It's now been two whole Six Nations tournaments since Wales last won a game in the 6 Nations.
This year, they even got nil-ed (https://www.sixnationsrugby.com/en/m6n/fixtures/2025/france-v-wales-31012025-2115/report).What are they even adding to the competition?
Don't worry, I am only being sarcastic, and I don't want rid of Wales, not least of all because I love Adam Jones.
But it is interesting that while there are suggestions that Wales (who came bottom of the 6 Nations) should have a play off against Georgia who won the Rugby Europe Championship, which is the next level down (https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/articles/cn04pz1wezyo), to see who gets to be in the 6 Nations next year, there's nothing like the volume of suggestions that really, the bottom team ought to be got rid of, like there was when it was Italy down there, not being able to scrape a win by any means.
Why the difference? Is it because Italy, being the newest participants in the 6 Nations are not one of the "old boys", or is it because the other "big teams" are scared that one day it'll be them down there?
In my sports-watching life time, I have seen every 6 Nations team other than England be the Wooden Spoon (team in last place) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Nations_Championship#Wooden_Spoon
If you think it could happen to you, you're less likely to suggest it when it happens to a Union of the same venerability as yours.
Even 8 years ago (https://fulltimesportsfan.wordpress.com/2017/04/02/how-dyou-solve-a-problem-like-italian-rugby/) I was suggesting a play-off would be better than straight replacement of a team, so I'm glad everyone is realising I was right.
It's even more important now - lack of regular play against the top teams *is* holding Georgia back, and given Portugal's heroics at the last Rugby Union World Cup, the lack of mobility between what I will call tier 2 and tier 1 gives them very little to aim for or any way of improving.
If it's just one team swapped out permanently, that doesn't solve the problem of growing the depth of the game.
There are some downsides to the playoff plan - most importantly, where to fit the game in an already packed calendar and maintain player welfare. But I can't think of a more equitable solution.
Even 8 years ago (https://fulltimesportsfan.wordpress.com/2017/04/02/how-dyou-solve-a-problem-like-italian-rugby/) I was suggesting a play-off would be better than straight replacement of a team, so I'm glad everyone is realising I was right.
It's even more important now - lack of regular play against the top teams *is* holding Georgia back, and given Portugal's heroics at the last Rugby Union World Cup, the lack of mobility between what I will call tier 2 and tier 1 gives them very little to aim for or any way of improving.
If it's just one team swapped out permanently, that doesn't solve the problem of growing the depth of the game.
There are some downsides to the playoff plan - most importantly, where to fit the game in an already packed calendar and maintain player welfare. But I can't think of a more equitable solution.
No comments:
Post a Comment