IRB ranking system goes haywire
By The Crowd, 27 Jun 2012 The Crowd is a Roar Guru
- Tagged:
- International Rugby Board, IRB, IRB rankings, rugby, Rugby Union
Related coverage
It is official: the IRB’s ranking system is the most flawed system in the world at the moment.
For the record this includes, in no particular order, the world’s banking system, the London Olympic ticketing allocation system, and even FIFA’s football nation ranking system.
It can be summed up in this statement on the IRB website: “Ireland, blown away 60-0 by the All Blacks, rise one (place)…”
Yes, that’s right, the Irish this week have traveled up the rankings going from eighth to seventh this week after what could only be described as one of the worst performances in living memory.
The mind boggles as to how this could be possible and how poor the rankings system must be.
What makes this all the more peculiar is that Wales, who lost another close match to the second ranked team, by one point mind you not 60, dropped two spots from fourth to sixth.
The problem is not that an effort is being made to keep the rankings up to date, each Monday midday UK time as it were, but that it is not done on an averaged-out system rather than game by game.
As it stands, points are taken off each team that plays each other. Point allocation or point loss depends on the two respective rankings, whether the game is home or away and of course the result. It also takes into consideration the points difference in the match.
You wouldn’t have thought this based on the fact that Ireland actually went up one place this week. Games at the Rugby World Cup are given double point significance, which seems the only sensible thing about the rankings system.
The problem with this is it is mathematically possible for the All Blacks to refuse to play any more matches and remain in first place possibly for the rest of humanity’s time on earth.
At this point we also need to suspiciously congratulate the very clever Scots for managing to manufacture a June itinerary specifically to rankings jump.
Full credit to them for spotting an opportunity to take some very valuable points from a vulnerable and naive Wallaby team, who were three days between a Super Rugby round and four days before another major Test match. John O’Neill fell for this one hook, line and sinker and the Scots whistled all the way to the rankings bank.
They also should be given a lot of credit for scheduling their other matches against two Pacific Island nations that were keeping them out of the top 10. By defeating both Fiji and Samoa and the big scalp of Australia all away from Scotland, they have risen from 12th to ninth simply by playing the system in their favour and coming up with the goods.
If they can maintain their form this puts them in much better standings for the RWC 2015 draw this December where rankings are key to first be included in the draw automatically, and secondly to be in a favourable pool or half of the draw.
In any case the IRB ranking system is flawed because the top three nations tend to predominately play each other so much that they only ever give and take points from each other and so never really drop down the rankings.
If Argentina can get into fourth place it will surely become a case of the top four nations simply perpetuating each other to stay the top four, leaving the European nations and the odd Pacific Island nation to vie for the fifth to 10th positions for the rest of eternity.
At the moment, the top 10 looks like this:
1. New Zealand
2. Australia
3. South Africa
4. England
5. France
6. Wales
7. Ireland
8. Argentina
9. Scotland
10. Samoa
I know my top 10 would have a much different order. What would yours be?
In the meantime, let’s pray that the Wallabies lose by 60 points to New Zealand in August and jump straight to the top of the ranking.
Looking to join The Roar team? We're searching for an experienced Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. Yes, this does mean you get to work with the site all day long! If you're a digital media sales star, we want to hear from you. Apply now.
![]()
Passionate about your union? Then sign up to The Roar's brand new daily union email, delivering Roaring articles directly to you day-in, day-out. You'll love it!
Click here to join now!
The Crowd Says (47) | Page 2 of Comments
Have Your Say
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby Union articles
- Where is Deans in the pecking order of rugby coaches? (406)
- Wallabies squad announced: Folau in, no Quade Cooper – yet (267)
- Deans: Should he stay or should he go? (246)
- SPIRO’s Lions Diary: Deans goes for experience, plus Folau (242)
- With Quade, Deans faces a real dilemma (237)
- Australia, time to get behind the Wallabies (232)
- Wallabies 25-man Lions squad: analysis (214)
- Has McKenzie cost Cooper the Lions Tour? (6)
- Does Quade Cooper really matter? (3)
- Rebels vs Waratahs: Super Rugby live scores, blog (409)
- Chiefs vs Crusaders: Super Rugby live scores (182)
- Can the Wallabies bash the Lions tight five? (39)
- What happened to all the rugby enforcers? (176)
- Saracens players leading British and Irish Lions (0)
Recommend this story.
- Explore:
- International Rugby Board, IRB, IRB rankings, rugby, Rugby Union


June 27th 2012 @ 1:40pm
Brendon said | June 27th 2012 @ 1:40pm | Report comment
think of it this way..
The last ten tests between each of the nations…..
1. NZ on top(obviously)
2. Aus(beat SA 6/7 and wales 6 on the trot etc etc)
3. SA( has really only lost to NZ and AUS in the last few years( maybe one or two )
4. Wales( has beaten the northern teams regularly but cant beat the southern ones so rightly in 4th
5. England( same as wales but cant beat wales too often, but throw in a few wins against Aus)
6. France ( win a few, lose a few.. Seem to lose to Italy and win against NZ occasionally but not AUS and SA. Also lose to ENG and Wales)
7. Argentina ( unlucky that they dont play the big nations as often. Will go higher but probably go down first
8. Ireland( can beat the northern hemiosphere teams, occasionally AUS. About right that they are higher than teams that pull of a win against a top 6 team once in a blue moon)
June 27th 2012 @ 1:48pm
B-Rock said | June 27th 2012 @ 1:48pm | Report comment
1. New Zealand – this is getting ridiculous. I cant see the ABs getting beaten this year.
*daylight*
2. Australia – this is very close with SA – if SA beat England on the weekend i would switch them here
3. South Africa – see above
4. Wales – very unlucky against Aust – how are they rated 6th after coming fourth at the RWC, winning the 6N and going very close with the number 2 team in the world away from home in all three matches? This baffles me more than Ireland
5. France – could range between 2 and 8 depending on their mood
6. England – could be talked into moving them up to 5 but there is no way they are a better team than Wales.
7. Ireland – the ABs would have beaten anyone else in the world by 30+ on the weekend so the poor Irish shouldnt feel to bad about it. What wasnt mentioned above is that they almost beat the ABs the week before – this has to count for something too.
8. Argentina – havent seen much of them – will reserve judgement till the RC
9. Scotland – Hard fought win over the WBs, If you said they should be above the Argies, I wouldnt argue with you.
10. Samoa – havent seen much of them
June 27th 2012 @ 2:30pm
Swapacrate said | June 27th 2012 @ 2:30pm | Report comment
I think ranking points suck for the world cup, I remember the Boks were top, for a little while after world cup, not dissing the world cup win. But the world cup has created an unhealthy attitude towards consistency, and double points just doesn’t make sense, for some flukey wins or flukey draws.
The world cup ruined last years tri nations the Boks and NZ had a different game plan to OZ, it could of backfired, but it didnt for NZ. Where they rested a lot of players in some of the games, which lost them some cohesiveness in some games.
Anyway I digress
In my opinion Australia can be awesome or they can have mairs hence my rankings, which are based on my version of the truth, and not who beats who in one off games. Its all about my version of consistency.
1. NZ
2. Meat eaters
3. Austalia – (Samoa & Scotland & Ireland)
.
.
.
4. France (France are hopeless at the moment, but when the get a good coach this could change)
.
5.England (Isee England on the up and are dark horses)
6.7. Wales and Ireland . (Ireland beat Australia, Wales beat Ireland, Australia beat Wales 5 times & 3 times with a depleted squad, I think Ireland would have given this depleted Aus team a run as well) Australia has a talented 15, when they are all fit, but for this series they were not fit. Wales won 6 nation, but I think any of those teams could have won it, as in this Welsh series it was the bounce of the ball, on a couple of occasions.
8.9.10. Argentina, Scotland Samoa. If Samoa has its best team it could even jump up to 6&7.
June 27th 2012 @ 2:36pm
formeropenside said | June 27th 2012 @ 2:36pm | Report comment
The ranking system is stupid.
I would just use the seeding from the last RWC for 1-8, with regional tournaments for the balance 12 spots.
June 27th 2012 @ 4:18pm
The Werewolf said | June 27th 2012 @ 4:18pm | Report comment
I agree with you.
that way the year after the world cup can be used to start building a new side if need be for the next world cup instead of having to pick tried and tested to stay high in the rankings for another 12 months.
When you consider we have the lions next year that doesn’t leave a lot of time to bring young players through… at leats until after the lions test series methinks.
June 28th 2012 @ 2:07pm
Jerry said | June 28th 2012 @ 2:07pm | Report comment
So who is ranked 5?
June 27th 2012 @ 2:57pm
Dasher said | June 27th 2012 @ 2:57pm | Report comment
“The problem with this is it is mathematically possible for the All Blacks to refuse to play any more matches and remain in first place possibly for the rest of humanity’s time on earth.”
This is not exactly true. If:
1. NZ hang up the boots. 2. Australia maintain a ridiculous unbeaten streak against SA, bearing in mind that after a while only Australian wins on South African soil will count,. 3. And SA never lose to anybody else to maintain a healthy IRB rating. (If it drops too low, it will cease to push up Australia’s.) … tttthhheeennn Australia can reclaim the number one spot! (I suppose the same applies for SA, but let’s not entertain that thought.)
June 27th 2012 @ 3:06pm
kovana said | June 27th 2012 @ 3:06pm | Report comment
ALSO.
If the ABs stopped playing for a few years…
Their rating may be deemed to be ‘dormant’, in which case they will be removed from current ranking lists.
June 27th 2012 @ 5:10pm
The Werewolf said | June 27th 2012 @ 5:10pm | Report comment
I don’t think the AB’s will stop playing rugby any time soon so we may have avoided a crisis.
I was of course using a license to exaggerate to possibly gain a chuckle. Good to know you guys are on your toes!
June 27th 2012 @ 3:03pm
kovana said | June 27th 2012 @ 3:03pm | Report comment
Far too much hyperbole and exaggeration in this article
1. The ABs were playing the 8th ranked team, and there was a HUGE gulf in ranking points. So no loss in ranking points to Ire.. They were expected not to win.
2. Wales and Aus were ranked very close, which is why Wales was expected to win at least one match… they didnt, and thats why points were exchanged.
3. Argentina lost to France.. AT home… by more than 15.. Simples.
The take home points are these..
1. Try and win every match.
2. Dont expect points to be exchanged between teams where there is a huge gulf in ranking points.
3. Dont LOSE AT HOME!
June 27th 2012 @ 3:08pm
kovana said | June 27th 2012 @ 3:08pm | Report comment
Also to Werewolf, the author, What Would be YOUR current top 10?
June 27th 2012 @ 9:44pm
The Werewolf said | June 27th 2012 @ 9:44pm | Report comment
Top 3 as it stands. I would have Wales at 4, England 5, France 6, Argentina 7, Scotland 8, Ireland at 9, Samoa 10.
June 27th 2012 @ 6:21pm
Carl Unger said | June 27th 2012 @ 6:21pm | Report comment
At least 10-20 is looking realistic
June 27th 2012 @ 8:11pm
Rob9 said | June 27th 2012 @ 8:11pm | Report comment
Correct, they’re 6th according to the only rankings that count.
I believe they are the 3rd best team in the world right now and my guess is that over the next year in the lead up to the lions they’ll cement that position in world rugby.
June 27th 2012 @ 9:54pm
Matthew Skellett said | June 27th 2012 @ 9:54pm | Report comment
This is the thing about the rankings system -the gerry-mander is that if the “1st Tier “countries only play each other then their relative “ranking” will remain unchanged into perpetuity -you had a situation (before this year) where no matter how many games Scotland lost , no matter how badly they played , they NEVER sank to worse then # 10 in the rankings -Well thank goodness for the Olympics -because the scene is now going to change exponentially and about time too. Money , Population and Rescourses now are the major factors -slowly but surely Russia, China , Brazil , Canada and the USA will use their relatively stronger elements to affect the change that needs to happen anyway-more open and mor competitive tournament structures and better outcomes for the many rather than the few and this means in effect that in the next 2-3 years you’ll see the AB’s get a couple of red cards as well as their fair share of yellow ones and so it should be