Joke rankings change cancels out another joke rankings change

Japan dropped down the rankings thanks merely to their washout in Hong Kong. That cancelled them rising up the rankings in similarly silly circumstances last year as well.

Since WR opted to give their world rankings quadrennial importance for 12 out of the 102 ranked nations. They have gained far more prominence and rugby fans are far more aware of them than they previously were. With WR even plugging weekly press releases to update us all on even the most minor changes to them, and that press release getting copy and pasted on various rugby media outlets.

However certain people have now started to give what is, at best, a rough guide of recent form ridiculous of importance.

Particularly slightly lower down the rankings than the top 10, despite the list getting increasingly more dodgy the further you go down.

Coaches are sometimes heard referencing to their ranking to show their progress. Or fans referencing a ranking as part of a criticism of a coach for example.

However this week there was a perfect example of exactly why the rankings really shouldn't be taken as a serious and accurate measure of a team's progress or worth.

The final match of the Asian Rugby Championship between Japan and Hong Kong was abandoned after 10 minutes due to a heavy storm and called off as a draw with both teams sharing the points.

It was a fixture that has been played annually since 2005, and in which time Japan have won by an average of 55 points.

Japan, who were ahead when the players were marched off, were never going to lose the match. Yet the rankings can't take account of that and as a result they've dropped 2 places for the 'draw'. Hong Kong for their part have climbed 2 places out of the result.

The funny thing about this is has actually given Japan a slightly more accurate position in the rankings pecking order than they had before.

Last year they cracked the top 10 for the first time. That was followed by pats on the back from those who looked at that, likely not having observed the actual events on the pitch, and cited it as to their progress.

However a month before reaching 10th, Cherry Blossoms got a ranking boost last year after beating Samoa, at the time 8th in the rankings, by a comfortable margin. That Samoan side, although given status by both nations as a full international, was in actual fact simply the Samoa 'A' side that had competed in the Pacific Rugby Cup earlier in the year.

With no European based players involved, and mostly consisting of locally based talent, there were 10 debutants in the 23 who between them have only amassed one extra cap in the year since.

As last year their ranking got a big boost after beating Samoa, 8th at the time in the rankings, by a comfortable margin. That Samoan side was in reality, simply the Samoa ‘A’ side missing all European based players and mostly consisting of locally based talent.

Obviously Japan would not have had nearly as easy match against the proper Samoan side, the one they will face at the World Cup. To add to that they had also beaten the year before a Wales side that was also hugely weakened, and also boosted their ranking.

The rankings can't account for weakened lineups. And with rugby being a sport where lineups vary so much with injuries, rest, rotation and amongst numerous other possible reasons for non-availabilities, it further shows the rankings inaccuracy.

The farce of the draw against lowly Hong Kong actually has ended up just cancelling out that victory over Samoa, which was pushing towards a very dubious interpretation of 'full international'.

That Japan rose up after that win, and now have that pretty much wiped out after this draw sums up how stupid it is to use rankings as a way of judging teams without knowing context behind the results.

There will probably be some who, unaware of the context behind the results, may think Japan aren't making as good progress as they were a couple weeks ago because a game was washed out.

Similarly there were some who thought their progress was that much greater than it actually was because they beat a hugely weakened Samoan team that helped them reach a high of 10th.

Both matches had impact on the rankings, but made little difference to an actual evaluation of a side.

As an aside, with the rankings system as it is, which sees bouncing up and down after every win or loss. There's also good argument for something so fickle as the rankings not to be used for something as in the distance as seeding for a World Cup 3 years out.

Word coming out of WR is that they are looking for a way to change the way the rankings are calculated. Maybe that's a hint they have realised the current rankings aren't that accurate as well, and hopefully as well altering the decision to give them more emphasis since 2008.