peasy23 Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 Bit harsh on Rhys Webb imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peasy23 Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 Happy enough with the Scotland team, good strong bench as you would think Japan can't possibly play another 80 minutes at the same level they did on Saturday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Lambies Doos Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 Scotland by 15 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
honestly united Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 What is the self interest? Have they been asked? The Self interest is from the rest of the teams in the 6 Nations not wanting promotion / relegation between the 6 nations and 6 nations b. There is promotion all the way frm Six nations b (which Georgia have dominated for the last 6 -7 years) to Division 3 yet none between 6 Nations B and the 6 nations as the top table teams dont want to lose out on TV and Commercial income if they have to drop down. Im all in favour of having a play off every 2 years (combined rank of home and away matches) between bottom team in the 6 Nations and top team in 6 nations B even if it puts scotland out of the 6 nations for a couple of years - altough trips to Lisbon, Madrid, Bucharest and Moscow could make for a decent change to Paris, Rome, London etc. Also there is the possibility of Georgia (and potential Romania) throwing a spanner in the works of qualification for the next world cup. Currently all teams who finish in the top 3 in thier groups automatically qualify for the next world cup and everyone else has to qualify, with European places coming through the 6 Nations B, and play offs with all other league (1, 2, 3) winners. However as it looks like Georgia will now finish 3rd (if they beat Namibia, Tonga have to beat one of Argentina or New Zealand to finish above them) and one of Scotland, Wales or Italy dont finish in the top 3 of thier group, they are then going to have to play all the teams in 6 Nations B as part of qualifing. Although to be fair, im sure if one of those 3 dont finish in the top 3 they will change the qualify for the next world cup so they dont have to inconvienence themself's playing the little teams! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
invergowrie arab Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 Im all in favour of having a play off every 2 years (combined rank of home and away matches) between bottom team in the 6 Nations and top team in 6 nations B even if it puts scotland out of the 6 nations for a couple of years - altough trips to Lisbon, Madrid, Bucharest and Moscow could make for a decent change to Paris, Rome, London etc. I'm sure you could find a way of having a holiday in Lisbon that doesn't involve bankrupting the SRU and killing off what shitty rugby we do still have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
honestly united Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 I'm sure you could find a way of having a holiday in Lisbon that doesn't involve bankrupting the SRU and killing off what shitty rugby we do still have. I'm sure you could find a way of having a holiday in Lisbon that doesn't involve bankrupting the SRU and killing off what shitty rugby we do still have. I dont think it would, we would still get games against England, Wales and Ireland every year as imagine the uproar if there was no Calcutta Cup match, not triple crown winner etc for 2 years, it would also boost the profile of the other countries in Europe and stop the money being hogged by the same 6 countries and granted there probably would be a dip in gates but it could also boost the team by having 2 years of winning the majority of their games and could bounce back up with a bit of confidence. Or granted it could be a clusterf**k and we fail to win the 6 Nations B or lose a play off, and then be playing in front of a 1/4 full Murrayfield with no games on TV, all the best players from Glasgow and Edinburgh diassapear off to the Top 14 or the Premiership as the SRU cant afford the wages for the Pro teams - but we would be their on merit and the 6 best teams in Europe would be i the 6 Nations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 I agree it needs looked at. At least the Southern Hemisphere has made efforts by adding Argentina, and adding Super Rugby franchises for Argentina & Japan. However they continue to neglect the Pacific islands. Regarding WC 2019 qualification... as I observed it's not impossible for Wales or Italy to finish 4th - when would they fulfil qualifiers? Would they just rig-up a gimme home-n-away playoff for them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Connolly Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 I agree it needs looked at. At least the Southern Hemisphere has made efforts by adding Argentina, and adding Super Rugby franchises for Argentina & Japan. However they continue to neglect the Pacific islands. Regarding WC 2019 qualification... as I observed it's not impossible for Wales or Italy to finish 4th - when would they fulfil qualifiers? Would they just rig-up a gimme home-n-away playoff for them? They'd probably have to slot the qualifiers in during the autumn test and summer tour windows. Italy could get away with it, but given Wales already have to have four AIs because they are skint, they could be f*cked if they had to replace a home game v NZ with an away game in Russia, for example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GAD Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 At least the Southern Hemisphere has made efforts by adding Argentina, and adding Super Rugby franchises for Argentina & Japan. However they continue to neglect the Pacific islands. The Pacific Islands get treated like shite by world rugby in general. They are the only really small poor countries where rugby is the main sport so are treated like player factories for the big clubs around the world. Much like many places in Africa are for football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peasy23 Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 The Pacific Islands get treated like shite by world rugby in general. They are the only really small poor countries where rugby is the main sport so are treated like player factories for the big clubs around the world. Much like many places in Africa are for football. Something echoed by former Samoan player Daniel Leo. http://www.espn.co.uk/rugby/story/_/id/12967315/dan-leo-retires-international-rugby-miss-representing-samoa-2015-rugby-world-cup He also tweeted this yesterday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GAD Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 Something echoed by former Samoan player Daniel Leo. http://www.espn.co.uk/rugby/story/_/id/12967315/dan-leo-retires-international-rugby-miss-representing-samoa-2015-rugby-world-cup He also tweeted this yesterday. It's quite shameful really. Most disappointing isn't just the way they are exploited by the club's, but by other unions as well. Nobody will go to play them, so the only way they can make any money is to go on tour, where they are forced to accept shite appearance fees (low 5 figures) whilst making the host nation a couple of million quid. They are then only able to pay the players a paltry amount, so they listen to the club's and stay away from the international team as they need the money. I don't know exactly what world rugby should do about it,but at least making some of the big teams go over there once in a while would make a big difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingscot Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 It's quite shameful really. Most disappointing isn't just the way they are exploited by the club's, but by other unions as well. Nobody will go to play them, so the only way they can make any money is to go on tour, where they are forced to accept shite appearance fees (low 5 figures) whilst making the host nation a couple of million quid. They are then only able to pay the players a paltry amount, so they listen to the club's and stay away from the international team as they need the money. I don't know exactly what world rugby should do about it,but at least making some of the big teams go over there once in a while would make a big difference. Scotland did. It was very well received. Ireland have too. I'm not sure about letting Georgia into the 6 Nations or the 'relegation' aspect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bully Wee Villa Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 Eight Nations with relegation every two years would be good, although I don't know enough about club rugby to know if it's feasible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GAD Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 Scotland did. It was very well received. Ireland have too. Yeah, we went a few years ago. Think that was the first time, though we may have gone to Samoa in the 90's maybe. New Zealand even managed to drag themselves over there for the first time ever this year so maybe things will start to change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparky88 Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 I dont think it would, we would still get games against England, Wales and Ireland every year as imagine the uproar if there was no Calcutta Cup match, not triple crown winner etc for 2 years, it would also boost the profile of the other countries in Europe and stop the money being hogged by the same 6 countries and granted there probably would be a dip in gates but it could also boost the team by having 2 years of winning the majority of their games and could bounce back up with a bit of confidence. Or granted it could be a clusterf**k and we fail to win the 6 Nations B or lose a play off, and then be playing in front of a 1/4 full Murrayfield with no games on TV, all the best players from Glasgow and Edinburgh diassapear off to the Top 14 or the Premiership as the SRU cant afford the wages for the Pro teams - but we would be their on merit and the 6 best teams in Europe would be i the 6 Nations. I'm sure the same arguments were trotted out about the end of the home internationals in football. Rugby, like football a few decades ago, is becoming a more global game, its the fastest growing sport in the us too. The latter paragraphb is probably roughly equivalent to the situation Scottish football is in and its not like its the end of the world. As said previously, its blatant self interest- Georgia's TV market isn't big enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 Scotland did. It was very well received. Ireland have too. Not particularly willingly, IIRC - weren't they part of an IRB scheme which was later abandoned? Like the 'Pacific Islanders' XV. Only 5 visits since 1990s - 2 since 2006: Italy - visited Fiji and Samoa in 2000 Ireland - visited Tonga and Samoa in 2003 Italy - visited Fiji in 2006 Scotland - visited Fiji and Samoa in 2012 Italy - visited Fiji and Samoa in 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
honestly united Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 The problem with the pacific islander teams is that its all well and good teams travelling over there to play them, but there is not the population or the money within the islands to rake in the huge gate money the other top 10 teams get. World Rugby need to start ensuring that there is a decent split in the gate money when they are over playing in Europe or Aus / NZ so they can pay the players more. Granted more home games against the top 10 would help, but would only go part of the way. Also they need to do something about clubs offering contracts that entice players to give up on Internationals (players are getting offered 2 contracts, one if they play internationals, and one, sometimes on double the wages if they retire from internationals), and the situations where you get top class players (one example is Tonga'huie the prop) who only play for their countires at the World Cup and never in the pacific championship or tours etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
invergowrie arab Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 Murrayfield for 6 nations against the home nations isn't a kick in the arse off 50/50 home and away fans as it is. Spain and Portugal aren't going to fill that void no matter how many 80-0 pumpings we hand out. All of the SRUs corporate and sponsorship comes because of the 6 nations. I don't know-how you realistically bridge the gap.Broadcasters and sponsors won't ever allow the original 5 to leave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 I think the only way to do it would be to expand it to an Eight Nations then have some kind of pool system: for example 2 pools of 4 (first 3 weeks) then the top halves and bottom halves from each pool come together in 'top half' and 'bottom half' pools (last 3 weeks - or last 2 weeks and carry across the mutual result). I don't think English/French club rugby would accept a straightforward group of eight requiring 2 extra matchdays. You could relegate the bottom team in the 'bottom half' pool, which is never going to be one of the major powers, then replace them with the top nation from a second level tournament. However, even that would mean some level of sacrifice... but given the current system sees the established powers and Italy playing each other once and that's it, no alternative going to be avoid the need for something to give somewhere. If you introduce relegation to the Six Nations then you risk us or Italy going to the wilderness - if you expand the Six Nations then you need to find 2 more dates, or have a pool system where some don't play others. You can say the same of the Southern Hemisphere... how would they accommodate some/all of Fiji, Samoa or Japan? Italy and Argentina were just lucky that they got in first to fill the odd numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
invergowrie arab Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 Italy weren't even really first. More just right place at right time. There was a time it was thought Romania would be the ones to join. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.