Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Other Stuff
Archived
Rugby World Cup 2015
Should the 6 nations be opened up
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Feicarsinn" data-source="post: 749911" data-attributes="member: 22777"><p>How so? I'm saying you improve youth coaching and facilities and help more players secure pro contract so they're playing all year round, as opposed to simply giving them 5 matches a year that they'll most likely lose badly. While playing in the 6 nations would increase exposure and probably revenue, we've seen from the case of Italy that it really doesn't help to improve the national squad if you don't have good systems in place underneath the facade.</p><p></p><p>Ireland are actually a pretty good example of this. We were terrible in the 90's despite having as much exposure to top tier rugby as anyone. What changed was the development of the provinces in the early 2000's into proper professional organizations. The domestic game was streamlined and a heavy emphasis was placed on bringing in foreign expertise to bring up the standard of coaching and management. The academies have been completely overhauled and are probably the best run systems in the Celtic nations at least. The difference these changes have made to the quality and quantity of player available to the national team have been far more important that a couple of extra test matches. If the IRB can help the like of Georgia to set up similar systems then they're onto something. Just putting them into the 6 nations and hoping they become good seems pretty poorly thought out, and damaging to the competition.</p><p></p><p>The 6 nations is the premier competition in northern hemisphere rugby. It's not a bloody development league. To remain a meaningful competition it needs be fiercely competitive. As things stand there are two sides in the competition who haven't been genuinely competitive for at least 10 years. Is it in anyone's interests to further dilute the quality? I'd be very happy to see Georgia and Romania in the picture in the future, but not as just another inevitable win for the big 4 every year. I want to see that they're producing players capable of challenging the likes of Wales and Ireland occasionally and Italy and Scotland regularly before we tinker more with the most prestigious competition in world rugby. And that's reflected in their youth sides and the number of players they have playing professionally.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Feicarsinn, post: 749911, member: 22777"] How so? I'm saying you improve youth coaching and facilities and help more players secure pro contract so they're playing all year round, as opposed to simply giving them 5 matches a year that they'll most likely lose badly. While playing in the 6 nations would increase exposure and probably revenue, we've seen from the case of Italy that it really doesn't help to improve the national squad if you don't have good systems in place underneath the facade. Ireland are actually a pretty good example of this. We were terrible in the 90's despite having as much exposure to top tier rugby as anyone. What changed was the development of the provinces in the early 2000's into proper professional organizations. The domestic game was streamlined and a heavy emphasis was placed on bringing in foreign expertise to bring up the standard of coaching and management. The academies have been completely overhauled and are probably the best run systems in the Celtic nations at least. The difference these changes have made to the quality and quantity of player available to the national team have been far more important that a couple of extra test matches. If the IRB can help the like of Georgia to set up similar systems then they're onto something. Just putting them into the 6 nations and hoping they become good seems pretty poorly thought out, and damaging to the competition. The 6 nations is the premier competition in northern hemisphere rugby. It's not a bloody development league. To remain a meaningful competition it needs be fiercely competitive. As things stand there are two sides in the competition who haven't been genuinely competitive for at least 10 years. Is it in anyone's interests to further dilute the quality? I'd be very happy to see Georgia and Romania in the picture in the future, but not as just another inevitable win for the big 4 every year. I want to see that they're producing players capable of challenging the likes of Wales and Ireland occasionally and Italy and Scotland regularly before we tinker more with the most prestigious competition in world rugby. And that's reflected in their youth sides and the number of players they have playing professionally. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Other Stuff
Archived
Rugby World Cup 2015
Should the 6 nations be opened up
Top