turkish political leader and have in fact occupied the #1 spot about seven years now, and indeed most of the rankings' 13-year existence. They have never fallen below #3 :!: England have always been inside the top 10, current #3 Australia & #4 SA have never dropped out of the top 6. & these are the only teams that have ever occupied the top spot. Wales, Ireland & France, currently #5, #6 & #7, have never been outside the top 10, but never climbed higher than #2. Scotland, currently #8, has charted a course of mediocrity, remaining always between #6 & #12, current #9 Argentina has got as high as #3, and current #10 Fiji has always been between #9 & #16. The remaining tier 1 nation Italy is currently #13, and has always been between #8 & #15. After Fiji at #11 & #12 in fact comes Ge :D rgia and Japan, two of the big improvers in rankings history having at one time been as low as #23 & #20 respectively. Meanwhile, spectacular nose-dives by former RWC contenders include Iv :oops: ry C :oops: ast, current at #52, Zimbabwe #37 & Portugal #30. &, in case you were wondering, yes, I did write this after discovering the hash (#) symbol on my keyboard :D :ugeek:

http://www.worldrugby.org/rankings/mru?lang=en
If they're good enough to play at World Cups, why not in between?
User avatar
Lizard
Posts: 4048
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 11:41 pm
Location: Dominating the SHMB

Re: World Rankings

Post by Lizard »

Just looking at the rankings in the context of RWC seeding, it would take something rather startling for any of the top 3 of NZ, Eng or Aus to fall out of the top 4 band. They each have between about 88 and 95 points.

There's then a gap to the next bunch of 6, all grouped from about 83 points down to 80 being Ire, SA, Wal, Sco, Fra, Arg. The question being which will rise to 4th and make the top band, and which will fall to 9th and the bottom band. A big part of this question is whether the Springboks are just having a bad year or are truly now just one more team.

There's a bit of a gap to the last group of automatic qualifiers each with about 74-75 points, Jap, Geo and Ita. Non-automatic qualifier Fiji actually outranks all of these but only by a fraction of a point.

We could again see a pool of death comprising, say, NZ, SA, Fra, Fiji.
______________________
Dominating the SHMB
======================
User avatar
rowan
Posts: 7756
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 11:21 pm
Location: Istanbul

Re: World Rankings

Post by rowan »

We are reaching an interesting scenario in the Six Nations where Argentina may yet be rescued from the dreaded ninth spot come 10 May, thanks to the disappointing results from both France and Wales. With two rounds to come in the 6N, the rankings are:

1. New Zealand 94.78
2. England 91.02
3. Australia 86.35
4. Ireland 84.18

5. Scotland 82.18
6. South Africa 81.79
7. Wales 81.16
8. France 80.57

9. Argentina 79.91
11. Japan 74.22
12. Georgia 74.14
14. Italy 71.81

Those in bold still have the possibility of changing their seeding, for better or for worse. Change is dependent on the final two rounds of the 6N:

Wales v Ireland
Italy v France
England v Scotland

Scotland v Italy
France v Wales
Ireland v England

Scotland overtaking Ireland looks quite unlikely, but a win in Twickenham would give them a terrific chance. If Wales should lose at home to Ireland, then the France v Wales match on the final weekend may turn into a playoff to see who will drop below Argentina in the rankings.
If they're good enough to play at World Cups, why not in between?
User avatar
rowan
Posts: 7756
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 11:21 pm
Location: Istanbul

Re: World Rankings

Post by rowan »

As expected, Canada drop below Germany to an all-time low of 23rd following their shock loss to Brazil, while the Tupis enter the top 30 for the first time, ahead of the Netherlands.
If they're good enough to play at World Cups, why not in between?
User avatar
rowan
Posts: 7756
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 11:21 pm
Location: Istanbul

Re: World Rankings

Post by rowan »

:idea: Imagine if you will a future in which travel requirements have become a non-factor and international rugby tournaments based entirely upon word rankings regardless of geographical localtion. This may be closer than we think:

:geek: Teams face all division rivals once, first division winner declared champions, all other division winners promoted (automatically), all 10th-placed teams relegated (automatically).



Division 1
NEW ZEALAND
ENGLAND
AUSTRALIA
IRELAND
SCOTLAND
FRANCE
SOUTH AFRICA
WALES
ARGENTINA
FIJI

Division 2
JAPAN
GEORGIA
TONGA
SAMOA
ITALY
ROMANIA
USA
SPAIN
NAMIBIA
RUSSIA

Division 3
URUGUAY
GERMANY
CANADA
PORTUGAL
HONG KONG
KENYA
BELGIUM
CHILE
KOREA
SWITZERLAND

Division 4
BRAZIL
CZECH REPUBLIC
NETHERLANDS
POLAND
MOLDOVA
ZIMBABWE
UKRAINE
LITHUANIA
SENEGAL
PARAGUAY

Division 5
SRI LANKA
KAZAKHSTAN
COLOMBIA
UGANDA
MALTA
MADAGASCAR
MALAYSIA
COOK ISLANDS
TUNISIA
MEXICO

Division 6
MOROCCO
TRINIDAD & TOBAGO
LATVIA
GUYANA
COTE D'IVOIRE
CROATIA
PHILIPPINES
ISRAEL
SINGAPORE
CAYMAN ISLANDS

Division 7
SWEDEN
VENEZUELA
LUXEMBOURG
BOTSWANA
CHINESE TAIPEI 40.27
ANDORRA
CHINA
PAPUA NEW GUINEA
JAMAICA
HUNGARY

Division 8
BOSNIA & HERZEGOVINA
BERMUDA
UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
GUAM
NIGERIA
SLOVENIA
INDIA
SERBIA
PERU
THAILAND

Divison 9
PAKISTAN
ZAMBIA
BARBADOS
ST VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES
AUSTRIA
DENMARK
NIUE ISLAND
BAHAMAS
CAMEROON
SWAZILAND

Division 10
TAHITI
NORWAY
UZBEKISTAN
MAURITIUS
RWANDA
SOLOMON ISLANDS
BULGARIA
MONACO
INDONESIA
GREECE

Development tournament (Home & Away):
VANUATU
FINLAND
AMERICAN SAMOA
If they're good enough to play at World Cups, why not in between?
User avatar
rowan
Posts: 7756
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 11:21 pm
Location: Istanbul

Re: World Rankings

Post by rowan »

Just food for thought, of course. It would probably require teleportation to become a reality!
If they're good enough to play at World Cups, why not in between?
User avatar
rowan
Posts: 7756
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 11:21 pm
Location: Istanbul

Re: World Rankings

Post by rowan »

How about 5 World Cups:

Division 1
NEW ZEALAND
ENGLAND
AUSTRALIA
IRELAND
SCOTLAND
FRANCE
SOUTH AFRICA
WALES
ARGENTINA
FIJI
JAPAN
GEORGIA
TONGA
SAMOA
ITALY
ROMANIA
USA
SPAIN
NAMIBIA
RUSSIA

Division 2
URUGUAY
GERMANY
CANADA
PORTUGAL
HONG KONG
KENYA
BELGIUM
CHILE
KOREA
SWITZERLAND
BRAZIL
CZECH REPUBLIC
NETHERLANDS
POLAND
MOLDOVA
ZIMBABWE
UKRAINE
LITHUANIA
SENEGAL
PARAGUAY

Division 3
SRI LANKA
KAZAKHSTAN
COLOMBIA
UGANDA
MALTA
MADAGASCAR
MALAYSIA
COOK ISLANDS
TUNISIA
MEXICO
MOROCCO
TRINIDAD & TOBAGO
LATVIA
GUYANA
COTE D'IVOIRE
CROATIA
PHILIPPINES
ISRAEL
SINGAPORE
CAYMAN ISLANDS

Division 4
SWEDEN
VENEZUELA
LUXEMBOURG
BOTSWANA
CHINESE TAIPEI 40.27
ANDORRA
CHINA
PAPUA NEW GUINEA
JAMAICA
HUNGARY
BOSNIA & HERZEGOVINA
BERMUDA
UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
GUAM
NIGERIA
SLOVENIA
INDIA
SERBIA
PERU
THAILAND

Divison 5
PAKISTAN
ZAMBIA
BARBADOS
ST VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES
AUSTRIA
DENMARK
NIUE ISLAND
BAHAMAS
CAMEROON
SWAZILAND
TAHITI
NORWAY
UZBEKISTAN
MAURITIUS
RWANDA
SOLOMON ISLANDS
BULGARIA
MONACO
INDONESIA
Qualifying tournament winner

Qualifying tournament:
GREECE
VANUATU
FINLAND
AMERICAN SAMOA
If they're good enough to play at World Cups, why not in between?
User avatar
rowan
Posts: 7756
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 11:21 pm
Location: Istanbul

Re: World Rankings

Post by rowan »

Division 2 pools might look like this:

URUGUAY
BELGIUM
CZECH
NETHERLAND
SENEGAL

GERMANY
HONG KONG
BRAZIL
POLAND
LITHUANIA

CANADA
CHILE
SWITZERLAND
MOLDOVA
ZIMBABWE

PORTUGAL
KENYA
KOREA
PARAGUAY
UKRAINE
If they're good enough to play at World Cups, why not in between?
User avatar
rowan
Posts: 7756
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 11:21 pm
Location: Istanbul

Re: World Rankings

Post by rowan »

Division 3:

SRI LANKA
COOK ISLANDS
TUNISIA
LATVIA
SINGAPORE

KAZAKHSTAN
MADAGASCAR
TRINIDAD
GUYANA
ISRAEL

COLOMBIA
MALAYSIA
MOROCCO
CROATIA
CAYMANS

UGANDA
MALTA
MEXICO
IVORY COAST
PHILIPPINES
If they're good enough to play at World Cups, why not in between?
User avatar
rowan
Posts: 7756
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 11:21 pm
Location: Istanbul

Re: World Rankings

Post by rowan »

Division 4:

SWEDEN
THAILAND
BOSNIA
BERMUDA
PERU

VENEZUELA
CHINA
PNG
UAE
SERBIA

LUXEMBOURG
HUNGARY
NIGERIA
INDIA
GUAM

BOTSWANA
CHINESE TAIPEI 40.27
JAMAICA
ANDORRA
SLOVENIA
If they're good enough to play at World Cups, why not in between?
User avatar
rowan
Posts: 7756
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 11:21 pm
Location: Istanbul

Re: World Rankings

Post by rowan »

& finally division 5 - the tournament you or I could probably play in without disgracing ourselves too much...



PAKISTAN
BAHAMAS
TAHITI
MAURITIUS
BULGARIA

ZAMBIA
NIUE
NORWAY
UZBEKISTAN
INDONESIA

BARBADOS
DENMARK
SWAZILAND
SOLOMONS
MONACO

ST VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES
AUSTRIA
CAMEROON
RWANDA
Qualifier (Greece, Vanuatu, Finland, US Samoa)
If they're good enough to play at World Cups, why not in between?
User avatar
rowan
Posts: 7756
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 11:21 pm
Location: Istanbul

Re: World Rankings

Post by rowan »

So here are the updated World Rankings :D

Image
If they're good enough to play at World Cups, why not in between?
User avatar
rowan
Posts: 7756
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 11:21 pm
Location: Istanbul

Re: World Rankings

Post by rowan »

Probably should be a few Kiwi provinces in that top 14 as well, but forget about the provincial baabaas. They hardly knew each other!
If they're good enough to play at World Cups, why not in between?
User avatar
Stones of granite
Posts: 1642
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 9:41 pm

Re: World Rankings

Post by Stones of granite »

rowan wrote:So here are the updated World Rankings :D

Image
What does it look like now?
User avatar
rowan
Posts: 7756
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 11:21 pm
Location: Istanbul

Re: World Rankings

Post by rowan »

About the same since Lions don't count !!
If they're good enough to play at World Cups, why not in between?
User avatar
rowan
Posts: 7756
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 11:21 pm
Location: Istanbul

Re: World Rankings

Post by rowan »

POSITION TEAMS POINTS
1
(1)
NEW ZEALAND
94.78
2
(2)
ENGLAND
89.87
3
(3)
AUSTRALIA
86.35
4
(4)
IRELAND
84.66
5
(7)
SOUTH AFRICA
82.87
6
(5)
SCOTLAND
82.18
7
(8)
WALES
81.36
8
(6)
FRANCE
80.92
9
(9)
ARGENTINA
79.58
10
(10)
FIJI
76.46
http://www.worldrugby.org/rankings/mru
If they're good enough to play at World Cups, why not in between?
User avatar
rowan
Posts: 7756
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 11:21 pm
Location: Istanbul

Re: World Rankings

Post by rowan »

South Africa dropped? & I thought all the reports were saying Scotland was up to 4th :?

1(1) New Zealand 94.78
2(2) England 90.14
3(4) Ireland 85.09
4(3) Australia 84.63
5(6) Scotland 83.90
6(5) South Africa 83.63
7(8) Wales 81.45
8(6) France 80.16
9(9) Argentina 79.31
10(10) Fiji 76.63
11(11) Japan 73.61
12(12) Georgia 72.92
13(13) Tonga 71.85
14(14) Samoa 71.25
15(15) Italy 71.00
16(16) Romania 70.27
17(17) USA 66.10
18(21) Uruguay 63.15
19(18) Spain 63.15
20(19) Russia 63.13
If they're good enough to play at World Cups, why not in between?
User avatar
rowan
Posts: 7756
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 11:21 pm
Location: Istanbul

Re: World Rankings

Post by rowan »

Crazy really. They'll all be blown out of the water at the next World Cup anyway; just like they were at the last.
If they're good enough to play at World Cups, why not in between?
User avatar
rowan
Posts: 7756
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 11:21 pm
Location: Istanbul

Re: World Rankings

Post by rowan »

World Rankings
Previous positions in brackets

(1)(1) New Zealand 94.78
(2(2) England 90.14
(3)(3) Ireland 85.39
(4)(4) Australia 84.63
(5)(6) South Africa 84.16
(6)(5) Scotland 82.47
(7)(7) Wales 81.73
(8)(8) France 79.63
(9)(9) Argentina 79.50
(10)(10) Fiji 78.06
(11)(11) Japan 73.79
(12)(12) Georgia 73.41
(13)(13) Tonga 71.85
(14)(15) Italy 71.00
(15)(14) Samoa 70.97
(16)(16) Romania 70.27
(17)(17) USA 65.71
(18)(18) Uruguay 63.15
(19)(19) Spain 63.15
(20)(20) Russia 63.13
If they're good enough to play at World Cups, why not in between?
User avatar
rowan
Posts: 7756
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 11:21 pm
Location: Istanbul

Re: World Rankings

Post by rowan »

Rest of the table:

21
(21)
NAMIBIA
60.27
22
(22)
GERMANY
59.78
23
(23)
CANADA
59.60
24
(24)
HONG KONG
58.66
25
(26)
PORTUGAL
57.26
26
(25)
KENYA
57.17
27
(27)
BELGIUM
56.94
28
(28)
CHILE
54.76
29
(29)
BRAZIL
54.50
30
(30)
SWITZERLAND
53.63
31
(31)
KOREA
53.34
32
(32)
CZECH REPUBLIC
53.19
33
(33)
NETHERLANDS
53.19
34
(34)
POLAND
52.35
35
(36)
ZIMBABWE
51.17
36
(35)
MOLDOVA
50.29
37
(37)
UKRAINE
49.69
38
(38)
LITHUANIA
48.93
39
(40)
PARAGUAY
48.54
40
(45)
UGANDA
48.46
41
(41)
SRI LANKA
48.27
42
(42)
KAZAKHSTAN
48.14
43
(43)
COLOMBIA
47.97
44
(44)
MALTA
47.72
45
(39)
SENEGAL
47.61
46
(46)
MADAGASCAR
47.43
47
(47)
MALAYSIA
47.31
48
(48)
COOK ISLANDS
47.11
49
(49)
TUNISIA
46.89
50
(50)
GUYANA
46.56
51
(51)
MOROCCO
46.48
52
(52)
LATVIA
46.22
53
(53)
COTE D'IVOIRE
45.66
54
(54)
TRINIDAD & TOBAGO
45.51
55
(55)
CAYMAN ISLANDS
45.20
56
(56)
MEXICO
45.12
57
(57)
CROATIA
44.68
58
(58)
PHILIPPINES
43.44
59
(59)
ISRAEL
43.07
60
(60)
SINGAPORE
42.90
61
(61)
SWEDEN
42.57
62
(62)
VENEZUELA
41.14
63
(63)
LUXEMBOURG
40.49
64
(64)
BOTSWANA
40.46
65
(65)
CHINESE TAIPEI 40.27
66
(66)
ANDORRA
39.86
67
(67)
CHINA
39.58
68
(68)
PAPUA NEW GUINEA
39.27
69
(69)
JAMAICA
38.76
70
(70)
HUNGARY
38.56
71
(71)
BOSNIA & HERZEGOVINA
38.48
72
(72)
UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
37.93
73
(73)
GUAM
37.85
74
(74)
NIGERIA
37.71
75
(75)
SLOVENIA
37.68
76
(76)
BERMUDA
37.39
77
(77)
INDIA
37.12
78
(78)
SERBIA
36.90
79
(79)
PERU
36.82
80
(80)
THAILAND
36.76
81
(81)
PAKISTAN
36.74
82
(82)
ZAMBIA
36.72
83
(83)
BARBADOS
36.48
84
(84)
ST VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES
34.91
85
(85)
AUSTRIA
34.89
86
(86)
DENMARK
34.66
87
(87)
NIUE ISLAND
34.45
88
(88)
BAHAMAS
33.76
89
(89)
CAMEROON 32.33
90
(90)
SWAZILAND
32.04
91
(91)
TAHITI
31.79
92
(92)
NORWAY
31.59
93
(93)
UZBEKISTAN
31.29
94
(94)
MAURITIUS
31.27
95
(95)
RWANDA
30.98
96
(96)
SOLOMON ISLANDS
30.40
97
(97)
BULGARIA
29.94
98
(98)
MONACO 29.17
99
(99)
INDONESIA
28.73
100
(100)
GREECE
28.55
101
(101)
VANUATU
27.45
102
(102)
FINLAND
27.41
103
(103)
AMERICAN SAMOA 25.53
If they're good enough to play at World Cups, why not in between?
User avatar
rowan
Posts: 7756
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 11:21 pm
Location: Istanbul

Re: World Rankings

Post by rowan »

So Canada will be underdogs against Uruguay if they meet in the World Cup qualifiers - which seems likely!

Wow, if they lost that I think they'd struggle to get past Pacific III or whoever in the repechage tournament. Imagine if Canada didn't qualify :o :oops:
If they're good enough to play at World Cups, why not in between?
User avatar
rowan
Posts: 7756
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 11:21 pm
Location: Istanbul

Re: World Rankings

Post by rowan »

Actually, that's the way it should be. If you're a tier 2 team at the bottom of your game, what's the point in showing up at a World Cup to get obliterated by tier 1 teams?
If they're good enough to play at World Cups, why not in between?
User avatar
Eugene Wrayburn
Posts: 2621
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 8:32 pm

Re: World Rankings

Post by Eugene Wrayburn »

rowan wrote:Actually, that's the way it should be. If you're a tier 2 team at the bottom of your game, what's the point in showing up at a World Cup to get obliterated by tier 1 teams?
That's rather been our argument against the expansion you've been pushing.
I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person.

NS. Gone but not forgotten.
User avatar
rowan
Posts: 7756
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 11:21 pm
Location: Istanbul

Re: World Rankings

Post by rowan »

As explained before, that's why I think it should have never expanded beyond 16. I'm not sure who the royal 'our' you speak of is, but you have clearly overlooked the comments I've been making on the topic. I mainly think that the 20-team format sucks, entails unequal scheduling, protracted group stages, too many dead rubbers and an almost impossible route to the quarters for the tier 2 teams. Therefore, as World Rugby has taken the step to expand once and include tier 3 teams, it might as well do so again for the sake of a better schedule, given the top half dozen tier 3 teams are now all about the same level (Spain & Germany beat Uruguay last year, for example, while Russia were unfortunate not to do so in Montevideo this month), and a 24-team format will not only eliminate the need for byes and dispense with the often tedious group stages more quickly, it will actually reduce by one the number of games tier 3 teams are likely to be involved in (from 4 to 3), while giving tier 2 teams a very realistic chance of progressing from their groups. As mentioned more than once before, it was the 24-team format which first saw African teams begin to come through in the FIFA World Cup. But, once again, if it were my decision personally, the tournament proper would still involve 16 teams and there would be a much larger and more inclusive qualifying system. I hope it doesn't give you too much of a headache trying to figure all this out.
If they're good enough to play at World Cups, why not in between?
User avatar
rowan
Posts: 7756
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 11:21 pm
Location: Istanbul

Re: World Rankings

Post by rowan »

Canada below Germany :oops:

I doubt it'll happen, but Canada''s failure to qualify would actually give the tournament some credibility, hypothetically-speaking.

Rank Change* Team Points
1 Steady New Zealand 94.78
2 Steady England 90.14
3 Steady Ireland 85.39
4 Steady Australia 84.63
5 Steady South Africa 84.16
6 Steady Scotland 82.47
7 Steady Wales 81.73
8 Steady France 79.63
9 Steady Argentina 79.50
10 Steady Fiji 78.06
11 Steady Japan 73.79
12 Steady Georgia 73.41
13 Steady Tonga 72.47
14 Steady Italy 71.00
15 Steady Samoa 70.36
16 Steady Romania 70.27
17 Steady United States 65.84
18 Steady Uruguay 63.15
19 Steady Spain 63.15
20 Steady Russia 63.13
21 Steady Namibia 60.27
22 Steady Germany 59.78
23 Steady Canada 59.47
24 Steady Hong Kong 58.66
25 Steady Portugal 57.26
26 Steady Kenya 57.17
27 Steady Belgium 56.94
28 Steady Chile 54.76
29 Steady Brazil 54.50
30 Steady Switzerland 53.63
If they're good enough to play at World Cups, why not in between?
Post Reply