6 Nations or 7 nations?

Question

is it fine the way it is r do we add another and if so Argentina or should we have an annual or bi-annual qualification for the last spot btween the weaker european teams.

and will a seventh team spell the end of the autumn internationals, will the clubs go mad?

Answer 1

When the Home Nations invited France to join them in the 1920s to form the "Five Nations", it took France a good fifteen years before they became an equal.

Italy then joined to form the Six Nations, but they are yet to be regarded as equals.

To include Argentina in an extended Seven Nations would be nonsensical. Teams would spend more of their time travelling than anything else, and there would be very little travelling support (Still a feature of the Six Nations).

If a Seven Nations were to be established, the obvious candidate is Romania.

Answer 2

Mmmmm, I have, for several months suggested the Pumas, who play mostly in Europe, should  join the 6N and be based say somewhere like Malta, as they don't get enough team time together! They would be awesome if they could!

Interesting idea about having bi-qualifications.  This would promote rugby union, as we have seen the minnows of the RWC tournament have given us some entertaining games, both matches last night proved to be very enjoyable!

Clubs will not like though, as it will mean an extra weekend for their international players away from the people who pay them.

This why I think central contracts should come  in to place, where the Union has the upper hand over the clubs!

Then we could have the Pumas in the 7Nations and a qualifier in the 8N!

Answer 3

6.

Answer 4

6

Answer 5

Come join the Tri Nations Family, and  expand it to Four Nations. It will be a real boost to Rugby all round.

Answer 6

10. Two divisions of 5 with the top team in division 2 being promted at the end of the comp. That way Argentina (whose players mainly play in France and England and have been looking at playing home games in Spain or Belgium), Georgia, Romania and Portugal will have a top quality compeition to play in and will improve for the next world cup.

Answer 7

I think that they should be allowed to play in the 6N with a base in spain. I f they are allowed to play reguraly with the the like s of nz, aus, rsf they will develop at an even more alarming rate, consequently making a further mockery of how the northern hemisphere teams are playing!

Answer 8

keep it as 6 and let the pumas play in the tri (quad) nations

Answer 9

Sorry 6 nations. If Aregntina want to play with the big sides, then it would be better for them to join the Southern Hemisphere teams. The idea of the Northern teams flying to Argentina to play in there summer would not be fair or wise to anyone.

Also there are better contenders to join the nations sides, Holland, Germany, Spain, Portugal, Belgium, Norway, Austria, etc, etc.

Answer 10

The clubs will be mad but it is their duty to supply players to the international team, it will also give new players a chance to stake their place.

It would be a great idea to bring in Argentina, it would make the cup more open and the Grand Slam all the harder. The idea was that they base Argentina in Spain at one of the stadiums there, it wouldnt be that bad for the Argentinians because most of them play in Europe anyway.

However the 6 nations was set up as a European compition, so they wonder if they let in Argentina now will they have to leave in the likes of Georgia or even Figi, Samoa or Tonga in years to come, then it becomes a full international league.

It would be great if they had a special competition evey four years with the top ten teams, the likes of:

NZ, Aus, SA, Ire, Eng, Fra, Wales, Scot, Arg & Ita (or even one of the pacific islanders teams) they could play it the year after a lions tour and it would be a great foundation for the next world cup

Answer 11

Well it only became the six nations because england decided that they were too good to be playing in the 5 nations. then when italy said yes we will join. i dawned on them that they would be getting so fewer games. theoreticaly it should still be the 5 nations. will england being booted out for thinking that they are too good.

Answer 12

No thanks, we the argies prefer playing in a quad nations, the top 4 nations in the world (tri-nations + Argentina). The northern hemisphere is dull.

Note: confused shark: Argentina is 4th in the world ranking. The best european (or northern-hemisphere) country is placed 5th. So we are not "developing" when it comes to rugby.

Answer 13

7. More competition will only make the others stronger.

Answer 14

6 nations.

Answer 15

I think Argentina have well and truly justified that they need to be included in some major competition whether that be northern or southern hemisphere that will allow them to be competitive with the likes of AB's, SA, Australia, England, etc. So inclusion in one major annual competition is a must in order for Argentina to keep progressing and moving forward. Which in a couple of years time, may be quite scary for some of the middle weight teams . . .

Yahoo!Xtra official rugby expert for Auckland. Ask me anything on Yahoo!Xtra answers.

Answer 16

Argentina would certainly improve the competition but there would be a lot more travelling involved...Personally, I'd like to see a 7 nations' championship...Argentina have certainly shown that they deserve to be included. I don't think they would be good enough to join Aus, SA and NZ's competition though...yet.

There should be a similar competition for emerging nations like Georgia, Japan, Namibia, Uruguay, Russia, Spain etc too...that would be a fillip for the sport.

Answer 17

1, Wales.

Answer 18

Sis nations is fine as 7 teams would mean teams having weekends off again like in the 5 Nations days.  Argentina should maybe get a tournament going with the USA and Canada as they are all developing nations with promise as far as Rugby is concrned.

Answer 19

Argentina join the Southern Hemisphere tri Nations next year