Petition asks for changes to Six Nations Championship

[Aristodemus]

I'm not in favour of adding teams myself, however, if they were to change the format I think only one way would be acceptable. That would be to extend the competition to 8N, but this would cause many problems. It's a very difficult scenario to find a solution for but I feel it would be better to find better competition and exposure for the smaller nations elsewhere.

 

[Tony Manx]

So you agree with me though that you could easily fit an eight team tournament in to six weeks. Another way to do it if you only want to play five games is top two from each pool play in crossover semi-finals while bottom two from each pool play to avoid the wooden spoon.

In this format, every team gets five games still.

In the other part of your answer you've substantiated what I'm saying. An eight team tournament is going to bring in more money than a six team tournament because it's going to have a larger tv deal. When you build in a proper revenue sharing model, it's a win for everyone. This would of course require individual countries to put aside their own self-interests.

The expansion of the Six Nations isn't about money though, a larger tournament would bring in more cash. It's about preserving tradition which you admit is the reason it won't expand.



It would clearly provide a lot of benefits, especially with a revenue sharing model like the NFL's and a salary cap, even teams like Connacht would be able to compete.

I doubt it will be ever happen though for the same reasons the Six Nations won't be expanded. Plus, the club game isn't setup atm to be a dominant force and really plays second fiddle to the international game. With all the clubs in Europe playing under one banner and marching to the same tune, that could put the international game in real jeopardy.

Crickey, you can use facts that do not work to support your argument like no one else I know!

1 No your plan for leagues over six weeks is not workeable or acceptable.

2. No it would not generate more money.

3. No there will be no agreement on revenue sharing as you believe - look at the war over the no defunct H Cup.

4. Tradition is good but the other reasons stated make it easier to justify for those unlike me who feel it has to be justified

 

[Canadian_Rugger]

Crickey, you can use facts that do not work to support your argument like no one else I know!

1 No your plan for leagues over six weeks is not workeable or acceptable.

It's workable but I agree with you that it probably isn't acceptable, for reasons of tradition and the fact the home nations won't agree to a loss of tests against other home nations.

2. No it would not generate more money.

How can it not generate more money? Two extra teams with a larger TV audience? There are ways to structure the competition to make it more appealing to broadcasters.

3. No there will be no agreement on revenue sharing as you believe - look at the war over the no defunct H Cup.

This is a rugby problem, albeit it's one I'm familiar with. We had a similar problem in North America with the National Hockey League which never had revenue sharing until 2005. The benefits of the agreement that's been in place have been overwhelmingly positive though and the league has never made more money than it's making now. They just signed a 5.2 billion 12 year deal in Canada for broadcasting. This is alongside their 2 billion dollar US deal. That's money Rugby can't even hope to match with the current setup. The markets are just too small.

 

[Tony Manx]

It's workable but I agree with you that it probably isn't acceptable, for reasons of tradition and the fact the home nations won't agree to a loss of tests against other home nations.



How can it not generate more money? Two extra teams with a larger TV audience? There are ways to structure the competition to make it more appealing to broadcasters.



This is a rugby problem, albeit it's one I'm familiar with. We had a similar problem in North America with the National Hockey League which never had revenue sharing until 2005. The benefits of the agreement that's been in place have been overwhelmingly positive though and the league has never made more money than it's making now. They just signed a 5.2 billion 12 year deal in Canada for broadcasting. This is alongside their 2 billion dollar US deal. That's money Rugby can't even hope to match with the current setup. The markets are just too small.

The figures you quote are due to the size of population and consequent size of support to that sport.

Rugby is not no 1 sport in any country other than NZ and look at the size of their population!

I do not think that even Soccer, which must be the biggest sport in the world excluding USA, generates anywhere near those figures in single countries!

The nations who you would like to see in the 6 N may have large populations, I do not know I am sorry, but the size of rugby tv watchers would be tiny and would have little persuasive power in increasing advertising revenues?

 

[Peat]

The dream's gotta be to change that though Tony - well, maybe. Not as big a fan of the march to endless expansion and money. Still, I'd like a more skilled game, a better game, a game that actually gives players a rest. Money would be good for that. Would like a more international game.

 

[Canadian_Rugger]

The figures you quote are due to the size of population and consequent size of support to that sport.

Rugby is not no 1 sport in any country other than NZ and look at the size of their population!

I do not think that even Soccer, which must be the biggest sport in the world excluding USA, generates anywhere near those figures in single countries!

The nations who you would like to see in the 6 N may have large populations, I do not know I am sorry, but the size of rugby tv watchers would be tiny and would have little persuasive power in increasing advertising revenues?

The 5.2 Billion is in Canada where the population is around 36 million, a Six Nations tv deal would definitely not command that money but it could command a lot more than it is right now.

Romania has a population of roughly 20 million, Georgia is 4.5 million. The reason these countries don't generate much interest in Rugby is because their teams don't ever get to play against top competition. In fact, this really only applies to Romania, Georgia draws excellent crowds for all their rugby matches. A match against a Six Nations country would probably sell out the national stadium 50,000+ as Georgia is a rugby mad country. Romanian rugby also influences rugby in surrounding countries in the Balkans and Moldova so you've got those countries which could be targeted as well.

Romania has hosted tonnes of highly attended tests in the past. Of course the civil war in 90s did a number on their rugby but they are slowly recovering.

Romania and Georgia are so much better than the other participants in the ENC, Georgia is probably as good if not better than Italy and they regularly beat them at age grade. Romania aren't far off the Italians either. Short term the plan should be to expand the Six Nations to include Romania and Georgia.

The same arguments being made against this were used when it was expanded to include first France and now Italy, including these teams has only enhanced the competition. Long term the plan should be to put promotion/relegation in place between ENC Div 1 and a new Eight Nations tournament as that would bring Spain, Portugal, Germany, Russia, etc... In to the fold. This would make the 6N the de facto European Championship.

 

[Tony Manx]

The 5.2 Billion is in Canada where the population is around 36 million, a Six Nations tv deal would definitely not command that money but it could command a lot more than it is right now.

Romania has a population of roughly 20 million, Georgia is 4.5 million. The reason these countries don't generate much interest in Rugby is because their teams don't ever get to play against top competition. In fact, this really only applies to Romania, Georgia draws excellent crowds for all their rugby matches. A match against a Six Nations country would probably sell out the national stadium 50,000+ as Georgia is a rugby mad country. Romanian rugby also influences rugby in surrounding countries in the Balkans and Moldova so you've got those countries which could be targeted as well.

Romania has hosted tonnes of highly attended tests in the past. Of course the civil war in 90s did a number on their rugby but they are slowly recovering.

Romania and Georgia are so much better than the other participants in the ENC, Georgia is probably as good if not better than Italy and they regularly beat them at age grade. Romania aren't far off the Italians either. Short term the plan should be to expand the Six Nations to include Romania and Georgia.

The same arguments being made against this were used when it was expanded to include first France and now Italy, including these teams has only enhanced the competition. Long term the plan should be to put promotion/relegation in place between ENC Div 1 and a new Eight Nations tournament as that would bring Spain, Portugal, Germany, Russia, etc... In to the fold. This would make the 6N the de facto European Championship.

Well we can all dream but it will not happen in my lifetime.....but if it does you can bring a bottle of champers to God's waiting room to drink with me and I will ask my great grandchildren to make sure you are reimbursed cos I will have forgotten!!!

 

[vasysm]

Italy showed us why we don't belong to 6N yet.

Also, no civil war in Romania in the 90s.

 

[Canadian_Rugger]

Italy showed us why we don't belong to 6N yet.

Also, no civil war in Romania in the 90s.

Sorry, screwed up my dates, when Ceausescu lost power and was shot by firing squad, December 1989 so just before the 90s

I suppose It was also more of a revolution and insurrection than a civil war, poor word choice on my part.

 

[vasysm]

A revolution mixed with a coup some second-string communists were preparing and seized power shortly after.

 

[Car]

There is a new qualification tournament starting this year with clubs from Italy, Romania, Portugal, Spain and Germany that will feed in to the Challenge Cup.

Which is good because Heidelberger RK has no proper competition in our joke of a league. There's also a team from Belgium involved.