Pumas get Tri-Nations lifeline
20 Feb 2006
Saru says it will welcome Argentina into the Vodacom Tri-Nations, barely a year after the Pumas were excluded from the five-year Murdoch deal.
The Pumas are desperate for some regular competition and have even spoken of their desire to join the Six Nations. If they were allowed a seat at the Tri-Nations table it would only be from 2011.
“We would support your request to play in the Tri-Nations,” Saru deputy chief executive Mveleli Ncula told the Argentinean ambassador to South Africa at a function. “If the idea of including the Pumas ever reached the Sanzar boardroom we would offer our support at those discussions.”
“We belong in a tournament in the southern hemisphere and not in an expanded Six Nations,” ambassador Carlos Sersale di Cerisano said. “But at this stage that possibility is at least five years away.”
Springbok coach Jake White said he would welcome the inclusion of the Pumas.
“I think it would add a new dimension to the tournament and perhaps refresh it,” White said. “Many people have been calling for a return to longer tours instead of a Tri-Nations, but perhaps the inclusion of Argentina would be another option.
“It would mean vast travelling distances, which might help us as New Zealand and Australia would have to travel more than they currently do.
“Argentina have improved their player base tremendously through the French league, and the Tri-Nations would give them a chance to regularly play as a national team and further improve their rugby.”
31 Comments
20 Feb 2006, 17:22 pm
Now this could be good!
20 Feb 2006, 17:27 pm
That would be great, more variety in the Tri Nations. Never thought i would say this but it is sorta starting to get a bit dull.
Bring in the Pumas…
20 Feb 2006, 17:27 pm
I agree… Only problem is that they’d be the also rans year after year, but I guess that it would be good for their development… Nice warm up/breather games for the rest. Also good to try out new combos for the big ones…
20 Feb 2006, 17:31 pm
Travel would be a prob though. The Boks and the Puma’s wold have to make 2 fu**ing long trips and the All Blacks and Aussies only one.
20 Feb 2006, 17:34 pm
Ignore my last comment, I wasn’t thinking.
20 Feb 2006, 17:38 pm
Cool perhaps we can have S16 as well, plus some extra tours.
I feel fresh just thinking about.
If we accept the Argies in the 3Nations something has to give.
20 Feb 2006, 17:39 pm
lol londonshark. ask Ig if he wouldn’t please remove it.
anyway, bringing in the argies would be great!! 2011 is still a helluva long way off though. and i must say that the commitment shown by mr ncula isn’t exactly huge: IF it came up we would support the idea. moerse. bring it up then why don’t you??
20 Feb 2006, 17:40 pm
dood, we just don’t do 3 games against each nation anymore. that is the new system, innit?
20 Feb 2006, 17:50 pm
JUSM
I think we playing 3 against England this year.
20 Feb 2006, 17:53 pm
Ooops make that 2 vs England and 1 Ireland.
Plus 2 vs Scotland and 1 France.
Lets not forget the Tri Nations and then CC.
There is a shitload of rugby.
20 Feb 2006, 17:58 pm
rugby is about money. there is no finacial benefit to including argentina. its not gonna happen.
which is sad. instead of playing NZ and oz 3 times each, i’d rather play in a 4 nations and play each team twice.
20 Feb 2006, 18:08 pm
It’s a tough one, I’d like to think we get rid of the tri-nations eventually it’s saturated and done for.especially with 3 tests against each other now.
20 Feb 2006, 18:27 pm
its a shame that the teams already in the tri-nations are not gonna benefit much from the Pumas inclusion -but change is good !
20 Feb 2006, 18:27 pm
agreed, Tri-Nations is tired. Lets get something new going…
maybe have it every second year or something, i love watching it and all but a bit of a change wouldn’t harm anyone…
20 Feb 2006, 18:28 pm
You cant really say that though. Look what the six nations has done to Italy, its taken them that extra step…
20 Feb 2006, 19:22 pm
bokpiel, i like your once every 2 years idea.
i wonder if the aussies and nz’s will agree. imagine their travel routine if the pumas play. half way across the world, eish. they will cross the dateline so many times they wont know how old they are, thats assuming that they do know how old they are..
20 Feb 2006, 20:54 pm
It would be fantastic for the development of Rugby in the whole of S.America and broaden its appeal in the non-English speaking world; let’s face it – it’s still got kind of a British Commonwealth feel about it whether you like it or not. Oh, and Buenos Aires is a great night out (better not tell the Aussies!) Plus, the Argentinians would give a better account of themselves in the tri-nations than the Italians have for their first ‘x’ number of years in the six nations. Open the closed shop!
20 Feb 2006, 23:11 pm
Fantastic idea and about bladdie time. Get the Pumas involved in a new SH tournament for the good of world rugby
20 Feb 2006, 23:50 pm
SA only want the Argentinians in so that the Boks won’t keep on coming stone last in the 3N as it currently is. With their “transformation” teams.
Not so?
20 Feb 2006, 23:56 pm
Tosser
21 Feb 2006, 02:26 am
munkiboi
I agree entirely. Each team would still play six games, but with Argentina in we
(a)add some variety – not that I’m sick of what we have now
(b)help develop world and S.H. rugby and
(c)balance out the home and away games.
Plus I don’t think they’d necessarily be the minnows everyone assumes. Not after a couple of seasons anyway.
21 Feb 2006, 02:38 am
Excellent idea – it will add more variety to the series. The Australasians will also have to fly east over the vast Pacific, whilst the Saffas have to take a shorter trip west over the Atlantic – the poor Argies will really have to travel a lot east & west.
Will SANZAR become SANZAGAR or what? Will the Super14 be expanded to include Argie provincial teams? Remember the battle of Tucuman – it could be interesting.
I still think the series should become a 5-team affair with a combined Pacific Island team as well – the only problem is that the islands don’t have stadiums and if they dare to use a NZ stadium, their players will be scooped into the All Blacks.
21 Feb 2006, 05:26 am
Agree. argentina should be included in the tri nation after the 07WC.
21 Feb 2006, 05:46 am
argentina is the one nation on the verge of breaking through big time. if they could get involved in a comp like the 3n, they will become one of the top 5 teams in the world. imagine if they could keep a squad going for a period of two to three months instead of flying their star players in from europe a week before they have to play a test?
this will elevate another team into the top tier of international rugby and that’s what the game needs.
21 Feb 2006, 07:18 am
Argentina have to have a tv market for Rupert Murdoch invest in. After it is his money and the rugby goes on his networks.
21 Feb 2006, 07:25 am
A five nations including Argentina and the Combined Pacific team would work. The Pacific team could play one home game in each of the three islands. The stadiums are tiny but at least they’d add variety to the tourno and draw big crowds to away games.
But Argentina needs to wake up to professionalism – until recently rugby was still an amateur sport in Argentina. Think it may still be. This would never work in a professional tournament.
21 Feb 2006, 09:33 am
I dont for a second believ that they are minnows right now!! They have beaten France and Australia recently, and teh only rason that they didnt beat SA at home (admittedly under Straueli) was because of a dodgy reffing decision for a penalty in injury time…
Wouldn’t that make SARU look like dooses- if we came stone last in a 4N competition!!?
21 Feb 2006, 10:01 am
Delek, you make a point a whole heartedly support. The fact that SANZAR would only let the Argies in later or not at all shows them up for what they are. Shortsighted and self serving old gits.
Munkibooi, You claim rugby is about money. we have very different views about this game and could debate it. Anyway, excluding Argentina displays a short term financial greed and an inability to develop new markets. Similar to the abysmal idea of giving NZ the next world cup.
South Africa should do everything in its power to bring the Argies in [as well as the pacific barbarians]. Aus and NZ will only ever look to their own interests. history tells us this very clearly.
22 Feb 2006, 03:44 am
I agree with the idea of helping other Nations develop their Rugby,let’s be honest SA don’t get much of that money anyway, but the Tri-Nations is a tournament unto it’s own.Here in Europe it is the rugby highlight of the year,whether people admit it or not.Nobody here can resist the idea of watching the world’s 3 Premiere teams going head to head,even the most hardcore 6N supporters are glued to the screen during the Tri-Nations.In my opinion it is the premiere tourney after the World-Cup. Do we really wanna give that up by diluting the competition and minimising the importance of, arguably, the world’s foremost Rugby tourney?I also like the idea of the tradition and importance that the Tri-Nations could eventually become, if it hasn’t already reached that point.The most treasured trophies around the world are the ones with time-tested history behind them(ie. The Ashes)Is it better to develop Rugby in Argies,when we should be doing that very job in SA, or help establish a competition that in years to come will be the envy of the entire Rugby planet?I personally would like to see the Tri-Nations become the litmus test for world Rugby,there is no reason to make the Tri-Nations a charity cause for developing Rugby nations!!Sounds harsh but why give up a good thing so that our players can travel ungodly distances on a regular basis, only to get injured in a blowout win?There are better ways to develop our players (especially younger ones)than to send them to Arg to get hammered by guys who are trying to prove themselves worthy of big contracts in the Premiereship…
22 Feb 2006, 04:09 am
SA Rugby is bigger than our personal entertainment,it means a lot to many people who wanna see SA win big tourneys and games without having to rely on travel schedules that suit us better than Oz and Nz.I’d rather see 6 games played at full intensity than a bunch of half-*** games designed to conserve energy and personnel for games that matter in the broader context of the overall victory…Tackler, why the hell do you even bother reading or contributing to this forum?Is your life that sad that you’ve nothing to do but try in vain to annoy us with useless dribble in an effort to satisfy your own inferiority complex? It’s not our fault the Wallabies were that terrible in 2005
26 Jun 2006, 07:21 am
Rednik, why is it an abysmal idea to give one of the biggest rugby nations with the most successful international history their first world cup to host?
How can you say that NZ will only ever look to their own interests?
The NZRFU are not NZ. The Pacific Island Team was greatly received in NZ (unlike Eddie Jones abysmal comments). The NZRFU does in fact help other pacific nations. If they were just looking to their own interests then they would not even consider teh Argies.
The truth is that the NZRFU will look out for their own intertests most of the time (not only ever). The NZ public just want more rugby.
Just becasue SA keeps donating players to Australia this does not make them the caring, giving ambasiders of world rugby
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.