Boks in 6N

[higgik]

Austin Healey is restarting the conversation on the Boks playing in the 6N, especially ad they have teams in the URC. His idea is to drop the Italians, but I think there is a better suggestion.
By expanding to a proper Euro-Africa 10 nations, there would only need to be 1 more match and no more calendar dates than current.
2 groups of 5, play 4 matches over 5 weeks.
Top 2 in each group play semi final and final at pre-determined venue, (2 weeks).
3rd and 4th play for positions 5-8.
5th play promotion relegation v winners of div 2 groups.
SA in - tick
Italy stay - tick
Increase exposure for T2 nations - tick
Promotion/relegation - tick
No extra weeks - tick

It might mean no regular Calcutta Cup in the Spring, but that could be a match in the Autumn instead.

 

[Reiser99]

Unfortunately I think the home nations rivalry games are too lucrative. Moving the Calcutta cup to the Autumn means missing a game against other opposition due to a limited window. I'm all for giving other nations a chance, but I don't see it happening, especially when finances are already extremely strained.

 

[higgik]

Yes, that was a negative, but there would not be a match in the Autumn v the Boks.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

No to all of it.

The only thing that needs fixing around the 6N is Italy. Otherwise it ain't broke.

It's the local dust up element that gives the 6N its unique flavour. Tamper with that and you've just got another contrived meaningless tournament. We're lucky to have that geographical closeness and history but that is what it is.

And if that makes me sound like a change resistant dinosaur I really don't care.

Developing nations can, and should, be included in summer tours and AIs.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

No to all of it.

 

[Welsh Exile]

Playing devils advocate but surely the same was said when it was the 4 nations, then the same again when it was the 5 nations looking to add Italy.

I don't feel too strongly about it either way tbh. I can see both sides. My heart agrees but I'm not dead against it where'd I'd get really angry if it happened kind of thing.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

I wouldn't be against an Autumn nations cup style 8 nations if there was the quality to do it and keep the triple crown in place. Currently there isn't so please leave alone.

 

[Reiser99]

What I would say is there is never anything wrong with discussing new ideas as that is how progress is made. I don't think anyone on here will blindly say the 6Ns is perfect and great for rugby as a whole, because it's not. It's great for the 6 teams involved and that's it. Look at the issue with Georgia. Comfortably the best team in Europe outside the 6Ns, but has struggled to progress further because they don't play better sides.

I'm not sure what the solution is, but just going "no" certainly doesn't help when people make suggestions.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

What I would say is there is never anything wrong with discussing new ideas as that is how progress is made. I don't think anyone on here will blindly say the 6Ns is perfect and great for rugby as a whole, because it's not. It's great for the 6 teams involved and that's it. Look at the issue with Georgia. Comfortably the best team in Europe outside the 6Ns, but has struggled to progress further because they don't play better sides.

I'm not sure what the solution is, but just going "no" certainly doesn't help when people make suggestions.

It's the inter continental angle that I'm really violently against.

Wouldn't object to promotion and relegation for European teams in the 6N. But the reality is that it would just be the same teams bouncing around to little effect as outside the traditional 5N teams no European countries are close to having the domestic game to support a decent international side - that includes Italy who've conclusively demonstrated for years that there's so much more to developing than just regular games against tier 1 opposition.

A teams, Autumn and Summer windows can all be used to help develop the wider game. Progress and tradition are both important and not mutually exclusive.

 

[Reiser99]

It's the inter continental angle that I'm really violently against.

Wouldn't object to promotion and relegation for European teams in the 6N. But the reality is that it would just be the same teams bouncing around to little effect as outside the traditional 5N teams no European countries are close to having the domestic game to support a decent international side - that includes Italy who've conclusively demonstrated for years that there's so much more to developing than just regular games against tier 1 opposition.

A teams, Autumn and Summer windows can all be used to help develop the wider game. Progress and tradition are both important and not mutually exclusive.

I don't disagree. However this is an example of a good response to someone's idea.

'No to all of the above' is not a helpful answer, that was my point.

 

[BPM]

Perhaps, but in fairness to Old Hooker, that was just the first line of a post that expressed a broader explanation of his rationale.

I'm in complete agreement with Old Hooker. Making the 6 Nations amnesty inter-continental competition doesn't do it for me at all.

I'm open to the idea of promotion/relegation, but ultimately, I think it would be pointless as we'd most likely just see a yo-yo between Italy and Georgia that provides no real benefit to anyone.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

My hope is that in 10-20 years Rugby might actually have a proper euro's system competition.

I'm fine with SA clubs in the european championships, but Internationals is a no for me.

 

[Scotty]

What tier 2 nations have a strong domestic competion? Not just europe teams, id say italy, Japan and USA. SA are Tier 1 and do. They must prove they have 1 before joining the 6N like promotion to the prem.

For me unless a team has a strong demestic league they should not be in the 6N, as italy proved, annualy games vs Tier 1 plus games all year in pro14 doesnt mean you will improve.

Throwing teams like Georgia in they will just get battered as italy do, then not improve as they dont have strong demestic games.

For USA/Japan time difference is an issue,

SA could be great but its far to travel unless they were based in a euro country for their home games(cut travel time and get exposure to rugby in that country, say spain for example. Just an idea.)

 

[Reiser99]

What tier 2 nations have a strong domestic competion? Not just europe teams, id say italy, Japan and USA. SA are Tier 1 and do. They must prove they have 1 before joining the 6N like promotion to the prem.

For me unless a team has a strong demestic league they should not be in the 6N, as italy proved, annualy games vs Tier 1 plus games all year in pro14 doesnt mean you will improve.

Throwing teams like Georgia in they will just get battered as italy do, then not improve as they dont have strong demestic games.

For USA/Japan time difference is an issue,

SA could be great but its far to travel unless they were based in a euro country for their home games(cut travel time and get exposure to rugby in that country, say spain for example. Just an idea.)

Thing is, it is a catch 22 situation. How do you develop a strong domestic league if your players don't play the best players in the world. Even if Georgia had lots of clubs and plenty of players, being top of the Georgian league might be similar to where they are nationally.

I think the question is how long a time frame are we looking at, because taking the home nations for example, they've played for decades with at least 25 years of professionalism. This is also on top of being popular enough to have enough players. Georgia's first international was in 1989 which is not much longer than professional rugby in the tier 1 nations. If we allow rugby to develop naturally then it will possibly be decades for tier 2 sides to develop. If people want rugby to expand then there needs to be extra support and opportunities given to accelerate that. Rugby in Georgia for example will gain more popularity with their team playing tier 1 matches than by just advertising it's domestic game.

 

[Scotty]

Thing is, it is a catch 22 situation. How do you develop a strong domestic league if your players don't play the best players in the world. Even if Georgia had lots of clubs and plenty of players, being top of the Georgian league might be similar to where they are nationally.

I think the question is how long a time frame are we looking at, because taking the home nations for example, they've played for decades with at least 25 years of professionalism. This is also on top of being popular enough to have enough players. Georgia's first international was in 1989 which is not much longer than professional rugby in the tier 1 nations. If we allow rugby to develop naturally then it will possibly be decades for tier 2 sides to develop. If people want rugby to expand then there needs to be extra support and opportunities given to accelerate that. Rugby in Georgia for example will gain more popularity with their team playing tier 1 matches than by just advertising it's domestic game.

I get that but use USA for example, have a strong well funded league, even if no where near prem level the foundation is there so why do Georgia deserve the chance to step up over a USA? They may be stronger now but due to demestic constraints their ceiling is alot lower.

Funding is a huge plus i mean look at scotland only 2 teams but still a tier 1 nation.

Im all for tier 2 getting exposure but dont want another italy where in 10 years time they havnt beat England once.

If italy are replace it needs to be with someone capable of competing or with real infastructure in play to improve.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

It's why this potential European super cup for me is pretty important.
Saying that if the Jagaures to Pro 14 and spain happened that could help Spain put in a bid. Say a split squad of Argentine and Spainish players.

For me the world cup needs to be expanded first.
Gives nations a bigger target. Look at Japan yes they have the money in the league but the country only really took notice once they actually did well in the RWC.

 

[Scotty]

It's why this potential European super cup for me is pretty important.
Saying that if the Jagaures to Pro 14 and spain happened that could help Spain put in a bid. Say a split squad of Argentine and Spainish players.

For me the world cup needs to be expanded first.
Gives nations a bigger target. Look at Japan yes they have the money in the league but the country only really took notice once they actually did well in the RWC.

Be honest i missed this, well heard of but didnt look it up, but on looking i like it but think it should be say 4 teams with 2 clubs each of the top emerging nations to allow them all to have a second league(like championship to prem but that would feed them 2 teams).

Just feel this gives them 2 top teams like italy and Scotland and a second club tier the country could get behind their team to really grow the league