Have losing bonus points ruined the Six Nations?

After an intriguing opening weekend of the Six Nations, England were left with many questions to answer after being comprehensively beaten in the Calcutta Cup. Apart from how poor England's attack was, the main takeaway was the loosing bonus points system which allowed England to still claim a point. How can a team who play so badly still be rewarded for failure?

Why was the loosing bonus point introduced?

The idea behind the loosing bonus points system was to create an attacking expansive style of rugby for the full eighty minutes of a Six Nations fixture. If a team is within seven points of their opponents come the end of a match, then that team shall still gain a point despite the loss. It supposedly rewards a teams efforts in tight fixtures, but in such a fiercely fought out competition I'm unsure whether this should be the case.

It was also thought that Italy would benefit from their introduction, as it would give them more opportunities to get points on the table and avoid the wooden spoon. Year after year Italy are put to the sword by the other five nations, but if they were to perform to their optimum ability and still lose the match by within seven points, then their efforts wouldn't be for nothing. However, in the four years since its introduction, Italy have claimed only one loosing bonus point in their 29-27 loss to Scotland in 2018. This quite clearly shows how ineffective the system has been in one of its core aims.

How it can decide champions

The loosing bonus point doesn't just affect the bottom of the table though, as shown in last years Six Nations. Many people have labelled England's championship win as a 'victory by default', as the loosing bonus point which they claimed against les blues, all but sealed them the title.

In their 24-17 loss to France, it was an Owen Farrell kick in the 80th minute of the game which would ultimately prove vital as England were utterly dominated throughout the game. Both England and France ended up with five wins and a loss apiece, but England won the championship due to a higher points difference throughout the tournament.

In my opinion, why is a team rewarded for loosing a match like England did last year? In every other sport you are not rewarded in any way for loosing and in one of the most competitive tournaments in sport, I don't see why you should benefit from loosing a match.

I write this now, as I feel the 2021 Six Nations could have the same issues as stated above. Last weekend was an exact replica of 2020, with England scoring a loosing bonus point for possibly their worst performance under Eddie Jones' management.

England were bullied in the pack, devoid of any attacking intent and were extremely lucky to only lose the game by a five point margin. This loosing bonus point which England claimed could come crucial by the end of the tournament, as the lack of fans in this years Six Nations evens the playing field quite dramatically. Even though they have had an early set back, England are still in with a fair chance of winning the championship with another two games at home and crucially their tie against France being at Twickenham.

I feel that the idea of a loosing bonus point in leagues such as a the Aviva Premiership is a perfectly sound idea, due to the number of games played and higher number of opponents met. Over a thirty game season if a team were to keep loosing by just a few points, then this system makes sense to keep the league tight and reward teams for continued efforts throughout the season.

However, in a five round championship such as the Six Nations where the margins between winning and loosing are at their finest, it has brought about unfair results in the past and it quite possibly could do in the near future.