Proposed Nations Championship

[Derpus]

The SANZAAR nations should just decide to not play England anymore between World Cups. Still play the other European nations, but not England.

I don't really think anyone in the 6 nations wants it.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

^ it's been reported that France & Wales want the extra €/£ to combat the power of the French & English Clubs.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

^ it's been reported that France & Wales want the extra €/£ to combat the power of the French & English Clubs.

Scotland and Italy are against it as they'll be the likely candidates for the relegation game most years. Though the chances of them being relegated are actually quite small any time in the near future. Ireland apparently have concerns about it as well. Which is weird as they'll likely never have to worry about it. And I suspect England are just looking for more money.

 

[Rebels3]

For those interested in the discussion, please listen to Will Greenwood’s Rugby podcast from Sky Sports UK. This weeks pod has an advertising agency guy on that is absolutely brilliant, a very balanced conversation that looks at it from a corporate point of view. It’s starts about 2-3mins in.

More than worth the listen

 

[kiap]

And I suspect England are just looking for more money.

Bottom line is England … and for that matter France, Wales, SANZAAR and the rest … are all looking for more test match money. That's why a new comp is proposed.

NZ and Oz can moan all night - but if they want to see the cash, the roadblock of 6N relegation has to be unblocked.

We all know that attempting to 'boycott' the NH teams won't do jack in generating dollars.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

For those interested in the discussion, please listen to Will Greenwood’s Rugby podcast from Sky Sports UK. This weeks pod has an advertising agency guy on that is absolutely brilliant, a very balanced conversation that looks at it from a corporate point of view. It’s starts about 2-3mins in.

More than worth the listen

So the Infront money is actually Chinese money. He's also big on the Infront deal as a means of sustaining the international game and providing the pathway to creating a more compelling scene.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

Scotland and Italy are against it as they'll be the likely candidates for the relegation game most years. Though the chances of them being relegated are actually quite small any time in the near future. Ireland apparently have concerns about it as well. Which is weird as they'll likely never have to worry about it. And I suspect England are just looking for more money.

Agree re: the Colts☆ & suspect you're right re: Ringinland as Nigel's beef doesn't really stand up.

☆Celts

Bottom line is England … and for that matter France, Wales, SANZAAR and the rest … are all looking for more test match money. That's why a new comp is proposed.

NZ and Oz can moan all night - but if they want to see the cash, the roadblock of 6N relegation has to be unblocked.

We all know that attempting to 'boycott' the NH teams won't do jack in generating dollars.

Instead of a boycott per se maybe it needs to be "yes, we'd love to come to Twickers, what's our cut of the Gate & TV rights money?".

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Agree re: the Colts & suspect you're right re: Ringinland as Nigel's beef doesn't really stand up.

I, well, I would like to think the 6Ns Unions weren't greedy enough to sell the entire rights of the most prominent property in its entirety to IMG but who knows. Nor do I actually think the CVC is a good one either. Especially as they have to surrender decision making rights in regards to broadcast and sponsorship.

So, I think we're seeing some hold outs in an attempt to increase the overall share of the pie they'll see. If WR (World Rugby) came out and offered something between £15-20m/year as opposed to the £10/year the current proposal has I suspect we'll see things change pretty quick.

 

[Rebels3]

So the Infront money is actually Chinese money. He's also big on the Infront deal as a means of sustaining the international game and providing the pathway to creating a more compelling scene.

Yeh I found that very interesting, I was quite surprised he was in favor of the World rugby deal if he had to choose between the options.

I get the sense Rugby is about to go big time, it’s just about arguing how that looks.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Yeh I found that very interesting, I was quite surprised he was in favor of the World rugby deal if he had to choose between the options.

I get the sense Rugby is about to go big time, it’s just about arguing how that looks.

I get the sense that's his thinking on the matter as well going from his inputs. That this is the start of something a lot bigger than what Rugby has ever seen. He's makes a good point about the value of greater parity at the RWC and the pathway for emerging nations to progress.

 

[Joe King]

I don't really think anyone in the 6 nations wants it.

I was thinking that if England were to be agreeable, then the rest would follow.

But it was a little tongue in cheek.

 

[Derpus]

England be agreeable??

 

[Rugbynutter39]

If they remain against, it's dead. Simple as that.



Basing the proposal on 6N relegation is a fool's errand. Promo to the Six Nations - it's dreamin' …

Sadly yes Kiap but I admire WR (World Rugby) giving it a crack. I personally am surprised by some of the negativity towards WR (World Rugby) personally as for me they have done a lot of good things for the game given politics of rugby and indeed attempting League of Nations with promotion / relegation and adapting where needed to try and appease (e.g dropping semi finals). But sadly yes despite knowing for the broader game relegation/promotion for 6 nations would be best scenario we also know this has long been a debate had that has little chance of seeing any chance given incumbents like England want to preserve the status quo and only think of their own interests and not the broader health of the game.

I would like to see a RC at least adopt 6 sides with promotion / relegation but that of course would only come if broadcaster prepared to support with decent money (albeit lesser money more likely than would be offered under current WR (World Rugby) proposal). and have this played off against 6 nations. Ok for European rugby would be detrimental but maybe if RC with promotion/ relegation successfully and goes from strength to strength in Southern Hemisphere would put more pressure for change in Northern Hemisphere for eventual long term change to 6N's with promotion / relegation. I think the latter still wishful thinking but who knows long term.

 

[kiap]

I admire WR (World Rugby) giving it a crack. I personally am surprised by some of the negativity towards WR (World Rugby) personally as for me they have done a lot of good things for the game given politics of rugby and indeed attempting League of Nations with promotion / relegation

I agree.

Regarding "incumbents like England want to preserve the status quo", what WR (World Rugby) has to do is work on that (and with it). That's assuming WR (World Rugby) need the deal - and I reckon they do.

As posters here have suggested, the status quo is the base negotiating position of England/other 6Ns. But a 'no' might be turned into a 'yes' by retuning/clarifying the deal.

Steve Martin (not the comedian Canuck, but the Norn Iron sports deal bloke on the Will Greenwood pod mentioned above) talked about relegation sides in football getting large parachute payments. That's the sort of 'backstop' arangement they need to put in place for the (unlikely) event of relegation.

Even more importantly, what the 6N teams need (Sanzaar teams too, for that matter) is an acceptable test schedule that would be rolled out in the event of relegation. IMO, relegated sides will still need matches with 6N/TRC teams.

I would like to see a RC at least adopt 6 sides with promotion / relegation

Dunno about that. There can be a distinction between the 6-team World conference and TRC.

And that's without affecting the test matches the 6-teams (with promo/relgation) would play.

TRC is a Sanzaar animal and remains interwoven with the Supe. Forget about opening that pandora's box.

And there's no need to do so. TRC would remain a subset.

 

[kiap]

adapting where needed to try and appease (e.g dropping semi finals).

I think the next adaption they should look at is dropping the Nations Championship from 12 teams to 10 teams.

So the intial teams would be: 6N minus 1 … and … TRC plus 1

Addio, Italy. Bula, Fiji!

This would make it easier to fit everything in.

NO relegation from the 6N … but the bottom 6N team doesn't play for the Nations Championship.


If Georgia want to make it, the possibility should still be open, but they have to be better (or beat) TWO of the 6N teams over a two year cycle - e.g. for 2018+19 this would be England and Scotland (with Italy already out of contention).

 

[Sir Arthur Higgins]

I agree.

Regarding "incumbents like England want to preserve the status quo", what WR (World Rugby) has to do is work on that (and with it). That's assuming WR (World Rugby) need the deal - and I reckon they do.

As posters here have suggested, the status quo is the base negotiating position of England/other 6Ns. But a 'no' might be turned into a 'yes' by retuning/clarifying the deal.

Steve Martin (not the comedian Canuck, but the Norn Iron sports deal bloke on the Will Greenwood pod mentioned above) talked about relegation sides in football getting large parachute payments. That's the sort of 'backstop' arangement they need to put in place for the (unlikely) event of relegation.

Even more importantly, what the 6N teams need (Sanzaar teams too, for that matter) is an acceptable test schedule that would be rolled out in the event of relegation. IMO, relegated sides will still need matches with 6N/TRC teams.


Dunno about that. There can be a distinction between the 6-team World conference and TRC.

And that's without affecting the test matches the 6-teams (with promo/relgation) would play.

TRC is a Sanzaar animal and remains interwoven with the Supe. Forget about opening that pandora's box.

And there's no need to do so. TRC would remain a subset.

Latest proposals include a substanutial parachute payment for relegated team and also guarantee current revenue till 2033 I believe.

 

[kiap]

^ That's the 1st thing needed.

And by relegation, I mean relegation from the Nations Championship conference. That doesn't necessarily have to be the same entity as the 6N. In fact, it's better if it's not the same thing. Ideally, the 6N would remain as is.

The 2nd thing needed is an acceptable schedule for the 6N team not in the Nations Champs.

6N remaining as is would meet that, IMO. Failing that, multiple tier 1 oppo is still required.

The more I look at it now, a 10 team world league seems like a way to make this thing fit better.

 

[Derpus]

^ That's the 1st thing needed.

And by relegation, I mean relegation from the Nations Championship conference. That doesn't necessarily have to be the same entity as the 6N. In fact, it's better if it's not the same thing. Ideally, the 6N would remain as is.

The 2nd thing needed is an acceptable schedule for the 6N team not in the Nations Champs.

6N remaining as is would meet that, IMO. Failing that, multiple tier 1 oppo is still required.

The more I look at it now, a 10 team world league seems like a way to make this thing fit better.

That doesn't sound at all possible from a scheduling perspective.

 

[kiap]

That doesn't sound at all possible from a scheduling perspective.

Lazy comment. Prove it to me.

Show your working.

 

[Finsbury Girl]

These guys who want to shower money all over rugby are most certainly not doing it for the good of the game.

The unions would do well to recognise this. Getting into bed with these PE type guys will 100% result in faces getting ripped off.