Rugby Opinion - in the wake of Guildford's humiliation

It was thanks entirely to Guildford's nobility that it happened at all. And for that, Worthing paid their opponents full credit. But a lesser-spirited club might have stayed at home and given Worthing a legitimate 20-0 walkover. That would have been an outrageously unjust determination of fate, but a permissible option.

Guildford could pursue that route this Saturday and what would Ealing say to that?

Few can have truly enjoyed either watching or playing in that 146-point procession, yet the league rules decree that the team finishing with the greater points difference should be the winner in the event of two clubs tying in the final table.

Is this best for this particular sport?

National League 3, the next level up, award an extra point for scoring four tries or more and one to a team losing by less than seven points.

Head of Worthing Rugby, Ian Davies, with experience of this with Haywards Heath last season, points out: "That almost ensures that no two clubs will end up with the same number of league points."

An alternative tie-breaker to points difference would be to compare the teams number of tries scored, then the number of conversions kicked and then, maybe their ratio to tries scored.

Failing that, resort to various other items, such as penalties kicked or goals dropped, sinbinnings maybe '” and the stattos will eagerly espouse further (even more deeply?) meaningful criteria to suggest if all else fails.

Some sports decide league position tie-breakers on the head-to head result, then the points aggregate between the locked sides.

But this season, we are looking to reward the team that, in victory, shows the least mercy in attack, no matter how impregnable their defence. In other words, the rules allow 80-minute embarrassments, both to watch and, ultimately, to execute.

What do you think? What's your ideal solution? What good does a thorough 100-point thrashing do for rugby?

Go on! Email [email protected]