6N to trial bonus points in 2017

[strawclearer]

As Mick Cleary says:

"The system is in for a trial period. But it will stay. The bonus point system is not ruinous. But nor is it necessary. The Six Nations has marched to its own beat. And done pretty well, thank you very much, doing just that."

Agreed.

[trendylfj]

Be grateful that they didn't try to introduce a playoff system for the top 4 teams.

[Stu_F]

Be grateful that they didn't try to introduce a playoff system for the top 4 teams.

That's next, they'd not thought of it before but now you've brought it to their attention.......

[jgriffin]

Looking at some of the previous comments, I'm almost starting to regret initiating this thread.

Frankly, attempting to initiate sensible discussion or even trying to have some banter attracts the various trolls and termagants who now infest this forum.

BTW I think the bonus points idea is a good one if run as per AP or even Top14, simply as a tie-breaker.

[Soggypitch]

Looking at some of the previous comments, I'm almost starting to regret initiating this thread.

Frankly, attempting to initiate sensible discussion or even trying to have some banter attracts the various trolls and termagants who now infest this forum.

BTW I think the bonus points idea is a good one if run as per AP or even Top14, simply as a tie-breaker.

A very strange post JG. Which exactly of the above posters are "trolls and termagants" ? They all seem like decent people to me with varying opinions, certainly not odious or malicious. Excepting ellis9 of course who we all know is just plain barmy!!

[mol2]

If tries were the most important thing why not go the whole hog and make it into a 7s tournament?

That way we could have it all done over a weekend with less disruption to the clubs and at a single stadium as there's no way that would sell out home and away fixtures!

[BFG]

I don't think it'll change the outcome too much.
It might make the tournament more interesting as long as one or two teams aren't too dominant.
If nearly all teams can beat each other then it will be interesting.
In effect one team could still win every match kicking penalties and win a grand slam and the title over a team who wins four matches and scores loads of tries but loses one match 6-3 against the grand slam winner.
I really don't see it encouraging it to open up should there be a grand slam decider but amongst the middle to lower placings it could create some exciting play and different outcomes.

[ellis9]

BFG, I am surprised no one has shot down your comment yet. I said the exact same thing about a team winning all of their matches by kicking penalties and it won't necessarily encourage teams to score tries but apparently this isn't an option worth discussing.

[BFG]

BFG, I am surprised no one has shot down your comment yet. I said the exact same thing about a team winning all of their matches by kicking penalties and it won't necessarily encourage teams to score tries but apparently this isn't an option worth discussing.

Maybe no-one cares.
The best teams usually win anyway.
If it's a very even competition then yes bonus points will make it more interesting but it won't make winning any less important.
I'm hopeful it'll be more interesting going on the good showings of the Northern Hemisphere teams this autumn but we will soon see.

[h's dad]

I don't think it'll change the outcome too much.
It might make the tournament more interesting as long as one or two teams aren't too dominant.
If nearly all teams can beat each other then it will be interesting.
In effect one team could still win every match kicking penalties and win a grand slam and the title over a team who wins four matches and scores loads of tries but loses one match 6-3 against the grand slam winner.
I really don't see it encouraging it to open up should there be a grand slam decider but amongst the middle to lower placings it could create some exciting play and different outcomes.

I think you're right in that changes to outcomes will be minimal. I don't think the objective is to change the winner but to make the games more exciting as a spectator sport by encouraging attacking play. I think you're even more right when you say it won't encourage teams to open up in a grand slam decider but, as you say, it may have some impact on at least some of the other 14 matches. If this does happen I would suggest that the changes will have achieved their main objective.

Essentially very different to what some have written but I'm sure that was more than apparent to most of us.

[DickyP]

All the arguments above are true in their own ways but pretty much irrelevant. I'm all in favour of encouraging a more exciting game but that doesn't have an exact correlation with numbers of tries scored. Competitiveness makes for excitement not tries: if the latter were the case we'd enjoy watching the All Blacks put 60 on the Italians more than watching Ireland beat Australia by a couple of points.

Also scoring tries doesn't map directly to open-attacking rugby. What is the most common method of trying to get the 4th bonus point try? The kick to the corner followed by the catch and drive. Exeter score lots of tries but most are by forwards from about 3 feet out!

More importantly people miss the real implication of bonus points: that is that some wins are better than others. A 50 point win over a minnow is 'better' than a one point win over the world champions. The real purpose of bonus points IS therefore to distort the won/lost record rankings and so, that being the case, why are we worried about ensuring a GS winner is champion?

I do, however, quite like the logic of the Bonus Points as separators rather than simplistic points difference and would be happy to see them used as such.

[Soggypitch]

Looking at some of the previous comments, I'm almost starting to regret initiating this thread.

Frankly, attempting to initiate sensible discussion or even trying to have some banter attracts the various trolls and termagants who now infest this forum.

BTW I think the bonus points idea is a good one if run as per AP or even Top14, simply as a tie-breaker.

A very strange post JG. Which exactly of the above posters are "trolls and termagants" ? They all seem like decent people to me with varying opinions, certainly not odious or malicious. Excepting ellis9 of course who we all know is just plain barmy!!

I'm still waiting for just one person to actually criticise the uncriticisable (no such word I know)jgriffin, for calling a group of respectable posters "trolls and termagents", see above.
The mods have removed pasts of mine for far less insulting terminology, including describing ellis9's opinions as "tiresome", if I recollect.
Perhaps it's one rule for some and one for others, or maybe "termagents" is a term of endearment - whatever, I think we should be told!!

Ps. Get well soon Mrs JG.

[ellis9]

Eddie Jones is currently being interviewed on Skysports and was asked will England do anything differently now bonus points are being introduced and he said no.

He said if we play well, we will score 4 tries, if we don't, then we won't. Basically, although we may score 4 tries and get bonus points, it's not the introduction of bonus points that incentivises England to do so.