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
Tier 1 expansion - the great debate.
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="TRF_heineken" data-source="post: 968281" data-attributes="member: 40658"><p>I know, they will be the most disadvantaged by this plan, and that's why I can't really see a lot of structural changes to the current setup of the 6N and the RC (albeit rather new). But they are essentially the 10 nations that are the tier 1 group. and they hold the most power. And for them to make drastic changes to a system that is working (for them), won't happen quickly.</p><p></p><p>Japan, kinda shat their own bed when they went against the SANZAAR partners in relation to the 2023 bid when they didn't vote for SA. And since then, the Sunwolves were also demoted from Super Rugby. But in all honesty, I don't think the Sunwolves issue has anything to do with this. The plan has been for a while to get SR back to it's former glory when it was the Super 14/12 with the round robin programme instead of the conference system. So SANZAAR just went back to what they knew worked in order to keep their own system working better, before looking at other ventures.</p><p></p><p>I say, we have to use this as a model, in that I get there should be expansion, but don't try too much too soon, or it'll backfire like it did with the Sunwolves. </p><p></p><p>For me, I think the simplest solution would be to extend the international window by 4 weeks. But split those 4 weeks in 2 during the year. Have 2 extra weeks during the June internationals, when NH based teams travel South, and have 2 week with the EOYT extra. But those 4 weeks must be solely used to have Tier 1 teams play Tier 2 teams. Like a warm-up to a series.</p><p></p><p>Let's say next year Ireland tours SA for the June internationals, they will play 3 tests. But before we play Ireland, we will play to matches against a team like Tonga and Uruguay in a one-off game. Then when we go on the EOYT we usually play 3 games in the UK and Ireland, and another game against France or Italy. Why not have a game against Georgia and Spain while we are on tour?</p><p></p><p>This way, the tier 2 nations learns to travel to tier 1 games and get accustomed to the bigger stadiums and the difference in intensity, but also gets to host the big guns at home and get the locals perhaps more interested in the sport.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="TRF_heineken, post: 968281, member: 40658"] I know, they will be the most disadvantaged by this plan, and that's why I can't really see a lot of structural changes to the current setup of the 6N and the RC (albeit rather new). But they are essentially the 10 nations that are the tier 1 group. and they hold the most power. And for them to make drastic changes to a system that is working (for them), won't happen quickly. Japan, kinda shat their own bed when they went against the SANZAAR partners in relation to the 2023 bid when they didn't vote for SA. And since then, the Sunwolves were also demoted from Super Rugby. But in all honesty, I don't think the Sunwolves issue has anything to do with this. The plan has been for a while to get SR back to it's former glory when it was the Super 14/12 with the round robin programme instead of the conference system. So SANZAAR just went back to what they knew worked in order to keep their own system working better, before looking at other ventures. I say, we have to use this as a model, in that I get there should be expansion, but don't try too much too soon, or it'll backfire like it did with the Sunwolves. For me, I think the simplest solution would be to extend the international window by 4 weeks. But split those 4 weeks in 2 during the year. Have 2 extra weeks during the June internationals, when NH based teams travel South, and have 2 week with the EOYT extra. But those 4 weeks must be solely used to have Tier 1 teams play Tier 2 teams. Like a warm-up to a series. Let's say next year Ireland tours SA for the June internationals, they will play 3 tests. But before we play Ireland, we will play to matches against a team like Tonga and Uruguay in a one-off game. Then when we go on the EOYT we usually play 3 games in the UK and Ireland, and another game against France or Italy. Why not have a game against Georgia and Spain while we are on tour? This way, the tier 2 nations learns to travel to tier 1 games and get accustomed to the bigger stadiums and the difference in intensity, but also gets to host the big guns at home and get the locals perhaps more interested in the sport. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
General Rugby Union
Tier 1 expansion - the great debate.
Top