posted Mar 2, 2008

Ridiculous idea, seeing as this happens so often on tours anyway.

Now, that said, Heineken v S14 winners is a game I'd watch, and a true clash of styles!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Mar 2, 2008

This arrangement already exists - it's called the World Cup.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Mar 2, 2008

Does Rugby Union really want to follow Association Football? We've seen the way that the Premiership has all but destroyed the national teams. Rugby union was, arguably, at its best in the amateur era.

But if we go for an unnecessary world club championship, we will far from selling the game overseas merely add to player burn-out and begin the inexorable wage inflation spiral ultimately leading to match tickets that are inaccessible to individuals and crowds dominated by corporate hospitality.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Mar 2, 2008

I don't see why not, I won't mind seeing Wales vs. New Zealand every year

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Mar 3, 2008

This is stupid!!

The reason why the RWC is so special is because it is only once every 4 years. This will only move the focus towards even bigger competitions and away from local rugby. It is a disastrous idea.

It should stay as is. With experimental sides playing in Autumn, the 6Ns, the TriNations, The super 14, the HEC, the Premiership, the Magners League, the local clubs...is that not enough? Plus the RWC every 4 years! That's enough.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Mar 3, 2008

Is there ever to much Rugby?

I think not

But then again Im a fan of the best game in the world

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Mar 3, 2008

I think we are still adjusting to the impact the world cup has had on the international game. It is a wonderful competition, but it has inevitably meant that all other tournaments have become "devalued" to an extent. The 6N has retained much of its cachet because of its long history and the tri-nations is respected because of its participants. There is a growing sense however that pretty much all other international matches (inc tours) are nothing but testing grounds for the big competitions. In principle there's nothing wrong with this - it's probably necessary - BUT we haven't seen a corresponding adjustment in the cost of going to see those games. If the unions want to keep playing so many games outside competitions but with weakened or experimental sides then lets accept that but have half price tickets so we don't feel cheated.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Mar 3, 2008

Too much talk about the traditional 'Five' Nations/Big 3 down south......I've not trawled through every entry so far, but there doesn't seem to be enough discussion about more efforts being made to bring the newly established forces to the top table, such as Argentina.

As we can all see, they are no longer a 'developing nation' in so much as the players are concerned....when did France last beat them??

We also need to get the South Sea Island chaps further established, and not cherry picked by you know who.

Italy - slowly slowly, but I really think that a BIG win against a resurgent Wales or England/France is not that far off.......and what happened to Romania!! Yes – forgotten due to politics and money. Perhaps Georgia should be pushed to develop?

God forbid us if the Germans ever took rugby seriously!

I appreciate that this not a simple answer, but I think certain priorities need to be considered for longevity of what SHOULD be a truly global game, not simply a game 'hogged' by the 8(arguably 10) big playing nations.

An over-booked International calendar WILL cause the supply/demand effect to create a football situation – if anything, our round-ball, coiffured, Vantage-driving colleagues have a lot to learn from all levels of rugby union – let’s keep it that way!

Anyway, there you go for what it's worth,

An England Fan, through good and bad.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Mar 5, 2008

chunky, I think you've got 2 seperate discussions there - top 10 and 2nd tier.

Not sure where the idea of 'more rugby' is coming from. the IRB started this discussion in order to add MEANING to the current June/November tests. Note they didn't say add GAMES to...

So the point is do people want the current meandering pointless tests, or something with a goal at the end? NZ are at least going for the GS this year again so thats something to follow, but what are SA and Aus doing when they go north? Why don't 1 or 2 NH teams try the SH GS and visit SA, NZ, Arg, Aus? Or a Pacific GS round the Islands plus NZ and Aus?

as for "2nd tier" there is a lot for them. Pacific Nations showed through in the RWC with all bar Samoa performing well.
The IRB announced an Asian 3 division league to cover from India to Japan.
Nth America only has Churchill Cup, but why not add Uruguay and Argentina to an Americas tournament?

There is a lot going on and lot more being discussed that we don't hear about.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Mar 5, 2008

SouthSeaIslander:
Argentina, Canada, USA, Uruguay and Chile already play a tournament.
Argentina always plays with the team B, and always win that American Cup.
Why we (Argentina) cant play a more serious tournament is something I cant understand

add comment | complain about this comment