Information Please

Can someone please post a list of the remaining Test matches to end 2013?
Also is this some sort of Tournament other than the usual AI`s.Last year
there seemed to be a newtournament emerging.Also can any one confirm
if the Bonus Points system is finally coming into force in the 6Ns?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_end-of-year_rugby_union_tests

The AIs are just stand alone fixtures. Some will have a trophy attached for any meeting of those 2 nations but there is no tournament as everyone will play different nations.

As far as I know there are no plans to have BPs in the 6 Nations.

Thank you for the help,it seems it is World wide not just the usual AI`s.
Good to see Nz Maori Touring again after the finacial constraints mean`t
no Nz A side fielded Maori/Juniors.
Last year some Nations contested a quadregional Tournament[for want of a better
word] including the Boks which was reason for enquiry.
Read somewhere that 6Ns were going to introduce the bonus point system.
It is about only top Tournament not using them,interesting comment in
Telegraph.About the system is producing more boring/negative games. Plainly
this isn`t true of recent SH games.

emack2 wrote:
Last year some Nations contested a quadregional Tournament[for want of a better
word] including the Boks which was reason for enquiry.

Was that not this Summer - SA, Samoa, Scotland and Italy?

emack2 wrote:
Read somewhere that 6Ns were going to introduce the bonus point system.
It is about only top Tournament not using them,interesting comment in
Telegraph.About the system is producing more boring/negative games. Plainly
this isn`t true of recent SH games.

With teams playing a different number of home and away matches - I cannot see them using BPs in 6Ns. That may just be me hoping though. I do not like them, I do not want to see them in use.

Yep, the quadrangular was this summer (it was only a few months ago ).

The reason you don't have bonus points in the 6Ns is that you need to have home and away fixtures for them to be workable. I think they're fine in tournaments that have that set-up.

emack2 wrote:Thank you for the help,it seems it is World wide not just the usual AI`s.
Good to see Nz Maori Touring again after the finacial constraints mean`t
no Nz A side fielded Maori/Juniors.
Last year some Nations contested a quadregional Tournament[for want of a better
word] including the Boks which was reason for enquiry.
Read somewhere that 6Ns were going to introduce the bonus point system.
It is about only top Tournament not using them,interesting comment in
Telegraph.About the system is producing more boring/negative games. Plainly
this isn`t true of recent SH games.

It depends what you call boring, Emack (not you personally, but people and the Telegraph generally). I didn't find many/any 6 nations games boring this year. Even though some were low scoring there were a lot of nail biting, close finishes and a couple of upsets which I found enthralling. Even Wales v Scotland for me was exiciting, and that was a complete kick feat, but then I had a vested interest. I can imagine people from outside the 6N finding them boring, but then I have often found the 3N boring in the past even though it contained the top 3 sides in the world.

As Cyril says, without home and away there's no danger of teams not trying away from home and just concentrating on home game wins - if you want to win it you have to go for it away from home. I don't think under the current format that giving an extra point would suddenly change a 16-15 Ireland v England game, for example, into a 38-34 win.

Obviously all games are home and away at the same time so I assume you mean as in a return fixture at the other home. Can someone explain why they think that you need to have home and away fixtures for it to be workable? Actually I'm not a massive fan of the BPs (especially the losing one) but it sort of works in ITM cup and Super Rugby.

Griff wrote:

It depends what you call boring, Emack (not you personally, but people and the Telegraph generally). I didn't find many/any 6 nations games boring this year. Even though some were low scoring there were a lot of nail biting, close finishes and a couple of upsets which I found enthralling. Even Wales v Scotland for me was exiciting, and that was a complete kick feat, but then I had a vested interest. I can imagine people from outside the 6N finding them boring, but then I have often found the 3N boring in the past even though it contained the top 3 sides in the world.

The favourites and potential winners England went into the last match only needing to lose by (from memory 8 points) yet by the end of the match had played MORE than 320 minutes (5 hours and 20 minutes) of rugby to score ONE try from 4 matches of the 5 it played. Boring may not be the correct description but something sure is...and exciting cant be one of them...

So the middle rounds of the 6N last year I agree- strictly for fans of those nations...

Surely the point of the Bonus points system incidentally one I abhor.
Should apply to ALL Tournaments Home and away applies in 6Ns applies
anyway over a 2 year cycle.
There were many shared titles in the Home nations/5Ns anyway so a
system as footling as points difference or tries scored is worse than bonus points.
In practical terms England and Wales shared the title whatever the book says.
PLEASE no England versus Wales shouting that is just an example it could
have been any of the 6Ns sides.
Why should only some tournaments be lumbered with the bonus points thing?

Two reasons the bonus points were introduced-

One was to split ties, the other to make the game more exciting- 4 tries for a point means sides will be gunning for them more- as will they be trying to get within 7 for a loss for the other point rather than giving up at 8 or 13 points down with 5 minutes to go.

Just translates as 'no bonus points, less excitement'. What else can it possibly mean?

I am aware of the idea,my pont being it should be universal or not at all.
The Telegraph article referrerd to NH Rugby and the point being the no
risk approach in Tournaments.
Example IF the 4Ns title was down to a bonus point decision,AB`s saying
risk nothing.80 minutes playing 55 metre Rugby back in the days of Don Clarke
the result being the be all and end all.
Supporters and excitement mean`t nothing just the result I`ve seen more turgid
matches in my life.From some VERY great sides who used that approach ABs 1950
-65.Boks 1960-2,England pretty often in 200-3 period Boks 2009 etc.
Wins by whatever means are more important to Coaches and the media don`t ever
doubt it.When the 2009 situation occurs for the ABs and they start losing regularly
the knives will be out again.

Perhaps but the SA match at Ellis where they were chasing bonus points as a priority ends up being described as one of the greatest tests ever, and becomes a media frenzy, so if that's not an advert for it I don't know what is.

Taylorman wrote:Two reasons the bonus points were introduced-

One was to split ties, the other to make the game more exciting- 4 tries for a point means sides will be gunning for them more- as will they be trying to get within 7 for a loss for the other point rather than giving up at 8 or 13 points down with 5 minutes to go.

Just translates as 'no bonus points, less excitement'. What else can it possibly mean?

Make the game more exciting for whom? The stadiums are already sold out for the 6N as it is. You couldn't get people more excited in Wales, for example! We have bonus points in our league and have poor attendance; we don't have bonus points in the 6N and we can't get stadiums big enough to house all of the people who want to watch it. Go figure!

Yes some games are damp squibs, but that's just life. First week of the 6N this year: Wales v Ireland was a good game of rugby - a game of 2 halves. 6 tries scored, 3 a piece. Would an extra point for another try have made the game more exciting? No in my opinion. Would it have made the teams try to score another one? No - they were going all out to do it anyway, without the carrot of another point being dangled in front of them. England 38-18 Scotland - England didn't seem to need the extra motivation of another point to get their 4 tries. They did it anyway. You could argue that Scotland's motivation for the whole tournament was perhaps maintained because they only went behind 2 points in the tournament, rather than 3. Food for thought maybe. Italy then beat France in the afternoon, and I don't think you could argue that they didn't try to win or put the effort in just because there wasn't a bonus point on offer. That was some tense, close, nail biting rugby. The fear that by losing so closely and not getting anything (as you would under a bonus point system) is enough motivation for a team to strive to win and claw back a deficit (IMO). And this is where this argument about only playing home or away comes in - you haven't got the cushion of thinking "ah well, we'll see them again at home where we'll be better". You have to try to win away as there is no second chance against that nation. We see it in the Heineken Cup all of the time, coaches talking about picking up the bonus point away from home. A win is great for them, but they're happy to pick up a losing bonus point. That sucks! They should be going all out to win away (again IMO).

I get the point that more tries is more fun. But I disagree that less tries means the games are automatically boring. 7s is a bit boring to me and there are loads of tries. I watch maybe 2 or 3 games in a 7s tournament and I'm done. Same old same old, someone running under the posts and dabbing down. Repeat and enjoy! The obvious answer is a balance somewhere in the middle. Teams 'trying to play rugby' (I hate that term - all rugby is 'playing rugby', but whatever) is what we want. But if they only manage 2 tries in getting a win, as long as they've tried their hardest to win them I'm satisfied that an extra point wouldn't have made much difference.

The best thing you could do to promote the 6Ns further (like it needs it!) would be to move the tournament to the end of the season where you're likely to get better weather and stop frozen pitches in France. As an aside an even better idea would be to have all season in the NH and SH match each other. I'm not holding my breath on that.

Griff,I /we understand the system don`t like it but we are lumbered with it.
It was introduced to make RU sexy for TV,the real fans watched anyway but
in my opinion should be the same for all.

The Universal Season is of course the ideal one,but with modern Stadia and closed roofs
the weather is taken out of the equation.Bet you wouldn't have a game like that on
Saturday in Dunedin in the old "House of Pain".
Money rules today 3 pm matches on Natural turf,Open Stadia,and in Winter are a thing of
the past.
The most obvious thing of course is RUGBY WAS a Winter Game in both Hemispheres
and Touring sides played in them not all year round.

It can't be the same for all though, unless the tournaments are set up the same way.

I think the bonus point system makes the Heinken Cup fascinating viewing but I can understand why some people don't like them.

A lot depends on your viewpoint. I love the 6 Nations and like the Rugby Championship. Sure, there are some dour games in the 6 Nations but the RC was a two-horse race this year with only the NZ/SA games holding a real attraction for me. Watching Argentina and the Aussies getting a mauling wasn't really my idea of great spectacle.

It just seems that bonus points make much more sense when you have home and away fixtures. I think it wouldnt add anything to the 6N

I cannot see BPs in the 6N. The idea of a grand slam team not winning the tournament would go against all the history of the competition.

Exiledinborders wrote:I cannot see BPs in the 6N. The idea of a grand slam team not winning the tournament would go against all the history of the competition.

You would structure the win and bonus points so that cannot happen. it is the number of sides / points for a win that allows that scenario. That just needs to be tweaked.