nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Argentinian Solution

Al_Fernz

I think we can all agree that Argentina need to have regular competition.

Does anybody think that it would be feasible for Argentina to have maybe 2 professional provincial sides in the Super 14? That way they retain all their talented young players and maybe bring back their foreign based players.

This would allow them to field a team in the Tri-Nations because most of their players wouldn't be based in Europe. A five year lag between the provincial teams entering the super 14 and Argentina entering the tri-nations would be appropriate. This would mean that a base of players could be built up and young players retained.

Would this be financially viable?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Royale with Cheese

Did they not try and have a team entered into the super 14 when it was last expanded, but that was denied?

tHE vAGGABOND

I read somewhere there are serious talks about expanding super 14 from its current short season, to a full on 26 week jobbie, like most NH competitions. As part of that they would expand the number of teams.

That would be the time to include the pacific islands and/or Argentina. But rugby in Argentina is amateur, and they don't look like they want to change that, which would **** up a super x franchise!

That said, I still think the best solution would be a '3rd' yearly comp, between teams from the America's and the pacific islands [think Fiji, Samoa, Tonga, Argentina, USA or some combo of..] It would be a good comp, and also ensure these teams did not get hammered by the larger nations [and stop the tri-nations stealing good players from the islands, as they will get capped, and get some much needed revenue for their unions!]

Al_Fernz

tHE vAGGABOND wrote: »

I read somewhere there are serious talks about expanding super 14 from its current short season, to a full on 26 week jobbie, like most NH competitions. As part of that they would expand the number of teams.

That would be the time to include the pacific islands and/or Argentina. But rugby in Argentina is amateur, and they don't look like they want to change that, which would **** up a super x franchise!

That said, I still think the best solution would be a '3rd' yearly comp, between teams from the America's and the pacific islands [think Fiji, Samoa, Tonga, Argentina, USA or some combo of..] It would be a good comp, and also ensure these teams did not get hammered by the larger nations [and stop the tri-nations stealing good players from the islands, as they will get capped, and get some much needed revenue for their unions!]

TBH, I don't think that would work either. Remember that one of the reasons that Argentina are not in the Tri-nations is because they have a lot of European based players. Organising such a tournament would be fraught with difficulty.

Also, I think Argentina and Fiji are of a much higher standard than Samoa, Tonga and the US.

Surely the Argentinian union would like to have at least 2 professional teams for the super 14 if it is for the benefit and development of the national game as a whole? They could model it on the Irish system. Also I think it is imperitave for the IRB and Argentinian government to support this. Perhaps, this could be rolled out if Argentina host the WC in 2015?

tHE vAGGABOND

our development style squad went over there last summer remember and played an argentine team minus a bunch of french based players and we lost two tests out of two..

Just cos they will be missing a few lads does not make them bad - it would hurt them against the all blacks, but not Fiji, Tonga, Samoa et al

I think a Tongan or a Soman <sp?> would be quite upset to be told they are not as good as Fiji! Thats like telling us we are not as good as Scotland or Wales - where who is better changes year on year

Al_Fernz

tHE vAGGABOND wrote: »

our development style squad went over there last summer remember and played an argentine team minus a bunch of french based players and we lost two tests out of two..

Just cos they will be missing a few lads does not make them bad - it would hurt them against the all blacks, but not Fiji, Tonga, Samoa et al

I think a Tongan or a Soman <sp?> would be quite upset to be told they are not as good as Fiji! Thats like telling us we are not as good as Scotland or Wales - where who is better changes year on year

Good point but you're talking about b-team rugby. The real goal should be to have Argentina competing with their best players at the highest level. That way it actually means something.

ATM I think Fiji are too good for Samoa or Tonga. I think they have far more world class players like Quera, Rambeni, Rupeni Caucaunibuca. But I suppose that changes every few years.

remus808

Al_Fernz wrote: »

Good point but you're talking about b-team rugby. The real goal should be to have Argentina competing with their best players at the highest level. That way it actually means something.

ATM I think Fiji are too good for Samoa or Tonga. I think they have far more world class players like Quera, Rambeni, Rupeni Caucaunibuca. But I suppose that changes every few years.

I think you underestimate Samoa or Tonga.. Both sides have some great players. Tbh Fiji would normally be considered the weaker of the South Sea teams (although Samoa have been bad of late, I personally think Tonga are much better than the other 2), they just happened to be the ones to place higher in the WC. (And i'm not taking away from their achievment)

Both of the other two have some great players.. Taione, Maka, T-Pole, Hola, Latu and Vaka for Tonga, off the top of my head..