Unions to consider bonus points system for 6 nations!

First topic message reminder :

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/sport/2013/0124/1224329226209.html

Each of the unions in the Six Nations left a board meeting in London this week clutching a comprehensive paper outlining the pros and cons of the tournament falling into line with almost every other professional rugby competition. The figures will be considered in the coming months before a final decision is taken.

it has its pro's and con's, What are your thoughts?

Well precisely. It isn't true, and nor is it true that i'm evil for not thining the Lions is a good thing.

Don't worry Jimpy, your secret's safe with us

I agree with Jimpy. If the Lions are getting whitewashed every tour then its pretty pointless. A series win is vital this time to keep the consept alive.

Thankfully the last series was incredibly close but tours like the 2005 one aren't great for the popularity of the Lions.

The Lions is supposed to be the best of the best from the UK and Ireland taking on the SH and if they are less competitive than the individual home nations then its time to call it a day.

Rodders,

In the last 30 years there has been ONE whitewash.

What the Lions tour needs is bonus points

rodders wrote:I agree with Jimpy. If the Lions are getting whitewashed every tour then its pretty pointless. A series win is vital this time to keep the consept alive.

Thankfully the last series was incredibly close but tours like the 2005 one aren't great for the popularity of the Lions.

The Lions is supposed to be the best of the best from the UK and Ireland taking on the SH and if they are less competitive than the individual home nations then its time to call it a day.

Fortunately, I think we'll be lucky enough to see the demise of The B&I Lions in our lifetime.

Our Grandparents hang on to the past with misty eyed affection, but I bet none of us tell them to get over it.

Jimpy, if it continues to make money for unions, players, sponsors, the host nation and tour operators then I think it will stay on.

Cyril on 606v2 wrote:What the Lions tour needs is bonus points

Close the thread, it's reached its logical conclusion!

red_stag wrote:Rodders,

In the last 30 years there has been ONE whitewash.

But i wouldn't say that a last series win in 1997 was particularly something to be proud of either.

Jimpy wrote:

red_stag wrote:Rodders,

In the last 30 years there has been ONE whitewash.

But i wouldn't say that a last series win in 1997 was particularly something to be proud of either.

Oh no certainly not but is that what rugby is about? We don't win the tournament enough so lets get rid of it. . . . . . . .actually the Anglo-French Heineken Cup changes spring to mind

AS i've said, the success of the Lions (or abject lack of it) isn't my main motivation for disliking it, although I must say that watching them get routinely beaten doesn't make me feel all warm inside either.

On a separate note I have to say I support the Anglo French Heineken Cup changes.

I really feel the Rabo and Amlin could both become great tournaments with it and that the Heineken Cup will remain a great tournament.

As it stands the Rabo and Amlin don't entertain me. The teams don't care about them.

Whats the point. If it aint broken then why fix it. Six nations is still by far the greatest rugby tournament on planet earth. Tri nations, heineken cup, super 15 forget em all 6 nations is way ahead.

Have a quick look at the newscaster (she is nice) then fast forward to 1:28:

http://www.rte.ie/sport/player/#!/clip/816/

It will never happen!!!

I think people should realise a couple of things about lions tours and their apparent dire record.

Test matches let alone series wins away to 3N sides are rare... and I mean very rare (even to each other).

Before the 3N took over NZ have won only 1 series in SA and SA 1 series in NZ.... in their entire history.

This is the record of the 3N sides from 97 onwards (for 2 or more away matches in given country).

AUS

3 away series to SA ('05, '08 & '10) Record = LDD.
3 away series to NZ ('97, '06 & '09) Record = LLL.

Total = 0 wins, 2 draws, 4 losses.

SA

2 away series to NZ ('08 & '10) Record = DL.
4 away series to AUS ('00, '05, '06 & '09) = LDLD.

Total = 0 wins, 3 draws, 3 losses.

NZ

2 away series to SA ('06 & '09) Record = DL.
4 away series to AUS ('98, '08, '10 & '12) = LDWW.

Total = 2 wins, 2 draws, 2 losses.

So for the 3 best sides in the world.... and generally bar ENG in 01-04 the 3 best sides in the world consistently in the last 15 years out of the 18 away series tours we have the following

Total = 2 wins, 7 draws, 9 losses.

All of those were for 2 match series also. Had their been 3 match series with home advantage most of those drawn series would have gone to the losses column.

Given that... the lions record doesn't look so bad... especially for a side that is thrown together 8wks before the 1st test.

Doesn't stop it being anachronistic clap-trap

Jimpy wrote:Doesn't stop it being anachronistic clap-trap

Perhaps. But still a lucrative one for the home unions or they wouldn't take part.

Back in 2005 (when I was still living in NZ) I was going out with an English girl. She dumped me after the 2nd test ... so I'm not entirely fond of the Lions either


On your club point earlier, if the Lions weren't touring then England would be touring instead, and presumably there'd be at least as many Leicester players involved. Granted it'd likely be a week or 2 shorter tour, but overall not that different in impact?

But unless i'm missing something, England don't tour in non Lions/WC Summers, why would they start doing so?

Eng do in lions years.

97 - toured ARG
01 - toured USA & Canada
05 - didn't tour
09 - toured ARG
13 - think they're going to ARG again.

Jimpy wrote:But unless i'm missing something, England don't tour in non Lions/WC Summers, why would they start doing so?

1) Money
2) Pressure from the SH nations who want to host tours (the flipside of the autumn internationals)

The only reason England don't tour in Lions/WC summers is that there's not enough room in the schedule currently.

Edit, hit send before I saw Fa0019's point - so pretty much instead of a boosted Saxons side touring in a Lions year they'd likely upgrade that tour to a full strength one.

I just think the players should have a jolly good rest.

Jimpy wrote:I just think the players should have a jolly good rest.

I'm with you there. The NH season structure in general is a mess - and the SH one is heading that way too.

The biggest argument against it is that the top European players dont get a fallow summer if required. Noone wants to rest them the year after a world cup because they are building, or the year before because they are desperate to nail down something resembling a plan for the world cup, and they all want to play in the Lions/World cup. Its very hard to fit a full summer rest in there, which is what many players really need to rehabilitate long term problems

Why should the players have a rest. They get paid much more than me and work a lot less. I for one dont think they need a rest and I love watching Lions tours as well. Doesnt get much better as a sporting spectacle on this planet.

Never understand why there are so many anti-lions whingebags. Just stop moaning watch it and get involved because its pure class.

As long as players are properly managed then I don't see the need for summer rests.

Take the example of Tom Croft. He's fit, but he's been out for near 1yr so Leicester are working him back slowly.
I also heard that George Ford was invited to tour with ENG in the summer but Lancaster, Cockerill and Ford himself agreed that a full pre-season would suit him better.

The sabbaticals of McCaw et al is another example of how players are now viewed in a more scientific way then before.

As long as players are not over used then major rest periods for entire squads IMO is not necessary.

Probably managed or badly enough injured to ensure they have a long rest?

You think theres a coincidence between Cockerill being adamant that Croft cant play every week and the existence of the 6 nations?



Yes entire squads dont need a rest every summer, but that wasnt my point. Its the intensity of the test rugby that the senior players are getting that becomes an issue.
Theres no way an international coach will rest a senior player for the 6 nations or that they would opt for rest/surgery instead of going on the Lions. It rarely happens in the build up to a world cup either, and although they have sent depleted squads in some past post world cup summers this year the coach was mostly concerned with cementing his job with wins rather than the long term health of his squad.
Keeping the non sanzar summer but ditching the Lions would give the opportunity to properly rest guys liek Dan Cole ( whos workload could spiral out of control if castro leaves Tigers) without leaving a squad with its pants down like the tour from hell. Its been a long term complaint of top players that they are getting battered and shortening their careers.

In all other aspects I support the Lions tours and look forward to them far more than the dullness of the usual summer tours.