World Rugby Chairman

[Rugbynutter39]

The NC was back on the table no matter who won. I think the biggest difference was that Pichot was looking to give more nations a vote on the council, which would have eroded a lot of the power that the 6 Nations unions have over World Rugby.

It's a bad sign that SANZAAR wasn't able to keep Japan and either Fiji or Samoa on their side. That's all it would've taken to swing it the other way.

Yep surprised Fiji and Samoa voted differently to rest of
Sanzaar...

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

From my reading of the article it implies that teams can only be promoted or relegated from the RC. So the 6Ns will be safeguarded.

So in Bill's Brave New World Rugby NH self-interest still rules. I'm fucking shocked.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

So in Bill's Brave New World Rugby NH self-interest still rules. I'm fucking shocked.

I don't think many in the position to complain will care if the $ are right. I can somewhat understand their position. They've spent over 100 years building the 6Ns into what it is. And we have to realise that you cannot just blow up everything and start again. Especially considering the top 10 nations bring in nearly all of the games revenue. With the 6Ns Unions being the biggest part of that.

I'd have preferred a broader structure. Instead of 12 say 16 teams in both divisions. Allowing for more interaction and movement but unfortunately realities have to be taken into the equation. The key here will be what's put into place regarding funding and measures designed to see the 2nd Div teams in the short to medium term really develop in quality to the point where they are putting real pressure on the 1st Div teams come RWC and pressing their case for more inclusion in the top division.

We'll have to wait and see if this comes in at roughly the same level of value the original project was projected at. I think given the hugely successful RWC that may be the case. I'd like to see the Union from both divisions receive the same level of funding across the board with the intention of pumping funds into those nations focusing on youth development and HP performance in order to grow the game in each respective nation and drive improvement.

This is part of why I want to see a U20s version of this. I think at that level things could be put into place to close the gap between the two tiers at a far faster rate.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

I don't think many in the position to complain will care if the $ are right. I can somewhat understand their position. They've spent over 100 years building the 6Ns into what it is. And we have to realise that you cannot just blow up everything and start again. Especially considering the top 10 nations bring in nearly all of the games revenue. With the 6Ns Unions being the biggest part of that.

I'd have preferred a broader structure. Instead of 12 say 16 teams in both divisions. Allowing for more interaction and movement but unfortunately realities have to be taken into the equation. The key here will be what's put into place regarding funding and measures designed to see the 2nd Div teams in the short to medium term really develop in quality to the point where they are putting real pressure on the 1st Div teams come RWC and pressing their case for more inclusion in the top division.

We'll have to wait and see if this comes in at roughly the same level of value the original project was projected at. I think given the hugely successful RWC that may be the case. I'd like to see the Union from both divisions receive the same level of funding across the board with the intention of pumping funds into those nations focusing on youth development and HP performance in order to grow the game in each respective nation and drive improvement.

This is part of why I want to see a U20s version of this. I think at that level things could be put into place to close the gap between the two tiers at a far faster rate.

Reality is for Southern Hemisphere we are better to accept proposal for this going ahead with 6 nations without promotion / relegation for them but still have relegation / promotion for RC so still developing game in sounthern hemisphere. Yes unfair for European countries but with private equity money for second tier will still be in better place. Get the world nations up and running - show how relegation/ promotion in Southern Hemisphere a success and then have a crack at promotion / relegation for six nations in another 7 years or next negotiation cycle. Now more then ever we need this world rugby nation concept with private equity money so if have to concede on 6 nations with no promotion / relegation so be it (at least for first negotiated term)

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

^ WCR & R39: you're right, of course, it just shits me that for all the talk of a fairer deal for everyone the first proposed action reinforces to privileged position enjoyed by certain NH Unions for no reason ther than "that's the way it's been since 1870-something".

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

^ WCR & R39: you're right, of course, it just shits me that for all the talk of a fairer deal for everyone the first proposed action reinforces to privileged position enjoyed by certain NH Unions for no reason ther than "that's the way it's been since 1870-something".

I agree. In a fairer world they'd man up to the fact that it's highly unlikely any of them would actually be relegated in the near future and not chuck another stink. But reality is there's no such thing as true fairness when it comes to money in this would.

I think the impact of this proposal hinges on the value WR (World Rugby) can leverage from it. Having a hugely successful RWC in Japan certainly will help that. It they could get similar or even more money than the original Infront offer and distribute it fairly (which is a big if) it could drive a number of countries massively forward in terms of participation and competitiveness.

 

[Dan54]

Much as I dislike it I think we have to realise that WR (World Rugby) can't change 6Ns because it not run under them, it run by 6Ns company I think. I really disappointed more that countries like Japan, Canada, the Islands have voted not to give themselves more say at the big table by getting a fairer vote.

 

[Quick Hands]

It's a bad sign that SANZAAR wasn't able to keep Japan and either Fiji or Samoa on their side. That's all it would've taken to swing it the other way.

Well, SANZAAR just booted the Sunwolves from Super Rugby so it's not really a surprise.

In relation to the Pacific Islands, a bit of historical context:

The South Pacific Champioship ran from 1986 to 1991 and involved NSW, Qld, Fiji, Auckland, Wellington and Canterbury.

Replaced by Super 6 in 1992 with the same 6 teams.

Super 10 was launched in 1993 comprising NSW and Qld, Top 4 teams from NPC, top 3 teams from Currie Cup plus the winner of the Pacific Tri Series between Fiji, Tonga and Samoa.

When SANZAR was formed for the 1996 season, the Super 12 comprised 5 x NZ teams, 4 x SA teams and 3 x Aust teams.

In the 24 years since SANZAAR haven't found a place for a PI team. Why would they support SANZAAR?

 

[Omar Comin']

In the 24 years since SANZAAR haven't found a place for a PI team. Why would they support SANZAAR?

SANZAAR have supported the Nations Championship concept which would include Fiji and Japan in the Rugby Championship (and give Tonga and Samoa the possibility of entering via promotion/relegation).

I'd just have thought that Japanese and PI rugby have much closer links to SANZAAR (particularly Australia and NZ) than to the 6 Nations Unions. They should anyway that's for sure - Japan, Fiji and Samoa all voting the other way is a bad sign for SANZAAR.

 

[Quick Hands]

SANZAAR have supported the Nations Championship concept which would include Fiji and Japan in the Rugby Championship (and give Tonga and Samoa the possibility of entering via promotion/relegation).

I'd just have thought that Japanese and PI rugby have much closer links to SANZAAR (particularly Australia and NZ) than to the 6 Nations Unions. They should anyway that's for sure - Japan, Fiji and Samoa all voting the other way is a bad sign for SANZAAR.

SANZAAR are no different from 6N - they vote and make suggestions out of self-interest, nothing more or less. Let's not pretend that we in the south are some sort of angelic host, while the forces of satan reside in the north.

At every expansion of Super Rugby, SANZAR had the chance to include a PI team but chose not to - the reason being financial self-interest.

To the Nations Championship, very easy for NZ, Aust and SA to take the high moral ground about promotion relegation when there's no real possibility of any of them being relegated.

Fiji and Somoa have voted out of self-interest, just like us. The writing was on the wall when the Fijian guy was seconded for the executive by France not one of the SANZAAR team.

 

[Derpus]

SANZAAR are no different from 6N - they vote and make suggestions out of self-interest, nothing more or less. Let's not pretend that we in the south are some sort of angelic host, while the forces of satan reside in the north.

At every expansion of Super Rugby, SANZAR had the chance to include a PI team but chose not to - the reason being financial self-interest.

To the Nations Championship, very easy for NZ, Aust and SA to take the high moral ground about promotion relegation when there's no real possibility of any of them being relegated.

Fiji and Somoa have voted out of self-interest, just like us. The writing was on the wall when the Fijian guy was seconded for the executive by France not one of the SANZAAR team.

Italy haven't won a 6 Nations match since 2015 - so the risk of relegation to the Celts (who scuppered the planned competition) is far less than to us, who recently lost to Argentina at home.

Agree with your points about not keeping the Islands on board. We've done fuck all for them really. Though i guess for the last 10 years we havent been in a financial position to.

 

[zer0]

Fair play to Fiji and Samoa if they think that's what's best for them.

On an entirely unrelated note, I think it's time for NZ to nominate the whatever-the-reborn-Juniors-are-being-called as our second -- player capturing -- team. Just a random thought that came to mind for whatever reason.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

^ that would be the All Blacks XV you're talking about. Technically the Junior All Blacks are still our official second team even though they haven't played in ten years. There's nothing to stop NZR nominating ABXV next year, though.

 

[Quick Hands]

Italy haven't won a 6 Nations match since 2015 - so the risk of relegation to the Celts (who scuppered the planned competition) is far less than to us, who recently lost to Argentina at home.

Agree with your points about not keeping the Islands on board. We've done fuck all for them really. Though i guess for the last 10 years we havent been in a financial position to.

Agree re Italy - maybe the Celts like a weekend in Rome or Milan during the season. Far more attractive that Tblisi or Bucharest.

For us to be relegated we'd have to lose to Argentina, Japan and Fiji in the one season. Even if our downward spiral continues you'd like to think we could beat one of them.

EDIT: 6N not being part of WR (World Rugby) is probably the clincher

With the proposed model incorporating competitions that are not owned or run by World Rugby, not all unions are presently in favour of immediate promotion and relegation," the World Rugby statement said.

 

[Omar Comin']

Fiji and Samoa have voted out of self-interest, just like us. The writing was on the wall when the Fijian guy was seconded for the executive by France not one of the SANZAAR team.

Sure, but I don't really understand what they're getting by voting for Beaumont over Pichot. On the face of it Beaumont is far more the establishment candidate while Pichot was the guy really backing the smaller unions. And if the PI's are going to be involved in any top tier regular competition it's going to be with SANZAAR, not the 6 Nations.

All I've heard is that Beaumont was open to changing eligibility criteria so that tier 1 capped players who haven't played a test match in a few years can switch allegiance to a PI team. But he doesn't have the power to do that, and the 6 Nations unions (his base of support) have been the biggest barrier to such a policy.

 

[Dan54]

'

Sure, but I don't really understand what they're getting by voting for Beaumont over Pichot. On the face of it Beaumont is far more the establishment candidate while Pichot was the guy really backing the smaller unions. And if the PI's are going to be involved in any top tier regular competition it's going to be with SANZAAR, not the 6 Nations.

All I've heard is that Beaumont was open to changing eligibility criteria so that tier 1 capped players who haven't played a test match in a few years can switch allegiance to a PI team. But he doesn't have the power to do that, and the 6 Nations unions (his base of support) have been the biggest barrier to such a policy.

I surprised about Japan and Canada too effectively voting to keep themselves from having a say at the main table!!

 

[kiap]

EDIT: 6N not being part of WR (World Rugby) is probably the clincher

Keeping 6N promo/relegation rigidly in the plan would be a good way to sink it, sorry/not sorry style. But it doesn't necessarily have to proceed down that track.

To be fair, punters on this forum identified that 6N reality when version 1.0 came out all those moons ago.

We'll have to wait and see how Bill & co go about it.

 

[Quick Hands]

And if the PI's are going to be involved in any top tier regular competition it's going to be with SANZAAR, not the 6 Nations.

Well, SANZAR started in 1996 and one of its first acts was shafting the PI out of Super Rugby (as noted earlier the winner of the Pacific Nations was in Super 10). In the 24 years since, the original 3 Australian teams were increased to 5, the original 4 SA teams were increased to 6 and teams were brought in from Japan and Argentina - but not one team from the islands in any form. So I'm not so sure that they would agree with you - and the objective evidence would indicate that SANZAR has deliberately NOT included a team from the islands for a quarter of a century. How long are they going to wait?

I'd assume that they believe that their interests are best served going with Beaumont. We're never going to be told why they voted that way, it just makes sense.

 

[Dan54]

Still to be fair to Fiji, Samoa, Japan and Canada, maybe they voted the way they did, which effectively stops them having more say (or equality) on the WR (World Rugby) board is because they feel they maybe haven't anything to contribute!

 

[Quick Hands]

So in Bill's Brave New World Rugby NH self-interest still rules. I'm fucking shocked.

If we're talking self-interest, let's not forget Pichot is not exactly a saint. A few years ago he supported the Twiggy Forrest World Series Rugby concept, and hey presto suddenly became head of Forrest's South American mining operation on big $$$ despite not knowing anything about mining. At the time Brett Robinson demanded that he disclose his interest to WR (World Rugby).

Then he pops up on the board of USA Rugby and in the fine print of his manifesto (not common knowledge in NZ and Aust I suspect) is that the Americas be added to the BIL tour roster, meaning that a BIL tour would visit every 16 years instead of every 12.

Then he makes up with Robinson and hey presto, Robinson is nominated to WR (World Rugby) by Argentina and Picho gets Argentina to withdraw its nomination from the RWC 2027 in favour of Australia so that Australia will support his run for WR (World Rugby) Chairman.

I think that the Beaumont/Laporte team will have a much better chance of delivering a functioning Nations Cup that will benefit everyone rather than Pichot.