LONG READ 'Haves and have nots': The Six Nations numbers reveal hidden truths

Knowledge comes quickly, but the slow drip of understanding takes longer – a lot longer. It is perhaps only now rugby folk are beginning to absorb the impact of the 2025 Six Nations. And it is only now we have a meaningful statistical report on the tournament, authored by World Rugby consultant and ex-international referee Corris Thomas. I am indebted to Corris for the stat tables, and some of the observations that follow.

New trends: Is the Six Nations offering better value for money?

Oh yes. There were 108 tries scored, the first time the championship has topped three figures. There were more points, more tries, fewer penalty goals and an increase in ball-in-play time taking the average to over 38 minutes for the first time in history – not just the history of the Six Nations, but the history of any major international rugby tournament in the professional era.

This Six Nations showed the game is becoming ever faster and more explosive at the top level, and 63% of all tries were scored within the first three phases of possession.

Thomas concluded there was a clear pattern, and a developing precedence of try-scoring over penalty goal attempts.

“The number of penalty goals kicked in this year’s championship was 43, compared to 54 last year, and a recent 10-year average of just over 60. This reflects the fact the penalty is now being regarded more as a vehicle for strategic possession than a direct method of accumulating points.”

The team that essayed the most penalty goals off the tee – Italy with 17 – finished fifth. England [2^nd] only attempted five and France nine [1^st].

Is the set-piece a true contest?

For the first time in history, all six teams topped the 90% retention threshold on their own lineout throw, with France winning 99% and only losing one of their own throws in the entire tournament.

That universal security on ‘own feed’ meant 68% of tries derived directly from set-piece, while for Ireland the dependence on set-piece was even higher: the men in green scored a colossal 88% of their tries from set-piece starters.

The steady decline of the scrum as a direct attacking weapon [only 13% of tries scored] highlighted the issue of supporting the set-piece as a true contest. It is the only physical ‘clash-point’ on the field where no contest for the ball is possible, and the average time for ball to be produced from scrum was a yawn-making 77 seconds. Some scrums lasted twice as long.

“The result is with an average of 11 scrums a game of which four end in a penalty, possession of the ball from the scrum happens only seven times per game.” [Thomas]

The role of the front row has changed dramatically since the amateur era. England has always been known historically as a nation which bases its game around strong set-piece, but a taster of England’s scrum stats now unveils a new scenario.

England had the best scrum in the championship, winning six more penalties than they conceded – but there were no scrums in the England-Scotland game after the 46^th minute; the Red Rose scrum had to wait until minute 58 to receive its first feed versus Ireland; England’s final feed of the win over Italy arrived in only the eighth minute!

Corris’ conclusions were eye-watering:

“Front row players now have quite different workloads. Instead of participating in 25+ scrums per game, and playing for 80 minutes which was the case in the amateur era, over 60% of front row players now participate in five scrums or fewer. And 6% participated in no scrums at all.

“Furthermore, front rows are now in physical engagement for an average of only seven seconds per scrum. A player who participates in the given average of five scrums per game will be physically engaged for fewer than 40 seconds in a game.”

A two-tier championship? And is the game dominated by bench forwards?

Three teams finished with four wins and one loss apiece. There was a definite sense the tournament became a contest between the ‘Haves’ [France, England and Ireland] and the ‘Have-nots’ [Scotland, Italy and Wales] and split into two tiers – a championship for the top three, and a plate for the others.

Only six of the 15 games finished within seven points, as opposed to 10 in 2024. There were only two games with a margin of four points or fewer compared to 10 one year previously.

Strong second-half teams took the laurels. France finished on +74 points in the second-half ledger, England on +52. Both featured forward-dominated 6/2 or 7/1 benches in 100% of their games. The bottom three sides utilised the 5/3 split more than 50% of the time, and Wales used it exclusively throughout.

A further reinforcement arrived via the method of scoring tries. Corris picks up the thread:

“There was a major difference in the number of tries scored by forwards in the top three teams [30] and the number scored by the bottom three teams [5]. Of the 26 tries scored by Italy and Scotland, 24 were scored by backs.”

Winners and losers 

Winner: France

Les Bleus won the tournament scoring a record 30 tries in the process, eclipsing England’s 29 tries back in 2001.

• Les Bleus scored the most tries [30] and conceded the fewest [11]. Their ratio of tries to penalty goals exploded to 4:1, up from 1:1 in 2024.
• France used the heaviest pack of forwards in the comp to maul their lineouts four times more than other teams, while winning 99% of their own lineout throw. They successfully shifted from the 6/2 to the 7/1 substitution option after round three.
• They only set an average of 83 rucks per game [4^th] while achieving nine line-breaks – a table-topping average of one break for every nine rucks set.
• The second lightest back line produced a total of 22 tries, double the number achieved by England and Ireland.
• Some 33% of French tries came from inside their own half – the other five teams averaged 16%. And 38% of all French tries derived from turnovers or kick returns [1^st].

Winner: England

England suffered a succession of close calls in 2024, losing to New Zealand by one, two and seven points over three games, by five to Australia and nine to the Springboks.

• A loss to Ireland by five points extended that to seven losses to Tier One opponents, but one-point wins against France and Scotland reversed the psychological tide and got the monkey of their backs. The floodgates opened with a cumulative 77-point winning margin in the last two rounds.
• England had the best set-piece in the championship, generating +6 penalties at scrum time and enjoying the greatest success on the lineout drive, with seven tries being scored in the cycle immediately following their 12 lineout throws.
• England scored a massive +52 points differential in the second half of games [2^nd behind France] off the use of the 6/2 bench, with 36% of their tries coming off turnover [2^nd]. They built 79 rucks and seven line-breaks per game for a healthy average of one break for every 11 rucks set.

Treading Water: Ireland

This was not a tournament for the more mature teams, with Ireland [average age 30, with cap average of 42] and Scotland [29 & 27] performing below expectations.

• Getting old, or merely obsolete? Ireland beat Italy and Wales by margins of five and nine points respectively, and they were losing 42-13 to France at home with only three minutes remaining.
• They averaged 90 rucks but only generated 5.2 line-breaks per game [4^th], just above Italy [5.0] and Wales [4.2]. Their average of 17 rucks per break compared unfavourably with England [11] and France [9].
• Green shoots! Ireland conceded a total of just two tries and four penalty goals in the first halves of matches – a defensive performance far surpassing any other team.
• Ireland also had by far the best discipline in the comp, conceding three fewer penalties per game than they were awarded. They enjoyed a happy habit of penalty award ‘purple patches’, indicating they still know how to apply the pressure tourniquet:
• France 15-6 pen count, including five of the first six and all the last six; Italy 10-4, including six of the last seven; Wales, 9 of the 12 penalties awarded in the second half including six of the last seven pens; Scotland, six of the first seven penalties. 

Losing Ground: Scotland

Scotland last won the championship in 1990. For the seventh time in 10 years, they finished in fourth place.

• In 2024 and 2025, Scotland led at half-time in four of their five matches, but only brought home the bacon on two occasions. Over that two-year period, almost 70% of their scoring came in the first half.
• While the top three sides scored 20+ tries in the second half, Scotland scored a mere nine. Scotland were -36 points in second half scoring in 2025.
• Scotland enjoyed the most possession of any team in all five matches, averaging 22.3 minutes per game [tournament average 19 minutes]. They built the most rucks [120 per game] while kicking the least [23], but only achieved one break every 18 rucks, just behind Ireland.
• Fifteen of their 16 tries were scored by backs, an exceptional percentage. Comparative figures are 11 of 25 by English backs and six of 17 by Ireland. Scotland used the 5/3 bench split more often not.

Cellar Dweller: Italy

The 2024 campaign represented the most successful Six Nations performance in Azzurri history, with Italy winning two and drawing one of their five games for a 50% record. That success was not repeated one year later.

• The Italian squad had a very low average age of 23, and averaged only 17 caps per player.
• Italy averaged only 15.7 minutes of possession per game, a full three minutes behind the fifth ranked side [Ireland on 18.5 minutes].
• Italy attempted 17 penalty kicks at goal – between two and four times as many as their opponents. They kicked five penalties to beat Wales in wet weather but the policy of taking three pointers failed overall in a competition which was decided by explosive, try-scoring enterprise.
• Nine of their 10 tries were scored by backs and 40% of their tries originated from inside their own half. Apart from France, the remaining four teams scored only 13% from their own side of halfway.

Cellar Dweller: Wales

By the end of the 2025 championship, Wales had lost 17 consecutive matches, and this year’s Six Nations performance was statistically worse than it had been in 2024.

• Wales faithfully followed the general trend of the 2025 tournament, with the high-possession teams losing ground to the speedy turnover scorers. Wales enjoyed 20 minutes of active time-of-possession [2^nd behind Scotland] but only scored five tries in phases 1-3. Of the 35 total tries scored in open play, Wales only contributed one.
• They built an average of 99 rucks per game, achieving a miserable ratio of one break per 24 rucks. Tries from range proved to be problematic – eight of 10 tries were scored from within their opponents 22m line.
• Wales were awarded three penalties fewer than their opponents per game [6^th]. Discipline was a persistent problem, with Wales conceding pens in prolonged salvoes:
• France – between the 11^th minute and 65^th minutes, Wales conceded 11 penalties to France’s three; Italy – between the first minute and 50^th minute, Wales conceded 13 penalties to Italy’s four; Ireland – between the 41st minute and the end of the game, Wales conceded nine penalties to Ireland’s three.

Conclusions

From the point of view of entertainment value related to scoring, there is no doubt the 2025 Six Nations was the best edition of the tournament so far. More tries and fewer penalty goal attempts than ever; more points, more ball-in-play, more content.

At the same time, questions arise: is the set-piece really a contest anymore? Are forward-heavy benches becoming too dominant? Is the championship splitting into two tiers again, and should the possibility of promotion/relegation be reconsidered?

As it always has been, the Six Nations remains one of the most fundamental crucibles of the game’s development testing!