Is Italy a true Tier 1 Nation?

[lagoerson]

Italy has only 28 all-time wins against Tier 1 Nations, around 10% of every game they played. Despite huge improvement under Qquesada they still struggle against elite: blowouts vs Argentina in Udine (18-50) and France that recently just put 73 on them.

Also in the last 5 years Italy has a 9% of win rate vs Tier 1 while Scotland, Argentina and Wales are in the range of 30-40%.

Do you really consider them a Tier 1 Nation?

 

[Kiwiwomble]

Italy has only 28 all-time wins against Tier 1 Nations, around 10% of every game they played. Despite huge improvement under Qquesada they still struggle against elite: blowouts vs Argentina in Udine (18-50) and France that recently just put 73 on them.

Also in the last 5 years Italy has a 9% of win rate vs Tier 1 while Scotland, Argentina and Wales are in the range of 30-40%.

Do you really consider them a Tier 1 Nation?

I think so, i think being Tier 1 means more the results (although they would help), i think its all the infrastructure below that, a professional club comp for example

i mean....someone was always going to be the worst Tier 1 team, i thing i dont have time to check is whats their record against tier 2 teams?

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

I think they are tier 1.5. They've won the majority of their games Vs tier 2 opposition but their record of losses Vs tier 1 nations is worse than their record of wins Vs tier 2.

Ie they are more likely to lose to a tier 2 side than win against a tier 1 side. Having said that, I think they have improved recently.

 

[lagoerson]

I think so, i think being Tier 1 means more the results (although they would help), i think its all the infrastructure below that, a professional club comp for example

i mean....someone was always going to be the worst Tier 1 team, i thing i dont have time to check is whats their record against tier 2 teams?

Well they have more losses than anyone against tier 2 sides for sure: 47 is a ******* lot. i think argentina has only 8 or something.

 

[lagoerson]

I think they are tier 1.5. They've won the majority of their games Vs tier 2 opposition but their record of losses Vs tier 1 nations is worse than their record of wins Vs tier 2.

Ie they are more likely to lose to a tier 2 side than win against a tier 1 side. Having said that, I think they have improved recently.

I acknowledge their improvement but they have 47 losses vs tier 2 while only 28 wins vs tier 1

Argentina 82 wins vs tier 1 vs only 9 losses to tier 2.

Silly to compare home nations (scotland, wales should have a similar record without the centennial competition).

But still, only Italy is WAY behind.

 

[Which Tyler]

Yes.
Because they play in an annual, tier one, international competition.

But they haven't always been tier 1, so their record from before 2000 is even more irrelevant than their record since.

They're the worst tier 1 side, but that doesn't make them "not tier 1"

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

Yes.
Because they play in an annual, tier one, international competition.

But they haven't always been tier 1, so their record from before 2000 is even more irrelevant than their record since.

They're the worst tier 1 side, but that doesn't make them "not tier 1"

Nail on head.

It'd br great to see them knock England over soon (if you're not an England fan obv), it's the biggest blotch on their record. They haven't beaten NZ but neither have Scotland or Wales (in the pro era) so that's not as big a black mark imo.

They also have a pro club who qualified for the European knockouts in a group where the current top English side failed to make it out of and both their clubs are in the scramble for URC knockouts. Rugby is niche but healthy in Italy.

 

[lagoerson]

Nail on head.

It'd br great to see them knock England over soon (if you're not an England fan obv), it's the biggest blotch on their record. They haven't beaten NZ but neither have Scotland or Wales (in the pro era) so that's not as big a black mark imo.

They also have a pro club who qualified for the European knockouts in a group where the current top English side failed to make it out of and both their clubs are in the scramble for URC knockouts. Rugby is niche but healthy in Italy.

I agree. Main problem of Italian rugby is the lack of a big Pool of talent. Still 77,000 registered players aint that far from Australia.

 

[Flankers' paradise]

Kind of irrelevant counting their all time record against tier 2 oppo, because before they joined the 6n they were playing most of the fixtures v tier 2 countries.

 

[Which Tyler]

For the sake of interest - has anyone got a straight list of matches played by Italy; preferably with results.
Google and Wiki are failing me, whilst ChatGPT tells me to do it myself

 

[mikebrownsauce1512]

For the sake of interest - has anyone got a straight list of matches played by Italy; preferably with results.
Google and Wiki are failing me, whilst ChatGPT tells me to do it myself

Hurry up and do it yourself, get back to work.

 

[Which Tyler]

Always knew we had at least one poster on here who was an AI

 

[Yulia]

Main problem of Italian rugby is the lack of a big Pool of talent.

Rugby is just not that popular there (as in other T1 countries), a lot of potential talents choose other sports I think

 

[djwizard84]

It sounds silly to me, that all the previous 2000 games should not count on Italy's record. If that's so, why since then WR separates the unions in Tiers? Then if that's the case, WR should abolish this protectionism and let all unions play freely against each other and start to reevaluate the ranking.

As long as there's no open competition, many "smaller" unions will not get the potential hidden in them, and I'm not only talking about in field potential.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

It sounds silly to me, that all the previous 2000 games should not count on Italy's record. If that's so, why since then WR separates the unions in Tiers? Then if that's the case, WR should abolish this protectionism and let all unions play freely against each other and start to reevaluate the ranking.

As long as there's no open competition, many "smaller" unions will not get the potential hidden in them, and I'm not only talking about in field potential.

I think that's only for this discussion. I don't think WR recognised "tiers" until the mid 00s (could be wrong) and in any case Italy would have been T2 until they joined the 6 nations.

 

[Which Tyler]

The question is "IS Italy a tier 1 nation" not "has Italy always been a tier 1 nation" or even "has Italy ever been a tier 1 nation"

Italy's status as a tier 1 nation started in 2000, so why would their record before that be relevant to the discussion?

As the question is set in the present tense, anyone wanting something more than "yes, they play in the 6N" and enter their record for discussion, will need to define what time frame they're referring to. But it will, by definition, need to be "Since 2000" as the absolr oldest - which, quite frankly, is stretching the idea of present tense well past breaking point. Even 10-12 years (AKA the length of an international career) is too long to apply the present tense to.

 

[WaywardKicker]

If I don't think too much about it, I guess I do think of them as tier 1, solely because of their Six Nations status.

However since this thread has got me thinking I'd probably say no. Part of me still thinks of a "true tier 1" nation as someone that gets regular invitations for test series against the traditional "big 3" in the southern hemisphere - NZ, SA and AUS. That just doesn't happen for Italy, (and by those metrics Scotland may be questionable too).