Should Georgia & Romania be added to the 6 Nations?

[Sandydragon]

Georgia should be playing the six nations teams in the AIs, actually all the top teams should play the top teams in the second tier. It would strengthen their case for change, even if logistically it is still difficult to achieve and needs to be carefully thought out to benefit everyone.

[rowan]

At the very least. Imagine if they just committed to one test each against an ENC 1 team a year! Actually, I'd use Italy more against the likes of Spain and Portugal, who they probably wouldn't humiliate too much, while the geographical proximity and cultural ties would also be an advantage. France used to have an annual test with Romania in the amateur era, and that was a major factor in the Oaks' development, to the point they started beating France in the 80s and also downed Wales (home & away) and reigning 5N champs Scotland. I think Ireland and Scotland would be the ideal candidates to develop closer relations with Georgia and Russia with annual tests - one year away, the next at home, while England and Wales could also chime in against the former. Meanwhile, I'd also like to see NZ and Australia open their annual account with a test against one of the Pacific Islands, while SA could perhaps establish an annual trophy match with Namibia - or else kick off the season with an away test against the African Cup holders each year. Argentina is already doing more than enough in the Americas.

[Adder]

Is that a thumbs down, Adder? You know, I think they should be a little bolder and actually challenge the 6 Nations to a 'European Championship' clash between the winners of the ENC & 6 Nations. This is kind of how the Super Bowl got started in the 60s. At first everyone laughed at the AFL challenging the more established and recognized NFL to a national championship decider, and that seemed justified as the NFL's Packers steamrolled their opponents in the first two Super Bowls. But then Joe Namath rocked up with the NY Jets and 'guaranteed' his AFL outfit would reverse the trend in Super Bowl III. The rest is history...

A misplaced comment. I can't delete them on tapatalk.

Sent from my SM-J500FN using Tapatalk

[rowan]

I like Georgia's style, but an ENC champion v 6 Nations spooner clash is pretty much a no-win situation for the latter. At least, they'll have everything to lose and nothing to gain. So I can see why they'd never accept that proposal. & perhaps the ENC is underselling itself here. Who says they are the second division of European rugby? That hasn't been established on the field and the 6 Nations is the one which has backed out. So until the 6 Nations is prepared to settle the issue on the pitch, ENC has every right to regard itself as a rival European competition and not an inferior one. That's why I suggest challenging the 6 Nations winner to an annual European Championship decider.

[Stones of granite]

Did I just imagine Scotland playing Georgia in the AIs?

[rowan]

Perhaps you just imagined Ireland playing South Africa as well.

Gee...

[Stones of granite]

Perhaps you just imagined Ireland playing South Africa as well.

Gee...

What's that got to do with the topic?
Non-sequitors R us

[rowan]

Yes, non-sequiturs certainly R U, Stones. The Autumn internationals are friendlies - hosted by the 6 Nations teams - against teams which are often under-strength and (in the case of the southerners) nowhere near full strength. So they are entirely irrelevant to the comment you appeared to be replying to, which was about staging an official play-off between the winners of the 6 Nations and ENC competitions. Until such time as that is done, on a level playing field and with official recognition of its status, the supremacy of neither competition can be established. It's arrogant to assume otherwise.

[Stones of granite]

Poor comeback.

Rowan, you should change your username to Don Quixote, it would suit you much better.

[rowan]

Not really. Don Quixote is a parody of the Catholic Church, which I don't resemble in any way.

It's using the AIs as a reference point that is a poor comeback. What happened in the 2014 AIs, then what happened at the World Cup - when it actually mattered? So your imagination and the AIs were the non-sequitur here.

All I'm suggesting is that the ENC should present itself as a rival European competition to the 6 Nations, and not undersell itself by accepting the status of defacto second division.

[Sandydragon]

Yes, non-sequiturs certainly R U, Stones. The Autumn internationals are friendlies - hosted by the 6 Nations teams - against teams which are often under-strength and (in the case of the southerners) nowhere near full strength. So they are entirely irrelevant to the comment you appeared to be replying to, which was about staging an official play-off between the winners of the 6 Nations and ENC competitions. Until such time as that is done, on a level playing field and with official recognition of its status, the supremacy of neither competition can be established. It's arrogant to assume otherwise.

You are completely taking the piss.

[Sandydragon]

Not really. Don Quixote is a parody of the Catholic Church, which I don't resemble in any way.

It's using the AIs that is a poor comeback. What happened in the 2014 AIs, then what happened at the World Cup - when it actually mattered? So your imagination and the AIs were the non-sequitur here.

All I'm suggesting is that the ENC should present itself as a rival European competition to the 6 Nations, and not undersell its by accepting the status of defacto second division.

Despite the differences in ranking points, which even double points at the RWC haven't addressed.

A shake up is needed but to assume that Georgia should have played England for the title of best in Europe is laughable.

[rowan]

Yes, non-sequiturs certainly R U, Stones. The Autumn internationals are friendlies - hosted by the 6 Nations teams - against teams which are often under-strength and (in the case of the southerners) nowhere near full strength. So they are entirely irrelevant to the comment you appeared to be replying to, which was about staging an official play-off between the winners of the 6 Nations and ENC competitions. Until such time as that is done, on a level playing field and with official recognition of its status, the supremacy of neither competition can be established. It's arrogant to assume otherwise.

You are completely taking the piss.

Right on cue

[old-n-slo-2nd-row]

I think 8 nations could possibly be the way to go, 2 pools of 4, seeding based upon the previous year, draw for home and away. Each team would end up playing 5 matches as now - 3 pool matches, 1 semi-final and 1 final/seeding match. Based on last year pool 1: ENG, SCO, FRA, ROM; pool 2 WAL, IRE, ITA, GEO. S/F 1v2 from pools, winners play for the championship, losers for 3/4 seeding next year; 3v4 from pools, winners and losers play for seedings/final positions. Would the potential "hammerings" be any worse than the current Champions Cup situation with the Italian teams? The current 6N teams would play at least 3 on possibly 4 times so the historic rivalries and bi-lateral trophies could still be contended.

[rowan]

In an ideal world, yes, that could work. But there are reasons relating to tradition and scheduling that would prevent that happening in the foreseeable future. That's looking at it from the 6 Nations' view; not my own. The other thing is, you would still need to fit a promotion-relegation system or we'd just end up with someone like Russia complaining about their exclusion in the future.

[old-n-slo-2nd-row]

when Russia start to show the same standards as Georgia has then yes - sustained in both RWC and Europe but at the moment there is no compelling case to go below Georgia and Romania

[rowan]

Right now there's not much of a case for Romania either

Don't get me wrong, I like your idea, I'm just anticipating the predictable objections likely to be raised by those concerned.

[Sandydragon]

Yes, non-sequiturs certainly R U, Stones. The Autumn internationals are friendlies - hosted by the 6 Nations teams - against teams which are often under-strength and (in the case of the southerners) nowhere near full strength. So they are entirely irrelevant to the comment you appeared to be replying to, which was about staging an official play-off between the winners of the 6 Nations and ENC competitions. Until such time as that is done, on a level playing field and with official recognition of its status, the supremacy of neither competition can be established. It's arrogant to assume otherwise.

You are completely taking the piss.

Right on cue

So you are taking the piss - just checking. For a moment i thought you were being serious.

[Sandydragon]

I think 8 nations could possibly be the way to go, 2 pools of 4, seeding based upon the previous year, draw for home and away. Each team would end up playing 5 matches as now - 3 pool matches, 1 semi-final and 1 final/seeding match. Based on last year pool 1: ENG, SCO, FRA, ROM; pool 2 WAL, IRE, ITA, GEO. S/F 1v2 from pools, winners play for the championship, losers for 3/4 seeding next year; 3v4 from pools, winners and losers play for seedings/final positions. Would the potential "hammerings" be any worse than the current Champions Cup situation with the Italian teams? The current 6N teams would play at least 3 on possibly 4 times so the historic rivalries and bi-lateral trophies could still be contended.

Why 8? Why not look at a much wider comp with more pools and a three stream knockout competition? Thats logistically the way to future proof the idea. There would be a lot of one sided matches early on and the biggest issues would be supporter interest and sponsorship. Ultimately these plans need to make money for the unions or they won't work.

[old-n-slo-2nd-row]

That's why I think 8 would work. lots of the "traditional" games, not diluted to the extent of dead rubbers, conservative enough for the powers that be etc..

Sent from my SM-G800F using Tapatalk

[Stones of granite]

Not really. Don Quixote is a parody of the Catholic Church, which I don't resemble in any way.

Let's see -
- An unshakeable belief that you are right about everything. Tick
- Totally convinced that those who don't agree with you have been brainwashed. Tick
- An irrational fear of the Great Satan. Tick.

Yeah, you pretty much do.

Don't you have some other windmills to tilt at?

[rowan]

Not really. Don Quixote is a parody of the Catholic Church, which I don't resemble in any way.

Let's see -
- An unshakeable belief that you are right about everything. Tick
- Totally convinced that those who don't agree with you have been brainwashed. Tick
- An irrational fear of the Great Satan. Tick.

Yeah, you pretty much do.

Don't you have some other windmills to tilt at?

What you mean is that I am not an apologist for the the biggest war crimes of the past seven decades - as you clearly are.

So you are reduced to the state of a salivating hyena lurking around, snarling and whining, snapping away at anyone who does not think as you do. That is the epitome of narrow-mindedness; the essence of human evil.

[rowan]

That's why I think 8 would work. lots of the "traditional" games, not diluted to the extent of dead rubbers, conservative enough for the powers that be etc..

Sent from my SM-G800F using Tapatalk

Agree with you there. But once they went to groups the possibilities for future expansion would be limitless. By 2050 sixteen teams might well be viable. By the end of the century every country in Europe. Who knows? Though I still think, for the reasons which have already been gone over (more than once) on this thread, a divisional system works well for rugby at the present. The key to its credibility, however, is open inclusivity, which means at the very least a promotion-relegation system.

Failing that, a play-off between the respective 6N and ENC winners and/or increased inter-action between Europe's so-called top tier and its so-called second tier, and it seems the AIs would be the best time, when such a fixture could basically be served up as an annual warm-up for the 6N teams for the big tests ahead.

[rowan]

How about this on a cyclical basis:

Year 1:

early June
Fiji v Australia - Suva
NZ v Samoa - Auckland
Namibia v SA - Windhoek

early November
Georga v England - Tbilisi
Romania v France - Bucharest
Russia v Scotland - Sochi
Spain v Italy - Barcelona

Ireland v Georga - Dublin
Wales v Romania - Cardiff

Year 2:

early June
Japan v NZ - Tokyo
Australia v Tonga - Brisbane
SA v Namibia - Bloemfontein

early November
Georgia v Wales - Tbilisi
Romania v Scotland - Bucharest
Russia v Ireland - Sochi
Portugal v Italy, Lisbon

France v Romania - Marseilles
England v Georgia - Manchester

Meanwhile, I've also suggested in the past the idea of touring teams including tier 2/3 nations on the AIs & summer tours. ie stronger Southern Hemsiphere teams could stop off in Tbilisi, Bucharest or Sochi for a one-off test en route to Western Europe, while Argentina might take on Spain, and 6 Nations could include Uruguay on tours to Argentina (Brazil or Chile for Italy?), Namibia on tours to SA (Kenya or Zimbabwe for Italy?), and Pacific Islands on tour Down Under (even if it means playing them in NZ or Oz).

[OptimisticJock]

It's our ball and you're not playing with it. Away and play with the other weirdos.