Rugby Union’s international governing body will pay $US2 million ($A2.2 million) so Argentina can play in an expanded Tri-Nations tournament from 2012.
International Rugby Board chairman Bernard Lapasset said the one-off payment would remove the final obstacle keeping the Pumas from joining the championship, which features Australia, New Zealand and South Africa.
The IRB council must confirm the deal at a meeting next month, Lapasset said.
Argentina finished third at the 2007 Rugby World Cup but has wanted regular matches against highly ranked opposition as it is geographically stranded on the international rugby map.
© AP 2012Recommend this story.
The Turkey 10
The Turkey 10 teams have now been selected, as Wild Turkey Bourbon's sport sponsorship kicks into the next exciting phase.
Choose which side you're going to support and get in the running to win $2,500!
Simply visit Wild Turkey Australia on Facebook for your chance to win.
Find out more.
- Explore:
- Argentina, IRB, Rugby Union, Tri Nations, wallabies
March 10th 2010 @ 9:07am
katzilla said | March 10th 2010 @ 9:07am | Report comment
Everyone’s got to do their bit.
Argentina can only get better from the constant competition.
Look at where oz are now. Truely world rugby power.
The finances will sort themselves and hopefully the Pumas will get a decent following at home once they start hosting the 3 top rated teams in the same year.
Personally I can’t wait to do a bit of a tour of Argy and see the ABs play.
March 10th 2010 @ 10:51am
ohtani's jacket said | March 10th 2010 @ 10:51am | Report comment
Hmm, a bit of hyprocrisy creeping in here now that Argentina have joined our competition.
March 10th 2010 @ 10:56am
pothale said | March 10th 2010 @ 10:56am | Report comment
Hyprocrisy, OJ?
No! Say it ain’t so.
March 10th 2010 @ 11:01am
ohtani's jacket said | March 10th 2010 @ 11:01am | Report comment
Yes, I went there!
March 10th 2010 @ 2:12pm
Sam Taulelei said | March 10th 2010 @ 2:12pm | Report comment
I just find it amusing that everyone assumes Argentina will struggle in the expanded competition. The history of touring teams to Argentina shows that it is always a struggle. If Australia played Argentina in Argentina now I’d bet on the Argies.
March 10th 2010 @ 3:05pm
Ora said | March 10th 2010 @ 3:05pm | Report comment
Not everyone Sam, there are some of us who are supporting the argies some of us even supplied some stats.
Argentina has played the SANZAR nations 43 times there records are below
Australia played 17 won 12 lost 4 drawn 1,
Biggest winning marin 53-6 at Ballymore June 2000, Biggest losing margin 3 -18 Ballymore July 1983
Australia posts an average winning margin of just 10.5pts, not exactly cricket score material
New Zealand played 13 won 12 lost 0 drawn 1,
Biggest winning margin 93 – 8 Wellington June 1997
NZ posts an average winning margin of 31.15pts a rather healthy differential although the last two times NZ and Arg met in Argentina the scorelines were 25-19 in 2006 at Velez Sarsfield, and 24-20 in 01 at river plate
South Africa played 13 and won 13
Biggest winning margin 63-9 Ausgust 08 Johannesburg
South Africas averagewinning margin 21pts
New Zealand and South Africa hold quite impressive records over the Argentinians although Australia has stumbled one or two times and the scorelines have been relatively close many times.
March 10th 2010 @ 3:38pm
Sam said | March 10th 2010 @ 3:38pm | Report comment
I think Argentina will be competitive, but only if they get their top 8-9 players in the squad. The Tri-Nations is bloody hard though, much tougher than the Six Nations (no offence, but facts are facts). I’m confident they will be competitive in Argentina, and I think give them 5 years and they will be up there as often as not.
March 10th 2010 @ 3:17pm
ohtani's jacket said | March 10th 2010 @ 3:17pm | Report comment
It’s important to remember that Argentina went through a golden period last decade, achieving a level of international success they hadn’t enjoyed since the Porta era thanks to the number of players playing professionally in the dreaded European leagues and a style of play that is constantly derided on this site. I love me some Pumas as much as the next guy, but if running rugby is what everyone is clamouring for then we’re not exciting inviting the French into the competition are we? Something to be mindful of as the Waratahs take a hiding for their style of play.
March 10th 2010 @ 8:38pm
Wavell Wakefield said | March 10th 2010 @ 8:38pm | Report comment
Is this a warning that you’re going to moan mercilessly about Argentina like you did with the Boks last season, OJ?
March 11th 2010 @ 9:39am
ohtani's jacket said | March 11th 2010 @ 9:39am | Report comment
Except for when they play against Australia.
March 11th 2010 @ 11:09pm
Wavell Wakefield said | March 11th 2010 @ 11:09pm | Report comment
Touche, sir.
March 10th 2010 @ 8:42pm
Katipo said | March 10th 2010 @ 8:42pm | Report comment
At last something to break the boredom of tri nations. Argentina should have been admitted years ago (and the pacific islanders). Bring it on!
I think they will surprise the negative Nellies and be competitive. They will be hard to beat at home. They have heart and attitude (and a big forward pack!)
March 10th 2010 @ 10:15pm
Dave said | March 10th 2010 @ 10:15pm | Report comment
Great news for Argentina rugby. Also good to see two fully professional Italian teams join the Magners League.
March 10th 2010 @ 10:41pm
abfall said | March 10th 2010 @ 10:41pm | Report comment
South Africa was defeated by Australia by 50 points in Brisbane in 2006 before winning the World Cup in France in 2007 so I don’t think Argentina’s results against SA and NZ will have any effect on the future of the Southern Hemisphere Championships.
NZ has been the favourite for every World Cup (6) but has won only once (in NZ in 1987) so I don’t think NZ commentators should have any reason to bad-mouth Argentina’s participation. In fact NZ was very lucky to defeat Argentina in their last 2 internationals.
Argentina defeated France twice in 2007, and contrary to KPM they were magnificent in the third place play-off with Corletto from Stade Francais, destroying the French from full-back – this was the same French side that had defeated NZ in the quarter-finals 2007 and later in NZ in 2009. Argentina also defeated Ireland in the World Cup, which subsequently won the 6 nations champiionships in 2009.
As to those who say that Italy has not made any progress, and is a premonition of what will happen to Argentina, we must remember that Australia should have been defeated in Padova in 2008 before Quade Cooper’s miracle last minute try, that NZ should have been beaten in 2009 if Stuart Dickenson had the fortitude to give a penalty try against NZ after Wyatt Crockett couldn’t keep the scrum up for ten consecutive scrums, that England just beat Italy a month ago in Rome, and that last week Italy defeated Scotland.
There’s a big rugby world out there and we should be applauding its existence.
March 11th 2010 @ 5:11am
Ora said | March 11th 2010 @ 5:11am | Report comment
That is an outright lie, New Zealand has not been favourite to win every world cup!
March 11th 2010 @ 5:27am
Wavell Wakefield said | March 11th 2010 @ 5:27am | Report comment
That’s right, and the great irony is that NZ won the WC when they were about 2nd or 3rd favourites behind Australia and perhaps France.
March 11th 2010 @ 5:29am
Ora said | March 11th 2010 @ 5:29am | Report comment
Wavell nothing to do with this thread here but I posted a pretty out there suggestion in regards to the Marks suspension and a suggestion to see what others think re the final score be interesting to see what you think and why?
March 11th 2010 @ 5:31am
Wavell Wakefield said | March 11th 2010 @ 5:31am | Report comment
Did you post the suggestion on this thread or another, Ora?
March 11th 2010 @ 5:32am
Ora said | March 11th 2010 @ 5:32am | Report comment
on another,
reports say referee Marks sacked
March 11th 2010 @ 8:51am
Sam said | March 11th 2010 @ 8:51am | Report comment
what a rubbish post. The All Blacks were not favourites at every World Cup (and this peaking between world cups thing is not true, look at 1998 and 1994, hardly great years in AB rugby). I think Argentina will be competitive, but i’m not going to argue that their record against South Africa and New Zealand – both of whom they have never beaten – is irrelevant because they beat France and Scotland at the last World Cup. As for Italy, sorry but they have been in the Six Nations ten years now, and havn’t progress much – they’ve won 2 (against Samoa and Scotland) of their last 18 Tests! They also rely on foreign born and raised players, look at the current squad, Josh Sole, Martin Castrogiovanni, Kaine Robertson, Luke McLean, Craig Gower, Manoa Vosawai, Matías Agüero, Gonzalo Canale, Gonzalo Garcia.
March 11th 2010 @ 5:39am
Wavell Wakefield said | March 11th 2010 @ 5:39am | Report comment
I see. About the game being declared a draw? Gee… it’s a hard scenario that doesn’t allow a satisfactory conclusion, IMO. Perhaps in a game-by-game basis such a sanction should be considered, because what if the “try” had not occurred with fifteen minutes left and the Sharks hadn’t scored after that point? Theoretically the Sharks would have had plenty of time to score more points but didn’t, so what then? The bare minimum, I would expect, is for the referee in question to publicly reveal why the penalty try was not awarded. Sacking somebody is a big step bearing in mind the stop-start nature of rugby as a sport. My personal preference would be second refs to be trialled so we don’t have problems like this (or Michalak’s forward pass in the 07 WC QF, for example).
March 11th 2010 @ 5:44am
Ora said | March 11th 2010 @ 5:44am | Report comment
Yes it is a very hard decison to make and one I don’t really have a strong view on. While for the good of the game and the controversy a draw seems a fitting call to make, other matches where a ref is suspended may not be so clear like you say, the other team may still be able to go on and score or they may not. It’s a lottery for sure and a decision I would hate to have to make
March 11th 2010 @ 8:43am
The Bush said | March 11th 2010 @ 8:43am | Report comment
http://www.rugbyweek.com/news/article.asp?id=24794 – Aritcle with JON… Seem’s to illustrate exactly what I said at the start of the article before people assumed that everyone was just bagging out Argentina for no reason.
I think we can all agree that the Tri-Nations has become boring, Argentina deserve a shot and it would be better for everyone all round. I don’t think anyone made a point on here to the contrary.
But to all the people who simply said things like ‘nah it’ll work wonders’ and ‘yeah those Argies are tough’ etc… That’s not contributing ideas to how to get their best players on the park. They’re just pointless well wishing comments.
Best of luck to Argentina… and to Italy with their new teams, hopefully it brings Club and Country glory for them (though I’m sceptical for a range of reasons that maybe deserve a whole new thread).
March 11th 2010 @ 2:52pm
Clint said | March 11th 2010 @ 2:52pm | Report comment
This is crap! I like the trinations because I can indulge in watching our great southern style of Rugby.
March 11th 2010 @ 11:11pm
Wavell Wakefield said | March 11th 2010 @ 11:11pm | Report comment
Me too, Clint. The mere thought that a team in the 3N/4N will exclusively kick, maul, defend and kick sends shivers down my spine.