Devalued 6 Nations...

I've seen this so said on this board several times....

"....devalued 6 Nations...."

Can someone explain what is meant by the term.

Can you also explain why the 6 Nations is always devalued when Wales are leading the table (ie. same said in 2005 and 2008) but when England, France or Ireland are leading the tournament it is NOT devalued...

I just don't understand the logic.

Similarly, why are the IRB rankings meaningless when Wales are higher than England, which they where a week ago, and likely to be again after the weekend. But when England are above Wales they mean everything....

I could simply take jealousy as the answer.... but surely as we're rugby fans not wendy ball, so there must be a logical explanation to the above...

Please explain....

"Can someone explain what is meant by the term. "

ehh? but you've answered your own question.

OK I know what is meant by "Devalued 6 Nations", but why is it devalued...

What characteristics make it devalued....

It isn't devalued, it is merely a wind up statement, the less you pay attention to it, the better.

The only way Wales can possibly do that well is if the 6 Nations is devalued. It's pretty much a tautology.

I don't think it is devalued.

However, the reason I'm disappointed with this year's Six Nations (other than Scotland's performance...) is that Wales are in pole position to win the title despite not playing as well as we know they can.

They were pretty even with Ireland;
They were better than a poor Scotland;
They were pretty even against England, where their much-vaunted backline were nullified; and
They beat Italy, but definitely failed to convince.

I'm NOT saying Wales wouldn't deserve the title, should they win it. They have played better, for the most part, than the other teams. However, you can't really say that they've been dominant. We know that Wales can play better than they are, and for them to win, despite this, devalues the tournament in some people's eyes. That's all.

I do think that this 'devalued Six Nations' line is used by a few posters as a stick to beat Wales, which is unfair. If it is devalued, then it's because the other teams have been unable to compete with Wales despite, as I've said, Wales not playing as well as they can.

On a side note, I would say that this championship has had more 'ugly' games than in previous years. Scotland v England, Wales v Italy, and France v Ireland, as well as others.

AFAIK the record books don't have an asterisk beside the 6N winner that reads "devalued" at the bottom. Surely that is all that counts?

IanBru wrote:I don't think it is devalued.

However, the reason I'm disappointed with this year's Six Nations (other than Scotland's performance...) is that Wales are in pole position to win the title despite not playing as well as we know they can.

They were pretty even with Ireland;
They were better than a poor Scotland;
They were pretty even against England, where their much-vaunted backline were nullified; and
They beat Italy, but definitely failed to convince.

I'm NOT saying Wales wouldn't deserve the title, should they win it. They have played better, for the most part, than the other teams. However, you can't really say that they've been dominant. We know that Wales can play better than they are, and for them to win, despite this, devalues the tournament in some people's eyes. That's all.

I do think that this 'devalued Six Nations' line is used by a few posters as a stick to beat Wales, which is unfair. If it is devalued, then it's because the other teams have been unable to compete with Wales despite, as I've said, Wales not playing as well as they can.

On a side note, I would say that this championship has had more 'ugly' games than in previous years. Scotland v England, Wales v Italy, and France v Ireland, as well as others.

But surely that speaks volumes for the work Gatland has done with Wales? As an Irish fan they were the better team but needed a questionable referee decision to win. But I have no doubt if that wasn't given they would have got the points themselves given they had marched up the length of the pitch. They only pulled away from Scotland with a two man advantage, and struggled to beat England and showed a real lack of creativity against Italy. Two seasons ago they would have lost probably two of those games. This year they are on for a Slam. Wales win games where they aren't at their best. Isn't that the mark of a good team?

Its not devalued at all, in fact the quality and competitiveness have been as good as I can recall.

A couple of games hinged on referee/TMO decisions but thats a reflection of how tight the games have been.

Wales have been the best team and thoroughly deserve their title and triple crown and if they put France away deserving GS champions too.

Not devalued at all, but i'm not convinced people have been making this claim.

The point from IanBru i think is spot on. Wales have clearly been the best team, but i can't help feeling they've been playing in 4th gear at best.

Aside from losing to Wales, my next biggest disappointment has been the fact Wales don't seem to have cut loose and shown what they can do. I think this is partly a result of a slightly limited gameplan. Gatland's looked to utilise your massive backline by smashing it up the middle, sucking defenders in and then going round the stretched defence. When that's failed, Wales haven't tried much else. This isn't me saying 'Wales can only play one way' but the complete opposite, i think Wales could be MUCH better if they mix it up more. I'd like to see Scott Williams start ahead of Davies to be honest.

I agree with Hookisms that Wales have learnt to win when not at their best.

I don't personally believe that any tournament is "devalued" if the opposition actually want to win it; you can only play the opposition you're up against. The LV= cup, perhaps... but even that serves a valuable purpose

I think the cries of "devalued" are often a knee-jerk response to an equally knee-jerk lack of any humility from a hard core of (usually Welsh) fans. If Wales can beat France they will have earned their Grand Slam, but it doesn't mean they are the finished article. They only just beat an Irish team who are, if we're honest, the wrong side of their peak, and needed a bit of luck and some help from the ref to beat an England team who probably had fewer caps between them than the Welsh front row alone.

The negatives include the Welsh discipline this season (a card per game), more than one moment of controversy and the fact that we haven't won this 6N by peaking. If the GS is won, it'll be the least thrilling of the trio. The last two were won by Wales being hands down the better side and with no controversy whatsoever by my recollection.

As a couple have said however, most of this could be interpreted positively. We're winning the tight games now many of which we almost certainly would have lost in the past. This shows a new level of bottle being broken in on by the team.

Also winning without being our best can surely be seen as encouraging. We're finding moderation here, hopefully gone are the days when we were either at our best and great or at our worst and terrible. A healthier mindset could well be developing. Also the last time we peaked immediately after a WC was followed by three seasons of disappointment, now we may peak at a more relevant time and generally greater consistency is potentially being developed.

I don't think it's being devalued, I'm not sure many people do. It just sounds like you want other nations approval on how good Wales are at the moment. I really don't understand it. Is winning the 6 nations(more than likely) this year not enough confirmation of that?

There's a lot of delusion of how Wales beat the other sides

Ireland - Wales scored more tries and couldve scored more end of

Scotland - they had two yellows For cYnical play because they had to cheat to keep in touch

England - as been pointed out England rarely lose at twickers to anyone, so good win there

Italy - Wales threw it about like a training game and made unforced errors which was disappointing.

To say Wales are lucky to be where they are is just plain wrong

Knowsit17 wrote:The last two were won by Wales being hands down the better side and with no controversy whatsoever by my recollection.

Not quite how I remember it... 40 minutes into the first game of the 2008 one, England were ahead 16-6 and Wales looked to be on the ropes. But England then lost Moody on 14 minutes and then Rees on 41 and ended up playing with Ben Kay at 6 for pretty much all of the second half. Wales put in a great effort to come back into the match and get the late try that sealed victory - but it was against a team with an old school lock trying to cover the back row. They also lost Strettle at about the same time as Moody.

Not controversial, just bad luck, but by no measure were Wales "hands down the better side". The wheels could easily have fallen off the Welsh campaign had England not had their worst day for injuries since the 2007 RWC Final (where Peter Richards ended up playing at 7 after Moody and Worsley both went off).

slartibartfast wrote:There's a lot of delusion of how Wales beat the other sides

Ireland - Wales scored more tries and couldve scored more end of

Slarti, let's leave out the crystal ball scores. The table gets complicated enough at this point in the Championship without the fantasy Could'a scoresheet complicating things.

slartibartfast wrote:England - as been pointed out England rarely lose at twickers to anyone, so good win there

Not true at all. Fortress Twickenham is a long time ago. England rarely lose to Wales, Scotland or Italy at Twickenham. Ireland, NZ, South Africa... are another matter. Wales needed a lucky break and four decisions to go against England that could equally have gone in their favour (missing North's hand into touch, not calling a penalty try for the collapsed maul, not giving Strettle's grounding - which certainly looked OK on the only replay available in the stadium, and not going back for the pen when advantage had not been called over).

It was a good result, but not the emphatic win that could (should?) have been given the disparity in experience between the teams.

Wales have done enough to be in line for a Grand Slam and will obviously deserve it, and praise for getting it, if they go on and do it.

However the OP should perhaps think back to other years and NO, winning sides rarely get the full garland parade of worship they feel they might deserve.

I remember when Ireland got it, the talk in these circles was blunt enough - Ireland only really got it because other contenders were in a period of.................... yep, it's that lovely all encompassing word again - Rebuilding.

The "devalued" tag gets an airing every year.....every year,not just this one.

SecretFly wrote:

slartibartfast wrote:There's a lot of delusion of how Wales beat the other sides

Ireland - Wales scored more tries and couldve scored more end of

Slarti, let's leave out the crystal ball scores. The table gets complicated enough at this point in the Championship without the fantasy Could'a scoresheet complicating things.

My post is in reaction to the garbage that Wales were somehow lucky as they only scrapped past Ireland, England and 13 man Scotland.

They were away wins and a good home win

Poorfour wrote:

slartibartfast wrote:England - as been pointed out England rarely lose at twickers to anyone, so good win there

Not true at all. Fortress Twickenham is a long time ago. England rarely lose to Wales, Scotland or Italy at Twickenham. Ireland, NZ, South Africa... are another matter. Wales needed a lucky break and four decisions to go against England that could equally have gone in their favour (missing North's hand into touch, not calling a penalty try for the collapsed maul, not giving Strettle's grounding - which certainly looked OK on the only replay available in the stadium, and not going back for the pen when advantage had not been called over).

It was a good result, but not the emphatic win that could (should?) have been given the disparity in experience between the teams.

Selective memory there - lets watch again and look at where the reffing went against Wales...

Dont forget Robshaw's yellow that he never got.We also did not pick any Saffers nor Kiwis.

slartibartfast wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

slartibartfast wrote:There's a lot of delusion of how Wales beat the other sides

Ireland - Wales scored more tries and couldve scored more end of

Slarti, let's leave out the crystal ball scores. The table gets complicated enough at this point in the Championship without the fantasy Could'a scoresheet complicating things.

My post is in reaction to the garbage that Wales were somehow lucky as they only scrapped past Ireland, England and 13 man Scotland.

They were away wins and a good home win

I've said from day one that Wales deserved victory in Dublin because they played better than Ireland. Most Irish here admitted that and recognise it...but like I said, the could haves are always many in a game of rugby and they invariably make friends with both sides. 'If we hadn't lost, we might have won,' kinda thing

Poorfour wrote:

Knowsit17 wrote:The last two were won by Wales being hands down the better side and with no controversy whatsoever by my recollection.

Not quite how I remember it... 40 minutes into the first game of the 2008 one, England were ahead 16-6 and Wales looked to be on the ropes. But England then lost Moody on 14 minutes and then Rees on 41 and ended up playing with Ben Kay at 6 for pretty much all of the second half. Wales put in a great effort to come back into the match and get the late try that sealed victory - but it was against a team with an old school lock trying to cover the back row. They also lost Strettle at about the same time as Moody.

Not controversial, just bad luck, but by no measure were Wales "hands down the better side". The wheels could easily have fallen off the Welsh campaign had England not had their worst day for injuries since the 2007 RWC Final (where Peter Richards ended up playing at 7 after Moody and Worsley both went off).

I remember it well, actually seen it tons of times since I have the boxset for both Slams and if things go well can start to plan adding a third to that collection

True you did have an exceptionally bad day with injuries but it wasn't that that cost it for England, it was events such as Jonny's wayward pass, England failing to regather that chaotic bouncing ball and Balshaw's infamous chargedown that set England back. Well, that and Wales finishing off their opportunities in the final 20 mins

SecretFly wrote:

slartibartfast wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

slartibartfast wrote:There's a lot of delusion of how Wales beat the other sides

Ireland - Wales scored more tries and couldve scored more end of

Slarti, let's leave out the crystal ball scores. The table gets complicated enough at this point in the Championship without the fantasy Could'a scoresheet complicating things.

My post is in reaction to the garbage that Wales were somehow lucky as they only scrapped past Ireland, England and 13 man Scotland.

They were away wins and a good home win

I've said from day one that Wales deserved victory in Dublin because they played better than Ireland. Most Irish here admitted that and recognise it...but like I said, the could haves are always many in a game of rugby and they invariably make friends with both sides. 'If we hadn't lost, we might have won,' kinda thing

I think we're agreeing. My if and but was a rebuttle to some of the chaff

Everyone said the same about England last year, so don't worry about it. A 6 nations title is as described, never devalued.

I guess no team was been at the top of its game this tournament, but that's maybe partly because there are more good teams in it than usual.

Wales have probably been best overall so far, but not by much. Ireland have been good but perhaps should have been even stronger (missing BOD), England had fairly low expectations and have greatly exceeded them, France have been slightly disappointing but are still strong, Scotland were showing encouraging signs until the last game, the quality of the Italian players is increasing year on year.

It's been a really good tournament (but then I would think that!).

Taffineastbourne wrote:Dont forget Robshaw's yellow that he never got.We also did not pick any Saffers nor Kiwis.

No but you picked plenty of Welsh who could be deemed as English - North,Davies,Cuthbert,Lydiate. They were either born in England or have at least one English parent.

Also Warburton who has an English father.


In regards to the rugby if Wales win the grandslam they deserve it.

Wales can only beat whatever is in front of them. You could argue this is in an England side in transition, a French and Italian sides with new coaches but ultimately so what. A win is a win.

No but you picked plenty of Welsh who could be deemed as English - North,Davies,Cuthbert,Lydiate. They were either born in England or have at least one English parent.

Also Warburton who has an English father.

Thats just poor, North has an English parent but grew up here and speaks welsh. That has to be more of a claim than lets say Botha, Hartley, Baritt, and even Tuilagi.

There are very few families in Wales, well east Wales anyway who don't have some sort of English heritage in their blood. The 2 countries are interlinked throughout thousands of years.

Cuthbert is the only 'questionable' one of that list, and he has always considered himself Welsh apparently.

I also think it's worth mentioning that the last 3 grand slams were won on the back of a new coach being appointed weren't they?

Jealousy.. that is the answer Major. I am jealous, but catching up.

Oh God no, please, please, God no. Let's not get into this again, firstly the grand slam is not even won yet, nor is the championship. We can all use if's and buts, so if we use them we cannot dismiss anyone else's if's and but's. Look the best team in the tournement will win it, and we will find this out on Saturday. At the moment as it stand the table say's that Wales are the best.

thebluesmancometh my point is that those who live in glasshouses should not throw stones.

Though admittedly I think we all live in glasshouses and enjoy throwing stones.

I like it that you say even Tuilagi. He's less English than Barritt.

Cuthbert is more English than either of them.

Well for me Tuilagi has more of a case because he came through the English system. Which is fair enough, but he has no English heritage that I know ofand Baritts granny once visited England???

I am 100% Welsh, granted with a tiny bit of Irish, Scot, and English heritage, but I am more English than those guys!!!

But then I am a great beleiver in not giving NZ so much credit due to half their team being poached from the islands for so many years. If you take the best physical specimens form physically brutal heritage you are always going to have an advantage!


And before anyone brings up the obvious, Cockbain, Howarth etc... I disagreed with them all, although was a child mostly.
But this is off topic, I'm not trying to hyjack the thread.

No GS can be devalued. This one, if Wales do win it, will be a major achievement as at least three if not 4 of the teams are very close to each other at the moment.

The only comment I would make, and I am not trying to devalue it, is that Wales are traditionally strong in the 6N after a RWC.

Possibly because they don't seem to change the teams so much.

Usually, (this RWC is an exception) it is the manager.

The only difference between England, Ireland, France and Wales at the moment is the bounce of a ball or a referees interpretation on a split second decision.

Though to be fair Wales did go to Ireland and win first game up with about 5-6 members of their first choice pack missing!
Wales have been unlucky with injuries especially up front, we have had 6 different locks, 3 open side flankers, 2 blindsides, 4 hookers, 3 loose heads etc (including subs). And 3 different captains.

Wales have done well this year because we have scored 9 tries and conceded only 3!

Wales haven't really been given a lot of credit by others outside Wales considering the massive disruption they have had to deal with.

AlynDavies wrote:Wales haven't really been given a lot of credit by others outside Wales considering the massive disruption they have had to deal with.

You are wrong. Wales have been given a huge amount of credit from people outside Wales. If you read the papers, watch the TV, listen to the radio you cannot miss pundits heaping superlatives on the team.


As to the OP - i guess you have bought the WUM bait hook, line and sinker. No championship is devalued, whoever wins is champion and should be acknowledged as such. If you can seal it with a GS then even better.

I think the first time I heard the 6N described as ‘devalued’ was by John Inverdale in 2008. This was because it was after the 2007 RWC and he felt that many of the teams were way below their best and short of players owing to injury.

Obviously the sentiment did not sit well with Welsh folk as Inverdale seemed to be implying that Wales didn’t have to beat much to win the Slam that year. For the record I can’t stand Inverdale and any Slam is deserved.

But since then I don’t think I have heard the expression mentioned by the studio pundits or journalists; probably because Inverdale (rightly) got a lot of stick for his comments in 2008.

It is a bit of a coincidence, post WC Wales generally do well, and post Lions the French are tipically strong.

Maybe it can be put down to rest and recovery but after Wales played every game possible last WC that doesn't ring true.

Goodness, the wumming has started early for this weekend

Is that aimed at me Billy? Didn't mean anything if it was... actually don't understand what I could've said wrong.

No, not aimed at anyone, its a general thing across the board when the big games are approaching. Dont get me wrong, i rather enjoy it all and get a good laugh

eirebilly wrote:No, not aimed at anyone, its a general thing across the board when the big games are approaching. Dont get me wrong, i rather enjoy it all and get a good laugh

Everyone is getting nervous, I think Wales is bouncing at the moment, I hope the players are as far away from Wales as possible!

For the first time ever I don;t want to see a Wales game, I'm half tempted to try and be in work and just get the result off someone later! I don't think my heart could take it, lol.

Alyn

My aunt lives in Cardiff and hasn't been able to Watch a Wales game live since the England win in 2005. She seriously gets so nervous, and then so excited during that her heart can't take it. She did have a triple bypass a few years before mind.

She has to record the game, get told the result and then can re watch later on.

Her reasoning is that she has always expected Wales to lose since the early 80's, so she wouldn't expect anything, but when we start to win and look good she just developed a nervous syndrome, compiled with her condition brought on hypertension, and she actually passed out before the next game 2005!

Stupid mare...

thebluesmancometh wrote:She has to record the game, get told the result and then can re watch later on.

I did that for a while too, listen on the radio and if we won watch it on I player later, though mostly now I just watch it.
I used to always skip Irish games in the 90's though because they were so bloody awful.

such double standards.

Wales win the Grandslam in 08, its because they have a new coach (honeymoon period having that affect on the players) - grandslam devalued.

Wales win the slam in 2012 itll be because other sides have new coaches (whereas they're sides in transition instead) - grandslam devalued.

Things the welsh have been berated for in the past, but no-one seems to get berated for if they're english.....

Hyping up a player after 1 good game....
Claiming a morale victory in defeat.....
Blaming the ref......
Claiming they were the better team despite stats and the scoreline.....

Its not everyone, and i dont want to generalise, but there seems to be different rules here dependant on the side of the bridge you're from.

Comfort, in all seriousness, there is no such a thing as a 'Devalued 6 Nations or GS'

Come Saturday, there is one Irishman here who will be willing the Welsh boys onto a GS

There will be another sat with me Billy, the missus little brother, the only problem is he's been told if we win the slam the pubs going to turn the telly off and we'll start the party!!!

And what a party it will be

Why is the 6ns devalued? surely the best team will win, who is the betst team? Well at the moment because they have won 4 out of 4 games, then you will have to say it is Wales.

Wales are heading for a Grand Slam on saturday, but if i was a welsh man, i would not count my chickens just yet.

Wales do have tho beat France if they do then they will be 6ns Granmd Slam winnersa. However if they do not win, on saturday they still have a chance of the champion ship, but if they loooooooooose on saturday, then England could have a chance of winning the tournament.

It will all depend on how many Wales lose by.

Nothing will compare to the 2005 slam though, we waited so long for it, I didn't think anyone thought we'd ever win another.

The 2008 one was "oh great another one", the 2012 will be lack the 2008 one as well to be honest (if we win of course).