This is a repost of an article I wrote for my Substack account back on March 15, I’ve decided to add to the blog as well so it can be used for reference in the future.
You know what, I can definitely think of better things to do of a Friday evening than book the main TV in the house so I can sit with a few beers and watch a rugby team I’m shouting for ship two tries in the early stages despite having an extra man and proceed to, on the one hand, keep the opposition scoreless for the remainder of the match, only for the other hand to keep knocking the ball forward (albeit in shitty conditions but they’re the same for both sides) for the remainder of the match, while still building up hope by clawing back 12 of the 15 point deficit in the process.
Then after accepting the loss, I try to console myself by putting this message in the WhatsApp group after following the other U20 Six Nations matches from the evening: “At least we dodge the wooden spoon – I thought Scotland might nick a second BP”. You see, when I first checked the FRAvSCO score it was 38-30 to the French so I presumed the Scots had 4 tries in the bank. Then it changed to 45-30 so I just presumed that left them in last place, yet having surrendered the telly back to the family for Fair City (don’t ask) I later found this message in the group : “Nope, Scotland nicked the LBP with a drop goal in the last play”
Well ain’t that a kick in the nuts. After the two Grand Slams for this age grade in recent years it would be mad to assume we’d continue that success, and in fact we didn’t do too badly last year either as it happened. But while a decline was expected, we certainly didn’t think it would be as bad as this and while I really want to avoid pointing fingers directly at the coaching rather than the actual talent, having watched all of the five matched I really have to say there seems to be a sharp decline in the cohesion and tactical nous displayed on the pitch. There have been some fine individual displays for sure, particularly Munster’s back rower Michael Foy, but with the ball we suddenly seem to have made ourselves remarkably easy to defend. Some might say the same is true of the senior team but I’ll keep that topic for the main Harpin content for now.
In fact I will also park the Under20 criticism if you don’t mind, you don’t want to be too harsh on the younglings plus this wooden spoon gives me the opportunity to harp on another issue that really grinds my gears. The way the Scots pipped us to 5th is another example of the very obvious flaws of the try bonus point system.
I’ll be honest – when it was first introduced I thought it was brilliant. I never subscribed to the notion that whatever football does, so must rugby do and this method of incentivising attacking rugby really did seem to be an inspired one that suited our code down to the ground. IIRC it was a southern hemisphere idea which naturally meant that the much more stubborn northern portion of the planet would take a while to adopt it but eventually they did.
But then in France the 🔝🐱🐴 (if you haven’t seen that before, it’s how I always write the name of that comp, it’s kind of my thing) went a bit rogue. I never actually heard of an announcement of their change, I only noticed when I was following a particular team and realised that although they had scored 4 tries they still only only got 4 points on the table. So the number nerd in me just had to know why and it turned out that rather than rewarding the scoring of 4 tries (a “Quantitative” BP as I call it), they instead gave it to team who scored three more tries than their opposition (“Differential” BP).
Hand on heart it took me a while to work out the benefits of this idea; at first I just thought the French were being, well, French. But the more you think about it, the more it makes absolutely perfect sense. While the QBP always seemed to be sufficient in theory, over the years in practice we frequently saw dominant teams “banking” their bonus in the early stages of a match only to take their foot off the pedal in the second, probably with the following week’s contest in mind. They would probably do enough to stay ahead in the particular match, but if they were at the top of the table while the opposition down the other end, the concession of a few tries in the final quarter wasn’t usually considered a hanging offence. And as a Leinster fan, I experienced this scenario more often than most – call that arrogant if you must, but all I’m really doing is stating facts.
But when I actually mulled over the advantages of the DBP over the QBP it became clear first and foremost that in many cases teams were being rewarded for things that didn’t necessarily deserve a reward. The winning team letting up after securing a winning margin is one example, but also why should a losing team EVER earn more than one point on the log?
Actually the French seemed to have a problem with even that one point and a few years ago they reduced the margin for earning the losing bonus from 7 down to 5. FWIW I don’t agree with that, seven is fine and means you still have something to play for with a 14-point deficit in the closing stages. But most certainly, one point should be that when it comes to a loss, especially when it means a team that loses scoring 4 tries does as well on the ladder as one that earned a draw with 3. The DBP also eliminates the messiness of draws where teams scoring 4 tries earn just 1 point fewer than those who actually triumphed. When you think of it, those scenarios are madness.
But I haven’t gotten to the biggest advantage of the DBP yet. I wrote earlier of teams banking their bonus with four early scores. Switch to the French system and this not only goes away completely, it also adds a new dimension – you can now put yourself in a position to earn the bonus only for it to be taken away.
I really got into the 🔝🐱🐴 when Sexton was playing over there and I remember a match where Racing were hosting Toulouse and had a lead of something like 23-0 going into the final stages. Seems comfortable enough, and while they had only scored the three tries, that was enough to earn them the BP. But literally with the final play of the match, Les Rouge et Noir went the length of the pitch for a score which meant Racing had to make do with just the four points, and for someone like me who appreciates a decent defensive stand just as much as a series of behind the back offloads, this was reasonable outcome for the Parisian side.
And although Super Rugby came up with the idea in the first place, eventually they too saw the light about the DBP and introduced it to their competition a while back. So I feel it’s about time the entire rugby world saw sense and kicked the QBP squarely into touch where it belongs.
Sadly I think it might take a while before this happens, what with the nature of rugby’s alickadoos being slow when it comes to change. However with the 2027 RWC being in Australia and World Rugby already being open to an expanded format to 24 teams, maybe that would be a perfect opportunity to introduce it to everyone.
One last thing – I hope you don’t think I’m only harping on this method because it put the Irish Under 20s in the basement last night. I’ve been on about this for years, and there have been several cases where the QBP was shown to be absurd, like when it was introduced to the Men’s Six Nations, someone realised that it was mathematically possible for a team to win the Grand Slam yet finish second on the points table. To “fix” this, they added a “slam bonus” of three extra points to anyone winning five matches.
But did that REALLY fix the problem? As I type it’s Super Saturday for the 2025 tournament and the way the table stands, it’s not impossible for Italy to get zero points against us while Wales get a LBP against England which would mean the Welsh avoid the wooden spoon despite having lost all five. Absurd.
And so I’ll end my scribbling with a string of acronyms…IMHO, the DBP is FTW and WR should exclusively use it ASAFP.
HARPIN' ON RUGBY 