RugbyRebels

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:

Puja wrote:
They were very far from alone or even the worst, just the ones unlucky enough to be without a chair at the moment the music stopped.

Puja

In a competition there are losers

I think it's the fact that no-one declared that there was a competition until it was announced they had lost which galled their fans.

Puja

If they want to contend they had no idea running a business at a loss came without risk I've no sympathy. In our economic model you can run at a profit and still get shafted, it's just how it is

In a shocking development it seems, according to the times, that some senior England players are unhappy with the RPA that the agreement will lead to them losing income. So much for the claims they’d be happy to earn less if they played less.

Peat wrote:

Stom wrote:The Lions is one of the things that sets rugby apart. To lose it would be a disaster, imo.

I'm not sure my attention will remain if rugby moves in the same direction football has over the past 20 years. There's a difference between growing the game and rampant capitalism.

I only came back to the sport because of the '09 Lions. Events are what grabs the world and the Lions is a fairly unique event in sporting terms.

I'm also not sure how much of my attention rugby is going to maintain like this, simply because I'm not interested in it for 11 months a year and dipping in and out isn't as fun. I get why the Premiership don't want to play second fiddle to the international game, but right now its like two fat guys trying to squeeze through a narrow door. Its not big enough for both to exist comfortably.

I kind of think that rugby might be approaching some sort of tipping point. Unions and clubs seem to be trying increasingly desperate efforts to generate more revenue (the pipe dream of cracking the US; multiple AB squads trotting the globe; adding teams to leagues from different continents). However, to me the product is increasingly stale. Some of this is personal, and i know i'm generalising, but fairly across the board one sees uncompetitive competitions between teams that barely resemble the clubs (or whatever) they once were. Internationally, i'm tired of the same fixtures coming up ('england v aus again, what fun'). That's why i like the lions and england playing nz less often, most other things are stale. I think at some point something may have to give. I mean, seriously, wales v scotland and italy v ireland for a second time this year? Weird.

Disliking uncompetitive fixtures, but you want to see more games that surely have to be of the likes of Ireland vs USA or England vs Romania?

Indeed, I don't see a good solution. Either boring repeat fixtures or boring uncompetitive games. It seems the whole system is bloated.

Is the solution to that not more three match series? Play each team less often but when you do, make it a proper test. Warm up games etc should then be against the smaller teams.

In terms of the club game, I think we just need less games so there is less need to rest people. At the moment a lot of the big teams dont get fully tested at home

That'd probably be the way i'd like them to go. Whether it's popular enough for other countries i dunno.

Cameo wrote:Is the solution to that not more three match series? Play each team less often but when you do, make it a proper test. Warm up games etc should then be against the smaller teams.

Yep. I think this would be the best solution.

Mellsblue wrote:

Cameo wrote:Is the solution to that not more three match series? Play each team less often but when you do, make it a proper test. Warm up games etc should then be against the smaller teams.

Yep. I think this would be the best solution.

Not the most obvious format to replace the 6N