Argentina for the Six Nations?

Rod · Post by **Rod** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 5:05 pm

I've suggested before on this site having 8 teams instead of the current 6 nations (i.e. add Argentina plus one other) Play in 2 conferences of 4 teams. Top 2 in each conference go into a semi final and final and 3rd place play off. So you still get 5 games and the finances could be shared so that the winners get most but the eliminated teams get a share.

Alternatively you could have two leagues of 4 teams with promotion and relegation.

The Argies deserve a national league chance.

Rocky181 · Post by **Rocky181** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 7:29 pm

Argentina should play in the Southern Hemisphere but Sanzar are too slow in acting...do they want to make the game more popular or do they want to maintain the 'Boys Club' attitude? the only problem with Southern Hemisphere rugby is if it clashes with the northen hemisphere comps like Heineken cup and that. Will clubs be willing to give up their players? Argentina will not be competitive if they have to put a 2nd string team.

Mr_Ben · Post by **Mr_Ben** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 8:51 pm

The 5 nations as they were did their bit for the development of the game by bringing in Italy to become the 6 Nations.
The European fixture lists is crowded enough already without adding more teams to the 6N's.
It's surely the SANZAR countries turn to show that they serious about helping the game develop and looking to expand the tri nations.

However...

That conveniently ignores the fact that the a large proportion of the Argentinian and Pacific Islands players play club rugby in Europe.

Anyone who can work out a way of solving that issue is doing better than me!

On a more general point about developing the game, if i remember rightly, the England bid for this years world cup included proposals for reducing the number of teams in the finals and setting up a "junior" world cup for the less established teams so that there weren't so many one sided matches?

I certainly think some form of european tournament below the 6N's involving the likes of Georgia, Portugal and Romania would be a positive step as well as showing that the IRB are serious about developing the game

Bill W · Post by **Bill W** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 8:56 pm

This was one (I cannot think of too many others) of the RFU's better ideas. It was rejected out of hand by the IRB.

And so it continues........

fferm buttocks · Post by **fferm buttocks** » Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:53 pm

No way, Jose. Why should the Pumas be in the Six Nations ... it's a European tourney. Their not even in the same hemisphere!

bigstef · Post by **bigstef** » Sat Sep 15, 2007 9:36 pm

There is a second tier of the six nations isn't there?

fferm buttocks · Post by **fferm buttocks** » Sun Sep 16, 2007 1:36 am

2nd tier?

Nah, the 6N should just for ever be the current ones, plus any others (like valiant Georgia ...) who get up to a standard ... but they MUST be in Europe.

Argentina got NOTHING to do with it.

simon redshaw · Post by **simon redshaw** » Sun Sep 16, 2007 7:09 am

All very well to say that, but where else are they going to play?

They are too good for the standard of the rest of the Americas, they are unlikely it seems to be omitted to the Tri Nations, so if they don't get omitted to the Six Nations, how are they supposed to get regular games?

It seems unfair to deny them such extra games. Of course, the IRB themselves don't care about fairness. Time their board were booted out?

Nabuk · Post by **Nabuk** » Sun Sep 16, 2007 8:01 am

Well on current showing I bet Argentina would turn the 6N's down if offered a place.

Why?

The standard would be too low......

muttley75 · Post by **muttley75** » Sun Sep 16, 2007 1:12 pm

Rod,
Must say I liked your idea but why not make it 2 leagues of 5 with promotion and relegation? There's plenty of teams that need the exposure (and the kick up the arris for the so-called senior nations!) that playing in something like that will do!

Just imagine England having a shocker of a season (not that difficult to do at the moment) and being relegated to the second division? Surely THAT would knock Thomas and Barron out of their dreamworld!!

As for the 10 teams, what about England, Ireland, Wales, Scotland, France, Italy, Argentina, Georgia, Portugal and Romania?

Surely someone has to take a forward step and embrace the junior nations and increase the chances of rugby becoming a true global game. If we in the Northern hemisphere did something like that it would shame the SH into accepting maybe a joint Pacific Nations side.

Start up 2 new competitions, funded by the IRB. One in the Pacific Rim to include USA, Canada, Japan, China, Uruguay (not strictly pac rim but..) and the remaining members of Samoa, Fiji and Tonga (they would be reduced stregth due to the joint Pacific nations team).
The other to be an African league with teams like Namibia, Cote D'Ivoire, Zimbabwe (given the political considerations not too sure of their admittance), Egypt, Morrocco, and all the other African nations that play.

Each major nation adopts 2 junior teams and aids in coaching, development etc and so forth and maybe sending over an amateur/semi-pro international team to play them and bring them on.

Surely that is some sort of blueprint to increase popularity and development of the global game. Something has to be done - the status quo CANNOT be allowed to continue! At the moment it is an absolute disgrace that nothing is being done to increase the game. Everybody (especially the SANZAR nations) seems to talk the talk, nobody at the moment wants to walk the walk!