If Georgia were to tour Ireland ...

Coburger

Hey, absolutely nothing against Georgia as a rugby nation, but what would people here think of Georgia were to do a three match tour playing Ireland?

I'm just raising this point for one or two reasons: what do people in New Zealand really think when they play Ireland? Is it the same way that people here would view it if we were playing Canada or Georgia?

Also, what does Ireland get out of playing New Zealand three times? Should we have gone the Scotland way and play one game against a power house and a game against Samoa or Argentina away? There often seems to be this thing that we don't play enough games against Southern Hemisphere teams. I wonder over the last five years how many games (excluding World Cup) we've played against a southern vs a northern hemisphere team.

One last thing, would Georgia give Ireland a better game than Ireland gave New Zealand?

.ak

Coburger wrote: »

One last thing, would Georgia give Ireland a better game than Ireland gave New Zealand?

Presently? Yes.

But isn't that all a tad kneejerk to something that's been ongoing? We wouldn't usually lose to NZ in that fashion. In the past few times we've met it's been +20 at worst. +60 is just a reflection on how bad a state Irish rugby is currently in. Georgia is actually in an ascendency, I doubt we'd put near that on them.

It's not all doomsday stuff mind you. A fresh set of ideas and a new set of staff at the top level would turn the ship around imo.

pickarooney

I think it would be great if Georgia were to play a couple of tests against Ireland. They're the kind of team we could 'safely' make 7-8 changes against between tests.

bilston

pickarooney wrote: »

I think it would be great if Georgia were to play a couple of tests against Ireland. They're the kind of team we could 'safely' make 7-8 changes against between tests.

You've obviously forgotten 2007 already!!

liammur

pickarooney wrote: »

I think it would be great if Georgia were to play a couple of tests against Ireland. They're the kind of team we could 'safely' make 7-8 changes against between tests.

And it would be good if the public turned out in numbers as well to watch the games. But would they ?

donfers

i'd have no objection to playing georgia, and like NZ i'd take the games around the country, ravenhill, thomond park etc. - it would give us a chance to blood new players and at home i'd say we would win by an about 30-40 points each game even with second string players

georgia to ireland is not the same as ireland to new zealand

ireland have beaten teams that have beaten new zealand in recent years, georgia have no pedigree of beating top tier nations at all, yes they ran us close in one world cup match but the distance in class between georgia and ireland is far greater than the distance in class between ireland and nz

we have a psychological issue with NZ that hopefully will be overcome soon, in the second test i saw belief in some of the younger players that they could win the game which i'd never seen before and i believe with a top coach and a good performance at home we could beat NZ

liammur

donfers wrote: »

i'd have no objection to playing georgia, and like NZ i'd take the games around the country, ravenhill, thomond park etc. - it would give us a chance to blood new players and at home i'd say we would win by an about 30-40 points each game even with second string players

georgia to ireland is not the same as ireland to new zealand

ireland have beaten teams that have beaten new zealand in recent years, georgia have no pedigree of beating top tier nations at all, yes they ran us close in one world cup match but the distance in class between georgia and ireland is far greater than the distance in class between ireland and nz

we have a psychological issue with NZ that hopefully will be overcome soon, in the second test i saw belief in some of the younger players that they could win the game which i'd never seen before and i believe with a top coach and a good performance at home we could beat NZ

There's no doubt we have s psychological issue with NZ, and to a lesser degree France, and both these teams seem to up their performance against us.

Snickers Man

Coburger wrote: »

One last thing, would Georgia give Ireland a better game than Ireland gave New Zealand?

That really depends on whether you're talking 22-19 or 60-0 doesn't it?

Dravokivich

liammur wrote: »

And it would be good if the public turned out in numbers as well to watch the games. But would they ?

Remember people can't go if they can't afford to. Only thing stopping me from going to international matches played at home is the crazy prices that tickets tend to be set at.

liammur

Dravokivich wrote: »

Remember people can't go if they can't afford to. Only thing stopping me from going to international matches played at home is the crazy prices that tickets tend to be set at.

I can't agree with you more. I remember a few soccer matches played in Thomond Pk a few years back and they were priced as if Brazil were playing, end result, a few thousand showed up. Sport is discretionary spending and should be priced accordingly.

CatFromHue

I don't see Georgia playing a two test series against the full Senior team a runner to be honest. To the best of my knowledge our Senior games have to be played in the Aviva (I could be wrong here but I think this is correct) and there's no way you'd get a good turnout for a two tests against Georgia in there. So financially alone it would be a bad idea.

Georgia playing a two test series against Ireland A with games in Limerick/Belfast/Galway is a different story though.

buck65

Ireland would be afraid of playing Georgia now, we couldn't afford to rest players for the sake of blooding others. A loss to them would be horrendous for our ranking, Ireland ducked playing Fiji for the same reason. Georgia deserved to beat us in the 2007 RWC only for Denis Leamy saving a definite try they would have, England earned it against them last year.
Too much to loose. We would have to be at full strength.

Tim Robbins

buck65 wrote: »

Ireland would be afraid of playing Georgia now, we couldn't afford to rest players for the sake of blooding others. A loss to them would be horrendous for our ranking, Ireland ducked playing Fiji for the same reason. Georgia deserved to beat us in the 2007 RWC only for Denis Leamy saving a definite try they would have, England earned it against them last year.
Too much to loose. We would have to be at full strength.

A sensible thing would be if Georgia played an Ireland under 29's. You know to give younger players their chance :-)

wp_rathead

Would there ever be an opportunity for Ireland Wolfhounds to tour Europe, playing likes of Romania, Georgia, Russia etc?

I know this is off topic as the OP is about is there a similar gulf between us and NZ and Georgia and us.
I believe the less established rugby nations are getting better as some results and performances in the RWC showed. Our national team seems to be in freefall at the moment- if you take out the Australian win and French draw away past two years haven't been exactly fruitful

Sat 05/02/11 SIN Italy 11 - 13 Ireland
Sun 13/02/11 SIN Ireland 22 - 25 France
Sun 27/02/11 SIN Scotland 18 - 21 Ireland
Sat 12/03/11 SIN Wales 19 - 13 Ireland
Sat 19/03/11 SIN Ireland 24 - 8 England
Sat 06/08/11 TES Scotland 10 - 6 Ireland
Sat 13/08/11 TES France 19 - 12 Ireland
Sat 20/08/11 TES Ireland 22 - 26 France
Sat 27/08/11 TES Ireland 9 - 20 England
Sun 11/09/11 WOC Ireland 22 - 10 United States
Sat 17/09/11 WOC Australia 6 - 15 Ireland
Sun 25/09/11 WOC Ireland 62 - 12 Russia
Sun 02/10/11 WOC Ireland 36 - 6 Italy
Sat 08/10/11 WOC Ireland 10 - 22 Wales
Sun 05/02/12 SIN Ireland 21 - 23 Wales
Sat 25/02/12 SIN Ireland 42 - 10 Italy
Sun 04/03/12 SIN France 17 - 17 Ireland
Sat 10/03/12 SIN Ireland 32 - 14 Scotland
Sat 17/03/12 SIN England 30 - 9 Ireland
Tue 29/05/12 TES Barbarians 29 - 28 Ireland
Sat 09/06/12 TES New Zealand 42 - 10 Ireland
Sat 16/06/12 TES New Zealand 22 - 19 Ireland
Sat 23/06/12 TES New Zealand 60 - 0 Ireland

bilston

In a Lions year we should send a squad to tour Eastern Europe. I think we're going to North America next June but three tests in Eastern Europe, one against Romania, one against Georgia and one against the Russians would be interesting especially if those teams were at full strength. Maybe an idea for 2017.

thomond2006

pickarooney wrote: »

I think it would be great if Georgia were to play a couple of tests against Ireland. They're the kind of team we could 'safely' make 7-8 changes against between tests.

tolosenc

bilston wrote: »

In a Lions year we should send a squad to tour Eastern Europe. I think we're going to North America next June but three tests in Eastern Europe, one against Romania, one against Georgia and one against the Russians would be interesting especially if those teams were at full strength. Maybe an idea for 2017.

Would it be possible to send one squad to North America and one to Eastern Europe? Under the guise of an A team, but with a more even distribution of players.

matthew8

tolosenc wrote: »

Would it be possible to send one squad to North America and one to Eastern Europe? Under the guise of an A team, but with a more even distribution of players.

TBH I would like us to send players to play Eastern Europeans and North Americans and Japanese even when we have a test series. Like send a second team to play Georgia, Romania and Russia in the summer and then invite them back for the Autumn to play in Thomond, RDS and Ravenhill to pay for sending the team over to Eastern Europe. For the other series we could send a team to USA, Canada and Japan. I'm sure these nations would be thrilled to get some games against us.

Cpt_Blackbeard

My Georgian is a little rusty, but he is essentially repeating the following a number of times:

If Georgia was a tour of Ireland ...
Yeah, absolutely nothing against Georgia, as a rugby nation, but what people here think that we should do a three-match tour of Ireland to play?

I raise this point only one or two reasons: I really think people in New Zealand, that when they play in Ireland? This is the same, that people would view it here if we were playing in Canada or Georgia?

Also, the Irish took game three in New Zealand? Should go to Scotland and play a game against the house and away from the game against Samoa or Argentina? It often seems that this is something that we do not play enough games against Southern Hemisphere teams. I wonder how many games the last five years (except for the World Cup) we played in the southern vs northern hemisphere teams.

One of the things that make the game better in Ireland than in Ireland to New Zealand?

Swiwi

Just throwing this out there, but what about promotion/relegation for 6N? Team with the wooden spoon plays the next best European side (ie Georgia) to see who stays up. Would give the Georgians/Romanians something to aim for. Never going to happen of course.

Swiwi

Swiwi wrote: »

Just throwing this out there, but what about promotion/relegation for 6N? Team with the wooden spoon plays the next best European side (ie Georgia) to see who stays up. Would give the Georgians/Romanians something to aim for. Never going to happen of course.

It's too far, the gap that is. Currently anyway. It will hopefully become a possibility in future years though.

I think it would be extremely beneficial for all parties if we could enter an A team in either a perpetual competition with Tier 2 sides, or certainly host a 2/3 week tournament akin to the first round of the World Cup with an A side and Georgia, Russia and Romania.

We want these guys getting better, and exposure to tough games will benefit our fringe players massively.

A tour of Eastern Europe with a dedicated Wolfhounds squad and coach (**** off Kidney) would be incredible. But I don't think the money would be there.

GerM

Swiwi wrote: »

Just throwing this out there, but what about promotion/relegation for 6N? Team with the wooden spoon plays the next best European side (ie Georgia) to see who stays up. Would give the Georgians/Romanians something to aim for. Never going to happen of course.

Has been discussed before but I don't think there's any benefit to it. These sides would be thumped in the 6N. Getting their dander up for one off games is one thing but doing it for 5 games in a row is another matter. We'd see them losing by 50 and 60 points a few times each season. Georgia, normally accepted to be the best of the second tier European nations, have been comprehensively beaten by sides like Italy A, USA and, this week, Canada.

Rugby in these countries benefits more by games against their rival countries where they can get an audience against neighbouring countries. Semi-regular games against A tier nations will give them an idea of where they need to get to. The IRB invests significant amounts and larger unions, like the RFU organised tournaments like the Churchill Cup to assist developing nations. There's far more benefit to those measures than lumping them into a 6N tournament which, right now, would probably be damaging to rugby in Georgia when they're hammered week in, week out.

Relegation would also be the death knell for rugby in Scotland if and when they're relegated or heavily damage Italy who are making gains.

Italy where getting thumPed at the start look how the 6 nations has beveled them my only issue is if there getting relagated and promoted every 2nd year they can't improve

Swiwi

Deleted User wrote: »

It's too far, the gap that is. Currently anyway. It will hopefully become a possibility in future years though.

I think it would be extremely beneficial for all parties if we could enter an A team in either a perpetual competition with Tier 2 sides, or certainly host a 2/3 week tournament akin to the first round of the World Cup with an A side and Georgia, Russia and Romania.

We want these guys getting better, and exposure to tough games will benefit our fringe players massively.

A tour of Eastern Europe with a dedicated Wolfhounds squad and coach (**** off Kidney) would be incredible. But I don't think the money would be there.

Certainly would provide good scrumming practice. They might have limited gameplans but those eastern european sides usually have monster forwards who can scrum & lineout pretty well.

jacothelad

Tim Robbins wrote: »

A sensible thing would be if Georgia played an Ireland under 29's. You know to give younger players their chance :-)

Like it...:D:D

Cpt_Blackbeard wrote: »

My Georgian is a little rusty, but he is essentially repeating the following a number of times:

If Georgia was a tour of Ireland ...
Yeah, absolutely nothing against Georgia, as a rugby nation, but what people here think that we should do a three-match tour of Ireland to play?

I raise this point only one or two reasons: I really think people in New Zealand, that when they play in Ireland? This is the same, that people would view it here if we were playing in Canada or Georgia?

Also, the Irish took game three in New Zealand? Should go to Scotland and play a game against the house and away from the game against Samoa or Argentina? It often seems that this is something that we do not play enough games against Southern Hemisphere teams. I wonder how many games the last five years (except for the World Cup) we played in the southern vs northern hemisphere teams.

One of the things that make the game better in Ireland than in Ireland to New Zealand?

When did Kidney say this? It's a model of clarity compared with his usual marshmallow blather. :D:D

GerM

Leah Jolly Marmoset wrote: »

Italy where getting thumPed at the start look how the 6 nations has beveled them my only issue is if there getting relagated and promoted every 2nd year they can't improve

Italy had proven through the mid-late nineties that they were capable of making the step up. They had beaten ourselves (3 times), Scotland and Wales along with a weakened French side. In their first ever game of the 6N, they beat Scotland comprehensively. They lost their way in the following seasons when a number of players (most importantly Dominguez) called it a day and they had no succession planning in place.

GerM

GerM wrote: »

Leah Jolly Marmoset wrote: »

Italy where getting thumPed at the start look how the 6 nations has beveled them my only issue is if there getting relagated and promoted every 2nd year they can't improve

Italy had proven through the mid-late nineties that they were capable of making the step up. They had beaten ourselves (3 times), Scotland and Wales along with a weakened French side. In their first ever game of the 6N, they beat Scotland comprehensively. They lost their way in the following seasons when a number of players (most importantly Dominguez) called it a day and they had no succession planning in place.

Ok I didn't realise they where so far along at the time I do remember Dominguez was outstanding and a big loss Russia japan the us and canada need to be given a chance in a big annual tourney for the development of the game thought I feel these Are the. Country's that Are well populated and have the athletes and money to add to rugby

Swiwi

Leah Jolly Marmoset wrote: »

Ok I didn't realise they where so far along at the time I do remember Dominguez was outstanding and a big loss Russia japan the us and canada need to be given a chance in a big annual tourney for the development of the game thought I feel these Are the. Country's that Are well populated and have the athletes and money to add to rugby

Great article on American rugby

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/jun/24/american-sports-fans-warming-rugby

Swiwi

Swiwi wrote: »

Leah Jolly Marmoset wrote: »

Ok I didn't realise they where so far along at the time I do remember Dominguez was outstanding and a big loss Russia japan the us and canada need to be given a chance in a big annual tourney for the development of the game thought I feel these Are the. Country's that Are well populated and have the athletes and money to add to rugby

Great article on American rugby

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/jun/24/american-sports-fans-warming-rugby

They would be a huge addition to top teir rugby if they can get there

CIARAN_BOYLE

bilston wrote: »

In a Lions year we should send a squad to tour Eastern Europe. I think we're going to North America next June but three tests in Eastern Europe, one against Romania, one against Georgia and one against the Russians would be interesting especially if those teams were at full strength. Maybe an idea for 2017.

Summer tours for the next 10 years have already been arranged, I'm pretty sure we are going to Japan or the PIs that year.

ormond lad

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

Summer tours for the next 10 years have already been arranged, I'm pretty sure we are going to Japan or the PIs that year.

tours during lions tours are
2017 japan
2021 pacific islands

Swiwi

Is this the future?...rugby with commentators from the US of A

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5NDiPGdzJ0&feature=player_embedded

Surreal.

Had a wee urge to get myself a Bud and a donut for a minute there.

DEFTLEFTHAND

I'd be in favour of a relegation, promotion system being incorporated into the Six Nations. Have the bottom 6N team relegated to the Nations Cup each year with the N.C winners gaining promotion to the top competition. The likes of Romania and Georgia would benefit and have impetus to improve.

bilston

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

Summer tours for the next 10 years have already been arranged, I'm pretty sure we are going to Japan or the PIs that year.

I suppose the Eastern European nations haven't been included in all of this?

bilston

bilston wrote: »

I suppose the Eastern European nations haven't been included in all of this?

nope :mad:

bilston

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

I'd be in favour of a relegation, promotion system being incorporated into the Six Nations. Have the bottom 6N team relegated to the Nations Cup each year with the N.C winners gaining promotion to the top competition. The likes of Romania and Georgia would benefit and have impetus to improve.

It's not realistic financially or even in rugby terms at the moment.

Hopefully we'll get there but we're not there yet.

What we could do is look at the current European Nations Cup. Currently there is Div 1A and 1B, Div 2A, 2B and 2C and Div 3A with 35 teams competing. I believe there is promotion and relegation throughout the pyramid.

However just from looking at the past winners of the European Nations Cup it's clear that Romania and Georgia dominate it, in the last 10 years Romania have won it 5 times and Georgia have won it 4 times.

Why not take Romania and Georgia out and enter them into a competition with Ireland A, England A, Scotland A and France A. Wales and Italy can join the party too if they like but they don't have A teams at the moment. You could even have promotion and relegation between this league and the next rung down so that the likes of Russia, Portugal, Spain and Belgium etc get a chance to develop as well. However after a few years of this it emerges than Romania and Georgia are dominating this competition then I think we can seriously consider adding them to the 6Ns and working out a suitable format from there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Nations_Cup_(rugby_union)#European_Nations_Cup_Winners_.282000-2012.29

One other thing, I'd like to see the leading club side from the winning nation of the European Nations cup entered into the Amlin Challenge Cup, actually there may already be Romanian involvement in that, but the more exposure players from these countries get to higher levels of rugby the better.

I agree that a competition like the above would be an excellent idea, but we would have to have extremely stringent rules on the 'A' players in order to retain the integrity of the competition.

Perhaps no more than 5 full caps? Or perhaps an U23's rule?

I definitely would love to see some form of fringe tournament alright, but I'm trying to figure out how you would go about it.

backawaygo onahead

All worthy stuff but until rugby gets its fairy godmother with a fat wallet such things will remain worthy ideas.

Certainly Ireland couldn't take on the financial losses that such a tournament would almost certainly involve.

Unless & until the big show gets more finance & teams in the major leagues are sufficiently financed and not loss makers for private owners as most clubs in England are for example, there will not be any trickle down funds for such worthy projects.

conf101

bilston wrote: »

What we could do is look at the current European Nations Cup. Currently there is Div 1A and 1B, Div 2A, 2B and 2C and Div 3A with 35 teams competing. I believe there is promotion and relegation throughout the pyramid.

However just from looking at the past winners of the European Nations Cup it's clear that Romania and Georgia dominate it, in the last 10 years Romania have won it 5 times and Georgia have won it 4 times.

Why not take Romania and Georgia out and enter them into a competition with Ireland A, England A, Scotland A and France A. Wales and Italy can join the party too if they like but they don't have A teams at the moment. You could even have promotion and relegation between this league and the next rung down so that the likes of Russia, Portugal, Spain and Belgium etc get a chance to develop as well. However after a few years of this it emerges than Romania and Georgia are dominating this competition then I think we can seriously consider adding them to the 6Ns and working out a suitable format from there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Nations_Cup_(rugby_union)#European_Nations_Cup_Winners_.282000-2012.29

While I can't see the home nations agreeing to this, unfortunately, most likely from a money/resources point of view, it's an idea that really has a lot of merit and could see huge improvements among those developing nations. Would also give us a chance to give players on the edge of the national setup more decent game time and a chance to stake a claim at a national place.

wonton

I think the most viable option involving romania and georgia would be to bring them up to include them in an 8 nations tournament. I think the damage done to scotland or italy financially (and other ways) in one year in the b tournament would out do the good romania or georgia would get from one year in the 6 nations.

Swan Curry

wonton wrote: »

I think the most viable option involving romania and georgia would be to bring them up to include them in an 8 nations tournament. I think the damage done to scotland or italy financially (and other ways) in one year in the b tournament would out do the good romania or georgia would get from one year in the 6 nations.

There's hardly enough time in the year for the 6 nations without adding 2-3 more weeks on.

wonton

probably would mean going the route of each team not playing all of the other teams each year.

bilston

wonton wrote: »

I think the most viable option involving romania and georgia would be to bring them up to include them in an 8 nations tournament. I think the damage done to scotland or italy financially (and other ways) in one year in the b tournament would out do the good romania or georgia would get from one year in the 6 nations.

I think Romania and Georgia need to prove themselves regularly first which is why I think putting them in an A comp with Ireland, England etc is the first step to take. If they dominate that like they dominate the Six Nations B then we'll know that in rugby terms they are ready to step up to an 8 Nations or more likely we'd have to scrap the 6Ns and introduce a European Championship. But I do think we're talking long term here....as in 20 years...but it's a nice thought...

profitius

Some good suggestions above.

I'd be in favour of an expanded 6 nations (7 or 8 teams) and have promotion relegation too.

The negative short term impact would be overshadowed by the positive long term impact. Not only would there be more games on TV, the impact it would have on the Nations cup would be massive in terms of sponsorship, crowds etc and most of all growing the game around Europe.

The opposition wouldn't be the best quality but either are Italy and it took France decades to become a force. In 10 years time there could be 3 or 4 new European teams up to the standard Italy are now.

Supposing Russia got promoted to the '8 nations'. They might want to show the matches on Russian tv. The money paid by TV companies would rise sharply after a few seasons.

In the long run the other benefit is lessens the European countries reliance on touring the southern hemisphere countries and southern hemisphere teams touring here.

There'd have to be room created for the extra 2 matches but that could happen. It would just mean clubs/provences have to go 2 extra weeks without their internationals in their domestic leagues.

ormond lad

profitius wrote: »

Some good suggestions above.

I'd be in favour of an expanded 6 nations (7 or 8 teams) and have promotion relegation too.

The negative short term impact would be overshadowed by the positive long term impact. Not only would there be more games on TV, the impact it would have on the Nations cup would be massive in terms of sponsorship, crowds etc and most of all growing the game around Europe.

The opposition wouldn't be the best quality but either are Italy and it took France decades to become a force. In 10 years time there could be 3 or 4 new European teams up to the standard Italy are now.

Supposing Russia got promoted to the '8 nations'. They might want to show the matches on Russian tv. The money paid by TV companies would rise sharply after a few seasons.

In the long run the other benefit is lessens the European countries reliance on touring the southern hemisphere countries and southern hemisphere teams touring here.

There'd have to be room created for the extra 2 matches but that could happen. It would just mean clubs/provences have to go 2 extra weeks without their internationals in their domestic leagues.

I wouldnt be in favour of both expanding the 6 nations and introducing promotion/relegation.
Dont expand the 6 nations as it means extending the season which is long enough as it is. Do one or the other.
Russia has some form of professional league and if Russia got more games against the top countrys it is more likely that players from the top nations may go to play in russia which will improve the standards in the league

profitius

ormond lad wrote: »

I wouldnt be in favour of both expanding the 6 nations and introducing promotion/relegation.
Dont expand the 6 nations as it means extending the season which is long enough as it is. Do one or the other.
Russia has some form of professional league and if Russia got more games against the top countrys it is more likely that players from the top nations may go to play in russia which will improve the standards in the league

A long term benefit of this would, IMO, be an end to having to play both autumn and spring tours in the same season. The should be every second season. Its a big statement to make but those tours are mainly about making money and if an 8 nations took off then the extra money would cover missing out on a tour every year.

Belgium are an interesting team and potentially one to watch out for. They've done well in underage rugby in the past 3 or 4 years, gone from 55th seeding to 23rd and tripled the number of players in Belgium. Its a (part) French speaking country too and in north west Europe so they would be a good country to try and boost their development.

ormond lad

profitius wrote: »

A long term benefit of this would, IMO, be an end to having to play both autumn and spring tours in the same season. The should be every second season. Its a big statement to make but those tours are mainly about making money and if an 8 nations took off then the extra money would cover missing out on a tour every year.

Belgium are an interesting team and potentially one to watch out for. They've done well in underage rugby in the past 3 or 4 years, gone from 55th seeding to 23rd and tripled the number of players in Belgium. Its a (part) French speaking country too and in north west Europe so they would be a good country to try and boost their development.

I dont like the idea of playing autumn/summer tours every 2nd season.
Dont see how an expanded 6 nations would cover the nov/summer internationals.

jacothelad

ormond lad wrote: »

I dont like the idea of playing autumn/summer tours every 2nd season.
Dont see how an expanded 6 nations would cover the nov/summer internationals.

We could bin the Autumn games which feck up the winter schedule and the run up to the Heineken Cup. Play the 6 Nations Home and Away. Bring in Bonus points then.

ormond lad

jacothelad wrote: »

We could bin the Autumn games which feck up the winter schedule and the run up to the Heineken Cup. Play the 6 Nations Home and Away. Bring in Bonus points then.

Which would you rather? More games against Australia/New Zealand/South Africa or more games against Scotland/Italy.
Keep Autumn internationals. they add a gap to the season from the opening 2 months of league games and the first 2 heineken cup games to the next 2 h cup games and the xmas set of league games.

profitius

ormond lad wrote: »

I dont like the idea of playing autumn/summer tours every 2nd season.
Dont see how an expanded 6 nations would cover the nov/summer internationals.

Eventually it would. Think of it as being an investment. You have to put something in to get something out.

ormond lad wrote: »

Which would you rather? More games against Australia/New Zealand/South Africa or more games against Scotland/Italy.
Keep Autumn internationals. they add a gap to the season from the opening 2 months of league games and the first 2 heineken cup games to the next 2 h cup games and the xmas set of league games.

Growing the game is more important so in 10 years time there'll be at least 3 other teams in Europe up to the level Italy are currently at.

Theres not enough good international sides. For example Wales have played Australia 5 times in less than a year.

ormond lad

profitius wrote: »

Eventually it would. Think of it as being an investment. You have to put something in to get something out.

I would much rather have the nov internationals every year but include the likes of georgia/romania

profitus wrote:

Growing the game is more important so in 10 years time there'll be at least 3 other teams in Europe up to the level Italy are currently at.

Theres not enough good international sides. For example Wales have played Australia 5 times in less than a year.

Growing the game is important but throwing the likes of Georgia etc into an expanded 6 nations is not the answer. They are nowhere near the level that Italy were when they joined the 6 nations and look how Italy did in their first 10 years in the 6nations

There is not enough good international sides but throwing extra sides into the 6nations isnt the solution to that.
Wales playing australia 5 times isnt great but tbf i would only give out about the game that was played in cardiff last december. as scheduling that game was ridiculous considering the players were barely back from the world cup and was just to help the welsh rfu who didnt have any autumn internationals to boost the coffers