Six Nations - England ranking at all-time low

Eurosport - Tue, 03 Mar 11:58:00 2009

England's Six Nations defeat to Ireland in Dublin has sent them to eighth place in the world rankings, their lowest position since the International Rugby Board's rankings system began six years ago.

RUGBY Martin Johnson England manager at Croke Park 2009 - 0

Comment 1 - 17 of 17

Sort comments by: Most recent

I agree with alot of the above.
The only thing that matter's these days is the world cup, 5 teams mentioned above have a chance while England is a long way from the top 5.Coaches mold the teams , and a average team with a good coach can go all the way. England don't seem have that coach.
From alskbell, on Wed 4 Mar 4:10PM
- 0
- 0
- Report abuse
1South Africa 2New Zealand 3Wales 4Australia 5France 6Ireland 7England 8Argentina 9Scotland 10Italy...i think that is a fairer reflection, but like most agree, any of 1 thru 9 can beat the other on their day.
From Koppite 1973, on Wed 4 Mar 10:46AM
- 0
- 0
- Report abuse
Ratings mean jack @#$%! winning something is what its all about.
From bozz, on Tue 3 Mar 6:22PM
- 0
- 0
- Report abuse
Totally agree with earlier comments regarding Argentina - 4th - only because they don't play in any meaningful games apart from the world cup , any touring involved is only a tester for most teams to blood new players . As for the rankings in general - not even worth the time it took me to jot this down , same as footy - nonsense . On there day anybody could beat anybody in the six nations (excluding italy). Bring on a European cup (including Argentina as most play in France or England anyway)and discard six nations so we can bring on the smaller nations and actually call it a world cup in future ! Its like the WORLD series in baseball - only played in America with the odd Cuban
From De La Fox, on Tue 3 Mar 2:21PM
- 1
- 0
- Report abuse
England were RUBBISH! They had to resort to cheating and dangerous assassination attempts to get anywhere. No doubt these dirty tactics were given the green light by Johnson. He should blamed for his teams "tactics".
From killian, on Tue 3 Mar 1:14PM
- 1
- 5
- Report abuse
How come Italy...a regular test playing nation are ranked below Fiji, who are not?? It just shows this ranking system is ill-thought out, no matter what. Yes, i would say England are deservedly low down, their results in the last 18 months have proven that, but Italy are a top 9 side.
From Koppite 1973, on Tue 3 Mar 12:17PM
- 2
- 1
- Report abuse
Well said 'seasons' (comment No.1) It all comes down to the bounce of the ball on the day...rankings mean jack S@*T in rugby!
From mark h, on Tue 3 Mar 10:49AM
- 1
- 0
- Report abuse
These rankings are a joke. South Africa are world champions and yet New Zealand who have won no Webb Ellis cups since 1987 are ranked no1, well above France who knocked them out of the last competition. Rugby rankings are not objective. You cannot compare competitions such as the Six Nations, Tri-Nations, World Cup with touring test series- it's completely different. As for the comments about an "ordinary" South Africa, that ordinary South Africa stuffed England 36-0 and beat them in the final with one of the finest displays of kicking in years, so let's not be peevish, but let's also not take this whole rankings thing too seriously either.
From Tarquinius S, on Tue 3 Mar 10:14AM
- 1
- 0
- Report abuse
Fully agree with Post 7: This ranking has no meaning. Argentina 4th...@#$%!
From Marc L, on Tue 3 Mar 10:12AM
- 0
- 0
- Report abuse
Funny, I thought they were the 8th best team in the world?
From Donald D, on Tue 3 Mar 7:43AM
- 0
- 0
- Report abuse
Its like FIFA rankings, they mean jack @#$%. The world cup is the only relevant competition. Look at Mexico and the USA, they are always round about top 10 in the footy rankings.
From laboca123, on Mon 2 Mar 10:40PM
- 0
- 1
- Report abuse
I dont understand why Argentina are in 4th place. Is this because they are not in the six nations or the tri-nations they remain safe on points.
From andrew, on Mon 2 Mar 9:40PM
- 6
- 0
- Report abuse
I don't really see how England could have started sixth when they were really the best team in the world by far. Ireland, now could beat anyone. Wales are weakening, yet still excellent, Scotland could and should have beaten south africa in the autumn and argentina have been off form since the world cup.
From rugbymad666, on Mon 2 Mar 8:37PM
- 1
- 5
- Report abuse
Not that strange really. England did well when Wilkinson was there and playing well. He is a legend of the game. 8th ranking is not the worst yet. Getting a zero-experience coach was obviously an strong indication on where the English rugby would sink before probably it rises (emphasis on ''probably'').
From Half A Brain, on Mon 2 Mar 7:56PM
- 0
- 2
- Report abuse
does this mean that if france and scotland beat england that they will drop below scotland in the world rankings for the first time.
From fordellman, on Mon 2 Mar 7:38PM
- 1
- 3
- Report abuse
Yes just look at the last Worldcup.. An awful England reached the final... They where beaten by an ordanary South Africa, it is a strange game sometimes...
From tulip, on Mon 2 Mar 6:46PM
- 4
- 1
- Report abuse
WHO GIVES A @#$%, IT ALL DEPENDS ON THE DAY.
WHEN EVER WALES AND ENGLAND PLAY EACH OTHER, YOU CAN GUARENTEE A GREAT GAME REGARDLESS THE FORM THEY ARE PLAYING AT THAT TIME.
THE BEST IN THE WORLD MEANS @#$% IN RUGBY.(PERSONAL OPINION)
IRELAND ARE PLAYING WELL AT THE MOMENT AND ARE RATED 6TH.
ENGLAND PLAYED A BETTER GAME ON SATURDAY, BUT STUPID THINGS(TEMPERS)LET THEM DOWN.
WELSH PAUL.
From seasons12379, on Mon 2 Mar 6:39PM
- 5
- 2
- Report abuse