6N to trial bonus points in 2017

[BeeJ]

According to Planet Rugby.

[ellis9]

I think it seems a bit irrelevant if they are going to give 3 bonus points for doing the grand slam. That means there's no need to score 4 tries in any of the matches. You can effectively win all of the games 3-0 and then get given 3 bonus points at the end. Isn't the idea of bonus points to encourage teams to go and score tries?

I understand the need to give the 3 points so that you are guaranteed to win the title if you win all the matches but as I have said above, there's no incentive really to go out and try to score 4 tries in matches.

[Iain]

Mixed feelings.

On the one hand, move with the times and encourage attacking rugby.

On the other hand, is it still a grand slam if you don't get bonus points? Could someone win the grand slam but not the championship?

EDIT - hadn't potted the bit about three points for the Grand Slam. Starting to look a bit odd.

[philw]

So a team could actually lose every match but still not finish bottom if they acquire enough bonus points?
Could be fun if relegation is ever introduced.

[ellis9]

I think it needs to be distinguished which is better.

Does winning the grand slam (potentially winning all games 3-0) mean that entitles you to win the Championship or could you win 4 games and get 5 points in each and then lose 1 with 1 or 2 bonus points meaning you deserve to win it. I know in this scenario the team winning all the games would be given 3 points so they would win.

I think if you decide the grand slam should mean you're Champions then you may as well stick to the current structure. Clearly with the 3 bonus points for winning the grand slam, they clearly feel that this deserves the title.

If you are guaranteed to win by doing the grand slam, how is there an incentive to go out and score 4 tries in each match?

Does this make sense?

[Soggypitch]

I think it's a great idea. The points look exactly the same as the current system in the Prem, which works well.

The only difference being 3 points for a grand slam.

I do not buy into the theory that this means teams will not be encouraged to play attacking rugby. Grand Slams are still unusual, most years it is decided on points with the winning team losing one game. In that scenario it is also not uncommon for two teams to win 4 matches and be tied on points only for points difference to determine the outcome. Far fairer to decide this with bonus points IMO.

England lost out on points difference twice during SLancaster's time, I wonder if that would have been the case if bonus points had been in operation? I seem to remember us scoring a lot of tries in those years, reckon we could have had two Championships there - but a stato will no doubt confirm or otherwise.

All in all a good thing.

[h's dad]

A Grand Slam will still guarantee being top of the table - I don't think the three points guaranteeing at least 23 points with the closest a runner up can get being 22 is a coincidence. Where it comes in to play is if there is no GS winner and the permutations get a little more interesting. It's probably a good thing in terms of what most people want to see.

[ellis9]

What most people want see? Which is?

[h's dad]

What most people want see? Which is?

It's to promote the scoring of tries, preferably through running rugby. What did you think?

[ellis9]

See my earlier posts. It doesn't necessarily encourage more tries. You can still win the tournament without scoring a try.

[ads]

How do you know you are going to win all the games though? Surely the best thing to do would be to win with 4 tries and guarantee the points just incase you slip up.

[Soggypitch]

How do you know you are going to win all the games though? Surely the best thing to do would be to win with 4 tries and guarantee the points just incase you slip up.

Which is exactly what I said above and ellis chose to ignore.

[h's dad]

See my earlier posts. It doesn't necessarily encourage more tries. You can still win the tournament without scoring a try.

So what do you think the objective of the powers that be is in introducing the bonus point system to the six nation competition?

And (multiple choice to make it easy), do you;
A) think teams will be more likely to want and try to score tries under the new system?
B) think teams will be less likely to want and try to score tries under the new system?
C) think the new system will make no difference as to whether teams will want and try to score tries?

[ellis9]

I am just putting another view across! I am not choosing to ignore anything! I am just saying it doesn't guarantee that teams will actually try to score more tries.

However, by not having the 3 bonus points for winning every game, this would encourage it more.

How do you know you are going to win every game? You don't.

I could ask how do you know you are going to actually score 4 tries a game? Same answer as above.

If you are winning a game by 4 points having scored 2 tries with 10 minutes to go and you get a penalty that is kickable, what option are you going to pick? 3 points every time.

[ellis9]

H's dad- answer A.

The powers that be obviously think that which is why they are trialling it.

My answer is it will make no difference.