Brett
Japan has managed to beat Spain twice, India and Samoa. Samoa being the only higher ranked team that it has beaten.
South Africa have beaten Japan, Spain, China, and most recently Denmark, USA and Ireland. Those last performances had them rise from 13th out of 15, to 8th out of 18. Their next match may well see them rise further up the ranking where you THINK they should be.
The number of games played and being played is as I have said before, the systems biggest drawback. As more matches are played a truer picture will emerge. The only way that we can test that is if, on the whole, higher ranked teams keep beating lower ranked teams and improving teams occasionally having some wins over huigher ranked teams. Have a look thru the scheme and that appears to be happening.

Regarding the rank of those other teams, I'm not questioning the data, I'm just saying that in terms of their actual ability, they aren't quite placed where I think they deserve to be. Obviously any settled system has to stick to its rules, so I'm not saying they be moved. But any scientist/mathematician when examining a model of the real world will always look to anomalies and ask the question "Is this a fault in the measurements or the calculations, or in my system (indicating the rules MAY need to be changed), or maybe an unavoidable consequence of quite reasonable rules"?

To have such a system widely accepted these are the kinds of criticisms we have to accept and discuss constructively.


---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN