What's at stake in June: World Rugby Rankings on the move

By Simon Bedard / Roar Pro

With a raft of Internationals upon us, I felt it was a good time to take a look at the World Rankings.

Most people don’t really understand how the rankings work, and many passionate fans will tell you the rankings don’t really matter as they only care about silverware in the cabinet. I understand this point of view, and as an Australian I feel the lack of ‘quality time’ spent with the Bledisloe Cup as much as the next person.

» View the current World Rugby Rankings

However, the World Rankings are important as they are the only way to compare all rugby nations and to demonstrate how an individual game has an impact on the bigger picture. Besides, this is the official system being used, so we should have some appreciation for it.

I am not saying it is perfect, and we could all spend a lot of time arguing about changes, but that is not the point of this article. The real point of this article is to give a quick overview of how the rankings work, and take a look at how the impending internationals will impact them.

The rankings are explained in full at the World Rugby website, but these are the highlights worth noting:

1. The rankings are run on a ‘points exchange’ system whereby teams can only move up in rank by taking points from another team.
2. Points exchanged are doubled during the World Cup finals to highlight the importance of the event.
3. Points and rank movements only apply to full international matches (e.g. matches against the Barbarians do not count).
4. Ratings are between 0 and 100, but when the system started all countries began at 40. The top side will usually have a ranking above 90. New countries added now start on 30 points.
5. A side that is ranked 10 or more points below their competitor cannot lose any points to them, as they are too far apart on the ladder. But the higher ranked team can lose points if they lose.
6. There is a formula used to calculate the rankings so you can predetermine the impact of any future match (Yes, I have worked out the formula and will share my predictions).
7. The system is very reliable and modelling went all the back to 1871.
8. Home ground advantage is factored into the calculations through a ‘handicap’ system.
9. The margin of victory is important with a line in the sand at 15 points. Any game with a margin of 16 points or more will result in more points being awarded/lost.
10. You cannot gain points for losing, and you cannot lose points for winning. A draw will depend on the difference in ranking points and who is the home team.
11. If a country does not play for a number of years their ranking points remains dormant and will not change. But their ranking position can still move based on the performance of other teams.

So these are the key points, and as mentioned, if you want more details and would like to see examples of how the points more you can find all of this at the World Rugby site.

So let’s take a look at what matches are coming up, and what changes could take place? Please note I will only review some of the more well supported matches. I apologise if I have missed your team, and would be happy to provide you with the analysis on your team if you want (just leave a comment for me in the article).

Current Rank and Points:
1 – New Zealand – 96.10
2 – Australia – 89.33
3 – South Africa – 87.66
4 – England – 84.60
5 – Argentina – 82.59
6 – Wales – 82.49
7 – Ireland – 80.33
8 – France – 78.36
9 – Scotland – 78.32
10 – Japan – 77.05
11 – Fiji – 76.96
12 – Georgia – 72.62
13 – Tonga – 71.60
14 – Italy – 70.78
15 – Samoa – 70.36

Matches – 11th June 2016:

AUSTRALIA (2nd, 89.33 pts) v. ENGLAND (4th, 84.60 pts)
The three-Test series can see a lot of changes in the rankings. But this first Brisbane Test will be very interesting. A win by Australia will not do much for its points or rank, although a win by 16 points or more will move Australia closer to the elusive 90-point mark, and within striking distance of New Zealand.

A loss for Australia would see them drop one position in the rankings to third, effectively swapping places with South Africa (assuming SA does not lose to Ireland).

A loss for Australia by 16 points or more would see Australia drop to fourth place, and England move up to third place. No doubt this would be seen as a catastrophe for the Australian side, and an awful omen for the series.

Even one loss from the three matches will cause an overall drop in points for Australia, and as you would expect, if England win the series (even 2:1), then they will overtake Australia on the ladder. England may surpass South Africa as well to take second place in the overall rankings, dependent upon a few different factors.

Only a clean sweep on the series will see Australia with a slight improvement in their points, and if they wish to crack the elusive 90-point mark it will need to beat England by 16 points or more in two of those matches. This might be a tough ask.

Prediction: Australia to win in Brisbane by less than 15 points.

NEW ZEALAND (1st, 96.10 pts) v. WALES (6th, 82.49 pts)
When it comes to ranking points, it is all upside for Wales in the upcoming series, as they cannot lose points to New Zealand (since they are more than 10 ranking points below NZ). However, they may receive a whipping at the hands of the world champions, which I am sure will be put down to a ‘learning experience’. A draw in just one match out of the three will hand Wales an increase in points which would see them move ahead of Argentina into 5th position. A win (by any margin) would see Wales move ahead of England into 4th place, although this does not factor the results of England vs. the Wallabies.

Prediction: New Zealand to win by 16 points or more.

FIJI (11th, 76.96 pts) v. TONGA (13th, 71.60 pts)
Tonga will need a win of 16 points or more to move above Fiji in the rankings. A win of 15 or less will see Tonga move up one place in the rankings at the expense of Georgia.

Prediction: Fiji to win by 15 points or less.

SOUTH AFRICA (3rd, 87.66 pts) v. IRELAND (7th, 80.33 pts)
A win for South Africa will make no difference to their rankings and virtually no difference to their points. If Ireland would like to move up the ranks they will need a win by 16 points or more, which would see them move above Wales on the table.

Prediction: South Africa to win by 15 points or less

ARGENTINA (5th, 82.59pts) v. ITALY (14th, 70.78 pts)
This match sees Italy with nothing to lose. They cannot lose points but can certainly take points off Argentina. A draw would see Italy move ahead of Tonga into 13th place, a win will see Italy move two places to 12th ahead of Georgia.

Prediction: Argentina to win by 16 points or more.

The Crowd Says:

2016-06-08T23:26:20+00:00

Hello

Roar Rookie


Thanks Simon

2016-06-08T23:11:50+00:00

Machooka

Roar Guru


Timely and interesting read Simon... so many thanks!

2016-06-08T22:00:43+00:00

taylorman

Roar Guru


I think the rankings accurately reflect the here and now, I.e the last games played. The top four certainly look right. Other than that it's a best effort at putting numbers to non exact science. Head to head is the best way of determining who is best. Everything else is hearsay and not admissible in a Court of law. Case dismissed... Next case please...? Of the predictions I think Ireland's injuries will expose their lack of depth big time and we'll get a blowout. Other than that, agree with the picks though ABs could struggle to get a full 16 point gap first up...if they do probably via the bench.

2016-06-08T21:33:24+00:00

moaman

Roar Guru


Agree

2016-06-08T21:32:48+00:00

moaman

Roar Guru


Yeah--I don't see why WCs should necessitate a doubling of points.

2016-06-08T20:33:47+00:00


I don't pay much heed to the rankings at all. I use head to head comparisons to tell me whether we are currently better, worse or on par with a team. Since November 2014 I haven't done much comparing. The decline in the Springbok team was bad enough

2016-06-08T17:10:17+00:00

Derm

Roar Guru


You can work out all the ranking predictions on this site which has been around for quite a number of years - http://www.lassen.co.nz/pagmisc.php#hrh.

2016-06-08T05:06:05+00:00

taylorman

Roar Guru


In 2011, had France beaten nz in pool play, they would have gone from 5th to first. NZ to fifth. All from that one result.

2016-06-08T04:53:01+00:00

IceBlue

Roar Pro


Yes, when I looked into it I was pleasantly suprised at both how simple it was (compared to other ranking systems) and how it still gives a very accurate insight into the strength of the team. Aside from my WC concerns, the only other aspects it gets wrong (geographic and calendar variances) are really difficult to accurately compensate for, and have a minimal effect on the overall rankings.

2016-06-08T04:44:47+00:00

IceBlue

Roar Pro


True, as much as these extremes can be considered to be accurate. Although I do dislike arbitrary rating caps. My personal preference would be to alter the factors of the formula (the gradient and intercepts of the graphing lines used) entirely during the WC, if they are going to count for more. That way, the games still count extra, while not disadvantaging teams that have little opportunity to improve their rating (NZ and SA being the most prominent examples at the last cup). It does strike me as a little complex, but the current method of simply doubling the points seems too simple and not without problems.

AUTHOR

2016-06-08T04:29:30+00:00

Simon Bedard

Roar Pro


The problem with rewarding points continuously for all events would ultimately see NZ (in this case) hit the maximum of 100 points and not be able to go further anyway. And while NZ is as close to the perfect team that any sport has to offer (wow...that was tough to admit), no team is actually perfect. So the score or ranking points of 96 actually make a lot of sense.

AUTHOR

2016-06-08T04:27:49+00:00

Simon Bedard

Roar Pro


Thanks IceBlue. I actually think the system works quite well. Despite the comment from Misha (which I totally understand), the system has a strong track record of accurately reflecting results and predicting success.

2016-06-08T02:59:06+00:00

IceBlue

Roar Pro


Thanks for going to the effort to determine this. One thing that I think is missing from the IRB/World Rugby rankings site is a rankings predictor, similar to what ICC have. Being able to investigate all the series and simultaneous impacts thereof would be an interesting exercise. Out of curiosity, what do you think of the ranking system in general? I keep meaning to do an article on it, but time is a major constraint for me at the moment... :(

2016-06-08T02:54:35+00:00

IceBlue

Roar Pro


I agree. During the last World Cup, for instance, there was a point when Australia came close to overtaking NZ, despite NZ not losing any games. The reason for this was that NZ gained no ranking points at all until the semi-finals (double zero is still zero), while Australia was close enough to the pack to still earn their doubled points. Not to mention other essentially random swings in rankings. Really, if points are going to be increased - and I think that they should be - then the range at which they can be earned should also increase to compensate. That said, these are the extremes that are less well covered by the statistics, so there are always going to be some problems at this stage.

2016-06-08T00:56:08+00:00

Misha

Guest


2. Points exchanged are doubled during the World Cup finals to highlight the importance of the event. That's the biggest flaw of this system - suddenly 1=2; 2=4 etc...when it should stay the same for validities sake

Read more at The Roar