• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

League of Nations

mdaclarke said:
This could happen although If I was cynical I would expect Fiji to be replaced with the USA.

The reality is that the 6N will never ever ever agree to promotion/relegation and any proposal with promotion/relegation is as dead as a dodo. But I expect Fiji to be done over.
Click to expand...
The USA option would also mean that teams could double up with a visit to USA and Argentina in the same year, less overall travel and only visiting americas every 2 years.
Also reduces the number of weeks to 7 if they use same format as 6N.
 
This is the second report I've read recently on this topic, with both suggesting the 6N unions are keener on it than SANZAAR, which I find baffling. No real details, with discussions to follow next month.

www.theroar.com.au

'Global champion every two years': World rugby revolution gathers pace as Six Nations ready to make leap

Rugby chiefs from the 10 big Test-playing nations will meet in London next month as they continue plans to overhaul global competition and crown…
www.theroar.com.au

I wonder if the 6N are looking for a legal way to abandon their obligations under the San Francisco agreement for more Tier1 vs Tier2 tests, otherwise I can't work out the rationale for this apparent change of heart.

In theory I'm in favour. Particularly if:

- it was multi-year rather than annual
- it allowed for some matches between the 1st and 2nd division
- in the final year of the cycle it focussed on playoffs to identify the champion and on a relegation/promotion tournament between the lowest ranked 1st division sides and the top ranked 2nd division sides
 
Reports of a revised proposal of Europe vs Rest of World in July and November windows with I think combined points totals for each side like the Ryder Cup?

Plus a second division with relegation and promotion.

www.smh.com.au

Plan for North vs South championship emerges after global season scrapped

The previously unsuccessful plan to create a global Test season was given a makeover at World Rugby meetings in Dublin and London. And it is much more popular.
www.smh.com.au www.smh.com.au

Too skimpy on detail for me to offer and opinion really.
 
Bruce_ma gooshvili said:
Reports of a revised proposal of Europe vs Rest of World in July and November windows with I think combined points totals for each side like the Ryder Cup?

Plus a second division with relegation and promotion.

www.smh.com.au

Plan for North vs South championship emerges after global season scrapped

The previously unsuccessful plan to create a global Test season was given a makeover at World Rugby meetings in Dublin and London. And it is much more popular.
www.smh.com.au www.smh.com.au

Too skimpy on detail for me to offer and opinion really.
Click to expand...

The 6N teams and Argentina will not agree to any proposal with promotion and relegation in a million years.

Any proposal will have to be a closed shop.
 
mdaclarke said:
The 6N teams and Argentina will not agree to any proposal with promotion and relegation in a million years.

Any proposal will have to be a closed shop.
Click to expand...

Sorry. Relegation and promotion in this new tournament only. 6N and TRC would remain ring fenced closed shops.
 
Bruce_ma gooshvili said:
Sorry. Relegation and promotion in this new tournament only. 6N and TRC would remain ring fenced closed shops.
Click to expand...

Scotland, Wales, Argentina and Italy will never agree to that in a million years either.

The SH nations make a lot of money from the June/July Tours and the NH teams make a lot of money from the November tests. They will not do anything to risk that, neither with the TV companies as the 6N/RC teams are the major TV markets.

I could see them agreeing to promotion and relegation for the non RC/6N teams with immunity from relegation for the RC/6N teams. There is no incentive for them to agree to anything else.
 
Bruce_ma gooshvili said:
This is essential for Test cricket (which is a bunch of friendlies) but less so for rugby. Ticket sales and interest in November tests are at near record levels in the NH.

Regardless I support it if the 12 spots are based on ranking, solely as a way of breaking the stranglehold of woefully underperforming unions like Italy, Australia and France at the expense of unions like Georgia and Romania (that appear more proactive). It might also make it easier for unions to secure their players for internationals rather than being subservient to clubs.

That said, the existing proposals for the top two Tier2 nations to get Tier1 tests until 2032 mitigates some of the above (although we've yet to see that being honoured in my opinion).

I also prefer the thought of a genuine Europe wide comp and a Pacific / Oceania wide comp every four years (two years after RWC) - maybe 8-10 teams in each, to give exposure to the top Tier2s without jeopardising the sanctity of the 6N and RC.

Something has to be done to change the status quo in my opinion. With so few Tier 1 nations, when one of them has a big wobble (like the Aussies and possibly France if they continue to sink) it threatens the entire sport.

Similarly when countries like Argentina and SA hit an economic slump, really bad things can happen to the main competitions like Super Rugby, whose future composition doesn't look set in stone. Look at how desperate some unions are for extra tests (e.g. Wales & Argentina) and you can see that not everything in the garden is rosey.
Click to expand...
A proper regional champs every 4 years would be great, but the SH would not go for it as they would lose too much money.

Also, I would go for 1 block in September and October, same as for RWC.
7 week block, then, NH could start domestic season.
Put 6N to end of season.
 
It is a big risk to take for Countries like Wales, Scotland, Argentina and Italy.

All it will take is one bad tournament followed by one bad game and you would lose all your November and July tests. The financial impacts would be devastating.

Even Australia, England, France and South Africa have shown that they are capable of having a bad couple of years.

Will believe it when I see it. If there is promotion and relegation then I think it there will ring fencing for the RC and 6N teams
 
what does this add to the game? seems like they are doing this just to say they are doing something.
 
die_mole said:
what does this add to the game? seems like they are doing this just to say they are doing something.
Click to expand...
A chance of more than 10 nations to get meaningful competition outside of RWCs and a pathway for competent Tier2 unions to develop the game to a much higher level (and broaden the TV market for everyone). Without jeopardising the holy cows of TRC, 6N and ruddy Lions tours. Is there an aspect of the status quo that you think is superior for the US?

More detail on proposals suggests 1x relegation playoff for both hemisphere's.


It does sound like a plan to screw over Tier2s by ripping up the agreement to more Tier1 vs Tier2 tests, letting division 2 run for a couple of years then point to it, say it isn't commercially viable and reject relegation (effectively killing the concept).
 
Last edited:
I think our probability of getting promoted up to the top tier and staying there is close to zero. With the proposal it looks like the only way T2 nations could get T1 tests is by getting promoted and staying. With relegation playoffs it seems even more unlikely a team would get promoted.

Right now the US and the other top T2 nations usually get 2-3 T1 tests a year. This would essentially rip up the 2017(?) Chicago Agreement where they agreed for more T1 v T2 tests.

Even on the T1 side I don't see that much upside. Have the Nation's leagues been that popular on any continent in football. The big tests are already popular and have quite the build up leading up to them.

It wouldn't be the end of world though. I wouldn't mind having a guaranteed 8 T2 tests a year . . . we usually struggle to fill our fixture list. It would just be nice if we could maybe get some games against some A sides or something.

Edit: I should also say that I think what World Rugby has been doing at the T3 level has been good the past year or so. Setting up high performance camps/tournaments at training sites is a good way to get those teams games/training time when they are on a limited amateur schedule.
 
die_mole said:
I think our probability of getting promoted up to the top tier and staying there is close to zero. With the proposal it looks like the only way T2 nations could get T1 tests is by getting promoted and staying. With relegation playoffs it seems even more unlikely a team would get promoted.

Right now the US and the other top T2 nations usually get 2-3 T1 tests a year. This would essentially rip up the 2017(?) Chicago Agreement where they agreed for more T1 v T2 tests.

Even on the T1 side I don't see that much upside. Have the Nation's leagues been that popular on any continent in football. The big tests are already popular and have quite the build up leading up to them.

It wouldn't be the end of world though. I wouldn't mind having a guaranteed 8 T2 tests a year . . . we usually struggle to fill our fixture list. It would just be nice if we could maybe get some games against some A sides or something.

Edit: I should also say that I think what World Rugby has been doing at the T3 level has been good the past year or so. Setting up high performance camps/tournaments at training sites is a good way to get those teams games/training time when they are on a limited amateur schedule.
Click to expand...
I don't think its unthinkable to suggest if the US continues to professionalise then in 10 years they could be the top Tier2 in Division 2 then knocking off a Japan or Italy. Highly unlikely but at least there'd be a pathway, which there isn't now. Plus if the divisions are connected and marketed as such there would likely be a fair bit of revenue sharing way beyond whatever is generated from playing some Tier1s in a couple of friendlies a year.

The first report indicates all the Tier2 unions supported this new proposal over retaining the San Francisco agreement tests. That doesn't mean they are right, but it does suggest they see potential as long as there are relegation playoffs.
 

What does the competition look like?
The international game would be split into two tiers of 12 teams and the biennial competition would culminate in a world grand final and two promotion/relegation play-offs — one for each hemisphere. It would be played in even years, to avoid the World Cup and British & Irish Lions tours.

The "Challenger" division would begin first, in 2024, and contain unions from Rugby Europe, Africa, Asia/Pacific and the Americas. Georgia, Spain, Romania, Portugal, the Netherlands, Samoa, Tonga, Namibia, the United States, Canada, Uruguay and Chile would be included, based on current rankings. Russia are suspended from all rugby at present.

With major unions anxious for assurances that the second tier is a viable competition, the "Elite" division would start in 2026. The Six Nations unions — England, France, Ireland, Wales, Scotland and Italy — would combine with the Rugby Championship countries — New Zealand, South Africa, Australia and Argentina — plus Japan and Fiji.


Does this mean relegation from the Six Nations?
No. The Six Nations and Rugby Championship would be ring-fenced, played separately from these leagues, and protected from any changes. There would be no relegation from either.

Instead, points would be accrued across the existing July and November windows, with a final and the relegation play-offs taking place in Europe — home advantage for the bottom-placed "Elite" team. The idea is to protect rugby's traditional tournaments but add context to the cross-hemisphere games — and increase the commercial value of the fixtures.

In Lions tour years there would be cross-division matches, giving the likes of Uruguay a chance to face a top nation such as Australia in a non-World Cup setting


How does it all work?
Each Six Nations team would play three southern hemisphere opponents in July and then host the other three at home in November.

To reduce the travel burden on players, the initial plan is for the southern sides to be grouped into two time-zone-friendly pods, with the lowest-ranked team from the southern hemisphere giving up home advantage.

In year one, Australia, New Zealand and Japan would play host to three Six Nations teams — say England, Ireland and Wales. Meanwhile, France, Scotland and Italy would travel to South Africa and Argentina. Fiji, as the lowest-ranked team, would choose to host their games in either South Africa or Argentina. If promotion and relegation changes the "Elite" 12, those time-zone groupings could be reorganised.

Consideration would be built in for teams who have to play Japan and New Zealand in consecutive weeks — with more time given to them to travel between the two. Fiji would have to sacrifice home advantage in year one. That sacrifice would always fall to the lowest-ranked side — unless they had made it in the previous tournament.

Therefore, within this model there is a commitment for top-tier Tests in Fiji — a scarcity now. In November, the fixture list would switch. So in this example, England would host South Africa, Argentina and Fiji. By the third week of November, the league table is set.


How is the winner decided?
There are three main ideas. The easiest, but least attractive, is to award the trophy to the team that finishes top. This would avoid the political battle — and compensation — of securing player releases for an additional week. Clubs currently only have to make players available for three autumn Tests.

The most favoured option is to play a grand final between the top two teams and two promotion/relegation play-offs between the winners of the "Challenger" division and the lowest-ranked "Elite" sides, one for each hemisphere. So Italy could face Georgia and Fiji face Samoa.

The process of negotiating an additional week of player release, even just for the four teams involved, will involve talks about the Six Nations dropping one of its two fallow weeks.

The grand final would initially be hosted in the northern hemisphere — but in future could be taken to places like Chicago, or Hong Kong; a move SANZAAR would endorse. A third option — facing some opposition — is for everyone to feature in the fourth week of November.

The six northern teams would each play their closest-ranked southern opponent at home. A full set of north-versus-south rivalries could be a marketing dream, would give meaning to a fifth-placing game, and provide extra home fixtures and therefore bumper pay-days for the Six Nations countries. Others feel it is contrived and the SANZAAR unions are not keen on playing dead rubbers.


How does relegation work?
The Six Nations and SANZAAR countries are deeply worried about this. It is the reason they want the "Challenger" division to start in 2024 so they can see what it looks like before signing up to relegation. They are concerned it would cause major financial issues if a country were to drop down for a year and lose its top fixtures, biggest crowds and therefore millions of pounds.

But others are determined that the whole structure needs jeopardy for it to work and provide an avenue for emerging nations to reach the top table.

Relegation would work like this. Let's say Wales finish bottom of the "Elite" league after poor results in July and November 2026. They then play the top-ranked northern hemisphere "Challenger" side, say Georgia, in a promotion/relegation play-off at the Principality Stadium. Lose and they are relegated from the "Elite" division.

In 2027, they would still play in the Six Nations, organise a normal pre-World Cup schedule and compete at the World Cup in Australia that autumn.

Georgia would take a slot in the proposed Challenger league but a system of promotion and relegation is yet to be agreed

In 2028, their relegation would take effect. They would remain in the Six Nations but in July would travel to play, for example, Uruguay, Chile and the US. In November they would host Tonga, Samoa and Canada.

If they won the "Challenger" division, they would play the promotion play-off game. Win that and they would be back in the "Elite" group in 2030.

What happens in Lions years?
The focus would be cross-division matches: "Elite" teams playing "Challenger" teams, as well as maintaining some marquee matches — such as France playing a series against one of New Zealand, Australia or South Africa. "Challenger" top seeds would be rewarded with games against "Elite" teams in July and November, so Georgia could play New Zealand, South Africa, Australia, Argentina, Japan and Fiji in a Lions year. The plan would also see England playing Tests in countries such as Uruguay, Chile, the US, Canada, Samoa and Tonga.


What's the timeline?
There are discussions in Dublin this week with a view to an executive committee vote in November that would commit the game to its biggest structural change since 1995. The commercial viability of this model is the key stumbling block and a pivotal discussion point this week.

The player unions are on board with this new model, having been included in discussions this time. The clubs and players were not part of the talks when a previous incarnation of this plan failed in 2019. If it fails again, sources have said it will be down to the self-interest of the top unions and them not being prepared to reach a commercial agreement which is for the greater good.

World Rugby, which is facilitating all these talks, wants a consensus on this plan by the end of the week.
 
TRF_Olyy said:
What an absolutely pointless load of ****
Click to expand...
If I was a Tier 2 nation I would not be banking on promotion and relegation ever coming in.


How does relegation work?
The Six Nations and SANZAAR countries are deeply worried about this. It is the reason they want the "Challenger" division to start in 2024 so they can see what it looks like before signing up to relegation. They are concerned it would cause major financial issues if a country were to drop down for a year and lose its top fixtures, biggest crowds and therefore millions of pounds.

But others are determined that the whole structure needs jeopardy for it to work and provide an avenue for emerging nations to reach the top table.

Relegation would work like this. Let's say Wales finish bottom of the "Elite" league after poor results in July and November 2026. They then play the top-ranked northern hemisphere "Challenger" side, say Georgia, in a promotion/relegation play-off at the Principality Stadium. Lose and they are relegated from the "Elite" division.

In 2027, they would still play in the Six Nations, organise a normal pre-World Cup schedule and compete at the World Cup in Australia that autumn.

Georgia would take a slot in the proposed Challenger league but a system of promotion and relegation is yet to be agreed
 

Similar threads

TRF_Olyy
Autumn Nations Series 2024
Replies
4
Views
228
japitts
japitts
thabo15
Why the rest of the world fears southafrican rugby
Replies
6
Views
478
Lé Ddanno
Lé Ddanno
Verde-Rubro
Sebastien Bertrank is the new national coach of Portugal
Replies
7
Views
1K
Geordie
G
Pieter Steph du Teague
World Rugby Team of the Season
Replies
6
Views
873
Kiwiwomble
Kiwiwomble
BPM
The Rugby Magazine - 6 Nations Fantasy Game 2022
Replies
9
Views
960
Scotty
Scotty

Latest posts

Top