Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Rugby Union
General Rugby Union
A new tournament: "the 4N"
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="scuubasteve" data-source="post: 144266"><p>I don't realistically see any alternative to combining the 3 pacific teams.</p><p></p><p>Unless the IRB subsidised them they simply wouldnt have the economy to compete in a professional environment. If you're suggesting that Japan would be heavily beaten (and I agree) then I'd suggest so would each of the Island teams if left separate. Just look at the Pacific 6nations this year.</p><p></p><p>I agree that Japan would take some big losses, as did Italy in the earlier 6nations (and still currently). But I believe that Japan has more potential than the Island team to get better. The Island nations have massive participation rates per capita and would struggle to find any more room to grow their player base. They would benefit greatly from more money, but therein lies the problem.</p><p></p><p>Looking at the bigger picture, you couldn't invite the pacific teams to the table without creating a way to offset thier weak financial situation. The added money that Japan would bring would subsidise the financial burden of the Pacific teams.</p><p></p><p>Another factor in Japan's favour is the new Experimental Laws. After watching alot of the ARC I believe its enevitable that most of these will be put through by the IRB in the near future. These laws make life easier for the traditionally smaller players and promote speed more than bulk. This will act as a catalyst for improving the effectivness of Japan's playing style.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="scuubasteve, post: 144266"] I don't realistically see any alternative to combining the 3 pacific teams. Unless the IRB subsidised them they simply wouldnt have the economy to compete in a professional environment. If you're suggesting that Japan would be heavily beaten (and I agree) then I'd suggest so would each of the Island teams if left separate. Just look at the Pacific 6nations this year. I agree that Japan would take some big losses, as did Italy in the earlier 6nations (and still currently). But I believe that Japan has more potential than the Island team to get better. The Island nations have massive participation rates per capita and would struggle to find any more room to grow their player base. They would benefit greatly from more money, but therein lies the problem. Looking at the bigger picture, you couldn't invite the pacific teams to the table without creating a way to offset thier weak financial situation. The added money that Japan would bring would subsidise the financial burden of the Pacific teams. Another factor in Japan's favour is the new Experimental Laws. After watching alot of the ARC I believe its enevitable that most of these will be put through by the IRB in the near future. These laws make life easier for the traditionally smaller players and promote speed more than bulk. This will act as a catalyst for improving the effectivness of Japan's playing style. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
General Rugby Union
A new tournament: "the 4N"
Top