Rugby World Cup 2007

I saw the argument where Argentina could play the games in Spain.

The other solution is to hold a Rugby World Cup every 2 years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ian McC

That was a fine performance today, well done England!

---

They played ok. Was a bit of a scrappy match, one of the most frustrating I have seen. I really think Aus played like the tired old side it is. Will be good if they clear out some dead wood. Especially Gregan. Might be nice if they could form a scrum too.

England should learn how to score tries.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SOD

I saw the argument where Argentina could play the games in Spain.

The other solution is to hold a Rugby World Cup every 2 years.

---

I think it certainly would be good to have it more often. It seems like a lot of time since then and with a sport that isn't played as widely as football it does seem like Rugby disappears into a black hole in regards to large tournaments. Sure you've got the 6 nations and tri-nations but at the end of the day there is no Euro 2000 that can get people's attention.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rah

They played ok. Was a bit of a scrappy match, one of the most frustrating I have seen. I really think Aus played like the tired old side it is. Will be good if they clear out some dead wood. Especially Gregan. Might be nice if they could form a scrum too.

England should learn how to score tries.

---

Yes it's a long time since Australia have been a team to be feared. I get laughed at when I say that Wilkinson is the English team but you have to agree that the rest of the team was lacklustre and other than defending they didn't do that much really. Just got penalties for Wilkinson to kick.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

I think it certainly would be good to have it more often. It seems like a lot of time since then and with a sport that isn't played as widely as football it does seem like Rugby disappears into a black hole in regards to large tournaments. Sure you've got the 6 nations and tri-nations but at the end of the day there is no Euro 2000 that can get people's attention.

---

There's also the summer tours and the autumn tours, but getting to play SA, Aussies & the Kiwis in a winner takes all situation only happens once evey 4 years. Having that every two years is better for everyone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flat.tyres

We have seen the leaps that Italy have made since joining an annual competition and I feel that Argintina deserve the same. Problem is that anyone in Europe can go to a 6 nations game whereas who from the home nations would go to Argentina for a weekend?

---

I understand that argument, but I don't think it's that straightforward. Question: how many people travel from UK to Italy for 6 nations matches? At what cost? I don't think the difference is that much with a trip to Argentina, unless you consider driving (and that case at least the time invested will be the same); and then Argentina is way cheaper than Italy when you are there.

In any case, you have tv these days, so it's not that half the stadium will be filled with fans from the other team. If you consider the distances between the tri-nations teams, the "fans have to travel" argument weakens a little.

I think there are arguments that could be used to favour Argentina in each of the tournaments. It is in the Southern hemisphere, so in this aspect the Tri is more reasonable (and with the different seasons, it might even not interfere with the European season where many players play). On the other hand, as was said, many Argentinean players play in France these days, so they are already there. And regarding the fans, it is cheaper to go from Argentina to Eruope than it is to go to Australia/NZ.

You get a few thousand fans that travel to Italy for the games. It can bee a long weekend break leaving on Friday, coming back on Monday and only cost a couple of hundred quid each for flights.

I do take your point though about TV. That's where I follow Rugby :D

Someone suggested holding Argentinian matches in somewhere like Spain. This would be a superb idea as not only would it allow the Pumas to participate but would generate even more exposure in Spain and Portugal.

As for a RWC every 2 years, I cannot see it working. You have qualifying, structure, tours and domestic comps to get around before you kick a ball. 4 years is fine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flat.tyres

You get a few thousand fans that travel to Italy for the games. It can bee a long weekend break leaving on Friday, coming back on Monday and only cost a couple of hundred quid each for flights.

I do take your point though about TV. That's where I follow Rugby :D

Someone suggested holding Argentinian matches in somewhere like Spain. This would be a superb idea as not only would it allow the Pumas to participate but would generate even more exposure in Spain and Portugal.

As for a RWC every 2 years, I cannot see it working. You have qualifying, structure, tours and domestic comps to get around before you kick a ball. 4 years is fine.

---

True. Hadn't thought about qualifying and so on. Perhaps 3 years would be better? I think if Argentina were to play some games in Spain on "home" turf at least some of the matches should be played in Argentina. Say 50% of their home games.

I don't think it would be a big issue for Argentina to play host at Spain. Also, with the level of professionalism in Rugby these days, I don't think travelling should be much of an issue. It may change things a little for the fans, though, and I'm ignorant regarding this: what would be the number of fans travelling to all the games of their team?

Just as I finished the previous post, I read in the Argentinean news that the IRB president said that Argentina is close to being admitted to the Tri-Nation.