RugbyRebels

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugby ... -boot.html

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2022/ ... r-overhaul

Seems this prospect is a serious possibility.

Squidge has commented on twitter "This could kill rugby in Italy stone dead. It could severely damage rugby in Australia, Argentina, New Zealand, Georgia. It could ruin rugby’s safest bet, the Six Nations. It wouldn’t even really benefit South Africa. But CVC would make money so I guess that’s what truly matters"

I'm with him.

There is a comment in the DT that summer tours to the SH are not properly thought out being simple follow-ons from amateur days. There is also a comment about Owen Farrell asking a conference, "When do we rest? When do we see our families?"

IMO, the global season needs properly organising and structured international competition would be better than all the friendlies in AIs and summer tours.

However, the first priority should be separating club (or regional) competitions. In England, it is an absolute nonsense to have our clubs playing primary matches in international slots.

Rugby should learn from other sports. Football successfully separates international and club fixtures. Conversely, cricket has over-indulged in internationals to the detriment of standards and the game in general.

I am genuinely horrified by this. What would it do for Italy, or any other European nation with aspirations? Where will SA home games be played?

Surely the Six Nations is a European competition.

Greebo wrote:I am genuinely horrified by this. What would it do for Italy, or any other European nation with aspirations? Where will SA home games be played?

Surely the Six Nations is a European competition.

And long may it stay European! However, it’s true that the Springboks are one of the sides that all international sides want to play against - an opportunity to be measured against the World Champions is not to be sniffed at. There’s been talk for a while now about the viability of Italy in the 6 Nations, but there are clear signs that rugby there is on the way up just by looking at the development of their younger teams, one of whom beat England only last week. Replacing Italy with the Boks would be a serious retrogressive step, in my opinion, and must be resisted. But nowadays, money seems to sway such important decisions, much to the detriment of our game.

Really don't understand this drive for 'context' - for me, the idea of going to a far flung land and playing them in several different venues over a period of time is a glorious one that must be defended. The Six Nations and Rugby Championship are the yearly yardsticks, which then all build up to the World Cup. It seems to me to be trying to copy the World Test Championship cricket has set up, but I thought that was a fairly lame and pointless idea too. As for South Africa joining the 6N, it would make the tournament more competitive in the short-term with horrible knock-on effects for rugby in Europe bubbling under the top tier in the medium to long term. Italy, as has been mentioned, are starting to show the signs of improvement from their investments in age grade rugby and their professional set up, and it shuts out not just Georgia, who've been knocking on the door for years, but also rapidly improving rugby nations like Spain and Portugal (and from a purely selfish point of view, a weekend in Tbilisi or Lisbon would be far more affordable than jetting down to Cape Town or Johannesburg!) Terrible ideas all round, but maybe I just hate change.

It would be a dark day for rugby. Needs to be binned before the heart gets ripped out completely and we see players opting to be ‘unavailable’ to represent their country.

6n, RC and WC make the pulse race… don’t let that go

I've never seen anyone in the public sphere that is in favour of this idea.

In that case……
I think it’s a good idea if they use it as a chance to expand and include Georgia. Two groups of 4 with playoffs, including semis if they can’t abide the idea of losing a game, leading to a Super Saturday/weekend with all games having something on the line, ie the title, 3rd, 5th and 7th.
If the knock-on effect is to force NZ & Aus to diversify into including Samoa etc and getting Japan back in the fold to be their replacement cash cow then all the better.

Mellsblue wrote:In that case……
I think it’s a good idea if they use it as a chance to expand and include Georgia. Two groups of 4 with playoffs, including semis if they can’t abide the idea of losing a game, leading to a Super Saturday/weekend with all games having something on the line, ie the title, 3rd, 5th and 7th.
If the knock-on effect is to force NZ & Aus to diversify into including Samoa etc and getting Japan back in the fold to be their replacement cash cow then all the better.

I just don't really see how handing Georgia the opportunity to be thrashed for a few weeks every couple of years really helps them develop. Money develops rugby, not being hopelessly outmatched, as we saw when Scotland started to get its act together and are possibly beginning to see the very earliest signs of in Italy. All well and good adding teams to a tournament but getting walloped from pillar to post for a couple of months over two decades did very little for Italian rugby. And for all that, worth pointing out Georgia aren't currently even top of the REIC table - Spain are and have made massive strides over the past couple of years.

SDHoneymonster wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:In that case……
I think it’s a good idea if they use it as a chance to expand and include Georgia. Two groups of 4 with playoffs, including semis if they can’t abide the idea of losing a game, leading to a Super Saturday/weekend with all games having something on the line, ie the title, 3rd, 5th and 7th.
If the knock-on effect is to force NZ & Aus to diversify into including Samoa etc and getting Japan back in the fold to be their replacement cash cow then all the better.

I just don't really see how handing Georgia the opportunity to be thrashed for a few weeks every couple of years really helps them develop. Money develops rugby, not being hopelessly outmatched, as we saw when Scotland started to get its act together and are possibly beginning to see the very earliest signs of in Italy. All well and good adding teams to a tournament but getting walloped from pillar to post for a couple of months over two decades did very little for Italian rugby. And for all that, worth pointing out Georgia aren't currently even top of the REIC table - Spain are and have made massive strides over the past couple of years.

The Georgians have asked for more opportunities against tier 1 nations though, if getting walloped is harmful, we’d best get the Italians out immediately. Italy were invited way after they’d peaked, perhaps if they’d been invited when on the up things would’ve gone better for them.
Being in the 8 Nations would bring them money.
The Georgians have dominated that comp for a while so it would harsh to tell them no as they aren’t currently top. It’s not until 2025 so just add in whoever you think will be top of the pile by that point.

South Africa joining the 6N is a solution looking for a problem, and failing to find one; and doesn't really do anyone any good.

The problem with the 6N, as has been mentioned repeatedly, is that it's a closed shop; but the solution is tough to find.
6 is plenty of teams already, and I don't think the tounie could cope with expanding to 8, or any odd number.

So promotion/relegation is the only answer - but bring the question of "but how"
For home & away fixtures to even out, it needs to be every 2 years; but even then, every 4 would be better to allow the promoted team a chance to get their feet under the table - which would effectively kill the relegated team down to, at best, the level Georgia currently occupy - comfortably better than every else, but nowhere near good enough to challenge the top tier.
So it kinda has to be a play-off between the bottom of the 6N and the top of the ENC - to be fair, it needs to be home and away; or at least, at a neutral venue. Which means you need to find space in the calendar. That space needs to be found for every team in the 6N in case they suffer a terrible run and end up last. That space simply doesn't exist in an already congested fixture.

It's also pointless aiming for a top-down approach, greater investment and encouragement is needed at the age-grade and club level of the lower tiers in Europe. Which is tough as hell, and beyond the remit of the 6N comittee.


I think the easiest, viable change might be to expansion of the U20s 6N and allow promotion within the EPRC (is the 3rd tier of that even running still?)

Makes the six Nations much less impressive interesting. The saffas should jog on and make their own regional competition.

Which Tyler wrote:South Africa joining the 6N is a solution looking for a problem, and failing to find one; and doesn't really do anyone any good.

The problem with the 6N, as has been mentioned repeatedly, is that it's a closed shop; but the solution is tough to find.
6 is plenty of teams already, and I don't think the tounie could cope with expanding to 8, or any odd number.

So promotion/relegation is the only answer - but bring the question of "but how"
For home & away fixtures to even out, it needs to be every 2 years; but even then, every 4 would be better to allow the promoted team a chance to get their feet under the table - which would effectively kill the relegated team down to, at best, the level Georgia currently occupy - comfortably better than every else, but nowhere near good enough to challenge the top tier.
So it kinda has to be a play-off between the bottom of the 6N and the top of the ENC - to be fair, it needs to be home and away; or at least, at a neutral venue. Which means you need to find space in the calendar. That space needs to be found for every team in the 6N in case they suffer a terrible run and end up last. That space simply doesn't exist in an already congested fixture.

It's also pointless aiming for a top-down approach, greater investment and encouragement is needed at the age-grade and club level of the lower tiers in Europe. Which is tough as hell, and beyond the remit of the 6N comittee.


I think the easiest, viable change might be to expansion of the U20s 6N and allow promotion within the EPRC (is the 3rd tier of that even running still?)

I'd love a Churchill Cup style competition with the likes of Georgia and Spain competing against England A and the Irish Wolfhounds. You could run it alongside the summer tours so the clubs aren't completely gutted during the season (although ideally you'd find a way to stop the Prem clashing with international games too). Not only do Europe's developing sides get exposure to high quality rugby, but it actually provides a use for the second teams who've not played games in forever.

I've always like the idea of an "A" Lions tour, the main Lions could do the usual three while the "2nds" (Bulldogs?) tour America, Europe or the Pacific Islands. Suspect there's no money for it though...

When I win the euromillions, I will set up a second tier/semi-pro/amateur Lions tour.

Mellsblue wrote:When I win the euromillions, I will set up a second tier/semi-pro/amateur Lions tour.

Will a SH equivalent tour the NH?

Oakboy wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:When I win the euromillions, I will set up a second tier/semi-pro/amateur Lions tour.

Will a SH equivalent tour the NH?

Not on my account.

SDHoneymonster wrote:I'd love a Churchill Cup style competition with the likes of Georgia and Spain competing against England A and the Irish Wolfhounds. You could run it alongside the summer tours so the clubs aren't completely gutted during the season (although ideally you'd find a way to stop the Prem clashing with international games too). Not only do Europe's developing sides get exposure to high quality rugby, but it actually provides a use for the second teams who've not played games in forever.

Yup, and I loved the Churchill Cup itself as well.

But I suspect it would run into the same problems as the Churchill Cup did - the tier 2 teams wanted to play our firsts, not second XVs, despite not doing well enough against the seconds to "earn" it.

twitchy wrote:I've never seen anyone in the public sphere that is in favour of this idea.

The money men luv it,.... so your opinion is moot.

Mr Mwenda wrote:Makes the six Nations much less impressive interesting. The saffas should jog on and make their own regional competition.

Well, after many years of encroachment they just bought Sarries. It seems they've taken your advice.

Oakboy wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:When I win the euromillions, I will set up a second tier/semi-pro/amateur Lions tour.

Will a SH equivalent tour the NH?

Hmmm. Now THAT is an interesting question.

kk67 wrote:

Oakboy wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:When I win the euromillions, I will set up a second tier/semi-pro/amateur Lions tour.

Will a SH equivalent tour the NH?

Hmmm. Now THAT is an interesting question.

Already tried with the Pacific Islands combined team.

Puja

The Six Nations have denied any plans for expansion and pointed out that Italy can't be removed without they themselves voting for it: https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2022/ ... ugby-union

The innate conservatism of the 6N board strikes again, but this time in a way that everyone's fine with!

Puja

Puja wrote:

kk67 wrote:

Oakboy wrote:
Will a SH equivalent tour the NH?

Hmmm. Now THAT is an interesting question.

Already tried with the Pacific Islands combined team.

Puja

That's not the same thing.