- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
There have been a lot of calls to re-invent the Six Nations, in order to bolster viewing figures, entice more fans to the game that previously were uninterested and to increase the fairness factor.
Personally, I think the Six Nations is a great competition, and it is constantly exciting.
There have been mutterings from the press about the spectacle this year being less than impressive, but it may in fact be suffering from a hangover after the World Cup, which had brilliant action displayed every week. The Six Nations is as exciting as ever, but let us look at, and discuss, the various thought processes surrounding an upheaval.
Problems
The perceived problems in the Six Nations are to do with predictability, a gulf in class and inequality.
Indeed, it seems the case that Scotland versus Italy every year (in recent years) is a race to avoid the wooden spoon. Despite Scotland’s obvious improvements over the last year or so, it seems to have been the case once again.
Furthermore, Italy and Scotland, at the end of the 2015 Six Nations, got ran over. They had huge scores built up against them as the top three teams competed for points differential. They had nothing to play for except pride, and pride can only get you so far.
Finally, each nation gets to play five games, which means they have three at home, and two away one year, and two away and three home the following year, and they constantly alternate.
This means that certain teams have a small advantage in some years.
Solutions
So can this be made fairer? Some have called for the addition of bonus points to the competition, in order to add an incentive to those at the bottom of the table. This would avoid the scenario of 0 points and to give the teams something to play for in the final round if they aren’t in contention.
On the face of it, this looks like a good idea. It works in other competitions, it solves the problems of a dull ending for lower ranked teams, and gives a reward to close-fought matches.
It also rewards excellent performances for teams piling on the points.
The major flaw in this plan, and why it has not come into effect, is the inequality it would bring. It could mean that a team could potentially achieve the grand slam, but still lose the competition. This alone is enough to get it laughed off the table. Imagine the uproar from Welsh supporters if they won the grand slam, only to be beaten by England as they lost two of their games by less than 7?
Another option could be would be to stage the games at neutral venues, thus eliminating the home factor. For example, having England versus Wales played at Murrayfield, or Ireland versus Scotland at Twickenham.
Again, the idea itself is not so stupid for fairness, but if the aim of a reform is to increase interest and fans participation, then demanding fans travel to a different country to watch their team play is certainly not the way to do it. Also, the point of the Six Nations is to improve the national teams, and to gain practise away and at home. You can hardly turn Twickenham into a fortress if you never play there!
Another solution is to play each fixture twice, once at home and once away, as they do in the Rugby Championship. Try getting Directors of Rugby at the Premiership clubs, especially infamously outspoken ones such as Richard Cockerill, to agree to be without their international contingents for another five or so weeks.
There are already arguments about player burnout and over-enthusiastic schedules, that to suggest a longer and fairer Six Nations wouldn’t go down well. It would be great for us viewers and fans, but unlikely to be supported by the clubs.
Finally, and this is my favourite option if it were to change, they could add another nation. After the Rugby World Cup, and World Rugby’s commitment to enlarging the scope of the game, this could be a very viable option. We saw the improvements of the so-called ‘minnow’ teams during the World Cup.
Adding a team would not only make it equal in terms of home-and-away games, but also make the bottom of the table more interesting.
There would also be a case for implementing relegation to have the seventh-ranked team rotated each year, giving the bottom of the table as much edge as the top, and ensuring that teams don’t fall into a lull during the last group of matches. This of course, could also be done with still six nations.
With teams like Georgia (my bet at this point) and Romania knocking at the door, the exposure against good teams such as the incumbent nations, would only aid their growth. Look at how Argentina have improved year on year after their inclusion in the Rugby Championship. Adding Georgia would add some impetus as well as promoting inclusivity within the game.
Are there any more ways that the Six Nations could improve? Or even should it?
Join The Roar rugby editor Christy Doran, former Wallaby Matt Toomua and a cast of regular and special guests as they look at the biggest issues in the game on The Roar Rugby Podcast. If you’re looking for great odds on the next game check out Aussie bookmaker PlayUp. Chances are you’re about to lose. Set a deposit limit.