As dust settles, Scotland find place behind Tonga in new world order

Are New Zealand truly the best team in world rugby with Australia second, as the IRB World Rankings show this morning, France third followed by South Africa and England, and are Scotland justifiably the tenth best side in the world behind Tonga? There may be some argument over the Tongans elevation to ninth, courtesy of their great win over France in the pool stages last month, but it takes a bit of disputing that the World Cup is not the modern measure of a nation’s improvement.

It may seem facile, knowing that Scotland were just two points from qualifying for the quarter-finals at Argentina’s expense, which would have dropped the Pumas from their seventh spot, and that Wales lost by a point to the French after suffering the handicap of losing their tighthead prop to injury and captain to a red card. In fact, Warren Gatland’s squad fell from fourth two weeks ago to now sit eighth in the world rankings, after losing to the Wallabies in Friday’s meaningless ‘bronze medal’ play-off. So they are behind four teams that failed to make the semi-finals which suggests the World Cup is not the gauge but, rightly, consistency over time the chief indicator.

The world rankings were launched in 2003 and England went into that year’s World Cup as the top-ranked side in the world and came out of it as such with the Webb Ellis trophy in the cabinet. Their slip down the charts since then – England are currently fifth – is a pretty accurate reflection of their on-field form in the past eight years.

New Zealand have gone into the last two World Cups as the world’s No 1, lost their mantle in 2007 to the Springboks, who left Paris with the World Cup, but regained it swiftly and held it this time through to the end of the tournament. Few would argue today that Graham Henry’s team are not the best in the world, but even though they would still have been there on the official rankings had they lost to France, and their run of victories over the past four years still have been far superior to any other nation. How many would have touted ‘Les Bleus’ as the best if Francois Trinh-Duc’s penalty attempt had slipped between the uprights and claimed a 10-8 win for France?

The World Cup is only a snapshot in time, once every four years, and teams’ fates can depend on the draw. But, with increasing pressure on players and their bodies, the World Cup is now the only global tournament that affords the preparation they require to be at peak fitness. Whether three months of summer training, rest and recuperation as enjoyed by the northern hemisphere sides is in fact the best build-up, or New Zealand, South Africa and Australia have it better coming off the back of the Super 15 and Tri-Nations is a moot point, but the players believe themselves to be at their best in World Cups. Scotland’s failure to reach the quarter-finals for the first time may highlight their slide in the world order but it is hardly noticeable on the IRB charts. Ian McGeechan’s team finished 2003 ranked ninth, Frank Hadden’s squad were eighth at 2007’s conclusion and Andy Robinson’s team are currently tenth, having been sixth, for a week, just over a year ago. Nothing points, yet, to a new world order, just a jumbling about at World Cup time that ends with the Webb Ellis holder atop the pile. But, looking a little below the top names, there are signs that that could change in 2015 when the tournament returns to England.

Argentina will by then have had four years competing in a new Southern Hemisphere competition with the ‘big three’ below the equator, Japan will have stepped up their planning for hosting RWC 2019 with increased investment in a squad they expect to reach the knockout stages in Japan, and the recent decision of the Olympic Games to admit rugby will have taken hold in the USA, Russia and China, where their governments have pledged to begin next year including rugby in their multi-million pound investment in Olympic sport.

Russia, alone, are speaking of £50m being ploughed into rugby, primarily to help the country’s team in the 2016 Rio Olympics, but achieved through the development of players in their current 12-team fully professional XV-a-side league. Watch for top names being lured over the next four years.

The IRB will also – if the top nations are true to their word – have devised a fairer draw that means the likes of USA, Canada, Russia, Georgia, Romania, Fiji, Samoa and Tonga will not have to play World Cup matches four days apart while the top nations enjoy ten days between games. More tours involving these nations against the top eight will also help to lift global standards.

Rugby in Scotland has been in decline over the past decade and international charts are not required to tell us that. Rankings can provide measures and indications, but never the complete picture. The World Cup try chart, that shows Scotland at 18th, is more pertinent in assessing where Robinson’s problems lie. We know Scotland have the quality of players, if not the finishers, deserving of a top ten place, but that is in a world order as it currently stands. One try scored against Argentina or simply an ability to grasp every restart and concentrate for the full 80 minutes in defence, may have propelled Robinson’s men to seventh or eighth in the world rankings.

But that may only have glossed over the true picture of under-performing professional teams, a club game struggling for attraction and youth and schools levels lacking the intensity of regular competition.

The World Cup is a great gauge of who has the mettle and skills to win on the biggest stage, and has provided a window on the world and a glimpse into the improvement of rugby going on elsewhere. The IRB rankings indicate consistency at Test level. Both, however, can provide the new SRU regime with the motivation it needs to make serious changes in the months and years ahead.