World Rugby boss calls for Six Nations relegation

Jawgap

Podge_irl wrote: »

From who?

Sponsors. TV revenue. Grants from their government.

Plus, if county leagues in other sports in the ar$e end of nowhere can run cost equalisation schemes related to travel, I'm sure the brains running the Pro12 can come up with something to facilitate Georgian participation.

irishbucsfan

Podge_irl wrote: »

Sure, but who controls Rugby Europe? 6N joined up with it and it would become very difficult for it to remain a relatively closed shop - even if that is in the better interests of all parties.

I think that would be up for discussion if there was going to be such a major change. I'd imagine the 6 Nations would want a considerable amount of voting power so a balance would have to be struck and then viciously fought for every 5 years repeatedly forever.

Podge_irl

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I think that would be up for discussion if there was going to be such a major change. I'd imagine the 6 Nations would want a considerable amount of voting power so a balance would have to be struck and then viciously fought for every 5 years repeatedly forever.

So basically your dream.

Podge_irl

Jawgap wrote: »

Sponsors. TV revenue. Grants from their government.

Plus, if county leagues in other sports in the ar$e end of nowhere can run cost equalisation schemes related to travel, I'm sure the brains running the Pro12 can come up with something to facilitate Georgian participation.

The Pro12 charged the Italians several million a season to initially participate in the league to offset the costs. They will have absolutely no interest in sourcing funding to pay for a Georgian team. Why would BBC/Sky care at all about a Georgian team being added - how does that in any way increase the TV value of the league? How much would local rights go for? I doubt very much.

Who will play for the team as well? All the best Georgian players are playing in France and probably on quite decent pay packets. Where do we find the extra four weekends to play the games?

croket

snotboogie wrote: »

Would a Georgian Pro 12 team be workable?

thomond2006 wrote: »

The travel costs would be prohibitive I'd say.

Unfortunately, yes.
I would like to see a professional league in Eastern Europe with teams from Romania, Georgia and Russia. More workable, I think 3 franchises with players from the georgian championship could join the professional Romania Super Liga

Podge_irl wrote: »

The Pro12 charged the Italians several million a season to initially participate in the league to offset the costs. They will have absolutely no interest in sourcing funding to pay for a Georgian team. Why would BBC/Sky care at all about a Georgian team being added - how does that in any way increase the TV value of the league? How much would local rights go for? I doubt very much.

Who will play for the team as well? All the best Georgian players are playing in France and probably on quite decent pay packets. Where do we find the extra four weekends to play the games?

Yes, most of the best players are playing in France and so Georgia can field a strong team without a professional domestic team.

croket

croket wrote: »

I would like to see a professional league in Eastern Europe with teams from Romania, Georgia and Russia. More workable, I think 3 franchises with players from the georgian championship could join the professional Romania Super Liga

Definitely this!

Legion2008

snotboogie wrote: »

Would a Georgian Pro 12 team be workable?

I see this type of question time and time again ..... this is the last thing that the Pro12 needs ..... it already suffers due to weak Italian teams, how is it going to be more credible with a weak Georgian team.

Bottom line World Rugby needs to co-ordinate the global calendar, then create a league structure with the 6N and 4N along with some of the countries who don't have regular games against the Tier 1 countries, so include the likes of Georgia, Russia, Portugal, Somoa, Fiji, Tonga and have 2 leagues with a relegation/promotion structure between them.

Simply making this the responiblity of 6N's to help improve the weaker teams won't work, we fall down a level while the SH continues to evolve and get stronger.

It won't happen because this would kill the RWC as a 4 year event but maybe that's what's needed .... it would certainly be an exciting league.

Jawgap

Podge_irl wrote: »

The Pro12 charged the Italians several million a season to initially participate in the league to offset the costs. They will have absolutely no interest in sourcing funding to pay for a Georgian team. Why would BBC/Sky care at all about a Georgian team being added - how does that in any way increase the TV value of the league? How much would local rights go for? I doubt very much.

Who will play for the team as well? All the best Georgian players are playing in France and probably on quite decent pay packets. Where do we find the extra four weekends to play the games?

Well, look, the world is full of problems and if we want solutions can be found or we can all sit around listening to those who see nothing but problems.

First, for the Pro12 to remain the Pro12 someone would have to be dropped in favour of a Georgian side - most probably one of the Italian clubs.

I'd imagine the TV companies might see it more as improving the product, and giving them an 'in' with a new market than satisfying the needs of their existing mature markets - Georgia has larger population than Wales for example.

Players? Existing players, maybe a marquee player or two drawn back from France, Saracens players loaned and placed with the team for accelerated development as well as any recruits who want to play rugby in a sports mad city - to look at other sports, Leicester show what can be achieved with the right manager and supports in place, as well as canny player recruitments and development processes

irishbucsfan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Is it within their power? Wouldn't it require a vote and could Lapasset garner enough support to do that?

Yes and Yes.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Ideally Rugby Europe would actually take charge of European rugby and everyone would play nice. But there's a lot of political power in that committee.

It may well just be personal politics between Lapasset and Beaumont though, I think that's most likely.

I think former total captured it well.

Podge_irl

Jawgap wrote: »

Well, look, the world is full of problems and if we want solutions can be found or we can all sit around listening to those who see nothing but problems.

First, for the Pro12 to remain the Pro12 someone would have to be dropped in favour of a Georgian side - most probably one of the Italian clubs.

I'd imagine the TV companies might see it more as improving the product, and giving them an 'in' with a new market than satisfying the needs of their existing mature markets - Georgia has larger population than Wales for example.

Players? Existing players, maybe a marquee player or two drawn back from France, Saracens players loaned and placed with the team for accelerated development as well as any recruits who want to play rugby in a sports mad city - to look at other sports, Leicester show what can be achieved with the right manager and supports in place, as well as canny player recruitments and development processes

Pie in the sky ideas don't really help anyone either.

Why would the Italians agree to dropping one of their clubs? We're now talking about a local Georgian team without most of their best players. How is that going to be better than an Italian team for anyone? Why are we asking everyone to fly an extra few thousand km to play what is likely to be another noncompetitive team.

Who does this benefit? If the answer is no one but Georgian rugby, while simultaneously damaging the interests of a current member of the Pro12 - why on earth would the Pro12 agree to it?

Italy is more populous than the rest of the Pro12 put together - TV companies still don't care about Italian matches. The only increase in TV rights would be the local Georgian rights and I can not imagine they will be worth much of anything.

Rugby isn't other sports. Players loaned from Saracens and local players with whatever "marquee player" you can get back (who will be on the lower end of the scale because they'll never match salaries) will be a completely useless team, and really bloody far away.

I think it would make the Pro12 worse. It's not a good idea.

Jawgap

Podge_irl wrote: »

Pie in the sky ideas don't really help anyone either.

Why would the Italians agree to dropping one of their clubs? We're now talking about a local Georgian team without most of their best players. How is that going to be better than an Italian team for anyone? Why are we asking everyone to fly an extra few thousand km to play what is likely to be another noncompetitive team.

Who does this benefit? If the answer is no one but Georgian rugby, while simultaneously damaging the interests of a current member of the Pro12 - why on earth would the Pro12 agree to it?

Italy is more populous than the rest of the Pro12 put together - TV companies still don't care about Italian matches. The only increase in TV rights would be the local Georgian rights and I can not imagine they will be worth much of anything.

Rugby isn't other sports. Players loaned from Saracens and local players with whatever "marquee player" you can get back (who will be on the lower end of the scale because they'll never match salaries) will be a completely useless team, and really bloody far away.

I think it would make the Pro12 worse. It's not a good idea.

It's a discussion board. Part of the enjoyment of being a sports fan (in any sport) is having silly discussions.

Will it happen? Will there be relegation from the 6N? No, it's unlikely in the extreme.

Likewise, a Georgian club being admitted to an expanded Pro12, is also extremely unlikely in anything other than the long term.

And rugby isn't other sports, you're right, but competition administration is competition administration whether it's tiddlywinks or rugby.

jm08

Jawgap wrote: »

It's a discussion board. Part of the enjoyment of being a sports fan (in any sport) is having silly discussions.

Will it happen? Will there be relegation from the 6N? No, it's unlikely in the extreme.

Likewise, a Georgian club being admitted to an expanded Pro12, is also extremely unlikely in anything other than the long term.

And rugby isn't other sports, you're right, but competition administration is competition administration whether it's tiddlywinks or rugby.

First of all, the cost of living in Georgia is 61% less than in Ireland so there is going to be a big financial gap between them and the rest.

Secondly, Rugby Europe have organised a tournament in June in Tiblisi which Emerging Ireland won last year I think. Although Georgia is hosting it, they were not competitive.

Italy is still struggling after nearly 20 years in Tier 1 Rugby (and they were winning all around them when they joined the 6Ns). Georgia will also find the 6Ns challenging.

CIARAN_BOYLE

jm08 wrote: »

Secondly, Rugby Europe have organised a tournament in June in Tiblisi which Emerging Ireland won last year I think. Although Georgia is hosting it, they were not competitive.

Georgia have to take development sides from 6 nations teams seriously before anyone lets them compete with the main international team.

hardCopy

jaykay74 wrote: »

But it shouldn't really be about an upset. It should be about the stronger of the 2 teams being in the following seasons 6 nations.

But we already know who the statistically stronger team is, that's why they're in a higher league to begin with. I don't think you could ever realistically expect the lower league team to beat the wooden spoon over three games. They shouldn't be expected to reach for that level of consistency until they've had a chance to play regularly at that level.

A three game series is never going to be high stakes or interesting to anybody, the worst you'll see is the potential embarrassment of a 2-1 win for the incumbent team.

Podge_irl

Jawgap wrote: »

It's a discussion board. Part of the enjoyment of being a sports fan (in any sport) is having silly discussions.

Will it happen? Will there be relegation from the 6N? No, it's unlikely in the extreme.

Likewise, a Georgian club being admitted to an expanded Pro12, is also extremely unlikely in anything other than the long term.

And rugby isn't other sports, you're right, but competition administration is competition administration whether it's tiddlywinks or rugby.

Well sure. I'm under no illusions that I have any impact on anything!

My issue is not so much that it is unlikely. My issue is that I don't think it is a good idea in the first place.

irishbucsfan

Deleted User wrote: »

Yes and Yes.

I think former total captured it well.

I don't think he could get nearly enough support to push that through. The 6 Nations and SANZAR together can control the agenda and they vote in a bloc, I really don't think there's anything World Rugby could do if they wanted to, which I very much doubt they do.

The change has to come from the 6 Nations committee, and it's not going to happen unfortunately for a long time.

jm08

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I don't think he could get nearly enough support to push that through. The 6 Nations and SANZAR together can control the agenda and they vote in a bloc, I really don't think there's anything World Rugby could do if they wanted to, which I very much doubt they do.

The change has to come from the 6 Nations committee, and it's not going to happen unfortunately for a long time.

There has been a fair bit of structural change with World Rugby recently.

http://www.worldrugby.org/news/122987

Lapassat managed to get elected chairman of World Rugby without the support of other 6Ns countries and NZ & Aus who supported Bill Beaumont.

The Lost Sheep

Jawgap wrote: »

In a practical sense it could be made to work, if the will was actually there, but as @thelostsheep points out the financial risk to the incumbents is too great for them to accept it.

I doubt the Italians or Scots would go for it; we'd be reluctant, Wales probably so as well. Perhaps only the French and English would be indifferent to it.

It's worth discussing though - in the context of whether anything is needed to refresh the 6N competition, outside the need for certain law reforms in the game.

We wouldn't go for it. I don't think any of the 6 unions would go for it as the risk of relegation would be open and therefore it could happen so why would they let the risk of relegation occur?
We need to do more outside the 6 Nations and then use the improvements outside the 6Nations to then develop an alternative to the 6 Nations that involves more nations and opens the closed shop.

snotboogie wrote: »

Would a Georgian Pro 12 team be workable?

Don't think so and one entering the league doesn't help the league which has enough issues as it is.

irishbucsfan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I don't think he could get nearly enough support to push that through. The 6 Nations and SANZAR together can control the agenda and they vote in a bloc, I really don't think there's anything World Rugby could do if they wanted to, which I very much doubt they do.

They are permitted to do so.
If it made sense, they would surely get the votes?

irishbucsfan wrote: »

The change has to come from the 6 Nations committee, and it's not going to happen unfortunately for a long time.

No. The change could also come from above, as I have suggested. The likelihood of that is obviously limited, given that chasm it would open in the game, but it absolutely could come from above.

croket

jm08 wrote: »

Secondly, Rugby Europe have organised a tournament in June in Tiblisi which Emerging Ireland won last year I think. Although Georgia is hosting it, they were not competitive.

It was a Georgia A team. Georgia asked to put an official A team and World Rugby refused. Only 2 players from this team started (and won) 2 months later the RWC opening game against Tonga.

esforum

jaykay74 wrote: »

But it shouldn't really be about an upset. It should be about the stronger of the 2 teams being in the following seasons 6 nations.

I would disagree, its about giving a new lower team the chance to compete against top tier teams. even if Georgia come up and go straight back down it would be a learning experience for them and hey lets be honest, give Italy or Scotland a chance of a winning season

Podge_irl

You do realise getting up to speed for Georgia requires more than just test matches. It would also require a huge amount of investment - much like Italian rugby requires still a huge amount of investment in underage structures. Investment that is impossible to commit to with yo-yoing financial situations.

snotboogie

Podge_irl wrote: »

Pie in the sky ideas don't really help anyone either.

Why would the Italians agree to dropping one of their clubs? We're now talking about a local Georgian team without most of their best players. How is that going to be better than an Italian team for anyone? Why are we asking everyone to fly an extra few thousand km to play what is likely to be another noncompetitive team.

Who does this benefit? If the answer is no one but Georgian rugby, while simultaneously damaging the interests of a current member of the Pro12 - why on earth would the Pro12 agree to it?

Italy is more populous than the rest of the Pro12 put together - TV companies still don't care about Italian matches. The only increase in TV rights would be the local Georgian rights and I can not imagine they will be worth much of anything.

Rugby isn't other sports. Players loaned from Saracens and local players with whatever "marquee player" you can get back (who will be on the lower end of the scale because they'll never match salaries) will be a completely useless team, and really bloody far away.

I think it would make the Pro12 worse. It's not a good idea.

Georgia would need to get the majority, if not all, of their international players back home for it to work, like Argentina did. I don't necessarily see it as a bigger challenge for Georgia than it was for Argentina. The Georgian national team would be an improvement on both of the Italian teams in the Pro 12. A Georgian Pro 12 team could also be a base for all of the talent in Eastern Europe, it could be a place for all of the Romanian and Russian players who are ready to make the step up.

The benefit to the Pro 12 would be the crowds and the extra games. Georgia have been averaging over 22,000 at their home games in the Nations Cup. The Pro 12 is a bigger tournament than the Nations Cup. You would imagine, based on the Nations Cup figures, that a Georgian team would be able to bring in crowds, almost certainly at a better rate than the Italian's and the Scots. More games might seem like a problem but the way things are going with TV (the only thing people watch anymore is live sports) it's going to be a big bonus. More games means more money. We've seen this with struggling sports in the US, who have received a huge boost just by being able to fill up airtime. The Pro 12, which was once thrown to the doldrums of Celtic language channels, is now becoming a desirable product for the likes of Sky Sports, despite the ailing quality of the league.

irishbucsfan

Deleted User wrote: »

They are permitted to do so.
If it made sense, they would surely get the votes?

But what makes sense for rugby worldwide may not make sense for the 6 Nations?

Deleted User wrote: »

No. The change could also come from above, as I have suggested. The likelihood of that is obviously limited, given that chasm it would open in the game, but it absolutely could come from above.

I can't see it happening unless the structure changes a lot more than it has.

jm08

croket wrote: »

It was a Georgia A team. Georgia asked to put an official A team and World Rugby refused. Only 2 players from this team started (and won) 2 months later the RWC opening game against Tonga.

My point is that if they don't bother putting out a good team when Tier 1 countries bother to go to their tournament, why should the 6Ns put themselves about for them.

Emerging Italy did beat them 26-10.

irishbucsfan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

But what makes sense for rugby worldwide may not make sense for the 6 Nations?

Precisely. World Rugby has the greater remit and power.

If the 6Nations refuses to open doors (to the benefit of rugby outside of the 6 Unions in question), World Rugby can and should force it to (if the cost of the inevitable fallout is worth bearing).

That it hasn't done so gives us some inferences about the values above.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I can't see it happening unless the structure changes a lot more than it has.

Or if the value of adding anyone else to the 6Nations is worthwhile / tenable.

irishbucsfan

Deleted User wrote: »

Precisely. World Rugby has the greater remit and power.

If the 6Nations refuses to open doors (to the benefit of rugby outside of the 6 Unions in question), World Rugby can and should force it to (if the cost of the inevitable fallout is worth bearing).

That it hasn't done so gives us some inferences about the values above.

Or if the value of adding anyone else to the 6Nations is worthwhile / tenable.

That's not really what I mean. The 6 Nations and Sanzar vote together except on disagreement between them internally. If the 6 Nations are totally opposed to changing rugby in Europe due to their own short term financial dependence on the 6 Nations competition, and Sanzar vote with them, how exactly would World Rugby change the setup? Even if the change was for the betterment of the majority of countries in Europe?

irishbucsfan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

That's not really what I mean. The 6 Nations and Sanzar vote together except on disagreement between them internally. If the 6 Nations are totally opposed to changing rugby in Europe due to their own short term financial dependence on the 6 Nations competition, and Sanzar vote with them, how exactly would World Rugby change the setup? Even if the change was for the betterment of the majority of countries in Europe?

World Rugby has the power to make it happen if it makes sense for it to happen. Not sure how many different ways you want me to post this?

Deleted User wrote: »

Ask yourself this, if this was reasonable, and doable, why wouldn't World Rugby simply not extend the 6Nations licence to them, thereby ending the competition, and creating the competition above themselves?

That's in their power.

The Lost Sheep

Podge_irl wrote: »

Absolutely. Georgia should be playing more games against the 6N/4N teams. They should be playing on the regular Autumn rotation.

They have to be given the chance to but when so many tour schedules are decided years in advance the door will remain closed.

snotboogie wrote: »

Would a Georgian Pro 12 team be workable?

Possibly but would it get Georgians back from France and would it do better than the Italians?

Jawgap wrote: »

Could be done with some financial support and cost equalisation - I think one of the teams in Tiblisi is associated with Sarries.

Financial support from who? Why would we want teams with direct PRL support in the league?

Podge_irl wrote: »

The Pro12 charged the Italians several million a season to initially participate in the league to offset the costs. They will have absolutely no interest in sourcing funding to pay for a Georgian team. Why would BBC/Sky care at all about a Georgian team being added - how does that in any way increase the TV value of the league? How much would local rights go for? I doubt very much.

Who will play for the team as well? All the best Georgian players are playing in France and probably on quite decent pay packets. Where do we find the extra four weekends to play the games?

+1.

Legion2008 wrote: »

I see this type of question time and time again ..... this is the last thing that the Pro12 needs ..... it already suffers due to weak Italian teams, how is it going to be more credible with a weak Georgian team.

Bottom line World Rugby needs to co-ordinate the global calendar, then create a league structure with the 6N and 4N along with some of the countries who don't have regular games against the Tier 1 countries, so include the likes of Georgia, Russia, Portugal, Somoa, Fiji, Tonga and have 2 leagues with a relegation/promotion structure between them.

Simply making this the responiblity of 6N's to help improve the weaker teams won't work, we fall down a level while the SH continues to evolve and get stronger.

It won't happen because this would kill the RWC as a 4 year event but maybe that's what's needed .... it would certainly be an exciting league.

Is it needed? It makes international rugby more and more like test cricket. Co-ordinate global calendar better yes but 2 leagues like this? No.

snotboogie wrote: »

Georgia would need to get the majority, if not all, of their international players back home for it to work, like Argentina did. I don't necessarily see it as a bigger challenge for Georgia than it was for Argentina. The Georgian national team would be an improvement on both of the Italian teams in the Pro 12. A Georgian Pro 12 team could also be a base for all of the talent in Eastern Europe, it could be a place for all of the Romanian and Russian players who are ready to make the step up.

The benefit to the Pro 12 would be the crowds and the extra games. Georgia have been averaging over 22,000 at their home games in the Nations Cup. The Pro 12 is a bigger tournament than the Nations Cup. You would imagine, based on the Nations Cup figures, that a Georgian team would be able to bring in crowds, almost certainly at a better rate than the Italian's and the Scots. More games might seem like a problem but the way things are going with TV (the only thing people watch anymore is live sports) it's going to be a big bonus. More games means more money. We've seen this with struggling sports in the US, who have received a huge boost just by being able to fill up airtime. The Pro 12, which was once thrown to the doldrums of Celtic language channels, is now becoming a desirable product for the likes of Sky Sports, despite the ailing quality of the league.

Would Georgian team be a fulcrum for all players from Eastern Europe? I don't think it would. Pro12 bigger than Nations Cup in what ways. Theyre incomparable considering what makes up each. Georgia wouldn't be able to get most of their top players back without a lot of funding and where does that come from?

irishbucsfan

Deleted User wrote: »

World Rugby has the power to make it happen if it makes sense for it to happen. Not sure how many different ways you want me to post this?

Yes, you're right you are having to repeat yourself. But you're not really understanding my point. It making sense for it to happen and the 6 Nations countries allowing it to happen are two different things. And World Rugby is unable to achieve anything without the support of 6 Nations/SANZAR. It might be the best idea long-term, but if it's going to cost the 6 Nations countries money or expose them to risk over the short term, they'll resist. I know you agree that certain bodies can be too focused on short-term gain!