Six Nations Exchange Year

2016 winter arrives. The February chill is in the air. The 2015 RWC is complete. How do you expand your horizons after the inevitable anti-climax that follows a RWC campaign?

Here's something that might interest you. Instead of competing in the 6N, you could exchange your place with the RC team of your choice. That team would come to play in the 6N tournament and you would take their place in the subsequent RC championship later that year. The package includes sending your test team to various Super team franchises and exposing them to the rugby on offer with the nations of that tournament and you would have the full support of the home fans whose side you have replaced.

How to enter? Simply write how you think you might fare in the 4N and why you have chosen that particular country as your exchange country. Similarly, you have to write how your exchange country will fare in the 6N tournament and the difficulties thy might encounter and the advantages they will have at their disposal. The same applies for SH fans: why you have chosen your 6N country and how you think you and your exchange partner will fare. The entry that is agreed on to resemble reality the most will win this exciting opportunity to discover a new way of rugby thinking and insight into another form of competition and playing style.

Send England to the Quad tournament we can take whoever. Antipodeans love England so it makes most sense.

Yeah, switch England with Argentina. I reckon we'd come last but it'll be good fun.

HammerofThunor wrote:Yeah, switch England with Argentina. I reckon we'd come last but it'll be good fun.

Not if we swapped the Wallabies with Wales as well...   

(in no particular order... just the groups)

RC: NZ / SA / England / Wales

6N: Ireland / France / Scotland / Italy / Australia / Argentina

I think England would adapt well and quickly to the RC. We've already seen them experiment with a more expansive game (tending towards SH style) but with the solid forward platform as is their tradition. It's quite a good period of transition for them. They'd probably have as much chance of the odd upset as Australia has... who knows? More likely they'd get closer to NZ and SA - but not quite close enough at least initially. The longer they played in that environment the better they would get. Similar for Wales. They'd probably end up in 4th place (3rd place may be too optimistic) in 2016 but would slot in well with the fast-paced counter-attacking nature of RC contests and thrive on the physicality of the forward tussles.

Oz in Europe would be a decent challenge even without England in the 6N. On current 6N form I'd say Ireland would be the danger team closely followed by France. If Argentina was also there (England and Wales playing down south) then you'd expect Oz to do well with proper lead up preparation - either win it or finish 2nd at least (Fail!). 3rd would be a huge failure in my opinion. Argentina would probably struggle to finish higher than 4th I reckon - losing to France, Ireland and Australia and beating Scotland and Italy.

It would be tough for any relocated team to play a series of consecutive away matches - that Grand Slam would be a remarkable achievement - probably more so for the travelling NH sides. If NZ headed north though I'd expect them to make the clean sweep - England or no England in there.
SA would have a fairly good chance of completing a GS - Australia could have a chance but would most likely drop a game... or 2 even. 

Where do you think would be the best chance for teams to exchange LB? Personally if England say swapped with Argentina, I'd think they'd struggle to adapt to the travel schedule being used to the ease of travelling in Europe.

Replacing NZ would probably be England's best bet. That way they'd be nice and close to Australia for their first two games and Argentina and SA would be fatigued for flying there. I don't think England would like the altitude so home games at SA would be wasted and they'd be more accustomed to the NZ weather.

That said, if I were exchanging NZ with a 6N team I would choose France or Italy and head as south as possible to head for good weather and hard tracks so the visiting teams would be shocked by the change.

Oh, you mean they would have to base themselves in Argentina if they replaced them?
I see what you mean. I was thinking that they swap with Argentina but base themselves in Canberra say.

Yes, swapping England with NZ would give England their best chance of course.

For Oz (in pure team swapping terms), I'd probably choose England too - although the Aussies might feel just as comfortable in Dublin or Paris. Good point about France or Italy for the acclimatisation factor. That would most suit the Wallabies performance too I'd say.

So many interesting permutations... the travel factor is a massive one. That's why any away win for our SH teams (thinking of Super Rugby as well now) is such a huge achievement really. Our climates are quite different. Even between NZ and Oz there is a notable difference. So even more marks to the ABs for being the most consistent team over an extended period of time. They are the best travellers by far.

Yeah that's it mate. If England moved to NZ for example, NZ fans would have to cheer on England and England fans would have to cheer on NZ and the respective teams would be based in the places they exchange with.

The Aussies would definitely prefer Rome I think or they might fancy their chances in Wales where the MS is a lottery for scrums because the pitch is a disgrace.   

I would genuinely be interested to see how SH teams would adapt to the fanatic rivalry of the 6N where home games have a large opposition contingent and similarly how the NH teams adapt to the horrendous travel schedule the SH teams face.

In that case we should swap with Australia. Force those Australians to cheer on England. It would be worth it even if we lost to Argentina.

Seriously though, how the feck do you guys do it? One game in Argentina, one game in South Africa? Mental.

Every RC game begins with a single flight Hammer.

In terms of cheering a 6N side on here - I think the order would be Ireland, Scotland, England, Wales, Italy then France. Lots of Italians here.   

Plenty of Poms too. It would almost be a home ground feeling for them. Except their fans would have to be excluded under the Kia Protocol, right?

Lots of Welsh here too I presume but they tend to keep to themselves and seem to have a low profile or are still stuck in the beer queue.  

I'm not so sure there's much cheering for Scotland LB. They'd have to do something worth cheering about.   

Italy would feel at home in Argentina. Australia wouldn't be a stretch for them either from the fans perspective. The grounds would.

I think there's enough ex-pats in any of those places to fill the respective stadiums with enough parochial fans but just like an exchange student is welcome at the dinner table so too would the visiting teams would get a warm reception.

I don't NZ would be anywhere near as successful as the AI's if we were in the tournament proper. There's far more dynamics going on in a tournament like that and the buildup of pressure into each match judging by these boards is huge, where the AI's are almost carnival like in comparison.

Likewise, a 6N side injected into the RC would also struggle big time. I don't think anyone would have guessed that Argie would be winless after 12 matches.

Wales would feel very home in areas of Argentina, still huge Welsh speaking areas there and now an estimated 200,000 people with a Welsh heritage. The language thrives and they speak Welsh and Spanish how wonderful is that. When Wales played in Patagonia against the Argentinians Wales were allowed to run on 2nd and the Welsh National Anthem was sung last as a sign of respect.

I have been twice now and emotions run high when you see how proud these people are of being Welsh and carry on the language, eisteddfods etc. So yeah Wales instead of Argentina

Taylorman wrote:I don't NZ would be anywhere near as successful as the AI's if we were in the tournament proper. There's far more dynamics going on in a tournament like that and the buildup of pressure into each match judging by these boards is huge, where the AI's are almost carnival like in comparison.

Likewise, a 6N side injected into the RC would also struggle big time. I don't think anyone would have guessed that Argie would be winless after 12 matches.

Pure assumption.  

In fairness rainbow, the whole thread is assumption. Tman said both exchange teams would struggle to adapt. As it's only for a year, I think that's a fair assumption.

Interesting fact about the Welsh in Argentina.   

Of course it is speculation, but no SH or NH team would be that phased by the opposition, we play each other too damned often now. I would far prefer top teams to go out and play 3rd & 4th tier nations once every few years. NZ to the PI's, Wales to Russia for example. Union struggles against other sports and no how bloody keen we are on Union we forget it is a minor sport in the big scheme of things. Nations that are just emerging in union need to impress on the youngsters and the 'big boys' need to stand back for money making and sell the sport a little more. Imagine India playing union, a billion population and some big buggers there too! The big nations and the greedy clubs and the controlling media could ruin this sport, a little forward thinking and it could make union huge.

Anyway Hong Kong 7's just started and beer is chilled. Bye bye.

When you look at the example of sevens, there is certainly more that can be done to incorporate minnows into the top rugby echelon. However, big is not always better. In football you may see Spain the top seeds play a minnow in a friendly but it's debatable whether it's meaningful the contest. The big thing union has to watch out for is that there is a healthy balance between club and test matches. This is already starting to become unhealthy and the bigger rugby gets the more unlikely it is to get any healthier.

Yeah Kia. I'd hate to see India controlling the game (and the media) through sheer weight of numbers. I mean - look what they've done to International cricket. They've completely ruined it. Bigger is certainly not necessarily better in many important respects!

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:When you look at the example of sevens, there is certainly more that can be done to incorporate minnows into the top rugby echelon. However, big is not always better. In football you may see Spain the top seeds play a minnow in a friendly but it's debatable whether it's meaningful the contest. The big thing union has to watch out for is that there is a healthy balance between club and test matches. This is already starting to become unhealthy and the bigger rugby gets the more unlikely it is to get any healthier.

Sometimes it is not the result that counts. I see the AB's playing games in unusual places but against Aussie for the sponsors and TV. What's wrong with going to Fiji or Samoa and playing a game with a full compliment of players? You went to Japan. These nations need $$$$$ and sometimes the richer nations need to stand back and smell the coffee. Let'snot be afraid of India, embrace the nation and all those wanting to advance in Union, after all if you want to be the best in the world you need to beat everyone! If Russia and the USA get serious then NZ et al would be in deep poo. Fact is football rules the roost BUT union is far more exciting and a harder more physical game. It's a man's game and to take the best to the rest is the way forward, NOT taking second teams.

There are 100 odd nations in the IRB rankings, would it not be great if they were all on a more level footing, or are the big boys afraid?

Don't teams like Fiji get more money from playing away though? You've also got to take into account the facilities they have. I do agree that more top tier sides need to be playing the likes of USA etc more often. As much as I love playing NZ and Aus was their any need to play them twice up here in 2 years?

I wouldn't label NZ a richer nation. Even Australia is in a dire financial state. That's why we have these bloated Bledisloe fixtures. If they went to Fiji (impossible at the moment because of the military coup) they wouldn't take the gate revenue and it's very difficult to get any television rights because the games aren't likely to be televised (look at when Scotland toured there the other year. Were the actual games broadcasted.)

I think far more meaningful would be to incorporate them into a quadrangular tournament much like Biltong proposed on another thread where the revenue could be distributed more evenly with bigger crowds and bigger media exposure.

Fiji don't get anything for playing away. They have to ask to have expenses covered. They may be able to get IRB grants. They'd get more have their 'home' games in somewhere like New Zealand (or even England) so they can keep the gate receipts (like Argentina did in 2008).

So in essence it's let's go to the big boys where the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ and stuff the rest. NOTHING is more meaningful that seeing a game in your own country, something the poor buggers in the PI's and eastern Europe never have because it's all about money. Pretty sick considering where our sport came from and was until very recently. All about Adidas, Nike, SKY, Telecom and the rest of the crap. Also means that NZ will keep their slice of the pie when it comes to grabbing any PI they fancy I guess.

rainbow-warrior wrote:So in essence it's let's go to the big boys where the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ and stuff the rest.  NOTHING is more meaningful that seeing a game in your own country, something the poor buggers in the PI's and eastern Europe never have because it's all about money.  Pretty sick considering where our sport came from and was until very recently.  All about Adidas, Nike, SKY, Telecom and the rest of the crap.  Also means that NZ will keep their slice of the pie when it comes to grabbing any PI they fancy I guess.

I know. Sickening

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2008/nov/14/autumn-internationals-walesrugbyunionteam1

HammerofThunor wrote:

rainbow-warrior wrote:So in essence it's let's go to the big boys where the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ and stuff the rest.  NOTHING is more meaningful that seeing a game in your own country, something the poor buggers in the PI's and eastern Europe never have because it's all about money.  Pretty sick considering where our sport came from and was until very recently.  All about Adidas, Nike, SKY, Telecom and the rest of the crap.  Also means that NZ will keep their slice of the pie when it comes to grabbing any PI they fancy I guess.

I know. Sickening

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2008/nov/14/autumn-internationals-walesrugbyunionteam1

Wow trawlled back to 2008 did ya? Was that the fault of the players or the WRU? Was it the fans opinion or the WRU?

All you have to do is look at the sulky attitude of the English and the Heiny Cup and their childish tantrums to see where the real greed is. Almost backfired too.

Pathetic attempt at derailment.  

HammerofThunor wrote:
http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2008/nov/14/autumn-internationals-walesrugbyunionteam1

Jeez thats incredibly stingy. Do all 6 nations unions do this kinda stuff?

I think if England swapped with NZ I think they could have a decent stab at the title.

SA is obviously a team seen as superior, but they are within distant to a point I would expect both teams to win their home games against each other. SA would rake up the bonus points though, something I don't think England are capable of doing yet.

France - they don't travel well so they would be disasterous.... Argentina might get their best result of the championship if they were in.

Ireland & Wales.... perhaps the tournament rugby would cause them to play better rugby away to their SH opponents and potentially get a result. SA away is too much IMO but performance is as important as a result... most NH teams come here and simply fall apart.

Scotland & Italy.... cannon fodder mark 10. I'd throw the WP U19s against Italy at the moment to see if they can get close.

rainbow-warrior wrote:

Taylorman wrote:I don't NZ would be anywhere near as successful as the AI's if we were in the tournament proper. There's far more dynamics going on in a tournament like that and the buildup of pressure into each match judging by these boards is huge, where the AI's are almost carnival like in comparison.

Likewise, a 6N side injected into the RC would also struggle big time. I don't think anyone would have guessed that Argie would be winless after 12 matches.

Pure assumption.  

Based on the Nh ability to win one test from 2 years of Southern tours a pretty accurate one- and that was a scot win against a second Oz side in a flash flood.

I think the usual would commence....

England and France would compete.

Wales and Ireland would show initial promise but fade.

Scotland and Italy will have their a.ss handed to them.

All assumed if all sides put out meaningful XVs and prioritised the tournament like a RWC.... In 6 of the 7 RWCs a 6N side has beaten a 3N side (91 was the only exception).

It was true 20 years ago, its true now and it will be true in all probability in 20 years time.

fa0019 wrote:I think the usual would commence....

England and France would compete.

Wales and Ireland would show initial promise but fade.

Scotland and Italy will have their a.ss handed to them.

All assumed if all sides put out meaningful XVs and prioritised the tournament like a RWC.... In 6 of the 7 RWCs a 6N side has beaten a 3N side (91 was the only exception).

It was true 20 years ago, its true now and it will be true in all probability in 20 years time.

And you assume this Bulls**t why? Last time you went to NZ you got battered 3 times and scored NO tries and that was with your lucky world cup winning team. In well over 120 odd years of rugby against Wales you are ONE test up.

Wales and Ireland would have as much ability to compete as France and England.

rainbow-warrior wrote:

fa0019 wrote:I think the usual would commence....

England and France would compete.

Wales and Ireland would show initial promise but fade.

Scotland and Italy will have their a.ss handed to them.

All assumed if all sides put out meaningful XVs and prioritised the tournament like a RWC.... In 6 of the 7 RWCs a 6N side has beaten a 3N side (91 was the only exception).

It was true 20 years ago, its true now and it will be true in all probability in 20 years time.

And you assume this Bulls**t why?  Last time you went to NZ you got battered 3 times and scored NO tries and that was with your lucky world cup winning team.  In well over 120 odd years of rugby against Wales you are ONE test up.

Wales and Ireland would have as much ability to compete as France and England.

geez you are so naive rainbow. Wales and Ireland between them havnt won vs the ABs in 60 years. If the two were to take Argies place in the RC they would both be annihilated. The travel to the high veldt one week then Eden Park the next? No idea.

What on earth have you seen that makes that not the case?

rainbow-warrior wrote:

fa0019 wrote:I think the usual would commence....

England and France would compete.

Wales and Ireland would show initial promise but fade.

Scotland and Italy will have their a.ss handed to them.

All assumed if all sides put out meaningful XVs and prioritised the tournament like a RWC.... In 6 of the 7 RWCs a 6N side has beaten a 3N side (91 was the only exception).

It was true 20 years ago, its true now and it will be true in all probability in 20 years time.

And you assume this Bulls**t why?  Last time you went to NZ you got battered 3 times and scored NO tries and that was with your lucky world cup winning team.  In well over 120 odd years of rugby against Wales you are ONE test up.

Wales and Ireland would have as much ability to compete as France and England.

He's a Scot. They've never had a World Cup winning team.

fa0019 wrote:I think the usual would commence....

England and France would compete.

Wales and Ireland would show initial promise but fade.

Scotland and Italy will have their a.ss handed to them.

All assumed if all sides put out meaningful XVs and prioritised the tournament like a RWC.... In 6 of the 7 RWCs a 6N side has beaten a 3N side (91 was the only exception).

It was true 20 years ago, its true now and it will be true in all probability in 20 years time.

Swap France with Ireland imo. The final standings of this 6N just gone are accurate and France do not currently look like threatening the top sides down south home or away. Not when they're finishing between 4th-6th and losing home games annually (over the last three years England, Ireland and Wales have now all won in Paris... in times past you wouldn't have seen such a phenomenon)

England and Ireland, I believe, would stand a half-decent chance. Wales and France would be outside bets on current form and deservedly so.

Taylorman wrote:

rainbow-warrior wrote:

fa0019 wrote:I think the usual would commence....

England and France would compete.

Wales and Ireland would show initial promise but fade.

Scotland and Italy will have their a.ss handed to them.

All assumed if all sides put out meaningful XVs and prioritised the tournament like a RWC.... In 6 of the 7 RWCs a 6N side has beaten a 3N side (91 was the only exception).

It was true 20 years ago, its true now and it will be true in all probability in 20 years time.

And you assume this Bulls**t why?  Last time you went to NZ you got battered 3 times and scored NO tries and that was with your lucky world cup winning team.  In well over 120 odd years of rugby against Wales you are ONE test up.

Wales and Ireland would have as much ability to compete as France and England.

geez you are so naive rainbow. Wales and Ireland between them havnt won vs the ABs in 60 years. If the two were to take Argies place in the RC they would both be annihilated. The travel to the high veldt one week then Eden Park the next? No idea.

What on earth have you seen that makes that not the case?

apologies to Welsh and Irish fans...one too many at a mates 50th...   I think it would be difficult for the two, but not as bad as that. Based on Argies performance to date as 9th? ranked, I'd say Wales and Ireland might have two or three wins out of 12 vs OZ, NZ and SA, but I wouldnt think any more. The three time zone thing, amount of travel, altitude with mostly consecutive tests makes the RC unique in its format, something the NH sides wont be used to.

After we win the RWC, i wouldnt fancy playing against the a SH bent on revenge. Hard to get motivated for a holiday exchange program after winning RWC...

so i'd say send the French as they're the only team who seems to actually be able to perform against SH sides on their home turfs.

  that's for you gunsgerms

rainbow-warrior wrote:

fa0019 wrote:I think the usual would commence....

England and France would compete.

Wales and Ireland would show initial promise but fade.

Scotland and Italy will have their a.ss handed to them.

All assumed if all sides put out meaningful XVs and prioritised the tournament like a RWC.... In 6 of the 7 RWCs a 6N side has beaten a 3N side (91 was the only exception).

It was true 20 years ago, its true now and it will be true in all probability in 20 years time.

And you assume this Bulls**t why?  Last time you went to NZ you got battered 3 times and scored NO tries and that was with your lucky world cup winning team.  In well over 120 odd years of rugby against Wales you are ONE test up.

Wales and Ireland would have as much ability to compete as France and England.

wales and ireland are now, as they were before, a single injury away from losing to anyone. Without sexton ireland wont worry anyone. Wales squad is so thin its anaemic. Thats why irish and welsh tours are weak, because key tired or semi-injured players often dont go and the strength in depth is the square root of f-all. Same has been true for england on occasions too when touring.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:2016 winter arrives. The February chill is in the air. The 2015 RWC is complete. How do you expand your horizons after the inevitable anti-climax that follows a RWC campaign?

Here's something that might interest you. Instead of competing in the 6N, you could exchange your place with the RC team of your choice. That team would come to play in the 6N tournament and you would take their place in the subsequent RC championship later that year. The package includes sending your test team to various Super team franchises and exposing them to the rugby on offer with the nations of that tournament and you would have the full support of the home fans whose side you have replaced.

How to enter? Simply write how you think you might fare in the 4N and why you have chosen that particular country as your exchange country. Similarly, you have to write how your exchange country will fare in the 6N tournament and the difficulties thy might encounter and the advantages they will have at their disposal. The same applies for SH fans: why you have chosen your 6N country and how you think you and your exchange partner will fare. The entry that is agreed on to resemble reality the most will win this exciting opportunity to discover a new way of rugby thinking and insight into another form of competition and playing style.

england - best nh team.

switch it with argentina worst 4n's team.


its pretty simple mate. lets get the wheels in motion

mystiroakey wrote:

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:2016 winter arrives. The February chill is in the air. The 2015 RWC is complete. How do you expand your horizons after the inevitable anti-climax that follows a RWC campaign?

Here's something that might interest you. Instead of competing in the 6N, you could exchange your place with the RC team of your choice. That team would come to play in the 6N tournament and you would take their place in the subsequent RC championship later that year. The package includes sending your test team to various Super team franchises and exposing them to the rugby on offer with the nations of that tournament and you would have the full support of the home fans whose side you have replaced.

How to enter? Simply write how you think you might fare in the 4N and why you have chosen that particular country as your exchange country. Similarly, you have to write how your exchange country will fare in the 6N tournament and the difficulties thy might encounter and the advantages they will have at their disposal. The same applies for SH fans: why you have chosen your 6N country and how you think you and your exchange partner will fare. The entry that is agreed on to resemble reality the most will win this exciting opportunity to discover a new way of rugby thinking and insight into another form of competition and playing style.

england - best nh team.

switch it with argentina worst 4n's team.


its pretty simple mate. lets get the wheels in motion

Yes that would be fun.

The thing is, between the 6N, the RC, the Southern and AI tours, we're all playing each other anyway in some shape or form.

They should formalise something out of it all

Are England really the best NH team? What do the antipodeans think?

never really thought of myself as an antipodean... sounds like an unborn frog or something like that but in any case, at this point in time Ireland are the best team...because they won the tournament all 6 sides were trying so hard to win, so that is the most accurate measure of that question.

In terms of playing NZ in a 3 test series, and with next years world cup, England. Why? To win a series, or the World cup, there needs to be a level of consistency, depth and a history of being able to win some big matches, overcome obstacles.

England were one match away from winning both the last two 6N and have had the more recent wins over NZ and Oz and a draw with SA in SA. That indicates consistency though is shaded by not being able to finish the job in the 6N.

Ireland don't look to have as much depth and in recent matches, at least with us, couldnt get over the line- test two a couple of years ago and last years AIs where they let NZ back in at the death. So theres evidence a psych barrier still exists where the ABs are concerned.

They also need to replace BOD and could be a different side without his leadership, but what they lose there they make up for with their new coach.

So on that basis I'd back England over Ireland to either win a test/ series in NZ, and win the World cup- history again with them on that one. Ireland are improving at a faster rate though, and this time next year he story could be very different.