Comments on: Pumas get Tri-Nations lifeline

By: chch

chch — Mon, 26 Jun 2006 05:21:34 +0000

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

By: Danish_10

Danish_10 — Wed, 22 Feb 2006 02:09:55 +0000

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

By: Danish_10

Danish_10 — Wed, 22 Feb 2006 01:44:27 +0000

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…

By: rednik

rednik — Tue, 21 Feb 2006 08:01:41 +0000

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.

By: wicked wugby wascal

wicked wugby wascal — Tue, 21 Feb 2006 07:33:10 +0000

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!!?

By: Delek

Delek — Tue, 21 Feb 2006 05:25:49 +0000

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.

By: BrumbyIV

BrumbyIV — Tue, 21 Feb 2006 05:18:09 +0000

Argentina have to have a tv market for Rupert Murdoch invest in. After it is his money and the rugby goes on his networks.

By: GCC

GCC — Tue, 21 Feb 2006 03:46:02 +0000

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.

By: oink12

oink12 — Tue, 21 Feb 2006 03:26:22 +0000

Agree. argentina should be included in the tri nation after the 07WC.

By: Hier kom groot k..

Hier kom groot k.. — Tue, 21 Feb 2006 00:38:30 +0000

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.

By: kiwi

kiwi — Tue, 21 Feb 2006 00:26:00 +0000

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.

By: Sprooser

Sprooser — Mon, 20 Feb 2006 21:56:18 +0000

Tosser

By: TheTackler

TheTackler — Mon, 20 Feb 2006 21:50:44 +0000

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?

By: jonny

jonny — Mon, 20 Feb 2006 21:11:58 +0000

Fantastic idea and about bladdie time. Get the Pumas involved in a new SH tournament for the good of world rugby

By: Sprooser

Sprooser — Mon, 20 Feb 2006 18:54:21 +0000

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!

By: Knersboy

Knersboy — Mon, 20 Feb 2006 17:22:40 +0000

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..

By: Bokpiel

Bokpiel — Mon, 20 Feb 2006 16:28:46 +0000

You cant really say that though. Look what the six nations has done to Italy, its taken them that extra step…

By: Bokpiel

Bokpiel — Mon, 20 Feb 2006 16:27:32 +0000

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…

By: mr.puntz

mr.puntz — Mon, 20 Feb 2006 16:27:00 +0000

its a shame that the teams already in the tri-nations are not gonna benefit much from the Pumas inclusion -but change is good !

By: CoffeeshopBok;-)

CoffeeshopBok;-) — Mon, 20 Feb 2006 16:08:54 +0000

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.