Should we have a SH 5 Nations?

[Burke's Boot]

Probably not much pay-tv moolah for Uncle Rups in the South Pacific Islands but there are plenty of islanders in NZ and Australia that would be keen to watch. The combined PI team in 04 was quite competitive and we saw what just one of their nations can do alone last Sunday. Obviously it would also help the PI nations financially instead of needing IRB handouts.

 

[#1 Tah]

Yeah, but think of playing in Apia one week, Durban the next and then Bournos Aries. Brutal.


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk

 

[Joe Mac]

I would prefer Japan or even the USA to be the 5th nation. Revenue galore up there, good time zone as well (Japan)

 

[Joe Mac]

You could even have a relegation system and play Japan, Hong Kong, PI, Russia, USA etc in a second tier with the winning team from this group being promoted to the current 4 nations format and the loser being relegated.

That kind of tournament would bring the power in Rugby Union back the Southern Hemisphere/Pacific

 

[RugbyInterest]

You could even have a relegation system and play Japan, Hong Kong, PI, Russia, USA etc in a second tier with the winning team from this group being promoted to the current 4 nations format and the loser being relegated.

That kind of tournament would bring the power in Rugby Union back the Southern Hemisphere/Pacific

And to add some spice, winners of SH 5 nations to play winner of NH 6 nations - we would soon see how accurate the predictions of Stuart Barnes are then.

 

[Joe Mac]

It wouldn't be that hard, The Pacific Nations Cup is already going ahead. Add USA, Canada, Russia etc into that group and promote the winner into 2013 4 nations comp to make it five nations. From there onwards (2014), the 5th placed nation gets relegated back into the PNC (Pacific Nations Cup)

 

[openside_tom7]

I don't think we should have a five nations with a Pacific Islands team, because all countries have a proud heritage and diminishing those three nations as individuals could well cause conflict. However, possible tours would be satisfactory in my opinion.

With the expansion of the Tri Nations to Four Nations next year I for one will be interested to see how Argentina progress. However past that there is room for more expansion. I believe you can split this competition up into two divisions. Division One will obviously be the Four Nations of New Zealand, South Africa, Argentina and Australia. Then the second division will be the Pacific Nations Cup teams of Japan, Fiji, Samoa and Tonga. The format will be in the fashion that the Four Nations will take place: 6 games for each team, i.e. everyone plays each other twice home and away. At the end of it the lowest ranked team from Division One plays the highest ranked team from Division Two in a play-off for who is promoted and relegated. This can be done in a home and away leg tie with an aggregate score.

I feel this format will give the likes of Samoa the opportunity to stake their claim to play top flight rugby on a regular basis, and hence improve the standard of their rugby as a whole. The only problem would be enabling all of their players to be eligible for matches, which can be sorted out in conjuction with the Argentina have done so.

What do you guys think?

 

[Burke's Boot]

1Tah, their games would have to be played away from the PIs like they did in 04 that included a game against the Boks in Gosford.

I don't think we should have a five nations with a Pacific Islands team, because all countries have a proud heritage and diminishing those three nations as individuals could well cause conflict. However, possible tours would be satisfactory in my opinion.

With the expansion of the Tri Nations to Four Nations next year I for one will be interested to see how Argentina progress. However past that there is room for more expansion. I believe you can split this competition up into two divisions. Division One will obviously be the Four Nations of New Zealand, South Africa, Argentina and Australia. Then the second division will be the Pacific Nations Cup teams of Japan, Fiji, Samoa and Tonga. The format will be in the fashion that the Four Nations will take place: 6 games for each team, i.e. everyone plays each other twice home and away. At the end of it the lowest ranked team from Division One plays the highest ranked team from Division Two in a play-off for who is promoted and relegated. This can be done in a home and away leg tie with an aggregate score.

I feel this format will give the likes of Samoa the opportunity to stake their claim to play top flight rugby on a regular basis, and hence improve the standard of their rugby as a whole. The only problem would be enabling all of their players to be eligible for matches, which can be sorted out in conjuction with the Argentina have done so.

What do you guys think?

Playing in a combined team works with the West Indies in cricket and the only way they could play in such a tournament is by having a combined side.

 

[Athilnaur]

Can't see the finances working myself, except possibly Japan. Travel is brutal now, add Argentina, Japan. Can't see it working without a much lighter S15 format. Might be more doable if SA wasn't in, but who wants that? The Bok injection to our game is huge.

And imagine the slow news days without PDivvy!

 

[Army_Gav]

Like I said in the previous thread, winner of the PNC (Pacific Nations Cup) should be the 5th nation.

 

[No4918]

You would nearly need to have the situation where each year 2 sides missed playing each other to minimise travel and time involved in such a tournament. To ensure a Bledisloe is played in the year we miss the AB's, 1 game could be held in a neutral venue to grow the game, which would only be every 5th year.

Or rather than home and away within the season, make it home one year then away the next. So next year Argentina travels to SA for 2 tests but doesn't play them at home, reverse that the year after.

This is a long way off and would need to see a strengthening of all sides with a chance of becoming the 5th side, no one wants to see them lose 10 in a row.

 

[tigerland12]

All these sides would get belted 90% of the time by Aus, SA and NZ
I dont see the point just yet

 

[daz]

All these sides would get belted 90% of the time by SA and NZ, and possibly more than 50% of the time by Oz, but maybe not.

Fixed to add Pacific Island updated data.

 

[RugbyFuture]

really, can we stop with the pipe dream of japan or america and shit, its really annoying and will never happen. America is too lowly right now and needs to be brought up in development with canada and a strikeforce in mexico to create the american nations, japan will graduate with the asian nations, its not only about the teams but the cultures of the countries and the rivalries, theres no reason for japan america russia or any of them to be involved. Pacific Islands is a chance, cept the Pacific Islands Rugby Alliance broke down a couple of years ago I do believe. still not enough money involved, though I do agree that it would be better for them.

 

[rustycruiser]

You would think SA would veto any Pacific Nations addition. Their tours are long enough already playing in just Australia and New Zealand.

Sad fact is there is zero money in the islands. The IRB is already bankrolling the Argentina addition. I don't see them bankrolling a PI country as well. Maybe once Argentina gets stabilized. But that is years away. The PIs are shit out of luck.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I like the idea. Evidently there is a move to add both the US and Canada into the PNC (Pacific Nations Cup) from next year so I think it would work. Would need advance scheduling but could prove worthwhile. Let's forget about money for a moment and think about the game, it would be great for the game.

 

[MajorlyRagerly]

thing is though, why should the PI's be a combined team?

Samoa, Tonga & Fiji have all proven at various times they are competitive as stand alone countries - at other times, they have been obliterated but that sort of performance you would expect to be rarer with more and more gametime vs the big boys.

 

[Ruggo]

thing is though, why should the PI's be a combined team?

Samoa, Tonga & Fiji have all proven at various times they are competitive as stand alone countries - at other times, they have been obliterated but that sort of performance you would expect to be rarer with more and more gametime vs the big boys.

I agree but I think combining them helps a bit with the financial hurdle. The idea would only work if the PI nations combined had some form of a presence in the Super rugby comp to keep players in the SH. There would have to be a way to maintain the individual integrity of the individual nations also.

 

[TOCC]

I would prefer Japan or even the USA to be the 5th nation. Revenue galore up there, good time zone as well (Japan)

I'm not sure why people have this misconception that Japan or the USA is a untapped cash cow for SH rugby..
USA rugby isn't even fully professional yet, mainly because there is insufficient interest to fund such tournament..

Japan is able to pay high wages, primarily from the corporate support which actually part of government legislation..
Broadcast agreements and crowd figures are insignificant in comparison.

 

[Army_Gav]

I think we can't underestimate the 'Olympic' factor also. Many expect a revolution (hehe) to occur in these countries given that Rugby will provide the means to an Olympic gold medal.

We all know the prestige, corporate support, sponsorship and advertising that goes with the Olympics.