• General Message Board

  • Iain Brown Iain Brown Jan 14, 2009 05:37 Flag

    expanding the 6 nations

    With the try nations looking at expansion by the inclusion of Argentina if the 6 nations were to expand what team could included in the 6 nations the European team showing the most promise looks like Romania any other ideas.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • It is an interesting idea, but , to be honest, if there was any more internationals something would have to give way at club rugby level.

      What maybe we need is the inclusion of the Saxons and the Greyhounds given an opportunity to play with the likes of Georgia and Russia in an European equivalent of the Chrurchill cup undertaken at 6 nations time. This would give development to the second string teams and allow the others to play against quality opposition.

      However I am not in favour of yet expanding the 6 nations, although with Russian schools now allowed to teach rugby, it wont be long before they are a serious force in the game as they are becoming at 7's. 2015 may be a good time to review this again, but not yet.


    • I like Bernards Idea of adding 2 of Georgia, Portugal and Romania to the 6 nations, why not have these 3 countries play off for the 2 8 nations places.

    • Let us in and we will tear you ALL apart after 3-5 years of practice:) Georgian team has won 64 % of test matches it has played (second worldwide after the all blacks with astonishing 75 %). This means: we need better opponents, only way to progress is to play with more skillful vis-a-vies. We love this game, we do care for this game and we can bring something new and interesting to it. Sooner or later you will have to let us in; it is nobler to do it 5 years earlier as a gesture of goodwill than 5 years later by order of necessity and common sense... From Georgia with respect.

    • They said that by including Italy into the then 5 Nations to make it Six that that would ruin the competition and yet it now makes for a more compelling event.
      It never fails to surprise me just how many people are opposed to change.
      Perhaps you ought to join the Flat Earth Society?
      So, in your opinion is the Six Nations a better contest than the Five Nations was and is it better now than when it was the Four Nations ie before France was invited to join.
      I agree that there should be a maximum number of International Teams in the Championship and that is why I suggested a 'League' system where the worst performing team of the season is relegated to the second tier and the best from Tier 2 is promoted.
      Change is good - that is what evolution is about. However, some people like sameness too much and are afraid of change.
      Are you afraid of change bty915479?

    • "The 2nd Tier could also include Argentina initially .... they are so bloody far away from anyone else of quality ..."

      Have you noticed the IRB rankings lately? And who came in Third in the last World Cup? And who beat France 5 out of the last 6 times they met? ARGENTINA!!!

      If you want to use the travelling distance as an excuse, that's fine. But Argentina are a quality side and they have players who can give the "big boys" a run for their money!

    • Expand the 6 nations rubbish. It would ruin one of the best rugby union contests outside the world cup and lions.
      As for argentina they shoud have been part of the SH tri nations years ago. It is only the racism of the SH keeping them out somthing for the IRB to deal with.

    • I agree with the concept of promotion/relegation.
      However, might it not be a better idea to create a 2 league system whereby the team that gets relegated goes into the 2nd League or 2nd Tier and is then still able to get match practice against possibly lesser opposition but match practice nonetheless.
      The teams in the 2nd Tier then get to play against one of the 'bigger boys' albeit probably Italy although it could easily be Scotland and cold have been Wales, England, Ireland or even France at some points in the past.
      The promoted team would acquire a huge amount of knowledge even if they stayed up for only one season and of course it would vary the drinking venues available - all in the name of cultural exchange you understand.
      It can be done and with a 2nd Tier including the likes of Portugal, Spain, Georgia and Romania it would provide these teams and their nations a well earned revenue generation system to reinvest in the game at a local grass roots and international level to enable them to obtain the services of 'better and more experienced' coaches from the Six Nations.
      Obviously, as a Welshman, if Wales were relegated then I would immediately call for this system to be abolished without delay but that aside I believe that this is a fairer system. The 2nd Tier could also include Argentina initially.
      Unfortunately for Argentina they are so bloody far away from anyone else of quality and I think part of the reluctance to include them anywhere is based upon the travel issue.
      A couple of hundred quid to go to France is OK but half a grand plus plus to go to Argentina is a bit much, even if they throw in some corned beef.

    • Would you trust a sherpa guide who scams forums and messes up other peoples threads...?

    • There is no incentive for the 'big boys' in playing low-class opposition, be it financial or from a playing perspective.
      The reason England/Wales & Ireland don't regularly invite the likes of Georgia, Portugal, USA to their shores is two-fold. Revenue would be average, crowds too, and they have nothing to gain from demolishing a below-standard team. Its like Manchester United picking friendlies against division 3 sides.
      They have nothing to prove and risk a defeat!
      Expand the union-playing nations, yes. But keep them at arms length until they are at a level where they can provide credible opposition, akin to Canada or the pacific islanders/fiji etc

    • View More Messages