Rugby's Tri-Nations or Six Nations - which would suit Argentina better?

Tue, Oct 16, 07 08:58
Rank it:
RSS  Digg  del.icio.us
What`s Online:

Marcelo Loffreda: He's turned the Pumas into a major force (Gettyimages.com)
The Pumas' impressive performance in the World Cup demands inclusion in a major tournament. The question is which of the two hemispheres would suit them better.
'Their style of play is far more suited to the Six Nations. However, whether it would benefit the tournament and Northern Hemisphere rugby in general is a difficult question'
On Sunday night Argentina finally were sent home from World Cup 2007 by a rampant Springboks performance, and I for one will be sorry to see them go. They put in some excellent performances and really confounded both expectations and their critics.

In previous tournaments Argentina were an unpleasant side who played nasty, negative, percentage rugby and were on the end of some heavy beatings from the major nations. That all changed this time round as coach Marcelo Loffreda's men truly established themselves as a major force in world rugby.

Surely everyone, however begrudgingly, would agree that for Argentina to reach the semi-finals of this tournament was a magnificent achievement. For a nation that  never really got to grips with the knock-out stages it was a huge step forward. In many ways the Pumas epitomise the experience of this World Cup, and have played a fantastic part in securing its place in the history books as a remarkable sporting event.

Both the players and the coaching staff have a lot to be proud of. Their opening 17-12 victory over France set the tone for the rest of the tournament as the underdogs defeated the favourites for the first but not the last time in World Cup 2007.

The guts, determination and not a little skill with which they ground out that victory was a lesson in smart tactics and grit that France will not forget in a hurry. It spurred the Pumas on to greater things, and they left some big sides trailing in their wake. After comprehensively winning their group, and putting out sorry Ireland in the process, they marched on past Scotland and only faltered against the vastly superior Springboks. To count France, Ireland and Scotland among your scalps in a World Cup indicates a very impressive performance indeed.

However, in the wake of defeat there are some big questions to be asked about Argentinian rugby. Surely they cannot continue to be the only IRB tier-one classed nation without regular competition alongside similar ranked sides? The Pumas, and rugby in Argentina, will not improve without this. They have proved they can compete with the best and should be treated as such. You could certainly argue based on results in the past eight years that they deserve that far more than Italy. So should they join the Six Nations or the Tri-Nations?

Their style of play is far more suited to the Six Nations, and they have proved they could compete effectively against every side they would face. However, whether it would benefit the tournament and Northern Hemisphere rugby in general is a difficult question.

Firstly, the international calendar is already overcrowded, and club-versus-country rows already dominate the period around the Six Nations and the autumn internationals. Club sides lose their top players for many weeks of the season, and it could be argued that the players themselves are suffering from playing too much already. Adding another team is not going to help that situation. The Seen Nations begins to look like one step to far.

This leaves the Tri-Nations, a much tougher nut to crack, and there would no doubt be huge resistance to letting the Pumas in. However, it does seem like the more sensible option; after all, Argentina is in the Southern Hemisphere! Also, it would be good for the flamboyant sides already in this tournament to test themselves against a more European-style opposition on a regular basis.

In the last two World Cups, this style of play has always proved a stumbling block for the Tri-Nations sides. The All Blacks invariably go in as favourites playing champagne rugby, but end up being defeated by a gritty European side who are willing to put in the hard yards. Australia have been twice defeated by England in this manner and South Africa lost out last time round as well.

Argentina have earned the right to play this standard of rugby on a regular basis. They are ranked higher in the world than virtually all the Six Nations sides, and above Australia, too. The question is, will the IRB step up to the plate and give them the chance?

What do you think? Should the Pumas be playing in the Six Nations or the Tri Nations? What should the IRB do? Post your comments below or submit an article of your own to Sportingo.
Rank it:
RSS  Digg  del.icio.us
Comments
Fridge Magnet (16/10/2007 10:57)
With so much time difference between Argentina and Australasia and with 1000's of miles to travel, I don't think a 4 Nations can fly. 95% of Argentina's players are attached to either UK or French clubs so their Season is September to May each year. The Argies have previously offered to base themselves in Spain/Portugal so travelling will be far far better. All it needs is the Blazer Brigade to put down their Gin & Tonics and get things organised but I fear Politics will screw it all up and Argentina will remain isolated for far too long. Let's cut the crap and get them involved.
Michael Duncan (16/10/2007 15:49)
Graham, I asked the same question in one of my articles but perhaps should expand on it a little. Neither the 3N or 6N in their current format suits so something big must give. The combined Pacific Islands side look good when they play and seems a logical way to take them forward seeing as the population of Tonga is less than most English towns that one has heard of. The home and away game format is not sacrosanct - the 6N does not have this. If gate receipts were shared then little revenue need be lost by not hosting matches in one's own country. Now start considering Australia a continent (as Europe is) and not merely a country and my proposed SH 5 Nations initially based in Australia might just work. The PI's and Argentina could join the SANZAR nations to make a five group tournament where each side plays four matches and has one rest week. The solution must be a viable business entity. If the problems of travel and crowd attendences are solved then this would fly. All we need is a name - The 'Sout
Michael Duncan (16/10/2007 15:58)
It seems my last sentence was cut. I'd call it the 'Southern Cross Cup' as the Southern Cross, having 5 stars, is symbolic of the 5 teams.
Darren Maslin (17/10/2007 02:09)
The strange thing is, Argentina seem to have improved without the need to compete in one of these tounaments. And when you see the lack of quality play involved in both hemispheres supposed top competitions, you wonder what kind of effect they have on the gameplay itself. Having stand-alone games and mini tours seems to be doing ok by the Pumas, so maybe there is something that everyone - and most notably the IRB - is missing...
Jonny (17/10/2007 06:13)
There is no reason why the Super 14 cannot be expanded to include a couple of Namibian teams. Namibia borders South Africa and so should be included so that the club level of rugby grows alot faster. Argentina should also be given a few teams to enter in this tournament. The problem with Argentina is its lack of depth and this would help solve alot of this, exposing more players to international club/franchise rugby. With this done there is then no reason why Uruguay cannot be given a couple of teams for the Super 14 too. Additional teams from the island nations of Fiji, Samoa and Tonga should also be let in, so with approximately 28 teams in the tournament after this, randomly allocate 14 teams to one pool each season (maybe seeding the top 8 teams into seperate pools) to ensure that the lower teams still get a taste of the best competition. This would be much rather preferred to than having a promotion/relegation system as the bottom teams are surely never likely to see the best! As for internationa
Chopvac (18/10/2007 20:55)
One of the biggest arguments against having Argentina joining the Tri-Nations is travel, but that argument is predicated on teams being forced to travel constantly, week after week. If all four teams were to travel in a group and play on consecutive weekends in one country, it would minimize travel concerns and let all the teams host games. Consider: Week 1 in Argentina ARG v AUS SA v NZ Week 2 in Argentina ARG v SA NZ v AUS Week 3 - off for travel Week 4 in South Africa SA v ARG AUS v NZ Week 5 in South Africa SA v AUS ARG v NZ Week 6 - off for travel Week 7 in Australia and New Zealand NZ v ARG AUS v SA Week 8 in Australia and New Zealand NZ v SA AUS v ARG The six games could be played in eight weeks, with two weekends off to allow for travel and time zone acclimation, and no travel between pairs of games. (New Zealand's and Australia's close proximity would mean Argentina and South Africa travel between those countries on consecutive weekends, but that's hardly a daunting trip.) Admittedl
Eduardo (25/10/2007 02:38)
Arriba PUMAS CARAJO!!!. Yeah... our style and player go better with the six nations, but we are a southern country. To be part of super 14 there is a problem, because argentinas Teams are amateur...the pros play in UK and France...There is no enough support to get into (or at least we have to wait till it comes to a professional league) In that sense Uruguay's problem is worst. BUT, THANK A LOT for your support and recognicing. ARRIBA LOS PUMAS>>>!!!
Gabriel (02/11/2007 14:45)
“What a load of rubbish, this from the same lot of fools that wanted South Africa thrown out of the Tri-Nations two years ago because we weren’t competitive enough.” Maybe SANZAR would be better off disbanding and throwing the weak Australians out and incorporating the Pumas into the Tri-Nations instead, then we would have proper rugby again - like the old adage goes - the forwards win games the backs decide by how much. “The Aussies can’t win because they don’t have forwards! As proved by the runners up in the World Cup when their forwards decimated Australia in the quarters! Let them go play league - we want real rugby to stay!” Australian rugby chief John O’Neill tried to get rid of Argentina. He said. “Close to home we have a big obligation to Fiji, Samoa and Tonga”. Wow! Now that the IRB think of Argentina, all of a sudden Mr O’Neill thinks of the Pacific Island nations. But. The Pacific Nations are not number 3 in the world ranking. Mr O’Neil wants to help them with a visa, then be Australian and fina
Gabriel (02/11/2007 14:45)
“What a load of rubbish, this from the same lot of fools that wanted South Africa thrown out of the Tri-Nations two years ago because we weren’t competitive enough.” Maybe SANZAR would be better off disbanding and throwing the weak Australians out and incorporating the Pumas into the Tri-Nations instead, then we would have proper rugby again - like the old adage goes - the forwards win games the backs decide by how much. “The Aussies can’t win because they don’t have forwards! As proved by the runners up in the World Cup when their forwards decimated Australia in the quarters! Let them go play league - we want real rugby to stay!” Australian rugby chief John O’Neill tried to get rid of Argentina. He said. “Close to home we have a big obligation to Fiji, Samoa and Tonga”. Wow! Now that the IRB think of Argentina, all of a sudden Mr O’Neill thinks of the Pacific Island nations. But. The Pacific Nations are not number 3 in the world ranking. Mr O’Neil wants to help them with a visa, then be Australian and fina
Add your comment here
PERSONAL ABUSE WILL NOT BE TOLERATED







*
Display your favourite sport or football team badge with your comment.
Sport
League
Team




Daily Poll

Who will win the 2008 F1 title?