• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

A Super Rugby style tournament would significantly improve European nations...

Nope has pro 12 made a difference to those countries involved prospects at the RWC? I don't think the inclusion of French and English teams will make a jot of difference and franchising rarely works. Champions cup is good enough.

Let's looks at it this way Wales were severely beaten up and had to play 4 hard games. England's management was terrible. France the same. Ireland are the real questions marks but it's mainly down to letting the game get away from too quickly and they are a better team than that
 
So... you'd focus on how the Pro 12 affected countries at the World Cup, then how Super Rugby did, to work out whether Super Rugby is a good thing to emulate? That's an... interesting... argument. Not to mention that without the Pro 12, there's a good chance all of Ireland, Wales and Scotland would be absolute no hopers, rather than underperformers and plucky unlucky underdogs.

The NH lags the SH. That's not a one-off thing, it's a well known pattern. Reducing it to the component parts of why it happened this time shouldn't be an excuse for not looking at why it happens every time. We need to drive up the standard of our rugby.

If not a Euro Super League, how?
 
Fair point....honestly I have no idea where to start short of kicking Scotland and Italy out of the 6 nations to try and breed better competition at international level. But thats massively unfair to both those teams. I'd probably drop the rest weeks from that competition however. We rarely get them in the autumn or whilst on tour and they are non existent at RWC.

I think a more powerful thing which will never happen is to play in the summer try to breed a different attacking and in turn defensive policy.
 
Last edited:
You realise you're advocating kicking a country that has just significantly outperformed England in the RWC, from the 6N?

And what relevance do the rest weeks in the 6N have?

I agree on that - more of the domestic season spent in better weather would help too.
 
Sorry the Scotland comment was more flippant than real more adjudged by their recent performances in the 6N than anything else and the fact I believe even teams leads to a fairer competition. Honestly I just wanted to drop 2 teams create better competition with home and away games ala the rugby championship. Also promotion relegation but I don't really think that's the answer and it will never happen.

Rest weeks are about intensity of the competition I've never particular enjoyed them and I don't think they help breed better playing rugby by taking the occasional week off.
 
Not to be overly sarcy, but I believe the topic is a possible Super Rugby tournament, not changes to the Six Nations...

Now, I know it's on the general topic of improving the standard up here, it is relevant, but it does seem odd to ignore the main question and start talking about improving the standard of 5 of the games our players play compared to the 20 odd they might rack up with their clubs.

The first and most important thing is the coaching. Players need to be taught better skills. At some point though, we have to consider how increase the standard required to be an English player at the top of the game. If the Premiership has an answer as appealing as the possibilities of an European Super League (ignoring logistical difficulties here), then it would be pleasing if it would actually disclose said answer.
 
You asked the question if not a euro super league then how....

I think though a minor point I made in my first post comes up though. How is the European Champions Cup not a de facto super league? The groups are a tiny bit smaller but apart from garunteed sports for the teams and who they play it's almost the same thing.
 
The competitions in the NH do not reward positive rugby as much as Super Rugby does. We saw the NH style come up short against the SH style in France v NZ and Ireland v Argentina. Bonus points in the Six Nations is the very first thing that should change.
 
You asked the question if not a euro super league then how....

I think though a minor point I made in my first post comes up though. How is the European Champions Cup not a de facto super league? The groups are a tiny bit smaller but apart from garunteed sports for the teams and who they play it's almost the same thing.

Tinkering with one competition, the smallest one at that, is the answer how?

And there's not enough games in the ECC to make it a proper super league.
 
Super rugby is a tier above club rugby which doesn't exist in England or France - any such SR style competition would involve condensing the English (and French, possibly/probably/whatever) premiership squads into a smaller number of teams - let's say 6-8. If we were to follow the SR formula as it stands - we would be looking at putting the best players from the Prem into 5 teams.
 
Super rugby is a tier above club rugby which doesn't exist in England or France - any such SR style competition would involve condensing the English (and French, possibly/probably/whatever) premiership squads into a smaller number of teams - let's say 6-8. If we were to follow the SR formula as it stands - we would be looking at putting the best players from the Prem into 5 teams.

I ask again Rats how can this be possible with present club ownership in France and England?
 
Fan base would be difficult to assess.

I don't think I could support a Midlands team.

How would you divide England?

North, Midlands, South west, South East?
 
I ask again Rats how can this be possible with present club ownership in France and England?

Desirability and feasibility are two different things.

That said, to extend the conversation in that direction, the Prem clubs could form a joint venture to run the Super Teams as a whole.
 
Fan base would be difficult to assess.

I don't think I could support a Midlands team.

How would you divide England?

North, Midlands, South west, South East?

Ennit,
Lancashire won't support Yorkshire, and vice versa.
Bristol won't support Bath and vice versa.
I don't have six fingers and webbed feet so i can't support the East Midlands.

It might have worked when professionalism came in but pro clubs are too ingrained now.
 
Ennit,
Lancashire won't support Yorkshire, and vice versa.
Bristol won't support Bath and vice versa.
I don't have six fingers and webbed feet so i can't support the East Midlands.

It might have worked when professionalism came in but pro clubs are too ingrained now.

You wish you had my webbed Leicestershire feet!
 
Ennit,
Lancashire won't support Yorkshire, and vice versa.
Bristol won't support Bath and vice versa.
I don't have six fingers and webbed feet so i can't support the East Midlands.

It might have worked when professionalism came in but pro clubs are too ingrained now.

So people say.

Me, I wonder whether this is true. There's plenty of rugby fans in London who have no time for Quins or Sarries. Imagine there's plenty of rugby fans in the north who've no time for Newcastle or Sale. Wish I could find out how many people turned up watch North or East Midlands against the touring sides compared to how many watched the clubs do it.

Certainly, the idea that the current club fans are the be all and end all of those interested in watching rugby is erroneous.

There's guys running rugby who reckon there's more people who'd watch Wasps than Coventry and more people who'd watch Yorkshire than Leeds. Those are steps towards what Super Rugby would entail. Will be interesting to see where they go.


In any case, desirability and feasibility are two different things. Whether the fans would go is feasibility.

Should we try to get them to go? That's the real question.
 

Latest posts

Top