Should Georgia & Romania be added to the 6 Nations?

[whatisthejava]

Georgia will never ever ever get into the 6N because it is not in the interest of Scotland, Wales, Ireland or Italy to allow it. No matter how much nashing of teeth and WR huff and puff those teams will veto it, the 6N is controlled by the 6N,

Its a rubbish answer, which doesnt answer the question of what to do with the rest of Europe. A pan europe competition every 4 years is the answer to run at the same time as the lions,

[rowan]

I've said the same. Two groups of four (6N, top 2 ENC teams) or 4 groups of 3 (6N, ENC 1st division)

[rowan]

Very strange that the 6 Nations teams don't play friendlies in Eastern Europe. They used to go across to Romania on occasions, after the Oaks began upsetting France - then stunned both Wales and 5 Nations champs Scotland in the 80s. Even as recently as the previous decade France when over there a couple of times, winning easily, though Italy were beaten on their last visit to Bucharest. But no 6 Nations team has ever visited Georgia, let alone Russia. Still, that will all change once World Rugby's new global calendar comes into play after the next World Cup. I believe Romania and Georgia are thereafter guaranteed annual tests with 6 Nations opponents, and surely some of them will be at home.

[rowan]

[Digby]

I don't know where the sudden lurch to setting up Georgia and Romania with games at u20s has come from. It's not maybe a bad idea in the longer term, and it should suit Georgia right now, but Romania have given very little time to the u20s group, it's basically all club based in that age group, so for now at least they'd be punching well below their weight in the u20s.

[rowan]

The reality is these two nations remain minnows in terms of registered player numbers. Romania's have actually been declining quite rapidly, while Georgia's are growing but not as quickly as you might think, despite all the hype about of that small nation. There's no comparison to, say, Argentina, Italy or Japan, all of whom have more registered players than Scotland and major domestic competitions well established and often drawn large crowds. Eastern Europe is one of the more promising regions in the game right now, but they still have a huge amount of work in front of them to catch up with the leading pack.

[Which Tyler]

Excellent news - should be U20, not U19, and should replace the existing U206N. If they can hold their own there for a couple of years, then calls for a senior 8N will become close(r) to undeniable.

As for why invite Romania as well - scheduling works far, far better with an even number of teams, so everyone plays every week; Romania may not be the next cab off the rank at junior level (I woudn't know); but they certainly are at senior; and deserve our help.

[rowan]

Pretty soon they're going to have to start including Russia in the discussions as well. They have more players than these two countries combined and a much more lucrative pro competition which is beginning to attract players from those two countries. I've been a little disappointed that the Bears don't seem to have come on much (if at all) since their RWC debut in 2011, but there are signs of significant strides being made at domestic, age-grade and 7s levels.

So by the time Georgia and/or Romania are genuinely ready for an expanded 8 Nations, Russia might well be knocking on the door as well. That's why I'd be quite happy if they merely added a promotion-relegation fixture to the 6 Nations and leave it at that. Thus the door would be open, but the Eastern Europeans - as well as the West - would have to earn their way into the top division, and I don't see any of them doing that until a great deal more progress has been made.

[Digby]

Excellent news - should be U20, not U19, and should replace the existing U206N. If they can hold their own there for a couple of years, then calls for a senior 8N will become close(r) to undeniable.

As for why invite Romania as well - scheduling works far, far better with an even number of teams, so everyone plays every week; Romania may not be the next cab off the rank at junior level (I woudn't know); but they certainly are at senior; and deserve our help.

Spain and Portugal would seem deeply unimpressed, and Spain at least would have a very strong case for being better at u20s level. The Romanians sound mostly pleased, but also a little caught out this will happen so quickly and will sees them needing to make a number of changes as to how their club/nats balance is struck, and also see them needing to spend some money on a more developed coaching/support structure for the u20s

[rowan]

Although I'm pleased for the sake of international rugby's global development that Romania & Georgia have attained direct represenation on the World rugby core committee, and that discussions on their future involvement in 6 Nations competition has become topical, it is nothing less than laughable that they have been given priority over the Pacific Islands. Fiji, Samoa and Tonga all have vastly superior track records to the Eastern Europeans, as well as greater playing numbers - much greater, in the former's case - and much, much greater in terms of players per capita.

[Digby]

The reality is these two nations remain minnows in terms of registered player numbers. Romania's have actually been declining quite rapidly, while Georgia's are growing but not as quickly as you might think, despite all the hype about of that small nation. There's no comparison to, say, Argentina, Italy or Japan, all of whom have more registered players than Scotland and major domestic competitions well established and often drawn large crowds. Eastern Europe is one of the more promising regions in the game right now, but they still have a huge amount of work in front of them to catch up with the leading pack.

But as regards adding teams to the 6N, and especially the hardly cash rich u20s, then two of those teams are significantly outside Europe,and the other is already in the 6N.

What survey/metric is being used to measure player participation in various nations?

[rowan]

The point being they don't have a strong case, while their player numbers remain in the 4 digit zone and they've never progressed beyond the group stages of the RWC. I'm not a fan of expanding the 6 Nations to accommodate them. I do support a promotion-relegation fixture, and if they can involve them at age-grade level, that's all very positive. But you wouldn't want to wreck the 6 Nations with sub-standard opponents.

[rowan]

CSM Baia Mare announced their squad for 2017 - 2018 season:

Props
Mihai Dico 16.08.1987 1,87 m 100 kg România
Domițian Mureșan 01.08.1995 1,86 m 120 kg România
Waisea Nailago 28.03.1989 1,89 m 129 kg Fiji
Constantin Mardare Pristăviță 23.05.1993 1,89 m 111 kg România
Paul Rusu 10.09.1984 1,78 m 115 kg România
Silviu Sebastian Suciu 16.10.1991 1,85 M 124 kg România

Hookers
Florin Bârdașu 23.09.1991 1,74 m 104 kg România
Ovidiu Cojocaru 19.11.1996 1,76 m 100 kg România
Iuri Natriashvili 25.01.1984 1,80 m 105 kg Georgia

Locks
Marius Dănilă 08.03.1987 1,95 m 114 kg România
Andrei Iurea 01.12.1996 1,94 m 105 kg România
Dumani Siphosethu Mtya 14.03.1985 1,94 m 114 kg Africa de Sud
Florian Roșu 20.04.1993 1,92 m 105 kg România
Johannes Van Heerden 09.12.1986 1,96 m 118 kg Africa de Sud
Mihai Matei 12.11.1997 1,94 m 97 kg România

Backrow
Răzvan Ailenei 04.02.1992 1,90 m 110 kg România
Cristian Marian Chirică 09.04.1997 1,91 m 95 kg România
Constantin Ene 08.08.1984 1,87 m 108 kg România
Sean Morrell 23.08.1985 1,89 m 110 kg Fiji
Feofaaki Holoia 29.03.1990 1,92 m 106 kg Tonga
Vlad Vișan 11.11.1999 1,97 m 115 kg România

Scrum-half
Alexandru Neculai Pălii 25.02.1995 1,78 m 90 kg România
Bidzina Shamkaradze 02.10.1983 1,69 m 82 kg Georgia
Alexandru Țiglă 19.02.1993 1,78 m 90 kg România

Fly-Half
George Paul Oprea 30.08.1993 1,93 m 106 kg România

Center
Sione Fakaosilea 13.01.1987 1,86 m 118 kg Tonga
Michael Doneghan 06.05.1991 1,90 m 98 kg Scoția
Alexandru Bucur 24.04.1994 1,83 m 92 kg România
Sergiu Lucaciu 13.03.1999 1,80 m 80 kg România

Wing
Adrian Apostol 11.03.1990 1,84 m 86 kg România
Mihai Lămboiu 25.07.1997 1,81 m 83 kg România
Sikuea Taliauli 14.07.1995 1,88 m 98 kg Tonga

Fullback:
Ratu Taniela Maravunawasawasa 30.04.1986 1,83 m 89 kg Fiji
Ionuț Botezatu 12.12.1987 1,82 m 90 kg România

Staff
George Sava – Head Coach
Vasile Lucaci – Assistant Coach
Silviu Duma - Manager
Teodor Buzatu – Video analist
Adrian Manolache – Academy Coach
Sione Vaiomounga – Academy Coach
Marius Peride – Medic

Timisora Saracens announced they signed Mesake Doge (Prop) - Fiji

[Sandydragon]

Excellent news - should be U20, not U19, and should replace the existing U206N. If they can hold their own there for a couple of years, then calls for a senior 8N will become close(r) to undeniable.

As for why invite Romania as well - scheduling works far, far better with an even number of teams, so everyone plays every week; Romania may not be the next cab off the rank at junior level (I woudn't know); but they certainly are at senior; and deserve our help.

Spain and Portugal would seem deeply unimpressed, and Spain at least would have a very strong case for being better at u20s level. The Romanians sound mostly pleased, but also a little caught out this will happen so quickly and will sees them needing to make a number of changes as to how their club/nats balance is struck, and also see them needing to spend some money on a more developed coaching/support structure for the u20s

Perhaps the U20s should have looked at a more ambitious idea, say a Euro championship model. If ti worked then perhaps it might have become more attractive to the senior competition.

[rowan]

All they need to do at all levels is link the 6 Nations with ENC via the introduction of promotion-relegation fixtures. Simple as that. This concept is commonly (perhaps deliberately) misconstrued as automatic promotion-relegation - which is, obviously, a very different matter. Promotion-relegation matches are never going to result in a respectable 6 Nations side being replaced by an ENC minnow. But one day (though it may be decades away) they will result in a strong ENC team replacing an inferior 6 Nations battler in the top division.

[Sandydragon]

All they need to do at all levels is link the 6 Nations with ENC via the introduction of promotion-relegation fixtures. Simple as that. This concept is commonly (perhaps deliberately) misconstrued as automatic promotion-relegation - which is, obviously, a very different matter. Promotion-relegation matches are never going to result in a respectable 6 Nations side being replaced by an ENC minnow. But one day (though it may be decades away) they will result in a strong ENC team replacing an inferior 6 Nations battler in the top division.

And the common misconception is that adding an additional fixture is just that simple. That space needs to be made first.

[rowan]

For the promotion-relegation fixture? That's not a misconception. That's the easiest thing in the world. If rugbydom hasn't the brains to figure that out, they must be a real bunch of chimps. Best staged within a month of the respective competitions' conclusions, however.

[Sandydragon]

Have you had a look at the fixture list? Will all players be available, not if the clubs have their way. The international windows are already under pressure, adding another fixture would be highly difficult. Don't forget that the domestic season ends just before the summer tours and these are fixtures made well in advance.
The entire calendar would need to be altered to fit in one more international game, or unions would need to keep one of the Summer tour weekends free just in case, which means a loss of revenue for someone.

It is far from the easiest thing in the world and if there were impact on domestic competitions above that agreed then I suspect that the ownership of players would come to a legal head far sooner than would other wise be the case.

In case you haven't noticed, the Lions, that international institution with a century of history behind it is having tour lengths reduce because of domestic rugby.

[rowan]

I think you're making a mountain out of a mole-hill. We're talking about one fixture. Expansion of the tournament would, of course, require a major upheaval, and that's why I suggest this as a far simpler and quite practical alternative. Only recently a prominent rugby figure (can't remember who, off hand) was calling for an annual World Championship fixture between the RC & 6 Nations winners. No question about a time-slot being found for it. Rugby is not that squeezed that it cannot find time for one solitary additional fixture. That's a poor excuse and blatant cop out.

You see things; and you say 'Why?' But I dream things that never were; and I say 'Why not?'

George Bernard Shaw

[Digby]

Have you had a look at the fixture list? Will all players be available, not if the clubs have their way. The international windows are already under pressure, adding another fixture would be highly difficult. Don't forget that the domestic season ends just before the summer tours and these are fixtures made well in advance.
The entire calendar would need to be altered to fit in one more international game, or unions would need to keep one of the Summer tour weekends free just in case, which means a loss of revenue for someone.

It is far from the easiest thing in the world and if there were impact on domestic competitions above that agreed then I suspect that the ownership of players would come to a legal head far sooner than would other wise be the case.

In case you haven't noticed, the Lions, that international institution with a century of history behind it is having tour lengths reduce because of domestic rugby.

It's why I'd just have straight promotion/relegation and avoid all the mess of an extra game. Though if they did have an extra game, and say England relegated 'cause in part they didn't have all their 'top' players then that'd be on England for how they structure their game (I'm not going to address teams other than England with that comment)

[Sandydragon]

I think you're making a mountain out of a mole-hill. We're talking about one fixture. Expansion of the tournament would, of course, require a major upheaval, and that's why I suggest this as a far simpler and quite practical alternative. Only recently a prominent rugby figure (can't remember who, off hand) was calling for an annual World Championship fixture between the RC & 6 Nations winners. No question about a time-slot being found for it. Rugby is not that squeezed that it cannot find time for one solitary additional fixture. That's a poor excuse and blatant cop out.

You see things; and you say 'Why?' But I dream things that never were; and I say 'Why not?'

George Bernard Shaw

Go on then. Reschedule the domestic seasons of the three 'domestic' leagues involved. The Top 14 for example is already impacting against international windows, how do you think the owner of Toulon would react if the international window were to be expanded? He is already challenging the current international windows.

The clubs would want compensation and might even challenge legally.

[Sandydragon]

Have you had a look at the fixture list? Will all players be available, not if the clubs have their way. The international windows are already under pressure, adding another fixture would be highly difficult. Don't forget that the domestic season ends just before the summer tours and these are fixtures made well in advance.
The entire calendar would need to be altered to fit in one more international game, or unions would need to keep one of the Summer tour weekends free just in case, which means a loss of revenue for someone.

It is far from the easiest thing in the world and if there were impact on domestic competitions above that agreed then I suspect that the ownership of players would come to a legal head far sooner than would other wise be the case.

In case you haven't noticed, the Lions, that international institution with a century of history behind it is having tour lengths reduce because of domestic rugby.

It's why I'd just have straight promotion/relegation and avoid all the mess of an extra game. Though if they did have an extra game, and say England relegated 'cause in part they didn't have all their 'top' players then that'd be on England for how they structure their game (I'm not going to address teams other than England with that comment)

Im not convinced that just having 2 years exposure to the 6N would be ideal development for the upcoming international side, but that would be the simplest method, providing the promotion and relegation was decided after 2 full seasons to account for home and away bias. If a team is bottom of the pile after 2 seasons then its fair game.

Given how long it took France to make an impact, I don't think that a 2 season rotation would be that good for the teams involved. But its the simplest option.

[rowan]

Digby, straight promotion/relegation would be a crazy idea. There remains a huge gulf between the two competitions. & the system in the ENC at the moment involves a division winner having to travel to the home of the bottom team from the division above, thereby proving themselves decisively superior. Portugal were unable to manage that against Belgium just recently, for example. That system would also work very well for the 6N. This year you'd have had Romania travelling to Italy to tackle the Azzurri, and it would require an upset of monumental proportions for the Oaks to prevail under those circumstances. But were they to do so, then so be it. They'd obviously handle themselves well enough in the 6 Nations, while the Italians would deserve to go down.

Sandydragon, I get what you're saying. You don't need to keep repeating it. But if rugby can't fit a solitary game in for the sake of unifying European rugby, then it needs to sort itself out pronto or risk implosion. I frankly regard it as an easily surmountable obstacle and nothing more. &, once again, what I am suggesting is actually a far simpler solution than most of the other ideas being bandied around. Your approach seems to be everything's impossible, nothing shall change, the game shall not move forward - which is depressingly myopic and lacking in mettle. I also think promotion-relegation should be annual. Who on earth thought up this 2-year nonsense?

[Sandydragon]

Digby, straight promotion/relegation would be a crazy idea. There remains a huge gulf between the two competitions. & the system in the ENC at the moment involves a division winner having to travel to the home of the bottom team from the division above, thereby proving themselves decisively superior. Portugal were unable to manage that against Belgium just recently, for example. That system would also work very well for the 6N. This year you'd have had Romania travelling to Italy to tackle the Azzurri, and it would require an upset of monumental proportions for the Oaks to prevail under those circumstances. But were they to do so, then so be it. They'd obviously handle themselves well enough in the 6 Nations, while the Italians would deserve to go down.

Sandrydragon, I get what you're saying. You don't need to keep repeating it. But if rugby can't fit a solitary game in for the sake of unifying European rugby, then it needs to sort itself out pronto or risk implosion. I frankly regard it as an easily surmountable obstacle and nothing more. &, once again, what I am suggesting is actually a far simpler solution that most of the other ideas being bandied around. Your approach seems to be everything's impossible, nothing shall change, the game shall not move forward - which is depressingly myopic and lacking in mettle. I also think promotion-relegation should be annual. Who on earth thought up this 2-year nonsense?

I repeat myself because you seem to think its easy. It really isn't.

And I agree that European rugby needs to sort itself out and that means a full restructure, including moving the 6N to later in the season.

[Digby]

Have you had a look at the fixture list? Will all players be available, not if the clubs have their way. The international windows are already under pressure, adding another fixture would be highly difficult. Don't forget that the domestic season ends just before the summer tours and these are fixtures made well in advance.
The entire calendar would need to be altered to fit in one more international game, or unions would need to keep one of the Summer tour weekends free just in case, which means a loss of revenue for someone.

It is far from the easiest thing in the world and if there were impact on domestic competitions above that agreed then I suspect that the ownership of players would come to a legal head far sooner than would other wise be the case.

In case you haven't noticed, the Lions, that international institution with a century of history behind it is having tour lengths reduce because of domestic rugby.

It's why I'd just have straight promotion/relegation and avoid all the mess of an extra game. Though if they did have an extra game, and say England relegated 'cause in part they didn't have all their 'top' players then that'd be on England for how they structure their game (I'm not going to address teams other than England with that comment)

Im not convinced that just having 2 years exposure to the 6N would be ideal development for the upcoming international side, but that would be the simplest method, providing the promotion and relegation was decided after 2 full seasons to account for home and away bias. If a team is bottom of the pile after 2 seasons then its fair game.

Given how long it took France to make an impact, I don't think that a 2 season rotation would be that good for the teams involved. But its the simplest option.

I tend to look at the AP and consider some teams do as Exeter, and some teams do as London Welsh. The chance would be there, do what you can with it, but at least it'd be open to giving a chance.