Italy out, SA in

Reports from the Daily Heil that the 6 Nations (or realistically at most 5 of them) are looking on getting SA into the 6 nations and Italy out. A tremendously bad idea that I would suggest is a fishing trip to see how it floats. Badly is the answer on twitter from prominent ex rugby players, pundits and fans.

It's going to sink quickly in my view. For every person who says Italy are floundering and should face peril there's another saying look at their u20s squad now. And the main drive was for Georgia to be included. 

Can't see how it helps the likes of Japan, Argentina etc either.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/article-10520719/The-Six-Nations-cosy-club-does-need-shake-South-Africa-NOT-answer.html

From a purely sporting point of view it makes sense, Italy haven't been up to grade for a long time now and are merely a points scoring opportunity. From a developmental side it's a terrible idea, the tier 2 sides (Italy are not of course) are marginalised enough as it is without further pushing them to the outside.

Italy, Japan, Argentina and Fiji have a lot to offer international rugby, that does need protecting.

Smells like CVC are about to extract their pound of flesh

I prefer it to remain the premier Northern Hemisphere and European competition, neither of which SA fit into.  Yes, they're in the same time zone.  But it's still a long old flight and not nearly as easy to get to as the current 6 nations away games for players and fans alike.

I like SA a lot as a rugby nation.  Possibly are/were my 2nd team.  But just not the right comp for them, in my opinion.  CVC, TV and other money people might think differently though.  And I guess they're the ones who will ultimately decide.

Italy own a stake in the 6n can they be forced out?

There’s probably something in the detail around how they can be bought out if agreed by all other shareholders

I wish people would leave Italy alone. I get that their results haven't been good, but they are really starting to turn thing around in the level below the national team. As is trotted out in these times, it took France years to bed into the competition. Every single other team has gone through periods where people would say that they deserved the boot. In my opinion we've got to stop looking at them like someone we 'permit' to be in the competition, and see them as stakeholders.

They are building something, they are now producing fantastic young players and relying less on Italian Argentines.

Agreed, if we’re swapping anyone for South Africa it should be Wales

BamBam wrote:Agreed, if we’re swapping anyone for South Africa it should be Wales

And so it begins

It’s been far too nice on here for a 6N

Other reports coming out now suggesting that may not be the case, rather a move to a 7 team competition with SA joining.

The equivalent competition in the South will involve NA, Aus, Arg, Japan and Fiji

Potentially even a league table with summer and autumn fixtures against the two conferences.

That is probably a better way to go and the long awaited move towards the global season.

Ahhhh the global season. Oh how I long for summer rugby in the NH. Lovely weather. Dry pitches. No wind howling making kicking a lottery

The only negative I've seen to summer rugby is losing the kids base with teachers not giving up their summer to coach etc. This issue is easy to resolve, keep all amateur rugby to the winter, just move the pro leagues to the summer. Also this means yer amateur players will have more opportunity to attend pro games as they wont be playing as much at the same time.

Win win

But back to the point, leave poor Italy alone

Can we not just promote Georgia to a 6/7n instead of having to include SA?

GeordieFalcon wrote:Can we not just promote Georgia to a 6/7n instead of having to include SA?

Would stop Italy being last every year

Oh for the days of proper A teams before clubs got all precious about their players and running a professional team - would be great to combine those with the 2nd tier European teams

Its a European competition, with B, C, D etc leagues going down.

If we're expanding then promote the strongest from the Euro Natiosn...ie Georgia.

Why do we have to pander to the wims of SA...

I agree this seems like a trial balloon, likely floated by CVC to plus up their investment.

In a vacuum it is a good idea, and would help SA financially, especially since their clubs are already playing in the north.

On the other hand, if this swaps out Italy, then does not help the global game, just puts some dough in someone's pocket..

On a final note before I go to work, We cannot not, and should not add more games for our players (that effing global game, nations cup, whatever we want to call it). We have kicked that dead horse around for a long time and that would be bad. Although I like enjoy Rugby the same as all of us, but there are simply too many games.

I'm not much of an eco-warrior, but I do consider the environment more now than I ever did. And it seems a bit wrong to be adding in more global competitions that add to the issue of emissions, etc. It's not going to do anything for the carbon footprint of the 6N, and I'm sure at some level as an organisation they will be tasked with reducing theirs.

Cumbrian wrote:I wish people would leave Italy alone.  I get that their results haven't been good, but they are really starting to turn thing around in the level below the national team.  As is trotted out  in these times, it took France years to bed into the competition.  Every single other team has gone through periods where people would say that they deserved the boot.  In my opinion we've got to stop looking at them like someone we 'permit' to be in the competition, and see them as stakeholders.  

They are building something, they are now producing fantastic young players and relying less on Italian Argentines.  

I actually disagree, I think it's good that Italy are being hounded like this and put under pressure, as for too long they've been too comfortable collecting the 6 nations money and not giving a damn about performances. I think it's been this hounding from the media that and fans that has led to Italy electing their new president who genuinely seems to be looking to upgrading everything about Italy rugby, including their domestic competitions. We're already seeing the fruits of this with their underage performances (also their national side is already notably better this year) and finally the national side are picking tours where they can actually win games where they can try to remember what it's like to win games and give their fans something to cheer about. They are apparently scheduled to tour Romania and Georgia this year and they just recently played Uruguay.

BTW I'm saying this as an Italy fan who wants them in the 6 nation, I don't want SA in any of the euro comps, including the HC.

As South Africa are tied to the Rugby Championship until at least 2025, it seems a bit of a long range plan.  From a fans perspective, it makes sense as South Africa align to European time zones much better than they do Australia/New Zealand.

The issue becomes topical because playing Italy in the 6 Nations has been fairly pointless for the last 6 years.  If one of the 'big 5' were at the bottom of the table, I am sure there would be no question of demotion or replacing a team with South Africa.

As a Sale fan to be honest we see enough Saffers playing week in week out anyway, so I am quite happy to pass on South Africa coming into the 6 Nations.  I would much prefer to see a Georgia, Spain, etc get the chance.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Can we not just promote Georgia to a 6/7n instead of having to include SA?

Even of Georgia are brought in the nations, will they win more games than Italy have won?

Italy since joining the nations have more or less the the whipping boys.

Having said that Italy have beaten every team (Except for England) Georgia will be a same won't they? How long will it take Georgia to come up to speed.


















9Except

Bearing in mind they have no professional set up in Georgia. Even longer, if ever!

BigGee wrote:Bearing in mind they have no professional set up in Georgia. Even longer, if ever!

Bearing in mind Georgia is not in Europe?????

majesticimperialman wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:Can we not just promote Georgia to a 6/7n instead of having to include SA?

Even of Georgia are brought in the nations, will they win more games than Italy have won?

But surely the great scheme is about building European Rugby....NOT just making the big teams stronger and richer.

I like to see how the lower European teams are doing...and id love one day to see some for of European Cup. Many moons away i know...

Let SA focus on building some of the upcoming African nations.

BigGee wrote:Bearing in mind they have no professional set up in Georgia. Even longer, if ever!

They do now have a professional side called the black lions which competes in the European super cup. Not enough to build a competitive squad but its a start.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

majesticimperialman wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:Can we not just promote Georgia to a 6/7n instead of having to include SA?

Even of Georgia are brought in the nations, will they win more games than Italy have won?

But surely the great scheme is about building European Rugby....NOT just making the big teams stronger and richer.

I like to see how the lower European teams are doing...and id love one day to see some for of European Cup. Many moons away i know...

Let SA focus on building some of the upcoming African nations.

I agree that the project should be to build rugby (and not just in Europe), but I fear that the professional game is more about building (or even just achieving) profits and any changes will be financially motivated. We are all familiar with the rising tide lifts all boats analogy, but my guess is the accountants (and specifically CVC) will working on timescales way shorter than that required to significantly reduce the gaps between the various tiers of international rugby.

Crow-barring SA into a 6 or 7 Nations competition will concentrate the money into this event to the detriment of the rest of the world in my view.

6 Nations have confirmed it isn't happening. Doubt they liked the press again.

There is a lot to say about where SA should or should not fit. Firstly looking at the club/provincial/franchise teams.

I believe it is payback time for European rugby as a whole insofar as this goes, for years the European set up has milked SA rugby players for their benefit in club and international rugby and the URC and Heineken cup is one way of giving back to the country who likely has more exports in world rugby than anyone.

As for the six/seven nations, there will be a massive imbalance in international rugby if the Springboks join the European comp.

Not only from a voting perspective (the European group plus SA will control world rugby development in perpetuity)

But also from the perspective that besides the world cup there is really only one other main competition in international rugby.

As much as we believe Japan might be the next big thing, or even USA, that is decades away from being "a thing" in international rugby, Australia and New Zealand might not survive the wait.

My vote is SA remains part of the Rugby Championship if only to retain balance in world rugby.

Having said that the attitude of the NZRU and RA has really started to turn me against Antipodean rugby over the past two years. Part of me says Frak 'em.

Sorry would start a new thread but I mainly like to nab others work as a base and amazingly I can't find a single match write up of the Georgia Italy game.

Bit surprised as I thought there would be a number of journalists with the broad themes ready to go. Georgia 28 19 Italy 19. Italy outscored in tries 3 to1 as well. As with SA a slightly weakened team but you'd imagine there will now be another swell for promotion and relegation, though I've seen a couple of people saying bring on a 7 Nations tournament.

Id rather have a 7 nations with Italy and Georgia than a 6n with SA.

Georgia are developing. They were known for their forwards but they are starting to produce some very talented backs now, possibly due to many playing in France.

Same for Italy. They seem to be very developing some more cracking players now and their U20's look to have some good kids coming through.

Id prefer to stick with that format.

Whilst I would prefer SA to remain in the Rugby Championship I suppose money talks.

I just don't see how the Six Nations can expand as there are already limited time in the Calendar.

The RC if it wants to expand has its own challenges, it is inevitable that Japan will be welcomed at some point. This begs the question of how the format will be changed to accommodate all the travel and whether it will still be home and away fixtures.

I think the most practical format will be to host the tournament in one country, alternating every year.

Just can't see it being popular with the clubs if it were to expand. Georgia do themselves no disservice with this result though.

I can't see SA in the Six Nations in the foreseeable future.  As others have said, I think it would damage the Rugby Championship and eventually relegate Rugby in NZ, OZ, and Argentina simply due to the differences in the financial resources of a Six Nations and Heineken Cup with SA involved compared to weakened.  Also, would likely cause a battle royale with the French and English clubs if it takes their internationals away from the clubs for any more time than now.

BigGee wrote:Other reports coming out now suggesting that may not be the case, rather a move to a 7 team competition with SA joining.

The equivalent competition in the South will involve NA, Aus, Arg, Japan and Fiji

Potentially even a league table with summer and autumn fixtures against the two conferences.

That is probably a better way to go and the long awaited move towards the global season.

But isn't SA in the Southern Hemisphere and Japan in the Northern?

To me the logic says the top six nations in Europe must be one league and the rest must make up another league.

The Six Nations is set, see no reason to change it. Even bringing in Georgia will just upset the season.

The SH teams of SA, NZ, OZ and Argentina need to decide whether they want to expand, Japan makes sense from a proximity point of view rather than the hemisphere.

It can bring much needed revenue to the RC. I just don't see from a financial viability perspective how any other nation will be involved.

The unfortunate reality is Fiji, Samoa, Tonga whilst exporting a myriad of players to all corners of the world they don't have financial viable markets, and I have not seen any tier one rugby nation give to Poopie about it.

The options for the 6n is:

1. Stays the same
2. Remains the same, but with promotion and relegation from the Euro nations.
3. Remove Italy and install SA
4. Begin to change to form a European Championship, 2 pools etc. (Could produce some cricket scores though)

I also notice in the recent African leg of the world cup qualifying, Namibia are through to the WC again. Theyve had it pretty easy for a long time now, however suddenly there are quite a number of African countries playing the 15s. Zimbabwe seem to be back again, Algeria and Morroco are coming on (with alot of French inluence) Kenya pushing on away from the 7's etc etc.

So it will be fascinating to see how those countries develop over the next few years. Due to population numbers alone, Namibia might start to find their dominance in Africa reducing.

Heaf wrote:

BigGee wrote:Other reports coming out now suggesting that may not be the case, rather a move to a 7 team competition with SA joining.

The equivalent competition in the South will involve NA, Aus, Arg, Japan and Fiji

Potentially even a league table with summer and autumn fixtures against the two conferences.

That is probably a better way to go and the long awaited move towards the global season.

But isn't SA in the Southern Hemisphere and Japan in the Northern?

No. Apologies, but you are completely wrong - this is Rugby! We do what we want. Making rules moving countries is easy. Making rules clarifying what is a high tackle, not so much, .

BamBam wrote:Agreed, if we’re swapping anyone for South Africa it should be Wales

I thought sa already played in the six Nations as Scotland?

Yoda wrote:

BamBam wrote:Agreed, if we’re swapping anyone for South Africa it should be Wales

I thought sa already played in the six Nations as Scotland?

Nope, they are just a subsidiary of ours

Old Man wrote:

Yoda wrote:

BamBam wrote:Agreed, if we’re swapping anyone for South Africa it should be Wales

I thought sa already played in the six Nations as Scotland?

Nope, they are just a subsidiary of ours

Still waiting for our next delivery. Matt Stevens, Mike Catt et al retired ages ago, pull your finger out!

Yoda wrote:

Old Man wrote:

Yoda wrote:

BamBam wrote:Agreed, if we’re swapping anyone for South Africa it should be Wales

I thought sa already played in the six Nations as Scotland?

Nope, they are just a subsidiary of ours

Still waiting for our next delivery. Matt Stevens, Mike Catt et al retired ages ago, pull your finger out!

Dave Ribbans please.

Yeah, sorry, some of the orders got lost during Covid. We had to put most of them on ice

As a South African, I don't want the Boks to join the 6 Nations. The 6 Nations is clearly a European competition. That's its identity. If you mess with that, you're messing with the DNA of the competition.

I’m sure this thread got necro’d with good intent, but it’s was to talk about Georgia beating Italy. Now it’s starting to get away from that, so not serving a purpose, as it encourages your average WUM. I love a bit of banter, but this site also doesn’t need people trying to provoke others either.