Rugby 2011

[BonnieShels]

What needs to happen soon is the realisation that there needs to be a way for the smaller European nations to gain entry into the Six Nations (SN). Unless there's regular competition with the better sides they will never make it. Just look at Italy now compared to Italy in 2000 when they joined the then Five Nations.

There have been some seriously watery proposals from the IRB and FIRA about some sort of promotion and relegation to the SN from the ENC.

Whilst this would be absolutely preposterous to have a direct relegation it would make sense for the last placed team to play off with the 1st placed ENC team to ensure a consistent goal for the ENC teams.
So say this year Italy play-off against Georgia for the right to play in the SN. Italy would win but the continued compettion for georgia would ensure that some day in the future they would have an opportunity to come play with the big boys.

[Charlie Darwin]

Rugby's problem is that the tradition of the 6 Nations is so marketable. Italy have undoubtedly added to the competition but the main draw is the four sides from these aisles, with France as sort of an exotic extra. They can't really tamper with the round robin format because the four B&I sides playing one another can't be messed with, so the only way they could really expand would be through some kind of messy promotion/relgation system as outlined above. A better short-term solution might be for NH teams to commit to one fixture a year against lower tier sides, so they can guarantee a couple of higher class fixtures in the way that Italy were before 2000 and Argentina have been until next year. I doubt either the NH or SH teams would agree to it easily though. They all operate on budgets that are dependent on regular tours against the same sides.

[BonnieShels]

Concur completely.

I think what I have outlined above is a fairly obvious solution. One extra game wouldn't kill Italy, Scotland or Wales a year! :P

[mypost]

Canada v NZ wasn't the cakewalk for the All Blacks it would have been 10 years ago.
This weekend is not coming quick enough.

I watched the full game, it was over in 10 minutes, and Canada lost by 60+ points. If that's not a cakewalk, what is?

Most of the games so far were walkovers, only a couple of shock results, and all the expected qualifiers sailed through, only having to play one difficult game.

Tbh, it's hard to see past New Zealand in a New Zealand WC. Even in their toughest games, they can destroy a team in a few minutes, especially at home.

[BonnieShels]

There was more to my sentence that I don't think you grasped.

[mypost]

Just look at Italy now compared to Italy in 2000 when they joined the then Five Nations.

There's not much difference. Italy have lost all 22 games against Ireland and England, another 10 against France, and most of the others. They're still pretty much a guaranteed 3 points and a points difference boost for everybody, unless you play muck.

[Real ale Madrid]

There's not much difference. Italy have lost all 22 games against Ireland and England, another 10 against France, and most of the others. They're still pretty much a guaranteed 3 points and a points difference boost for everybody, unless you play muck.

Its 2 points for a win in the six nations.

On the face of results, Italy, you might think have not made much progress, but looking at Italian rugby now compared to 10 years ago then I have to say there is a world of difference. Playing in a serious international competition has raised the profile of the game massively in Italy, added to that we now have 2 professional regional sides playing regular league rugby is going to bring it on further. On the pitch as well they are now a respected rugby nation – and while they have not got the wins they would have liked - going to Rome / Milan is now a serious game for any International side as Australia and New Zealand have found out in recent years, and the France game certainly showed what they are capable of. True some of the stats are ugly, but you have to look behind the stats – I reckon Italy will continue to improve.

[mypost]

Every team beats them unless they're a poor side or in one case this year, had an off day. When Italy come to Dublin next year, it'll be another mismatch and they'll lose by another 20/30-odd points. They serve little purpose in the 6N, except get hockeyed by better sides who have been playing the sport for nigh on 100 years.

As for the profile raise, I think most Italians prefer the beautiful game.

[bennocelt]

but they do get the odd win against the Scots and Welsh which is always amusing

[Real ale Madrid]

Every team beats them unless they're a poor side or in one case this year, had an off day

Well you are saying two things there:
1. You have to be a poor side to lose to Italy
2. Good teams have to play well to beat Italy
Contradictory statement I think.

When Italy come to Dublin next year, it'll be another mismatch and they'll lose by another 20/30-odd points. game.

Like the last 2 Six Nations meetings between the teams?
Italy 12-13 Ireland
Ireland 19-13 Italy
Don't see any mismatch there - were Ireland poor or just having an off day ?

They serve little purpose in the 6N, except get hockeyed by better sides

By that logic Scotland shouldn't be allowed compete either. Italy's 6N record in the last ten years was as good as Irelands in the 1990's - should they have kicked us out for a spell for "serving little purpose"?

As for the profile raise, I think most Italians prefer the beautiful game.

True - but does nothing to contradict the raised profile of the game due to top level competition, I didn't say it had a higher profile than other sports.

[legendz]

For someone who has talked a bit about pyramids, I'm not for this one! The 6 nations and tri-nations (now to be expanded to 4) are not part of a league system or anything like that, they are championships between certain nations. Tradition has to be respected. Marketability will have a say as well but generally that is influenced on wht the public want.
The ERC or IRB will have to find a different way for the lesser nations. The old 5 nations could accept one more team due to one team having a free weekend. The same has gone for the tri nations.
The European nations cup has a tiered structure. There is also a tiered structure in Asia. There has also been the development of the Pacific Nations. These nations have to find a different path. It's not a fob off, it's just nations have a championship amongst themselves and it has to be respected.
Regards options, would there be any possibility of a European Championship. The rugby calendar is packed. There are Lions tours every 4 years as well, that's another tradition of rugby.
In thinking of possibly ideas, I was mulling over the Davis Cup in tennis and it's format. Could there be a rugby version in Europe. There would be tiered groups of 4. It'd be knock-out based i.e. in Group I: England v France & Ireland v Wales, winner goes to Group I final. The two losers play in a third placed play-off with loser dropping to Group II. In Group II then Scotland v Romania & Italy v Georgia. Winners to final with winner going to Group II. Two losing semi-finalists in third placed play-off with loser dropping to Group III etc. This would only need two weekends and could be one game in May or June and the second game either in the same month or later in the year around the winter series, staged every second year, preferably even number years when there is no RWC or Lions tour.

[BonnieShels]

So, when Italy play well the other team has had an off day? Completely ridiculous talk.

[BonnieShels]

Legendz, instead of the bottom team of the 6N playing 1 more game against the best team in the ENC. You want to create a new competition modelled on the mental Davis Cup format and then shoehorn it into the packed schedule that exists?

BTW, the 6N is the European Championship. England are reigning Champions.

[mypost]

Well you are saying two things there:
1. You have to be a poor side to lose to Italy
2. Good teams have to play well to beat Italy
Contradictory statement I think.

I only said one, the first one.

Like the last 2 Six Nations meetings between the teams?
Italy 12-13 Ireland
Ireland 19-13 Italy
Don't see any mismatch there - were Ireland poor or just having an off day ?

How many times have we beaten them comprehensively in the past 11 years? How many away games have they won? How many titles have they contended for? How many WC 1/4F's have they made?

We won by 30 points last week. Australia beat them by almost the same in the tournament. Even on our "off days", we still beat them, home and away. England wallop them every year.

By that logic Scotland shouldn't be allowed compete either. Italy's 6N record in the last ten years was as good as Irelands in the 1990's - should they have kicked us out for a spell for "serving little purpose"?

It wasn't as good as Ireland's.

Scotland have a great history in rugby, they have won titles before, and they will be a force again in time. Italy have proved time and time again that they're not up to this level of rugby, and should be in with the Romanians and the Georgians.

[Real ale Madrid]

Ireland won 9 5N's games during the 90's . Italy won 7 games I'm thier first ten years in the competition. Not much difference. No calls for Ireland to be expelled either.

I didn't call for Scotland to be expelled, merely pointing out that via your logic, Scotland should be excluded based on thier results.

You keep replying to questions with more questions? Do you get a kick out of being negative? No one is saying Italy are top dogs. But surely you must accept that participation has been better than being left out in the cold in terms of thier rugby development?

[mypost]

Ireland won 9 5N's games during the 90's . Italy won 7 games I'm thier first ten years in the competition. Not much difference.

No calls for Ireland to be expelled either.

There was of course, one less game to play every year. Ireland have won Triple Crowns, Grand Slams, and Championships before. Italy have won nothing at club or international level, and will win nothing. Ireland beat them routinely every year, ergo Ireland>Italy.

No questions there.

[legendz]

Legendz, instead of the bottom team of the 6N playing 1 more game against the best team in the ENC. You want to create a new competition modelled on the mental Davis Cup format and then shoehorn it into the packed schedule that exists?

BTW, the 6N is the European Championship. England are reigning Champions.

I've nothing against the Davis Cup format. It works for having tiered groups and very few games. Space can be created for two weekends, use one weekend of the summer tests and another of the winter tests.
I'm not a supporter of the idea of promotion/relegation but asking around work with the rugby heads, there's a warm enough welcome to that suggestion or promotion/relegation so maybe it could be the way forward. Personally I'm not for it but that's just me.

[Real ale Madrid]

No questions there.

And no answers either, apart from underlying your assertion that results justify participation.

[legendz]

Just one final thing, if 6 nations winners are being given the title of European champion, there should be some promotion/relegation systems otherwise there would have to be a separate competition for determining the best team in Europe.

[BonnieShels]

Just one final thing, If 6 nations winners are being given the title of European champion, there should be some promotion/relegation systems otherwise their would have to be a separate competition for determining the best team in Europe.

Why would there HAVE to be? Because there is in Soccer?

The 6 Nations are clearly the 6 leading nations in the continent. The winners' of that competition are rightly considered the European Champions.