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?
Higgik
Guest
A start would be to sort out the NH season structure, ternationals and club matches run together and there is no blocking, this year Wasps played Bath 3 times in 5 weeks in 2 competitions. The international season should be August, September and October, with club rugby being played from November to May. My idea would be to begin with the 6N, (shortened by 1 week), followed by a rotation of 2 sets of tours, lions tour and World Cup over a 4 year period.
The Shaghai Doctor
Guest
NH stadia are inferior even to school fields in this part of the world. In the final of the RWC at Racist HQ, the referee had to move scrums because the turf kept giving away. I would not let my cattle graze on Stade Francais, Stinkingham, Mills Paddock , Choke Park or Muckyfield. Italy has a great surfaces even at its soccer grounds. The weather excuse is boring and as factual as a Ronald J McChump speech. NZL has dreadful winters and yet they play the most enterprising game over there. I like the idea of promotion and relegation. The 3 1/2 N could act as the feeder league to the Pacific Nations Cup. After all the competition is the play offs for fifth place at the RWC. lol. The best way to improve the 3 1/2 N is to give it match officials who are competent. They would have to come from Japan, the Americas and the PI.
kingplaymaker
Roar Guru
The RC will in time integrate Japan, the U.S. and Canada into a seven nations and when these begin to take all seven of the top spots in the world then the Six Nations will have to learn to adapt.
Derm
Roar Guru
What does this mean in plain English? The last round of matches in last season's 6 Nations is the same match-ups this season, except alternate home and away. what does "managing the process" mean in real language?
swamprat
Roar Pro
6 Nations can evolve but doesn't need too. It's completely Ok .
ClarkeG
Guest
Georgia don't necessarily have to play in the 6 nations to get a crack at the existing 6 nations teams.
Richard Harvey
Guest
In the scenario posited re bonus points, in a six team comp if Wales won all their games they would be on no less than 20 points if they failed to get any bonus points. If England lost 2 games as posited they could be on no more than 17 points assuming they received maximum bonus points and if they lost one only tyey would be on no more than 21 with maximum bonus points meaning they were more dominant than Wales even with one loss
Tim Reynolds
Roar Pro
The last round of the 6 Nations last season shows what you can do if the incentives are right. It was coincidental that you had three sides who could win the championship in the last round but it would come down to points differential. And the result? Tons of tries, tons of excitement, and many were saying that 6 Nations can be exciting. Take away the incentives and we've had the often dire displays of this season. What's wrong with managing the process so that exciting rugby is probable rather than just possible?
nickoldschool
Roar Guru
Agree that Oz has many other codes compared to SA and NZ but not compared to Europe. Gaelic football, football, basket, hand, volley etc attract a lot of attention and supporters too. Then you have the many individual sports which are also massive there. Re "It seems to me that SA and NZ home games sell out regularly in RC. Not sure about Argentina?" well not really again. NZ would sell out Eden park against SA and Oz but not against the Pumas that's why they play in Christchurch last year in front of 17k. Same in SA, they don't get 60K plus crowds against the Pumas and pretty sure they don't always sell out vs wallabies. The 6 Nations is an event in itself ethan. I come from a non rugby part of france and believe me the then 5N was still the main event on our sports calendar. Why? because playing the Welsh, Irish etc is more than just rugby. That's why the 6N is a success even if teams are now ranked anything from 5 to 15. Now I would love to see how southerners would attend the RC if NZ, Oz, SA and Pumas were ranked say 6, 8, 9 and 13. There are many imperfect things about European rugby, but there are also quite a few good ones. Pity its always hard for people on here to admit that.
The Magic Man
Roar Rookie
Improve the 6 nations: - Bring in a 40/20 kicking rule where the kicking team restarts at the line out. - Implementation of a 6 tackle rule. - Cut the team numbers from 15 to 13. -Tap restarts following a penalty and only pack scrums for double knock ons. - Keep the line out but only for general play kicks that find touch & not for penalties. Do that and Rugby League Administrations will panic.
the french
Roar Rookie
6 nations and 4 nations have become less relevant concepts as the world cup has established itself as the competition to win. Rugby is a 10 to 12 nations game at best anyway so the RWC really starts in the quarters and the one group of death. My solution is to scrap the 6 nations, and 4 nations and end of season tours out of the calendar and have a international super 12 nations every year at best or every 2 years at worst. Each nation play each other once and play cross a period of 4 months with semi finals and final system for the top 8 nations similar to the afl final system. No fall back option for any. The pro is that the world cup is more or less played every year or 2 so that implies increased tv and marketing revenue for all Unions and IRB. The calendar is clearly defined (let s say June to september) and all the clubs and franchises can organize their players list accordingly if it overlaps on domestic comps. The historical trophies(bledisloe, grand slam and so on)can still be attributed based on the game results at the end of the comp. The con is that starts to ressenble to the 7s comp but that s perhaps not so surprising. Also that s a lot of elite international games to be played and that could take players out of domestic comps altogether...
Taylorman
Guest
Don't think there's ever been an issue with the tournament. It's popular, it's well supported, it has a long history etc. The only issue is what those people running round with the ball on the grass in the middle that needs changing.
ethan
Guest
I agree, neutral venues is not a good idea at all for the fans. It seems to me that SA and NZ home games sell out regularly in RC. Not sure about Argentina? The problem for Australia is that Rugby is only the third most popular code behind AFL and NRL, not to mention that soccer is genuine competitor these days. League in European nations is tiny, so their only competitor is soccer. Add to that a much larger population spread over a much smaller area. It's a much different market. The reason Rugby in Australia doesn't sell out as much as Europe has nothing to do with the quality of rugby.
ethan
Guest
BP's make sense to me. Adding an extra nation also seems to make a whole lot of sense. Otherwise the only thing that can improve the Six Nations, and this is the most important thing, is the quality and style of rugby. But those arguments have been made a thousand times over so I don't need to say anymore.
NaBUru38
Guest
I'd do two groups of four teams, for example: Group 1: England, Wales, Italy, Romania. Group 2: Ireland, France, Scotland, Georgia. They play 3 matches each. The top two teams in each group advance to the European Championship. The bottom two teams play the European Challenge. That's 2 extra matches each. So two teams would be added, without adding more rounds.
Derm
Roar Guru
Damn! Didn't think of that. But we could have Japan, Tonga, Fiji and Samoa in lower rank 4N and bring in promotion and relegation for highest/lowest team each year.
Derm
Roar Guru
I thought mentioning the Cup would be a bit cruel since they've hardly seen it since the last century...
Derm
Roar Guru
Australians and South Africans dance? I shall look forward to this year's Championship with fervour. ?
Derm
Roar Guru
What were these articles that riddled the UK newspapers in advance of the tournament? Was it just the English papers? Or Welsh, Scottish, French, Italian and Irish papers as well? There was the usual one about bonus points which ignores the home/away inequity for different teams each year. And that the 6N company did not think moving the tournament to a later start was a good idea for a variety of reasons.
Joe Wood
Roar Rookie
I think the concerns raised before the tournament are the latter. It is a reaction to the poor NH showing at the RWC, but I doubt anything will be done. Something to be said about upgrading and improving competitions as they continue, but as you said there is very little commercially wrong with the tournament, so I think it is just a reaction