6 Nations 2017 General Discussion Thread

WeleaseWoderick

There's currently more merit in the idea of dropping Italy and going back to a 5 Nations than there is of expanding to 7 teams (I wouldn't do either).

If you look back at the 90s when the decision was made to invite Italy into the competition, they had beaten Ireland 3 out of the 4 times they played us and also beat France & Scotland. Those are the type of results we should be seeing from Georgia if they are to even be considered.

There definitely is scope for Georgia to play more tests against the bigger nations in the autumn internationals though.

Former Former

sydthebeat wrote: »

i have no idea of how the figures work so can you please expand on this?

I have no idea of the figures either.

But Italy is a market of 60 million people, a wealthy country within easy reach of the other five nations.

Georgia, on the other hand, is a poor country of 4 million people in one of the most unstable parts of the world without even a direct flight from London or Paris.

Seems logical to me that one is worth more than the other.

irishbucsfan

molloyjh wrote: »

EDIT: Also, if it doesn't matter to you that much then why are you posting so much about it? If you don't want to engage then don't. This half in and half out thing you're doing is a waste of everyone's time, yours included.

I'm talking about the 6 Nations in the 6 Nations thread. I'm not sure why you're trying to police it but that's what I'm posting about. I didn't realise people would be so defensive about a throwaway comment about the CEO, if it'll make you feel better I apologise unreservedly. If you want to actually discuss the 6 Nations I'd be happy to but I'm not really going to be forced into any other conversation I'm afraid.

irishbucsfan

WeleaseWoderick wrote: »

There's currently more merit in the idea of dropping Italy and going back to a 5 Nations than there is of expanding to 7 teams (I wouldn't do either).

If you look back at the 90s when the decision was made to invite Italy into the competition, they had beaten Ireland 3 out of the 4 times they played us and also beat France & Scotland. Those are the type of results we should be seeing from Georgia if they are to even be considered.

There definitely is scope for Georgia to play more tests against the bigger nations in the autumn internationals though.

I guess my problem with this is that these are all short term fixes and require a major action to be taken in order to reflect the game. Its also a system that enforces the status quo by funnelling money back towards these 6 nations.

If a team like Georgia have to be Ireland/Scotland/Italy to get into the 6 Nations, then those teams will just never schedule games against them. Whereas making the process official and requiring the bottom team in the 6 Nations to play against the winner of the ENC at least ensures they get a high level test every year.

Former Former

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Is this a different real world to the one where the 6 Nations and IRFU are HQd 2 minutes from each other and the employees of those organisations who have worked together have social relationships outside of their day to day jobs? Is it the same real world where other nations have complained about situations like that influencing the day to day work of those employees? Is it the same real world where people who work professionally within a very niche industry need to keep in mind their reputation with the very limited numbers of other prospective employers in the city they want to live in? Maybe thats a different world.

Now I want to stop here and point out the above paragraph sounds very conspirational, I want to point out I'm not saying any of this has influenced anything Feehan or anyone else has ever said in their lives, but I think its rich for someone to try to tell me that in the real world everyone is a model professional and organisations operate entirely independently of externalities. I'm completely aware of what the real world is.

I have no doubt the lads from the Pro12 offices and the lads from the 6N offices go for a beer in O'Donoghues on a Friday and have a good b*tching session about how crap Zebre, Treviso and Italy are and how they'd all be better off without them. That's definitely the real world.

But then there's the legal responsibility of a company officer to act in his employer's best interests, which is what Feehan is obliged to do when he talks about the Six Nations. Until such time as his shareholders say "right John, the policy is now XYZ", then he has to hold the line, regardless of what his own opinion might be. That's very much the real world too.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

As for our bread and butter. The importance of international rugby is exactly why I want rugby on the continent to be expanded. It should be beneficial to grass roots players in Sofia and Madrid as well as Clontarf and Coventry. Unfortunately Rugby Europe is completely undermined by the selfishness of these nations and that's what I would love to see ended.

Yes, agree, but as Feehan himself says, that's what World Rugby is there for.

irishbucsfan

Former Former wrote: »

I have no doubt the lads from the Pro12 offices and the lads from the 6N offices go for a beer in O'Donoghues on a Friday and have a good b*tching session about how crap Zebre, Treviso and Italy are and how they'd all be better off without them. That's definitely the real world.

But then there's the legal responsibility of a company officer to act in his employer's best interests, which is what Feehan is obliged to do when he talks about the Six Nations. Until such time as his shareholders say "right John, the policy is now XYZ", then he has to hold the line, regardless of what his own opinion might be. That's very much the real world too.

Right, but you're pointing out exactly what I'm saying, Feehan has a responsibility to represent his shareholders. Who are his shareholders? Would it be the organisation that I just said he represents? That's all I've said.

Former Former wrote: »

Yes, agree, but as Feehan himself says, that's what World Rugby is there for.

But they're not there for that. That's the problem. Rugby Europe are there for that. And unfortunately they're undermined by the 6 Nations.

molloyjh

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I'm talking about the 6 Nations in the 6 Nations thread. I'm not sure why you're trying to police it but that's what I'm posting about. I didn't realise people would be so defensive about a throwaway comment about the CEO, if it'll make you feel better I apologise unreservedly. If you want to actually discuss the 6 Nations I'd be happy to but I'm not really going to be forced into any other conversation I'm afraid.

Forced into any other conversation? All I'm asking you to do is explain what you meant in some of your posts because I don't know what they were intended to say. For example:

molloyjh wrote: »

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Don't let these people convince you that they're acting in the interests of anyone but themselves.

Didn't the statement itself explicitly say that they weren't there to operate in anyone elses interests?

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Sure. That statement did. Those are not the only words that have ever come out of John Feehan's mouth though.

So your reply to me was that Feehan has said other things. But in the context of the conversation I don't know what that means. Does it mean he once said Georgia should be in the 6 Nations? Did he once say it was up to the 6 Nations to develop Tier 2 countries? Did he once say that the 6 Nations Unions should develop rugby across Europe? Does it mean something else? I don't know because all you did was allude to something and expect others to figure it out from there.

Honestly, I'm incredibly confused as to why this is an issue. It's not like I've actually disagreed with you, I've just asked you to clarify your point to ensure that I understand it.

irishbucsfan

Former Former wrote: »

I have no idea of the figures either.

But Italy is a market of 60 million people, a wealthy country within easy reach of the other five nations.

Georgia, on the other hand, is a poor country of 4 million people in one of the most unstable parts of the world without even a direct flight from London or Paris.

Seems logical to me that one is worth more than the other.

For what its worth there is a LOT more money available to Georgian rugby than Italian rugby, believe it or not. For various reasons including government support and an extremely wealthy benefactor.

I think they themselves are handling it pretty well, the quote from their head coach to the BBC was pretty fair.

Georgia will not be deterred, however, as head coach Milton Haig explains.

"We can't control the decision-making process and we understand we won't be able to influence that apart from being consistent on the rugby field," he tells BBC Wales Sport.

"If it's going to cost us a certain amount of money [to join the Six Nations], tell us what it is and we will be able to come back to you with an answer.

"It can be frustrating but our job is to create a conversation and if we can keep the conversation alive then hopefully we can get a bit of support, not only from the media but within the internal structures of the Six Nations."

"If you're looking at potential, one thing we do know is we'll be bringing an Eastern European market to the table," the New Zealander adds.

"Not only would we be watched by our own fans, you can bet other Eastern European nations like Russia and Romania will more than likely tune in too.

"It will be for the greater good of Eastern European rugby. With the support of Mr Ivanishvili and the government, we think we can be sustainable.

"We'd be happy to sign up for a five-year deal. Even if it's three years, give us three years to prove ourselves on the pitch and commercially, and we'd be pretty confident we could do both."

I think it would be nice to hear from the 6 Nations committee if there is any mechanism or process at all for trialling this and how it could become a possibility. If its a case of Georgia needing to spending millions to cover any inability to produce a TV contract they're willing to do it, so you'd have to wonder what the issue is in that particular case. If its geopolitical concerns then thats fair enough to me.

thomond2006

Feehan and co. should at least hear them out.

Podge_irl

irishbucsfan wrote: »

If its a case of Georgia needing to spending millions to cover any inability to produce a TV contract they're willing to do it, so you'd have to wonder what the issue is in that particular case.

I presume its a case of none of the 6N teams wanting to risk not being in the 6N?

errlloyd

I'd love it if World Rugby stepped in for both us and SANZAR simultaneously.

The Rugby Championship has 4 teams choosing to play each other home and away instead of including any of Japan of the PIs even though all 4 of those countries have better records against Tier 1 nations than Georgia.

Former Former

Podge_irl wrote: »

I presume its a case of none of the 6N teams wanting to risk not being in the 6N?

Exactly.

We all assume it will be Italy as fall guy but there's always the chance that they won't be.

And no one wants a 6 Nations without one of the original five nations. I certainly don't.

And even if Italy were the losers, you're effectively asking them to sign their own death warrant to help develop other countries.

irishbucsfan

Podge_irl wrote: »

I presume its a case of none of the 6N teams wanting to risk not being in the 6N?

Oh yes, I'd presume that as well. But that's not really going to be a 'politically acceptable' excuse.

PTH2009

1 England (13)
2 Ireland (10)
3 Scotland (9)
4 Wales (5)
5 France (5)
6 Italy (0)

2 rounds to go and 3 teams still have the chance to win it and a big surprise is that Scotland are one of those 3 teams and have been very impressive over the tournament so far

England- 2 wins (BP or not) over Scotland and Ireland will be enough for them too win the title (they get the 3x Grand Slam points too). Could also win the title on PD if they lose to Ireland (If Ireland 2 non BP wins).

Scotland- 2x BP Wins Over England and Italy may be enough for them to win the title and they will also want Ireland to lose to Wales or England/

Ireland- 2x BP wins over Wales and England may be enough

Theres prob more sanarios too that im forgetting

molloyjh

PTH2009 wrote: »

1 England (13)
2 Ireland (10)
3 Scotland (9)
4 Wales (5)
5 France (5)
6 Italy (0)

2 rounds to go and 3 teams still have the chance to win it and a big surprise is that Scotland are one of those 3 teams and have been very impressive over the tournament so far

England- 2 wins (BP or not) over Scotland and Ireland will be enough for them too win the title (they get the 3x Grand Slam points too). Could also win the title on PD if they lose to Ireland (If Ireland 2 non BP wins).

Scotland- 2x BP Wins Over England and Italy may be enough for them to win the title and they will also want Ireland to lose to Wales or England/

Ireland- 2x BP wins over Wales and England may be enough

Theres prob more sanarios too that im forgetting

Basically Scotland can only win the Championship if they win their next 2 games, England lose their next 2 games (obv including Scotland) and we lose against Wales. If we were to get 3 BPs in that period then Scotland would need at least 1 TBP win, which they should get against Italy.

Ireland can still win if they lose to Wales but it would need England to lose against Scotland, us to beat England in the last week and Scotland to lose against Italy. Highly, highly unlikely.

If Ireland beat Wales and Scotland beat England then we'd still need to beat England anyway (thanks Bazzo!).

If Ireland beat Wales and England beat Scotland without the TBP it's pretty much a straight shoot out between Ireland and England on the final day. An Irish win of any kind would seal the Championship.

If Ireland beat Wales and England beat Scotland with the TBP then Ireland will either need a BP from one of the two games or prevent England getting the LBP in Dublin.

All other roads lead the trophy to London.

So in short we need to beat Wales and we can worry about everything else thereafter. While we can still win even if we lose to Wales (or draw) it's unlikely we will. If we manage to do that then a Scottish win would be nice too. But either way we'd need to beat England in Dublin really.

Bazzo

molloyjh wrote: »

If Ireland beat Wales and Scotland beat England then a draw would do in the Aviva in the last week unless England get a LBP and TBP.

Eh? This would have us going in to the final week(where Scotland play Italy) on 14 points and Scotland on 13 points. A draw would put us to 16 where Scotland with a win would finish on 17 or 18.

PTH2009

Obv i want us to beat Wales but even if we dont i would still love too beat England and Eddie Jones and cost them there historic record

molloyjh

Bazzo wrote: »

Eh? This would have us going in to the final week(where Scotland play Italy) on 14 points and Scotland on 13 points. A draw would put us to 16 where Scotland with a win would finish on 17 or 18.

Yeah so the short and the long of it is we need to win both of our remaining games. Bonus points might come into it if England get the TBP against Scotland, but otherwise the 2 wins alone will do.

Scotland need to win both of theirs, Ireland lose to Wales and then beat England.

Otherwise England win.

molloyjh

PTH2009 wrote: »

Obv i want us to beat Wales but even if we dont i would still love too beat England and Eddie Jones and cost them there historic record

If I'm honest I don't really care about that at this stage. I want the Championship. Nothing else matters right now. If we can do 3 in 4 that would be incredible.

wp_rathead

molloyjh wrote: »

If I'm honest I don't really care about that at this stage. I want the Championship. Nothing else matters right now. If we can do 3 in 4 that would be incredible.

Is it possible to lose to England and still win championship though?
They on 13-would need them to lose with no LBP to Scotland and beat us with no TBP so they be on 17
We would need to beat Wales with TBP and get a TBP and and LBP v England to level on 17 match points (in this scenario though Scotland will likely fin on 18 as they'll get 4 v England and probably 5 v Italy)

So basically let's just beat Wales and England

CMOTDibbler

wp_rathead wrote: »

Is it possible to lose to England and still win championship though?
They on 13-would need them to lose with no LBP to Scotland and beat us with no TBP so they be on 17
We would need to beat Wales with TBP and get a TBP and and LBP v England to level on 17 match points (in this scenario though Scotland will likely fin on 18 as they'll get 4 v England and probably 5 v Italy)

So basically let's just beat Wales and England

Thank you for sharing the inside of your head wih us.

wp_rathead

molloyjh

Yeah we could bamboozle ourselves with all sorts of permutations and calculations. At the end of the day we simply have to win our last 2 games. Do that and we'll almost certainly win the Championship. We may need to deny England a LBP to do it, but that's really about as complicated as it needs to get.

swiwi_

Things I thought I'd never see

1) Trump win the presidency
2) Brexit
3) Scotland 5th in the world rankings

Something to tell the grandkids anyway in a few years. Doubt they'll believe it once happened though.

Cosmo Kramer

swiwi_ wrote: »

Things I thought I'd never see

1) Trump win the presidency
2) Brexit
3) Scotland 5th in the world rankings

Something to tell the grandkids anyway in a few years. Doubt they'll believe it once happened though.

And, in typical Scottish fashion, just as they come good they ditch the coach that got them to this point.

The irony is that the better they do this year, the more pressure there will be on Townsend next year.

Dickie10

so when it boils down to it, the reality is we need to score 4 tries in cardiff to keep the champioship alive?

Bridge93

Dickie10 wrote: »

so when it boils down to it, the reality is we need to score 4 tries in cardiff to keep the champioship alive?

No we need to win in Cardiff to keep the championship alive. 4 tries in Cardiff and it is completely in our own hands against England

Unless we score 4 and still lose or England put an enormous score on Scotland

Dickie10

nope for some reason i had ireland on 8 points at the minute. no wonder i was getting so annoyed with the media telling me the championship is still on. sure it is...!!

at 8 points and england on 13 i thought ireland would need to get 4 tries in cardiff to get up to 13 points and with england winning agaanist scotlandthey would be on 17. so i thought we would need to beat england with 4 tries scored and win by more than 7.
no wonder i thought it was all over!

Dickie10

i predict ireland to beat wales 28-19 with three tries scored. england will beat scotland 22-14 so the game with ireland v england will be ireland on 14 points and england on 17 points. so in this likely scenario what happens if ireland beat england by less than 7 points?? were both oon 18 points

Dickie10

if im honest i think england will beat us in dublin. i would be extremly worried that we could get a mighty backlash from wales in cardiff too, were heading into the perfect storm in cardiff, just the time when this irish team would let you down with a bang. seems like the run up to the Argentina game in 2015, thinking a few steps ahead of ourselves then wallop!!