Édition du Nord

Select Edition

Nord Nord
Sud Sud
Mondial Mondial
Nouvelle Zélande Nouvelle Zélande
France France

Voici comment la France pourrait se retrouver 5e nation mondiale

Scotland v France – Summer Nations Series – Scottish Gas Murrayfield Stadium

Six rencontres comptent pour le classement mondial World Rugby masculin généré par Capgemini lors d’un week-end où la moitié des 20 équipes en lice pour la Coupe du Monde de Rugby 2023 sont en action.

ADVERTISEMENT

Les Summer Nations Series se poursuivent avec l’Angleterre et le Pays de Galles et la France et l’Écosse pour les matchs retour après ceux de samedi dernier.

L’Angleterre reçoit le Pays de Galles à Twickenham pour tenter de se remettre de sa décevante défaite 20-9 à Cardiff, tandis que l’Écosse se rend à Paris pour tenter de confirmer sa victoire 25-21 à Murrayfield.

Par ailleurs, la Géorgie et le Portugal se retrouvent sur le terrain pour la première fois depuis leur participation à la grande finale du Rugby Europe Championship en mars. Tenants du titre, les Lelos affrontent la Roumanie à Tbilissi et les Os Lobos rejouent la finale haletante des éliminatoires de la Coupe du Monde 2023 de novembre dernier contre les États-Unis à Faro.

Temuco accueillera la toute première rencontre entre le Chili et la Namibie, tandis que le match des Tonga contre le Canada à Nuku’alofa jeudi 11 août promet de donner un beau départ à un nouveau week-end chargé, alors que la Coupe du Monde 2023 se rapproche de plus en plus.

DES HAUTS ET DES BAS

En termes de classement, les matchs les plus importants pourraient bien être les deux rencontres des Summer Nations Series au Stade de France et à Twickenham.

En cas de deuxième victoire sur les Bleus en autant de semaines, l’Écosse peut prétendre à la quatrième place, son meilleur classement historique, si l’écart est supérieur à 15 points.

La France ne peut pas gagner suffisamment de points pour améliorer sa position actuelle de troisième, mais elle tomberait derrière l’Écosse, à la cinquième place, si elle était battue.

ADVERTISEMENT

L’Angleterre ne peut pas sortir de la sixième place, quel que soit son résultat à domicile face au Pays de Galles, mais les Gallois seront les mieux classés des deux nations s’ils confirment leur victoire de la semaine dernière à Cardiff par un autre résultat positif.

Une victoire, quelle qu’elle soit, permettrait au Pays de Galles de se hisser à la septième position, devant l’Angleterre et l’Australie, qui n’est pas en lice ce week-end.

S’ils parviennent à améliorer leur résultat de la semaine précédente d’au moins un point supplémentaire, le Pays de Galles gagnera une place de plus et se hissera au sixième rang, devant l’Argentine qui sera également dépassée.

Une défaite, quelle qu’elle soit, ferait chuter l’Angleterre à son plus bas niveau historique, la 9e place, avec un peu moins d’un dixième de point d’écart avec les Fidji (10e).

LES USA FACE AU PORTUGAL

La rencontre entre le Portugal et les États-Unis à Faro sera certainement un autre match très disputé compte tenu de ce qui s’est passé il y a neuf mois dans le match décisif du Tournoi de qualification finale de la Coupe du Monde de Rugby 2023.

ADVERTISEMENT

Le demi de mêlée d’Os Lobos, Samuel Marques, avait fait preuve de sang-froid à l’époque pour botter la pénalité qui avait permis d’égaliser à 16-16 et d’envoyer Os Lobos à la Coupe du Monde de Rugby 2023 aux dépens des États-Unis, à la différence de points.

Le Portugal ne pourra pas faire mieux que la 16e place s’il obtient sa première victoire contre les États-Unis en quatre tentatives. Mais les États-Unis gagneraient une place et poursuivraient leur ascension au classement sous la houlette du nouvel entraîneur Scott Lawrence s’ils parvenaient à s’imposer en Algarve.

Si les adversaires nord-américains du Canada leur font également une faveur en battant les Tonga jeudi 11 août, les États-Unis aborderont le match en sachant qu’une victoire sur le Portugal leur permettrait de gagner deux places et de se hisser au 15e rang du classement mondial.

Le Portugal pourrait perdre jusqu’à trois places s’il perd et si la Roumanie remporte une surprenante victoire contre la Géorgie à Tbilissi.

Si la Roumanie bat la Géorgie et qu’il y a un résultat positif dans un sens ou dans l’autre dans la rencontre Portugal-États-Unis, les Chênes gagneront une place, passant devant l’équipe battue à Faro, et atteignant ainsi la 18e place.

Une victoire de la Roumanie par plus de 15 points leur permettrait de gagner trois places et de se retrouver à la 16e place si le Portugal et les États-Unis font match nul comme la dernière fois qu’ils se sont rencontrés à Dubaï.

Avec un écart de 11,67 points entre les équipes avant la prise en compte de la pondération à domicile, la Géorgie n’obtiendra aucun point pour avoir battu la Roumanie lors de son premier match de préparation à la Coupe du Monde 2023.

De même, les Tonga ne seront pas récompensés s’ils mettent fin à trois défaites consécutives et remportent leur premier test depuis novembre.

Le Canada sera assuré de gagner deux places au 21e rang s’il bat les Tonga par plus de 15 points. Un écart moins important pourrait suffire en fonction du résultat du dernier match du week-end à Temuco.

Même avec 1,85 point en jeu pour une large victoire, la Namibie ne pourra pas améliorer sa position actuelle de 21e en cas de victoire sur le Chili, pays organisateur.

En cas de défaite, les Chiliens perdront deux places et se retrouveront à la 24e position, mais ils seront les mieux classés des équipes s’ils s’imposent face aux Welwitschias.

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Commentaires

0 Comments
Soyez le premier à commenter...

Inscrivez-vous gratuitement et dites-nous ce que vous en pensez vraiment !

Inscription gratuite
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

f
fl 6 minutes ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

"fl's idea, if I can speak for him to speed things up, was for it to be semifinalists first, Champions Cup (any that somehow didn't make a league semi), then Challenge's semi finalists (which would most certainly have been outside their league semi's you'd think), then perhaps the quarter finalists of each in the same manner. I don't think he was suggesting whoever next performed best in Europe but didn't make those knockouts (like those round of 16 losers), I doubt that would ever happen."


That's not quite my idea.

For a 20 team champions cup I'd have 4 teams qualify from the previous years champions cup, and 4 from the previous years challenge cup. For a 16 team champions cup I'd have 3 teams qualify from the previous years champions cup, and 1 from the previous years challenge cup.


"The problem I mainly saw with his idea (much the same as you see, that league finish is a better indicator) is that you could have one of the best candidates lose in the quarters to the eventual champions, and so miss out for someone who got an easier ride, and also finished lower in the league, perhaps in their own league, and who you beat everytime."

If teams get a tough draw in the challenge cup quarters, they should have won more pool games and so got better seeding. My system is less about finding the best teams, and more about finding the teams who perform at the highest level in european competition.

50 Go to comments
f
fl 43 minutes ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

"Would I'd be think"

Would I'd be think.


"Well that's one starting point for an error in your reasoning. Do you think that in regards to who should have a say in how it's setup in the future as well? Ie you would care what they think or what might be more fair for their teams (not saying your model doesn't allow them a chance)?"

Did you even read what you're replying to? I wasn't arguing for excluding south africa, I was pointing out that the idea of quantifying someone's fractional share of european rugby is entirely nonsensical. You're the one who was trying to do that.


"Yes, I was thinking about an automatic qualifier for a tier 2 side"

What proportion of european rugby are they though? Got to make sure those fractions match up! 😂


"Ultimately what I think would be better for t2 leagues would be a third comp underneath the top two tournemnts where they play a fair chunk of games, like double those two. So half a dozen euro teams along with the 2 SA and bottom bunch of premiership and top14, some Championship and div 2 sides thrown in."

I don't know if Championship sides want to be commuting to Georgia every other week.


"my thought was just to create a middle ground now which can sustain it until that time has come, were I thought yours is more likely to result in the constant change/manipulation it has been victim to"

a middle ground between the current system and a much worse system?

50 Go to comments
f
fl 58 minutes ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

"Huh? You mean last in their (4 team) pools/regions? My idea was 6/5/4, 6 the max, for guarenteed spots, with a 20 team comp max, so upto 5 WCs (which you'd make/or would be theoretically impossible to go to one league (they'd likely be solely for its participants, say 'Wales', rather than URC specifically. Preferrably). I gave 3 WC ideas for a 18 team comp, so the max URC could have (with a member union or club/team, winning all of the 6N, and Champions and Challenge Cup) would be 9."


That's a lot of words to say that I was right. If (e.g.) Glasgow won the URC and Edinburgh finished 16th, but Scotland won the six nations, Edinburgh would qualify for the Champions Cup under your system.


"And the reason say another URC (for example) member would get the spot over the other team that won the Challenge Cup, would be because they were arguable better if they finished higher in the League."

They would be arguably worse if they didn't win the Challenge Cup.


"It won't diminish desire to win the Challenge Cup, because that team may still be competing for that seed, and if theyre automatic qual anyway, it still might make them treat it more seriously"

This doesn't make sense. Giving more incentives to do well in the Challenge Cup will make people take it more seriously. My system does that and yours doesn't. Under my system, teams will "compete for the seed" by winning the Challenge Cup, under yours they won't. If a team is automatically qualified anyway why on earth would that make them treat it more seriously?


"I'm promoting the idea of a scheme that never needs to be changed again"

So am I. I'm suggesting that places could be allocated according to a UEFA style points sytem, or according to a system where each league gets 1/4 of the spots, and the remaining 1/4 go to the best performing teams from the previous season in european competition.


"Yours will promote outcry as soon as England (or any other participant) fluctates. Were as it's hard to argue about a the basis of an equal share."

Currently there is an equal share, and you are arguing against it. My system would give each side the opportunity to achieve an equal share, but with more places given to sides and leagues that perform well. This wouldn't promote outcry, it would promote teams to take european competition more seriously. Teams that lose out because they did poorly the previous year wouldn't have any grounds to complain, they would be incentivised to try harder this time around.


"This new system should not be based on the assumption of last years results/performances continuing."

That's not the assumption I'm making. I don't think the teams that perform better should be given places in the competition because they will be the best performing teams next year, but because sport should be based on merit, and teams should be rewarded for performing well.


"I'm specifically promoting my idea because I think it will do exactly what you want, increase european rugyb's importance."

how?


"I won't say I've done anything compressive"

Compressive.

50 Go to comments
J
JW 1 hour ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

Generally disagree with what? The possibility that they would get whitewashed, or the idea they shouldn't gain access until they're good enough?


I think the first is a fairly irrelevant view, decide on the second and then worry about the first. Personally I'd have had them in a third lvl comp with all the bottom dwellers of the leagues. I liked the idea of those league clubs resting their best players, and so being able to lift their standards in the league, though, so not against the idea that T2 sides go straight into Challenge Cup, but that will be a higher level with smaller comps and I think a bit too much for them (not having followed any of their games/performances mind you).

Because I don't think that having the possibility of a team finishing outside the quarter finals to qualify automatically will be a good idea. I'd rather have a team finishing 5th in their domestic league.

fl's idea, if I can speak for him to speed things up, was for it to be semifinalists first, Champions Cup (any that somehow didn't make a league semi), then Challenge's semi finalists (which would most certainly have been outside their league semi's you'd think), then perhaps the quarter finalists of each in the same manner. I don't think he was suggesting whoever next performed best in Europe but didn't make those knockouts (like those round of 16 losers), I doubt that would ever happen.


The problem I mainly saw with his idea (much the same as you see, that league finish is a better indicator) is that you could have one of the best candidates lose in the quarters to the eventual champions, and so miss out for someone who got an easier ride, and also finished lower in the league, perhaps in their own league, and who you beat everytime.

50 Go to comments
J
JW 1 hour ago
‘The problem with this year’s Champions Cup? Too many English clubs’

Well I was mainly referring to my thinking about the split, which was essentially each /3 rounded up, but reliant on WCs to add buffer.


You may have been going for just a 16 team league ranking cup?


But yes, those were just ideas for how to select WCs, all very arbitrary but I think more interesting in ways than just going down a list (say like fl's) of who is next in line. Indeed in my reply to you I hinted at say the 'URC' WC spot actually being given to the Ireland pool and taken away from the Welsh pool.


It's easy to think that is excluding, and making it even harder on, a poor performing country, but this is all in context of a 18 or 20 team comp where URC (at least to those teams in the URC) got 6 places, which Wales has one side lingering around, and you'd expect should make. Imagine the spice in that 6N game with Italy, or any other of the URC members though! Everyone talks about SA joining the 6N, so not sure it will be a problem, but it would be a fairly minor one imo.


But that's a structure of the leagues were instead of thinking how to get in at the top, I started from the bottom and thought that it best those teams doing qualify for anything. Then I thought the two comps should be identical in structure. So that's were an even split comes in with creating numbers, and the 'UEFA' model you suggest using in some manner, I thought could be used for the WC's (5 in my 20 team comp) instead of those ideas of mine you pointed out.


I see Jones has waded in like his normal self when it comes to SH teams. One thing I really like about his idea is the name change to the two competitions, to Cup and Shield. Oh, and home and away matches.

50 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ Barrett and Prendergast put Leinster European rivals on notice Barrett and Prendergast put Leinster European rivals on notice
Search