World Rugby boss calls for Six Nations relegation

swiwi_

Deleted User wrote: »

World Rugby has the power to make it happen

Does it? In theory, yes. But there are 28 votes at the table. I assume to make something pass you need a majority, ie 15 votes. So assuming the current 6N don't want to see change, can Georgia get the required 15 votes?

Fra, Eng, Ire, Wal, Scot, Ita = 11 votes
New Chairman is Eng = 1 vote

So Georgia would need most of SANZAAR, Canada, Japan, the 6 regional votes and Pichot the new vice-chairman to take their side.

All sounds fine.

Until England offers Australia an extra game at the end of the year, Ireland does the same for NZ, Wales offers to support SA's RWC bid and so on.

This is of course assuming World Rugby would want to impose an unwanted decision on the 6N.

The 5 original Unions are traditionally extremely conservative, I'm not sure I see any change to the 6N (promotion/relegation, starting the season a month later to enable a global season, bonus points etc).

pickarooney

What's the vote breakdown of the 11votes for the six nations?

CIARAN_BOYLE

pickarooney wrote: »

What's the vote breakdown of the 11votes for the six nations?

All but Italy have two votes each. Italy has 1.

The 3 Sanzar unions have 2 votes each.

Argentina Canada and Japan have 1 vote each.

Then there is 6 regional votes and the president and vice president get 1 each.

bilston

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

All but Italy have two votes each. Italy has 1.

The 3 Sanzar unions have 2 votes each.

Argentina Canada and Japan have 1 vote each.

Then there is 6 regional votes and the president and vice president get 1 each.

The fact that Argentina and Italy have one vote each and the "traditional 8" have two seems a bit off to me. I'm sure someone will come on to explain or justify it, but surely those two countries are equal partners at this stage?

CIARAN_BOYLE

bilston wrote: »

The fact that Argentina and Italy have one vote each and the "traditional 8" have two seems a bit off to me. I'm sure someone will come on to explain or justify it, but surely those two countries are equal partners at this stage?

Argentina and Italy have had one since they joined. We are more likely to see the original 8 lose votes than Argentina and Italy gain votes. The last thing anyone wants to see is more power concentrated in the big teams.

bilston

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

Argentina and Italy have had one since they joined. We are more likely to see the original 8 lose votes than Argentina and Italy gain votes. The last thing anyone wants to see is more power concentrated in the big teams.

Yeah, that's fair enough and makes more sense.

I just don't see why a country that has reached the WC semi finals twice, Argentina, should have less of a say on the future of the game than some other countries.

It reminds me of the UN security council!

jm08

Voting is changing:

World Rugby Council composition and voting rights
The number and spread of nations and their voting rights will increase for unions which conform to dedicated requirements.
Member union voting rights on Council will operate as follows, with unions receiving one vote for each criteria that is met up to a maximum of three votes:

• One vote and one representative: to member unions who have qualified for two consecutive Rugby World Cups within last eight-year assessment period
• One vote and one representative: to unions who have qualified for two consecutive Rugby World Cups within last eight-year assessment period and who participate in the Six Nations or The Rugby Championship
• One vote: to unions who have qualified for two consecutive Rugby World Cups within last eight-year assessment period and:
• have an annual audited average investment in rugby of £20 million over the last four years
• have bid to host major World Rugby events over last eight years or who are bidding for a World Rugby event in next four years
• have a sustainable women's programme with participation in the Women's Rugby World Cup or qualifiers in the past eight years
• have men's and women's sevens programmes – reflected by a minimum participation in regional competitions and or the World Rugby Sevens Series (men's and women's)

In addition:

• Two votes: to each of the six World Rugby regional associations

Subject to good governance criteria and the above criteria being met, a maximum of 20 unions and six regional associations will be eligible for a vote on Council. The process to determine union compliance with the criteria is already underway in order to facilitate implementation following the May 2016 Annual Meeting of Council.




France does not vote with 6Ns countries and last time out, SA was voting with France.

snotboogie

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

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?

Why wouldn't it be? Most of the Romanian squad currently play in Romania, their entire backline does. I don't see why you wouldn't be able to take the best 5 or so players not in France from the Romania squad and add them to the Georgian Pro 12 team.

The Pro 12 is a bigger competition than the Nations Cup in that it has better players, bigger crowds, more TV money, a bigger TV audience. It's bigger in every way I can think of that you would measure one sporting competition against another.

Their coach said they could get funding if they were entered into the 6 nations, why not the Pro 12? Argentina did it, despite having higher profile players on bigger wages in Europe. They also had huge currency issues to overcome. If Argentina can do it, why not Georgia? And if it doesn't work, what's the big deal? It may damage the reputation of rugby in Georgia and set them back but thats going to happen anyway if they keep improving and European rugby continues to shun them. So why not take a chance? I have no idea why European Rugby is so conservative. If Georgia were in the Southern Hemisphere they'd be getting a Super Rugby team.

jacothelad

snotboogie wrote: »

Why wouldn't it be? Most of the Romanian squad currently play in Romania, their entire backline does. I don't see why you wouldn't be able to take the best 5 or so players not in France from the Romania squad and add them to the Georgian Pro 12 team.

The Pro 12 is a bigger competition than the Nations Cup in that it has better players, bigger crowds, more TV money, a bigger TV audience. It's bigger in every way I can think of that you would measure one sporting competition against another.

Their coach said they could get funding if they were entered into the 6 nations, why not the Pro 12? Argentina did it, despite having higher profile players on bigger wages in Europe. They also had huge currency issues to overcome. If Argentina can do it, why not Georgia? And if it doesn't work, what's the big deal? It may damage the reputation of rugby in Georgia and set them back but thats going to happen anyway if they keep improving and European rugby continues to shun them. So why not take a chance? I have no idea why European Rugby is so conservative. If Georgia were in the Southern Hemisphere they'd be getting a Super Rugby team.

Would they? Are Fiji in? Samoa? Tonga? Uruguay? Kenya? Why not relegation in the R.C.C. since so many seem keen on it for European Rugby.

Utah_Saint

jacothelad wrote: »

Would they? Are Fiji in? Samoa? Tonga? Uruguay? Kenya? Why not relegation in the R.C.C. since so many seem keen on it for European Rugby.

I'm undecided on relegation but I think more should be done to help Georgia and maybe Romania. If World Rugby can fund Argentina RC and Super rugby teams then they can do the same for these teams.

jacothelad

Utah_Saint wrote: »

I'm undecided on relegation but I think more should be done to help Georgia and maybe Romania. If World Rugby can fund Argentina RC and Super rugby teams then they can do the same for these teams.

Surely it would be more beneficial roe W.R. to organise a competition featuring some of Georgia, Romania, Russia, Germany, Spain, Portugal. Imagine that relegation is introduced. To where and against which sides does a relegated team go to play against? No matter how people 'big' up Georgia they are not going to beat any of the 6 Nations sides in a serious game of rugby.....

Who gets to fund this purportive bun fight by the way? Ireland are just about breaking even as is and seem to have foolishly taken an expensive and wasteful shine to 7s rugby which is light weight flummery compared to the real 15 a side game. Fun to play, rubbish to watch.

Are the 6 Nations' teams being expected to take smaller shares of the financial situation they have created from the 5 and 6 Nations just to massage the egos of administrators and pour money into teams that are always going to fail. Look at Italy ffs. They should be in a competition along side Georgia and Romania et al not getting backscuttled every year. They are no better than they ever were after almost 16 years in the 6 N's and 21 years of pro rugby.

CIARAN_BOYLE

jacothelad wrote: »

Surely it would be more beneficial roe W.R. to organise a competition featuring some of Georgia, Romania, Russia, Germany, Spain, Portugal. Imagine that relegation is introduced. To where and against which sides does a relegated team go to play against? No matter how people 'big' up Georgia they are not going to beat any of the 6 Nations sides in a serious game of rugby.....

Who gets to fund this purportive bun fight by the way? Ireland are just about breaking even as is and seem to have foolishly taken an expensive and wasteful shine to 7s rugby which is light weight flummery compared to the real 15 a side game. Fun to play, rubbish to watch.

Are the 6 Nations' teams being expected to take smaller shares of the financial situation they have created from the 5 and 6 Nations just to massage the egos of administrators and pour money into teams that are always going to fail. Look at Italy ffs. They should be in a competition along side Georgia and Romania et al not getting backscuttled every year. They are no better than they ever were after almost 16 years in the 6 N's and 21 years of pro rugby.

I presume that it would be promotion and relegation between 6 nations and the ENC.

croket

swiwi_ wrote: »

Does it? In theory, yes. But there are 28 votes at the table. I assume to make something pass you need a majority, ie 15 votes. So assuming the current 6N don't want to see change, can Georgia get the required 15 votes?

Fra, Eng, Ire, Wal, Scot, Ita = 11 votes
New Chairman is Eng = 1 vote

So Georgia would need most of SANZAAR, Canada, Japan, the 6 regional votes and Pichot the new vice-chairman to take their side.

All sounds fine.

Until England offers Australia an extra game at the end of the year, Ireland does the same for NZ, Wales offers to support SA's RWC bid and so on.

This is of course assuming World Rugby would want to impose an unwanted decision on the 6N.

The 5 original Unions are traditionally extremely conservative, I'm not sure I see any change to the 6N (promotion/relegation, starting the season a month later to enable a global season, bonus points etc).

pickarooney

What's the biggest stumbling block to rugby developing in Italy currently? Where did it rank in terms of popularity in Italy?

snotboogie

jacothelad wrote: »

Would they? Are Fiji in? Samoa? Tonga? Uruguay? Kenya? Why not relegation in the R.C.C. since so many seem keen on it for European Rugby.

Georgia has over three times the population of Fiji, Samoa and Tonga combined. The potential for growth is obviously much bigger in Georgia as a result. They are already ranked above all of the Pacific Nations with the exception of Fiji, who they are only one place behind. Uruguay and Kenya are way down the pack. Kenya have never played a game in a world cup and are 15 places behind Georgia in the world rankings. Uruguay are 8 places behind Georgia. Even Russia are ranked above Uruguay.

jacothelad wrote: »

Surely it would be more beneficial roe W.R. to organise a competition featuring some of Georgia, Romania, Russia, Germany, Spain, Portugal. Imagine that relegation is introduced. To where and against which sides does a relegated team go to play against? No matter how people 'big' up Georgia they are not going to beat any of the 6 Nations sides in a serious game of rugby.....

Not sure if you are being sarcastic but that tournament exists. Its called the Nations Cup and Georgia have won 8 of the last 9 tournaments and the last 6 in a row. Georgia would be favorites in a home game against Italy.....

former total

pickarooney wrote: »

What's the biggest stumbling block to rugby developing in Italy currently? Where did it rank in terms of popularity in Italy?

1. Soccer
2. Soccer
3. Soccer
4. Soccer
5. Basketball
6. Soccer
7. Soccer
8. Olympic handball
9. Soccer
10. The auld lads in the village square playing dominos
11. Soccer
12. Rugby

bilston

What competitions do the USA and Canada play in?

I'm just thinking is there any reason why the 6Ns needs to be a European tournament? Could we get the USA and Canada into the B Six Nations alongside Georgia and Romania and say Spain and Russia? This would raise the level of that competition and possibly close the gap to the 6Ns proper making promotion and relegation a more realistic propsect even if not straight away.

Neil3030

pickarooney wrote: »

What's the biggest stumbling block to rugby developing in Italy currently? Where did it rank in terms of popularity in Italy?

Outside of going to matches, I have met ONE Italian I could say was into rugby in my years living mostly in the North East, Romagna. Admittedly not the hotbed (which is a bit more north than where we are), but not a million miles away. In my experience, nobody really cares. They don't dislike it, but it's very much a case of 'meh'. Football, motocross and a few other sports reign supreme.

When I moved to Italy in late 2011, Italy beat Scotland the following Six Nations. I was living in a student house at the time, and I was the only non-native-Italian. I watched the game on my own in the soggiorno, and every one of 5 or 6 people I met later didn't even know the game was on.

Neil3030

former total wrote: »

1. Soccer
2. Soccer
3. Soccer
4. Soccer
5. Basketball
6. Soccer
7. Soccer
8. Olympic handball
9. Soccer
10. The auld lads in the village square playing dominos
11. Soccer
12. Rugby

I'd probably swap 6 and 7, but otherwise this.

wp_rathead

bilston wrote: »

What competitions do the USA and Canada play in?

I'm just thinking is there any reason why the 6Ns needs to be a European tournament? Could we get the USA and Canada into the B Six Nations alongside Georgia and Romania and say Spain and Russia? This would raise the level of that competition and possibly close the gap to the 6Ns proper making promotion and relegation a more realistic propsect even if not straight away.

They play in Pacific Nations Cup
USA. Japan, Canada, Fiji, Tonga and Samoa
It's a comp that deserves more attention imo

DGRulz

Theres also the Americas Rugby Championship/ 6 Nations. Argentina(B), Brazil, Canada, Chile, United States, Uruguay.

The Lost Sheep

snotboogie wrote: »

Why wouldn't it be? Most of the Romanian squad currently play in Romania, their entire backline does. I don't see why you wouldn't be able to take the best 5 or so players not in France from the Romania squad and add them to the Georgian Pro 12 team.

The Pro 12 is a bigger competition than the Nations Cup in that it has better players, bigger crowds, more TV money, a bigger TV audience. It's bigger in every way I can think of that you would measure one sporting competition against another.

Their coach said they could get funding if they were entered into the 6 nations, why not the Pro 12? Argentina did it, despite having higher profile players on bigger wages in Europe. They also had huge currency issues to overcome. If Argentina can do it, why not Georgia? And if it doesn't work, what's the big deal? It may damage the reputation of rugby in Georgia and set them back but thats going to happen anyway if they keep improving and European rugby continues to shun them. So why not take a chance? I have no idea why European Rugby is so conservative. If Georgia were in the Southern Hemisphere they'd be getting a Super Rugby team.

Pro12 cant be compared to Nations Cup.
Where does this funding come from? There is no way you would or should have a best of East Europe team. If doing anything like that you have separate countries. The Argentinians situation was completely different and the Georgians wouldn't get a Super Rugby team if in the Southern Hemisphere. Look at the island nations as proof of that.

jacothelad wrote: »

Surely it would be more beneficial roe W.R. to organise a competition featuring some of Georgia, Romania, Russia, Germany, Spain, Portugal. Imagine that relegation is introduced. To where and against which sides does a relegated team go to play against? No matter how people 'big' up Georgia they are not going to beat any of the 6 Nations sides in a serious game of rugby.....

Who gets to fund this purportive bun fight by the way? Ireland are just about breaking even as is and seem to have foolishly taken an expensive and wasteful shine to 7s rugby which is light weight flummery compared to the real 15 a side game. Fun to play, rubbish to watch.

Are the 6 Nations' teams being expected to take smaller shares of the financial situation they have created from the 5 and 6 Nations just to massage the egos of administrators and pour money into teams that are always going to fail. Look at Italy ffs. They should be in a competition along side Georgia and Romania et al not getting backscuttled every year. They are no better than they ever were after almost 16 years in the 6 N's and 21 years of pro rugby.

We do have nations cup and yes quite likely Georgia wouldn't beat one of the 6 Nations sides but they need more games against them to help bridge the gap. As I mentioned already we've played Georgia the most of the 6Ns sides and we've played them 4 sides.

wp_rathead

You're right - i actually thought that was a seconds tournament but it's fully capped (except Argentina don't get any World Ranking points)

jacothelad

Neil3030 wrote: »

Outside of going to matches, I have met ONE Italian I could say was into rugby in my years living mostly in the North East, Romagna. Admittedly not the hotbed (which is a bit more north than where we are), but not a million miles away. In my experience, nobody really cares. They don't dislike it, but it's very much a case of 'meh'. Football, motocross and a few other sports reign supreme.

When I moved to Italy in late 2011, Italy beat Scotland the following Six Nations. I was living in a student house at the time, and I was the only non-native-Italian. I watched the game on my own in the soggiorno, and every one of 5 or 6 people I met later didn't even know the game was on.

I worked for a while in the Alma Mater Studiorum (University of Bologna) Shortly after I arrived I was sitting outside a restaurant having a drink when a column of fully armed, shielded, baton-ready, helmeted police marched by. About 30 of them. I thought..'WTF' It was because there was a basketball game between Bologna and Milan. So they take basketball seriously there then.......

I loved it there. I often wish I had stayed. Class place although rife with drug addicts and ladies of the night - allegedly. But otherwise just a wonderful way of life. When I arrived I was taken to meet the 'mayor' of the city. This took place in the Palazzo Comunale di Bologna. What a building. We sat at a 10m long table made of pink Carrara marble on chairs that dated back to the 15th century. Then there were the mid morning coffee breaks for socialising. 2 hour lunches for socialising. Italian wine. Gorgeous women with great style. Fabulous weather...It's almost as if I was in Whitehead.....:D

snotboogie

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

Pro12 cant be compared to Nations Cup.
Where does this funding come from? There is no way you would or should have a best of East Europe team. If doing anything like that you have separate countries. The Argentinians situation was completely different and the Georgians wouldn't get a Super Rugby team if in the Southern Hemisphere. Look at the island nations as proof of that.
We do have nations cup and yes quite likely Georgia wouldn't beat one of the 6 Nations sides but they need more games against them to help bridge the gap. As I mentioned already we've played Georgia the most of the 6Ns sides and we've played them 4 sides.

Why can't it be compared? All I was saying is that the pro 12 is a bigger and more prestigious tournament than the nations cup. We can see this because of the quality of the players, the attendances, the money and the TV viewing figures. I have no idea why you have an issue with this?

Why should you not have a best of Eastern Europe team?

Georgia has three times the population of all of the Island nations combined. They are ranked above Tonga and Samoa and are only one place behind Fiji. Super Rugby still looked very seriously at giving Fiji a team.

Georgia are ranked above Italy. Saying they couldn't beat them in a competitive game is ridiculous. Italy would probably be slight favorites in a neutral venue but the spread would be tight. Georgia would be favorites against Italy in Tiblisi.

former total wrote: »

1. Soccer
2. Soccer
3. Soccer
4. Soccer
5. Basketball
6. Soccer
7. Soccer
8. Olympic handball
9. Soccer
10. The auld lads in the village square playing dominos
11. Soccer
12. Rugby

Eh, every time I've played for a rugby team abroad there are always a few Italians knocking about. When is the last time Italy have had 70,000 people turning up to watch the auld lads playing domino's or at an Olympic handball game? Or at a Seria A match for that matter?

wp_rathead

snotboogie wrote: »

When is the last time Italy have had 70,000 people turning up to watch the auld lads playing domino's or at an Olympic handball game? Or at a Seria A match for that matter?

Treviso and Zebre get average crowds of 1,500-3,000, mind you they did get 5,000 at their derby which is encouraging

Utah_Saint

bilston wrote: »

What competitions do the USA and Canada play in?

I'm just thinking is there any reason why the 6Ns needs to be a European tournament? Could we get the USA and Canada into the B Six Nations alongside Georgia and Romania and say Spain and Russia? This would raise the level of that competition and possibly close the gap to the 6Ns proper making promotion and relegation a more realistic propsect even if not straight away.

I def think we need to be making moves to involve the USA and Canada in some form of NH tournament. I know the RC guys in the SH have made noises about involving them in the future. We need to cut of that market and secure it for the NH

ArmaniJeanss

snotboogie wrote: »

Eh, every time I've played for a rugby team abroad there are always a few Italians knocking about. When is the last time Italy have had 70,000 people turning up to watch the auld lads playing domino's or at an Olympic handball game? Or at a Seria A match for that matter?

The derbies between ACMilan&Inter, and both teams home games against Juve would generally all be 75K+ attendances in the San Siro.
But not really sure what it proves anyway, Serie A has 300+ games whereas the 2or3 home 6N games are special occasions. Even if they had an attendance greater than every Serie A match it wouldn't really prove rugbys popularity per se.

You know handball is indoor so its relatively limited on arena sizes?

****
Also, winter sports probably need to be added to the earlier list of rivals that eat into rugbys potential share of the sports markets; Italy have a proud tradition in various disciplines and usually get 10-20 medals at an Olympics.

The Lost Sheep

snotboogie wrote: »

Why can't it be compared? All I was saying is that the pro 12 is a bigger and more prestigious tournament than the nations cup. We can see this because of the quality of the players, the attendances, the money and the TV viewing figures. I have no idea why you have an issue with this?

Why should you not have a best of Eastern Europe team?

Georgia has three times the population of all of the Island nations combined. They are ranked above Tonga and Samoa and are only one place behind Fiji. Super Rugby still looked very seriously at giving Fiji a team.

Georgia are ranked above Italy. Saying they couldn't beat them in a competitive game is ridiculous. Italy would probably be slight favorites in a neutral venue but the spread would be tight. Georgia would be favorites against Italy in Tiblisi.

Eh, every time I've played for a rugby team abroad there are always a few Italians knocking about. When is the last time Italy have had 70,000 people turning up to watch the auld lads playing domino's or at an Olympic handball game? Or at a Seria A match for that matter?

I just don't see how you can say the Pro12 is more prestigious.
You shouldn't have a best of Eastern Europe side as the likes of Georgia don't want it and will progress further, quicker and easier if theyre on their own.

Podge_irl

snotboogie wrote: »

Georgia are ranked above Italy. Saying they couldn't beat them in a competitive game is ridiculous.

Georgia are ranked above Italy precisely because they don't play in the 6N.