No prospect of eastern Europe joining in 6 Nations

First topic message reminder :

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-union/international/six-nations-2016-no-prospect-of-eastern-europe-joining-in-best-tournament-a6840196.html#commentsDiv

Way to crush all hope for other nations in Europe. Whats the point in even developing rugby in other European countries?

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Rowanbi wrote:Yes, that's the classic international rugby Catch 22 situation. In order to compete with the best you must be given opportunities to play them, but until you are able to compete with them you will not be given that opportunity - at least, very rarely.

Btw, I didn't see Georgia receiving a swarm of test matches against tier 1 teams after almost beating Ireland at the 2007 World Cup, while Japan isn't showing up on any of the big guns' schedules following last year's stunning upset over the Springboks - not even South Africas

We're playing them twice in the summer. We are either big guns or we aren't. Some people need to start making their minds up.

And the schedules for the summer tours were in place BEFORE the RWC so Im not sure how the big guns are supposed to do that but Scotland are playing two games in the summer and Japan are playing Wales in Nov though that's their only game in that period

Rowanbi wrote:Yes, beat South Africa and you get rewarded with a test or two against  . . . Scotland. I'm sure the Japanese rugby community can hardly contain its excitement

You're saying Japan, Romania etc need games against the Tier 1 nations to help them. Since the SH is seemingly so far ahead of the NH it seems the NH needs more games against the top SH to close that gap, playing Japan etc will see them falling further back if you apply your logic across the board

At least we are playing these teams. What are the big guns up to? Are they going out of there way to bring on the game eh?

My point exactly. Bravo, Scotland !!

marty2086 wrote:

Rowanbi wrote:Yes, beat South Africa and you get rewarded with a test or two against  . . . Scotland. I'm sure the Japanese rugby community can hardly contain its excitement

You're saying Japan, Romania etc need games against the Tier 1 nations to help them. Since the SH is seemingly so far ahead of the NH it seems the NH needs more games against the top SH to close that gap, playing Japan etc will see them falling further back if you apply your logic across the board

Not really, because the Celtic nations already get to play France and England all the time, which helps them maintain their standards - at least, to the point of remaining competitive. Meanwhile, France and England are already getting plenty of tests against the SH giants to balance that out. So tier 1 teams have it all in their favor, one way or another, while the tier 2 & 3 teams are largely shut out.

And the schedules for the summer tours were in place BEFORE the RWC

I know. Just making a point about the general problem with international scheduling.

I see Georgia is ranked two places above Italy right now. A match between the two nations would really be an intriguing proposition these days, and given their both in Europe it seems a little odd that it never happens. Are the Azzurri running scared of the Lelos ??

It would ruin the geographical nature of the tournament.

Shouldn't we cut Italy and add Belgium then?

Italy were truly guff against Ireland. However provided stiff resistance against France on the first day of the tourney.

Lets see how they get on against Wales. Another cricket score will start me to question their involvement.

Sure Scotland have lost games in the past but, the last game of the 6N aside we have always been competitive. Italy have really regressed this year though.

Rowanbi wrote:I see Georgia is ranked two places above Italy right now. A match between the two nations would really be an intriguing proposition these days, and given their both in Europe it seems a little odd that it never happens. Are the Azzurri running scared of the Lelos ??

You do realise Italy are pretty much playing an experimental side in the 6Ns against the top 5 teams in the NH?

And they are running away from Georgia by playing Argentina? ABs? SA?

Yes, but everybody is in rebuilding mode at present, esp. after the collective 6 Nations flop at last year's World Cup. I don't think France has been taking the 6 Nations too seriously for a very long time, to be honest.

Italy has definitely improved since joining the tournament. We only have to go back to the 99 RWC when they lost to Tonga and conceded a ton against the All Blacks to see that. Also, they've won twice as many games during the past 7 years as they did during their first 7. But this year will certainly be one of their worst ever in the competition barring an upset in the final round.

I actually think the Azzurri would beat the Lelos quite comfortably if both teams were at full strength. But you'd have to agree it's a little curious that they never play each other, given they're ranked so close and both are in Europe. Of course, the relative lack of interaction between the 6 Nations and top ENC division 1 teams is fairly disgraceful anyway.

Meanwhile, regarding your last comment, Italy has nothing to lose playing the Southern giants since no one expects them to win. Only a century (unlikely these days) would really humiliate them. But an upset loss to the Lelos, on the other hand, would be an emarrassment to both them and the 6 Nations in general.

Rowanbi wrote:Yes, but everybody is in rebuilding mode at present, esp. after the collective 6 Nations flop at last year's World Cup. I don't think France has been taking the 6 Nations too seriously for a very long time, to be honest.

Italy has definitely improved since joining the tournament. We only have to go back to the 99 RWC when they lost to Tonga and conceded a ton against the All Blacks to see that. Also, they've won twice as many games during the past 7 years as they did during their first 7. But this year will certainly be one of their worst ever in the competition barring an upset in the final round.

I actually think the Azzurri would beat the Lelos quite comfortably if both teams were at full strength. But you'd have to agree it's a little curious that they never play each other, given they're ranked so close and both are in Europe. Of course, the relative lack of interaction between the 6 Nations and top ENC division 1 teams is fairly disgraceful anyway.

Meanwhile, regarding your last comment, Italy has nothing to lose playing the Southern giants since no one expects them to win. Only a century (unlikely these days) would really humiliate them. But an upset loss to the Lelos, on the other hand, would be an emarrassment to both them and the 6 Nations in general.

You ever think its Georgia running away? As they have plenty to lose if Italy beat them as the argument for their addition to the 6Ns goes away for another while

Rowanbi wrote:Of course, the relative lack of interaction between the 6 Nations and top ENC division 1 teams is fairly disgraceful anyway.

Not true.
World Rugby Tiblisi Cup 2015 Teams
Emerging Ireland
Emerging Italy
Georgia
Uruguay

South Africa has not sent a team since 2013 when they won it.

6Ns teams all participated in Churchill Cup up to that.

marty2086 wrote:

Rowanbi wrote:Yes, but everybody is in rebuilding mode at present, esp. after the collective 6 Nations flop at last year's World Cup. I don't think France has been taking the 6 Nations too seriously for a very long time, to be honest.

Italy has definitely improved since joining the tournament. We only have to go back to the 99 RWC when they lost to Tonga and conceded a ton against the All Blacks to see that. Also, they've won twice as many games during the past 7 years as they did during their first 7. But this year will certainly be one of their worst ever in the competition barring an upset in the final round.

I actually think the Azzurri would beat the Lelos quite comfortably if both teams were at full strength. But you'd have to agree it's a little curious that they never play each other, given they're ranked so close and both are in Europe. Of course, the relative lack of interaction between the 6 Nations and top ENC division 1 teams is fairly disgraceful anyway.

Meanwhile, regarding your last comment, Italy has nothing to lose playing the Southern giants since no one expects them to win. Only a century (unlikely these days) would really humiliate them. But an upset loss to the Lelos, on the other hand, would be an emarrassment to both them and the 6 Nations in general.

You ever think its Georgia running away? As they have plenty to lose if Italy beat them as the argument for their addition to the 6Ns goes away for another while

Emerging Italy beat Georgia 26-10 last year in the Tiblisi Cup.
Emerging Ireland beat Georgia 45-12.

Sin é wrote:
Emerging Italy beat Georgia 26-10 last year in the Tiblisi Cup.
Emerging Ireland beat Georgia 45-12.

Sine, I forgot about the Tiblisi cup but at the same time the Georgians didn't have access to all their players as many of the French based players can't/won't play as its not a full international and they aren't required to go

Sin é wrote:

Rowanbi wrote:Of course, the relative lack of interaction between the 6 Nations and top ENC division 1 teams is fairly disgraceful anyway.

Not true.
World Rugby Tiblisi Cup 2015 Teams
Emerging Ireland
Emerging Italy
Georgia
Uruguay

South Africa has not sent a team since 2013 when they won it.

6Ns teams all participated in Churchill Cup up to that.

I was talking about at test match level. As someone has already ponted out, Georgia were not at full strength for those games either, opting instead for an experiemental selection since the games didn't really matter anyway. Churchill Cup was against North American opposition. That's precisely the problem. 6 Nations teams would rather play North Americans than their own European neighbours - even those which are ranked higher than them

You ever think its Georgia running away? As they have plenty to lose if Italy beat them as the argument for their addition to the 6Ns goes away for another while

You might be right. I wouldn't know. We never hear much out of Georgia - but their Kiwi coach definitely wants them playing 6 Nations opponents regularly (if not added to the competition itself), and has been quoted on this in the British press many times. & I would certainly agree. The Lelos are way too good for the ENC. If they can't join the 6N, at least give them annual test matches against 6N opposition - including at least one a year in Tbilisi, where they often draw big crowds

Look, if the Georgians, who host the Tiblisi Cup, could not be arsed putting a proper team together to compete, I can't see why any of the 6Ns countries should put themselves out for them any more than they have.

By the way, Irishman Michael Bradley is Georgia's Assistant coach. He would have very good connections with some World Rugby Board members.

PS, the only time that Georgia draw big crowds in Tiblisi is when they are playing Russia.

Rowanbi wrote:
You might be right. I wouldn't know. We never hear much out of Georgia - but their Kiwi coach definitely wants them playing 6 Nations opponents regularly (if not added to the competition itself), and has been quoted on this in the British press many times. & I would certainly agree. The Lelos are way too good for the ENC. If they can't join the 6N, at least give them annual test matches against 6N opposition - including at least one a year in Tbilisi, where they often draw big crowds

Their coach can say all he wants those running the game are aware that schedules are tied up until 2019 and are targeting building the game from the ground up and developing a core group of players from the age groups.

Georgia also have on going issues with French based players that stifles their development that need addressed before they can progress.

You can't force unions to play games that are not in their best interests, what benefit is it to the Tier 1 nations?
Also Georgia struggle to compete with development squads so what good is it to them to play the top sides when they can't hold their own against scratch teams?

Sin é wrote:Look, if the Georgians, who host the Tiblisi Cup, could not be arsed putting a proper team together to compete, I can't see why any of the 6Ns countries should put themselves out for them any more than they have.

By the way, Irishman Michael Bradley is Georgia's Assistant coach. He would have very good connections with some World Rugby Board members.

PS, the only time that Georgia draw big crowds in Tiblisi is when they are playing Russia.

You of all people should understand how hard it is for tier 2 countries to get access to French and English based players. Georgia even had to cut a deal with the French clubs which involved them not playing for Georgia in the ENC to release them for the WC! Also with no professional league the Tiblisi cup can be used to try out younger and more inexperienced players, it's a nothing comp really.

The Tiblisi Cup was from 13-21 June. The final round of Top 14 is 4 June so quite a few Georgian players should be available. The PROd2 finishes 20th May (where probably most Georgians play).

While the situation with the French clubs is just awful, some effort could be made to get around it. Apart from anything else, it would seem Georgians might not be too happy to play in 6Ns as it would affect their job prospects with the clubs in France.

You can't force unions to play games that are not in their best interests, what benefit is it to the Tier 1 nations?

Also Georgia struggle to compete with development squads so what good is it to them to play the top sides when they can't hold their own against scratch teams?

Sure, we all know if left to their own devices the tier 1 nations would never play anybody except each other in between World Cups. Indeed, this was why the tiers were created in the first place. But that's a myopic, shoot-yourself-in-the-foot approach. If they helped develop more nations through increased inter-action they'd have more options - and we'd have a more competitive World Cup. This is where World Rugby needs to step in, do its job, and follow up on its 'globalization' rhetoric.

Your second comment overlooks the fact Georgia are ranked ahead of Italy right now. Perhaps that's not entirely accurate, I've admitted so myself, but suggesting they are not at least worthy of a test against the Azzurri is stretching it a little. At full strength they'd certainly give them a decent workout - especially in Tbilisi.

Rowanbi wrote:You can't force unions to play games that are not in their best interests, what benefit is it to the Tier 1 nations?

Also Georgia struggle to compete with development squads so what good is it to them to play the top sides when they can't hold their own against scratch teams?

Sure, we all know if left to their own devices the tier 1 nations would never play anybody except each other in between World Cups. Indeed, this was why the tiers were created in the first place. But that's a myopic, shoot-yourself-in-the-foot approach. If they helped develop more nations through increased inter-action they'd have more options - and we'd have a more competitive World Cup. This is where World Rugby needs to step in, do its job, and follow up on its 'globalization' rhetoric.

Your second comment overlooks the fact Georgia are ranked ahead of Italy right now. Perhaps that's not entirely accurate, I've admitted so myself, but suggesting they are not at least worthy of a test against the Azzurri is stretching it a little. At full strength they'd certainly give them a decent workout - especially in Tbilisi.

If left to themselves? Most Tier 1 nations do play Tier 2 nations I think England, SA and Australia are the exceptions and given the financial situations for the South Africans and Wallabies I can't blame them they have bills to pay and playing Georgia doesn't pay them

Ireland played Georgia in Nov. 2014 in Dublin and beat them 49-7. The attendance was 40K. The stadium usually takes 51K.

Was that a first choice Georgia team Rowanbi?

I always say it and I'll say it again.  Who assumes just because you have a ticket to the 6N that it means quality over continued mediocrity? (The answer to that one is obviously clear going on the opinions of Italy doing the rounds once again)
Plus - if that was a correct maxim then most 'large' ye Olde Worlde Nations would demand (through votes, power or money threat aggression) to join the SH Championship - where for example England, who will always judge itself in the same ball park as the big Three SH Nations, would have a better chance to prove itself on a yearly basis in the highest quality competition in the Rugby Union world?

So why don't the French, and English, and Welsh, and Irish and Scots....and Italy even, demand to be let into a higher quality competition by right, to better develop players and improve their rugby?  

Because no one competition is needed.  Europe has a massive population.... massive.  There is room enough for competing football Leagues of equal magnitude, with roughly equal ability to attract best players and with more than enough TV market slice to attract big money sponsors.  So why does European Rugby feel it must contain all it's 'presumed' quality in one Competition?

What's stopping Georgia and another five of the 'lesser' European Nations from creating a mirror image competition of the 6N?  And really go for it in terms of marketing and sponsorship.  Does it follow that if they really got down to business - and if they really put their money where their mouth is - that they couldn't still ever attract some very good coaches and produce a version of rugby that would rival that produced by the 6N, and indeed regularly beat 6N sides at perhaps future WCs?

I don't get the idea that these nations should feel aggrieved that their rugby can't develop simply because they aren't let into what is - yes - a Private club/competition based on a few centuries of tradition.

Create their own traditions, inject their own money...coax coaches to them by upping the offers... play hard and brutal against each other each year.  And who knows, in 12, 15 or 20 year's time, it might be us looking to join them.

6N sides should play these sides more often - yes.  SH sides should play them more often too  But their development needs to come from the minds of their own directors, Union leaders, TV networks, regional sponsors etc, etc.  No point in sitting on your hands if the opportunites don't arrive on your doorstep.  Think creatively and develop a rival to the 6N in terms of quality and ability.

I can't blame them they have bills to pay and playing Georgia doesn't pay them

As I mentioned, that's a myopic, shoot-yourself-in-the-foot approach, and is precisely the mentality which keeps the pond so small.

Ireland played Georgia in Nov. 2014 in Dublin and beat them 49-7. The attendance was 40K

Ireland were probably the best team in the Northern Hemisphere at that time, playing on their home ground, and if a 40k crowd didn't at least cover the costs I'd be surprised.

Create their own traditions, inject their own money...coax coaches to them by upping the offers... play hard and brutal against each other each year.  And who knows, in 12, 15 or 20 year's time, it might be us looking to join them.

Like the ENC, you mean? Georgia's basically outgrown that competition, most of the other teams don't have the resources to keep up with them, and now the Lelos have nowhere else to go.

Rowanbi wrote:

Like the ENC, you mean? Georgia's basically outgrown that competition, most of the other teams don't have the resources to keep up with them, and now the Lelos have nowhere else to go.

Not like the ENC...like the 6N. They've outgrown the competition because most other nations aren't committing the resources...it's not that the resources aren't there - they aren't being serious enough in committing resources. Is Georgia fighting with them to become more serious about it all and develop a real plan with real funding and real planning.

I repeat, Europe is more than big enough in terms of land area and population to hold more than one version of 6N... and for that other version to have more than enough potential audience, market share, sponsorship interest and ability to pay high grade coaches for it to be virtually equally successful to the older version

Rowanbi wrote:I can't blame them they have bills to pay and playing Georgia doesn't pay them

As I mentioned, that's a myopic, shoot-yourself-in-the-foot approach, and is precisely the mentality which keeps the pond so small.

Its short sighted paying the bills to keep the lights on?

Maybe you should send a letter to GRU and ask what the situation is and what plan they've got rather than blaming others because you seen a little short on knowledge of the situation

Rowanbi wrote:
Ireland were probably the best team in the Northern Hemisphere at that time, playing on their home ground, and if a 40k crowd didn't at least cover the costs I'd be surprised. [/b]

It was a second string team. Mostly players on their 1st or 2nd caps with 3 established players, Mike Ross, Gordon D'Arcy and Simon Zebo starting.

With the exception of England, most the Tier 1 teams are under severe financial pressure. Don't forget that the more income the Tier 1 countries generate, the more income World Rugby will have to spread around the poorer countries.

Was that a first choice Georgia team Rowanbi?

Sin é wrote:The Tiblisi Cup was from 13-21 June. The final round of Top 14 is 4 June so quite a few Georgian players should be available. The PROd2 finishes 20th May (where probably most Georgians play).

While the situation with the French clubs is just awful, some effort could be made to get around it. Apart from anything else, it would seem Georgians might not be too happy to play in 6Ns as it would affect their job prospects with the clubs in France.

It doesn't matter when the Top 14 finishes, they still don't want to release their players. They probably only have two weeks off, then their back into pre season training. Like I said the Tiblisi cup is used to play younger players. It's a development competition for all, not just Ireland and Italy. To suggest Georgia need to do more in this competition when they have already performed well on the world stage is rediculous to say the least.

marty2086 wrote:

Rowanbi wrote:I can't blame them they have bills to pay and playing Georgia doesn't pay them

As I mentioned, that's a myopic, shoot-yourself-in-the-foot approach, and is precisely the mentality which keeps the pond so small.

Its short sighted paying the bills to keep the lights on?

Maybe you should send a letter to GRU and ask what the situation is and what plan they've got rather than blaming others because you seen a little short on knowledge of the situation

World Rugby wrote:Over the four-year cycle, 2012-15, World Rugby will directly invest approximately £3.2 million in Georgia to assist in running the union's development, high-performance and national team programmes, as well as their hosting of the annual World Rugby Tbilisi Cup.

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

Sin é wrote:The Tiblisi Cup was from 13-21 June. The final round of Top 14 is 4 June so quite a few Georgian players should be available. The PROd2 finishes 20th May (where probably most Georgians play).

While the situation with the French clubs is just awful, some effort could be made to get around it. Apart from anything else, it would seem Georgians might not be too happy to play in 6Ns as it would affect their job prospects with the clubs in France.

It doesn't matter when the Top 14 finishes, they still don't want to release their players. They probably only have two weeks off, then their back into pre season training. Like I said the Tiblisi cup is used to play younger players. It's a development competition for all, not just Ireland and Italy. To suggest Georgia need to do more in this competition when they have  already performed well on the world stage is rediculous to say the least.

So the real blockage is the French clubs. Other Tier 1 countries have similar issues (like burnout etc) with players playing in professional leagues.

The Tiblisi tournament can be anything the Georgians want it to be. If they want it as a development tool, fair enough. But don't crib about 1st Tier countries sending their emerging teams to it. I'd imagine countries like Ireland would prefer the Churchill Cup where there is a bit more competition than the Eastern European one.

The point is anyway, it looks to me like Ireland & Italy (2 6Ns countries) at least are trying to aid the development of Tier 2 countries.

Sin é wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Rowanbi wrote:I can't blame them they have bills to pay and playing Georgia doesn't pay them

As I mentioned, that's a myopic, shoot-yourself-in-the-foot approach, and is precisely the mentality which keeps the pond so small.

Its short sighted paying the bills to keep the lights on?

Maybe you should send a letter to GRU and ask what the situation is and what plan they've got rather than blaming others because you seen a little short on knowledge of the situation

World Rugby wrote:Over the four-year cycle, 2012-15, World Rugby will directly invest approximately £3.2 million in Georgia to assist in running the union's development, high-performance and national team programmes, as well as their hosting of the annual World Rugby Tbilisi Cup.

'World Rugby’s high performance consultant looking after Georgia and Romania, (Richie) Dixon says the sport’s governing body should be saluted for their development of tier two nations — the likes of Fiji, Japan, Tonga, USA and Canada — by funding events such as the Tbilisi Cup, which ensures that such teams play each other regularly.

Georgia have won the ‘Six Nations B’ — the European Nations Cup — for the last five years and their aim is to join the Six Nations.

‘It may not happen before 2019,’ said Dixon. ‘But if teams like Georgia are making it into the quarter-finals, it will help their case. Georgia are getting there, and it’s good for the game'

Not to mention they are funded by a billionaire who has opened academies across the country with 23 due to be open by next years U20 JWC in Georgia.

Its almost like theres a road map in place.

It's not just the French clubs that block the availability of players, the english clubs have done it too. Also Georgia have been dropped from the u18 European championships after making it to the final (beating Ireland in the process). Still waiting for a reason as to why this is.

LeinsterFan4life wrote:It's not just the French clubs that block the availability of players, the english clubs have done it too. Also Georgia have been dropped from the u18 European championships after making it to the final (beating Ireland in the process). Still waiting for a reason as to why this is.

They drew with Ireland (8-8). They also drew with Italy (6-6) to make it to the final which they lost to France 57-0.

Perhaps they don't want to participate anymore?

LeinsterFan4life wrote:It's not just the French clubs that block the availability of players, the english clubs have done it too. Also Georgia have been dropped from the u18 European championships after making it to the final (beating Ireland in the process). Still waiting for a reason as to why this is.

Since when were they dropped?

Europe is more than big enough in terms of land area and population to hold more than one version of 6N.

It's also small enough to have a single European championship open to all European nations, albeit with divisions & promotion-relegation. In fact, all they need to do is connect the 6 Nations to the ENC via promo-relegation and - Voila! - there it is, ready-made.

Maybe you should send a letter to GRU and ask what the situation is and what plan they've got rather than blaming others because you seen a little short on knowledge of the situation

I'm not blaming anyone for anything. & I don't speak Georgia, or else I might send them a letter. But isn't this a chat forum? Do we have to go and write letters to all the unions on the respective matters we chat about? That seems pretty silly to me. Really, I just wanted to point out that Georgia have climbed two places ahead of Italy in the rankings, so it seems mighty curious they don't play each other, given they're both in Europe. Imagine Namibia overtaking South Africa in the rankings and not getting to play them . . .

It was a second string team. Mostly players on their 1st or 2nd caps with 3 established players, Mike Ross, Gordon D'Arcy and Simon Zebo starting.

It was a test match and drew 40k. Surely covered the costs. So why aren't we seeing more of the same?

Its almost like theres a road map in place.







There was a road map for Italy in the 1990s, but it included regular test matches with 5 Nations teams...

Rowanbi wrote: Europe is more than big enough in terms of land area and population to hold more than one version of 6N.

It's also small enough to have a single European championship open to all European nations, albeit with divisions & promotion-relegation. In fact, all they need to do is connect the 6 Nations to the ENC via promo-relegation and - Voila! - there it is, ready-made.

Have you got a promotion/relegation thing going on in your Championship there Rowanbi?   You know, a circus that might drop a 'big' Nation into the relegation zone for a few years and maybe they might find it pretty damn hard struggling out of it again too?  When your influence goes.... so surprisingly ( ) does the expertise, the coaching excellence, the funding for schools rugby and the sponsorship to subsidise the lessening crowds that will inevitably attend.

Yeah, maybe the up down circus of Promotion/Relegation would be a good thing for a big International Rugby Union event.  Let's experiment with it first using the best Version - let the SH Championship be guinea pig for 10 years or so. Get back to us on that one Rowanbi

Rowanbi wrote: Europe is more than big enough in terms of land area and population to hold more than one version of 6N.

It's also small enough to have a single European championship open to all European nations, albeit with divisions & promotion-relegation. In fact, all they need to do is connect the 6 Nations to the ENC via promo-relegation and - Voila! - there it is, ready-made.

Maybe you should send a letter to GRU and ask what the situation is and what plan they've got rather than blaming others because you seen a little short on knowledge of the situation

I'm not blaming anyone for anything. & I don't speak Georgia, or else I might send them a letter. But isn't this a chat forum? Do we have to go and write letters to all the unions on the respective matters we chat about? That seems pretty silly to me. Really, I just wanted to point out that Georgia have climbed two places ahead of Italy in the rankings, so it seems mighty curious they don't play each other, given they're both in Europe. Imagine Namibia overtaking South Africa in the rankings and not getting to play them . . .

It was a second string team. Mostly players on their 1st or 2nd caps with 3 established players, Mike Ross, Gordon D'Arcy and Simon Zebo starting.

It was a test match and drew 40k. Surely covered the costs. So why aren't we seeing more of the same?

Its almost like theres a road map in place.







There was a road map for Italy in the 1990s, but it included regular test matches with 5 Nations teams...

There wasn't a roadmap for Italy in the 90s as Italy were considered for the 5Ns when England signed up to Sky.

Italy played on average a Tier 1 nation once a year outside RWCs and were competing with the top NH teams and beating them. Georgia aren't doing that but are playing Tier 1 nations at a s

Some do actually write to unions etc, the reason I say you should is that you keep saying this should just happen without a grasp on the backward step it would be for the 6Ns. Italy who would probably be relegated under your suggestion bring a lot more revenue to the table than Georgia. Losing them would hurt their progression, cost money to the other nations and hurt rugby overall as the unions make most of their money from the 6Ns

Your idea is put them in and they'll learn to swim, where as the Georgians actually seem to have a coherent plan to become a force which is why you need to go get a better understanding of the subject rather than spouting some notion that theres nothing being done to aid the progression of Tier 2 nations such as Georgia

There wasn't a roadmap for Italy in the 90s as Italy were considered for the 5Ns when England signed up to Sky.

Sure there was. Talks about bringing them in began in earnest in the mid-90s, and over the next few years they played no fewer than 18 internationals against (what are today) tier 1 opponents - not all of them official test matches, of course.

Italy played on average a Tier 1 nation once a year outside RWCs and were competing with the top NH teams and beating them.

In fact, they played over 40 internationals against (what are today) tier 1 opponents in the 1990s - not all of them official test matches, of course. But the breakthrough didn't really come until 1995 when they downed Ireland in a full test match. By then they were already playing several games a year against (what are today) tier 1 opponents, and that trend would continue with 18 fixtures during the final 3 years of the century, 12 of them against 5 Nations teams (including XVs).

Italy who would probably be relegated under your suggestion

First of all, I wouldn't advocate automatic promotion-relegation for the very resons you mentioned. I'd make it an actual playoff fixture, with the team defending its place in the 6 Nations at home. That way the challenger would have to prove itself decisively superior by winning away. If Georgia were good enough to do that, then of course they would be full value for their place in the championship. Secondly, of course, the team facing the relegation playoff might very well NOT be Italy. Scotland have collected 4 spoons since Italy joined, and Wales and France have also finished last.

So unfortunately it is you who has been spouting ridiculous notions. You need to learn to discuss things like an adult rather than just make assumptions.

I think you should read back, you brought up the standing between Italy and Georgia in the rankings I merely ran with that thread and their positioning in the table along with their current stagnation. So hardly a ridiculous notion.

In the 90s there wasn't a roadmap for Italy as everyone was still trying to find their feet with professionalism, talks began with Italy when talks began about expelling England and Italy were the frontrunners to replace them.

Of the over 40 games you talk about(41 to be precise) nearly half were in World Cups, Qualifying or against the French.

As an adult Im aware of context, such as Unions didnt need to worry about paying players back in the early 90s hence the greater proportion of games then for Italy. They also beat the Tier 1 nations to earn a place at the table, Georgia cant beat teams made up of guys who can't make the 'A' teams of tier 1 nations never mind the test team yet you think they're ready for the big boys?

Im also aware that Georgia and World Rugby have plans in place to sustain them in the long term, maybe they learned from what happened with Italy and the lack of structures and organisation that has hurt them?

But the suggestion they had averaged one game a year against tier 1 opposition in the 1990s was woefully inaccurate, and yet Italy did not make a significant breakthrough until 1995, when they beat Ireland - a year before talks began which would result in their addition to the 5 Nations. So it's not as if they earned all those games by regularly beating tier 1 teams, as has been inferred. By the time they started to beat tier 1 teams they were already receiving many opportunities to do so. That's how it works. That's exactly what I've been saying. Georgia just don't receive that many opportunities - though they unquestionably deserve them, being ranked ahead of Italy at present. As for losing to A teams, it's already been pointed out that their top players are generally not released for such fixtures.

There isn't the room to expand the 6 nations currently and with the increasing money in the club game I struggle to think they'd be very happy to add an additional game in there. May make more sense for the Rugby Championship to drop to 1 game alternating home and away which would free up space for the Georgias and Japans etc

Just drop one of the rest weekends, going from; game, game, break, game, break, game & game to a format of, game, game, game, break, game, game & game.

There is no need for promotion or relegation so Scotland can be guaranteed their participation and the extra game can easily be included with teams using the opportunity to play their extended squads.

Finally an away match in Georgia will be a real test match and undoubtedly will focus and finance the games development in this eastern enclave.

Bring it on!

But would the clubs be happy with that king? I don't think so personally and I think it would be a pretty hard sell to them ie more money.

No 7&1/2 wrote:But would the clubs be happy with that king? I don't think so personally and I think it would be a pretty hard sell to them ie more money.

The rfu have the money, what they lack is the imagination.

Of course they would have to comprehensibly renegotiate their agreement reducing the number of games the elite players are available for club commitments. However, realistically this is something that is blinding obvious already with the current format as otherwise talents such as Otoje will have desperately short and frustratingly fragmented careers.

Again as the clubs are now getting more and more capable of generating serious money themselves though it won't be a simple case of have this money and now everyones happy. Saracens are rightly going to want as much access as possible to a player such as Itoje, and I guess their argument would be why should an expanding international calendar adversely affect them. There is then the French clubs who are already pushing pretty hard against the international game and the seeming hotch potch of contradicting priorities in the Pro 12.

Rowanbi wrote:But the suggestion they had averaged one game a year against tier 1 opposition in the 1990s was woefully inaccurate, and yet Italy did not make a significant breakthrough until 1995, when they beat Ireland - a year before talks began which would result in their addition to the 5 Nations. So it's not as if they earned all those games by regularly beating tier 1 teams, as has been inferred. By the time they started to beat tier 1 teams they were already receiving many opportunities to do so. That's how it works. That's exactly what I've been saying. Georgia just don't receive that many opportunities - though they unquestionably deserve them, being ranked ahead of Italy at present. As for losing to A teams, it's already been pointed out that their top players are generally not released for such fixtures.

Italys progress has been stifled by the lack of infrastructure and organisation there, what is being done in Georgia seems to be learning from Italys mistakes. There is a plan in place, maybe you should trust in that

kingelderfield wrote:Just drop one of the rest weekends, going from; game, game, break, game, break, game & game to a format of, game, game, game, break, game, game & game.

The rest weekends are there to protect the players and prevent burn out

kingelderfield wrote:Finally an away match in Georgia will be a real test match and undoubtedly will focus and finance the games development in this eastern enclave.

The GRU have a billionaire sugar daddy doing that, hes financed the building of 23 academies across the country that will all be up and running by next summer. The Emerging Springboks, Ireland and Italy have all went and played Georgia in the Tblisi Cup and the S. Africans and Irish coasted to wins yet you expect the Test sides to go and get a game?

kingelderfield wrote:Just drop one of the rest weekends, going from; game, game, break, game, break, game & game to a format of, game, game, game, break, game, game & game.

There is no need for promotion or relegation so Scotland can be guaranteed their participation and the extra game can easily be included with teams using the opportunity to play their extended squads.

Finally an away match in Georgia will be a real test match and undoubtedly will focus and finance the games development in this eastern enclave.

Bring it on!

There isn't the room to expand the 6 nation

I'd actually prefer to see a promotion-relegation fixture, but on the terms I mentioned earlier: 6 Nations wooden spooner at home to the ENC winner. As they say in boxing, the challenger needs to go in there and take the title off the champion. In spite of the current rankings, I think it will be a wee while before Georgia is capable of that. Meanwhile, they (& Romania) ought to be playing regular friendlies against 6 Nations teams. Their plight closely resembles that of the Pacific Islands, and yet they have advantages over the islands such as their geographical proximity to Western Europe and the size of their stadiums.

I would be happy with a system of promotion and relegation with the proviso that overall there are no more international games than at present. The last thing we want is a cricket-like situation where the international players never play for their clubs.

Perhaps reduce 6N to 5N with a play-off game between bottom team of 5N and top team from next tier.

I think 6 teams works well. I can certainly see why expanding the 6 Nations ad infinitum is not viable. This is an annual international championship, not a quadrennial tournament like the European football champoionship. But I think the promotion-relegation fixture has to come, and then rugby will actually be in the rather unique position among team sports of having an annual, all-inclusive European championship

Alternatively, of course, they could actually create a quadrennial European rugby championship. Start off with 8 teams in two groups of four, for example. The football championship only included 8 teams right up until the 1990s, believe it or not . . .