beez
Reserve Grade
Posts: 250
|
Post by beez on Jul 25, 2008 18:27:58 GMT 10
Druzik; can you explain how your rankings work? Seems odd that NZ are ahead of England.
Also what is going on with Canada? When did they last play? I'm curious because I found a Canadian Thunderbirds shirt in a second hand store last year. I believe Canada were the Cougars though.
|
|
|
|
Post by Druzik on Jul 25, 2008 19:02:37 GMT 10
Sure.
Its not really complicated, but it is a bit involved I guess. So basically matches are split into four categories that have a different weighting (multiplier)
Cat 4: World cup matches, this includes qualifiers - Multiply x4
Cat 3: Other test and 1st class matches like the current Euro tournament - Multiply x3
Cat 2: Senior A and B sides and BARLA - multiply x2
Cat 1: All other matches - weighting x1
Then I have a further multiplier for the level of domestic development. This seems to be an emphasis that the RLIF are putting on countries. So these have a further weighting
x4 for countries that have a full multilevel domestic structure and juniors
x3 For countries that have a multi level domestic competition and some level of junior development
x2 Countries that have one level of domestic competition
x1 Countries that have basically only a national team as such
So that gives countries their overall points, I then use an average to sort out teams on the same number of points.
Now NZ is ahead of england for two main reasons. for my time period 1.1.05 - 30.6.08 NZ has played more than england, remember its mainly been GB in tests. If we were to do just this years scores then England would be a head. Also NZ has had some success over this period, despite last years disastrous series the kiwis otherwise have had a good run against the aussies french and GB.
when I get timew I will do a 2007-8 ranking system and see where the teams are at. This will give a better local indications.
Canada.... not much is known there are a few guys still trying to get something going but not heard anything about them for a out a year now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Marv on Jul 25, 2008 19:05:24 GMT 10
Now NZ is ahead of england for two main reasons. for my time period 1.1.05 - 30.6.08 NZ has played more than england, remember its mainly been GB in tests. If we were to do just this years scores then England would be a head. Also NZ has had some success over this period, despite last years disastrous series the kiwis otherwise have had a good run against the aussies french and GB. Gb and England should be grouped together in your rankings as they are essentially the same thing. |
|
|
|
Post by Druzik on Jul 25, 2008 19:10:45 GMT 10
 I did that last time and everyone said they should be separate... make up your minds people! What about NZ Maori - are they classed as NZ and the aboriginal side as Australia?
|
|
beez
Reserve Grade
Posts: 250
|
Post by beez on Jul 25, 2008 19:42:57 GMT 10
Maybe it's just me but I'm still confused.
Your table say NZ have won 12 out of 27, while England have won 20 out of 28.
Can you explain the points system with an example - I had NZ with nine Cat 3 wins =27 plus three Cat 1 wins = 3
So 30 x 4 (domestic divider) = 120 but somehow they're on 532 points, even if I count the losses it doesn't add up.
What am I doing wrong?
|
|
|
|
Post by Druzik on Jul 25, 2008 21:01:46 GMT 10
Ahhhh
win = 3 points
draw = 2 points
loss = 1 point
Soeven though over all england have won more games its what kind of games they have been.
Example.
New Zealand
WC games weight=4
W = 0=> 0
D = 0=>0
L = 0=>0
total = 4x0 = 0
Tests weight=3
W = 9=> 27
D = 0=> 0
L = 14=> 14
total = 3x41 = 123
A&B weight=2
W= 3=> 0
D= 0=> 0
L= 1=> 0
total = 2x0 = 0
Other weight=1
W = 3=> 9
D = 0=> 0
L = 1=> 1
total = 1x10 = 10
Overall total = 4x(0+123+0+10) = 4x(133) = 532
------------------------------------------------------------------------
England
WC weight 4
W = 0=> 0
D = 0=> 0
L = 0=> 0
total = 4x0 = 0
Tests weight 3
W = 6=> 18
L = 0=> 0
D = 2=> 2
total = 3x20 = 60
A&B weight 2
W = 6=>18
D = 0=>0
L = 6=>6
total = 2x24 = 48
Other weight 1
W = 8=> 24
D = 0=> 0
L = 0=> 0
total = 1x8 = 8
Overall total = 4x(0+60+48+24) = 4x(132) = 528
|
|
|
|
Post by Kiwi fan on Jul 26, 2008 13:16:46 GMT 10
I did that last time and everyone said they should be separate... make up your minds people! What about NZ Maori - are they classed as NZ and the aboriginal side as Australia? Definately seperate. England and GB have the same players but are officially different teams. Personally, I would divide GB's points by 4 and give each nationa a quarter of GB's points. |
|
beez
Reserve Grade
Posts: 250
|
Post by beez on Jul 26, 2008 17:19:17 GMT 10
I see, thanks mate.
|
|
|
|
Post by Marv on Jul 26, 2008 18:37:03 GMT 10
I did that last time and everyone said they should be separate... make up your minds people! What about NZ Maori - are they classed as NZ and the aboriginal side as Australia? christ knows |
|
|
|
Post by Marv on Jul 26, 2008 18:39:16 GMT 10
England and GB have the same players but are officially different teams. Personally, I would divide GB's points by 4 and give each nationa a quarter of GB's points. why should ireland scotland and wales get points for a team which none of their players have played in? The England side is GB in name only. |
|
|
|
Post by Kiwi fan on Jul 29, 2008 17:03:33 GMT 10
England and GB have the same players but are officially different teams. Personally, I would divide GB's points by 4 and give each nationa a quarter of GB's points. why should ireland scotland and wales get points for a team which none of their players have played in? The England side is GB in name only. Because Great Britain includes Ireland, Scotland and Wales as well as England. We never produce RL players from Otago but Otago is still in the NZ team. You should have called your team England and skipped all troubles. |
|
|
|
Post by Marv on Aug 2, 2008 2:33:07 GMT 10
why should ireland scotland and wales get points for a team which none of their players have played in? The England side is GB in name only. Because Great Britain includes Ireland, Scotland and Wales as well as England. We never produce RL players from Otago but Otago is still in the NZ team. You should have called your team England and skipped all troubles. but otago isnt a seperate country to NZ whereas ireland and scotland are seperate to england which makes that a completley ridiculous statement kiwi fan therfore englands players are earning points for a team they have never played for and have no desire to play for and for what its worth i agree we should be england, not that it causes england any trouble whatsoever |
|
I did that last time and everyone said they should be separate... make up your minds people!