Should we move to a Five Nations tournament?

[Hollywood Jesus]

So it looks like we're bouncing between the 4th nation in the 4N coming from Nth and Sth hemisphere - which ever location the tournament is being played.

Surely this means that we consider both the Pacific and Euro to have teams worthy of lining up against the Big 3?

Wouldn't it then make logical sense to just have them both in every year?

You'd play both Pacific and Euro Cups every year and the winner of these two comps would then play whichever nation had just played in the 4N. Winners go on to next year's 4N.

All of a sudden you have a reason for players to declare for the smaller nations and stick with them. Tonga, Samoa, Fiji, PNG, Cook Is., Ireland, Scotland, Wales and France are now competing for something every single year.

This would also be better for the likes of these smaller nations as the 4N match against their equivalent from the opposite hemisphere would be a realistic chance of a win in the 4N as opposed to these smaller nations most likely losing their 3 matches under the current scenario.

Now, whilst PNG v France may not be a real drawcard when played in Aus/NZ, it could easily be joined with, say, NZ v Eng and played as a double header over in NZ (just like Eng v PNG will be this year). Similarly, Aus v PNG won't be a drawcard in Europe but you can join it with France v NZ and play a double header in France.

Thoughts?

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

I actually think the qualifying is vital. It helps with sponsorships for teams, even ones that have no chance of qualifying and there is a chance in the not too distant future that Wales could qualify ahead of France and Fiji, Tonga and Samoa could all qualify ahead of PNG.

I like the current set up.

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

You'd still have to qualify.

At present, you have to win the Pacific Cup to get the spot. In a Five Nations, you'd have to win the Pacific Cup and then you'd have to beat PNG in order to push them out and take their spot. If they beat you then they retain their spot.

Let's look at it this way - what will the Pacific Nations be doing this year? Tonga v Samoa as an opener to Aus v PNG but isn't that it? If it's not, it's only because other things will have been cobbled together because there is no Pacific Cup this year.

Last year when France played in the 4N, what did the Euro Cup mean? You won it against the other minnow nations and that was it. Under a Five Nations situation, you would have played France the next week (as an opener for the 4N final) and possibly earnt a trip Down Under for 2010.

Far from eliminating qualifying, it adds to it. Every year both Pac and Euro Cups mean something. Every year you get a chance to earn the right to play with the Big 3. Every year, the team that was already in needs to earn its spot for next year.

Qualifying is extended, it's more regular and has more meaning. It also locks players in for longer periods. If you played for Tonga this year, won the Pac Cup and then knocked of PNG to get a place in the 2011 5N then you're automatically locked in to play for Tonga next year in that competition. It's not the be all and end all of the problems we have but it's another small step towards alleviating them.

 

[joshreading]

I think gaining the loyalty of our Top Pac Islands players to their home nations is the key important factor as we go on.

Guys like Uate should NOT be turning out for Australia. The reason they are? Because there is no real chance of regular representation on the big stage.

As such I think that for atleast 3 years a Pacific United team should be in the five (or 6 nations). To represent Pacific though you would have to make yourself available to your home nation (eg. Fiji, PNG etc) For a start the team could also be more legitimate as well possibly being largely born in the pacific rather than children of immigrants to Australia or NZ as is the case with the top string sides Samoa and Tonga particularly turn out at times such as the World Cup.

A united powerful Pacific side would also be within range of giving NZ, Eng and Aus a race for their money (as opposed to any of the other sides) Also the other sides at peak strength rarely actually have home nation reps (eg. Samoa in the World Cup had only one or two Samoan born and bred players)

Give the Pac Island players the chance to be on the Big stage EVERY YEAR and you will strengthen the home nations behind it. Even if it is only a short term solution it is better than losing the likes of Uate to Australia. Guys like Lote also could have turned out this year if Pac were playing and I am pretty sure such a side is far easier to promote then PNG.

Note: this idea has already been put forward by reps in PNG and Fiji

 

[RedVee]

The key point is that there needs to be more games for the 'lesser' nations.

Hollywood J, I think you have it a little wrong. I think the France and PNG auto selects where for this round only. F'instance France is part of the upcoming Euro Cup so someone else needs to beat them to the title in order to become the new 4th team. I think (hope?) Wales is a shot and hope that over the years France/Wales becomes a real rivalry.

 

[flamin]

The key point is that there needs to be more games for the 'lesser' nations.

Hollywood J, I think you have it a little wrong. I think the France and PNG auto selects where for this round only. F'instance France is part of the upcoming Euro Cup so someone else needs to beat them to the title in order to become the new 4th team. I think (hope?) Wales is a shot and hope that over the years France/Wales becomes a real rivalry.

PNG qualified for this years 4N by winning the Pacific Cup last year.

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

Yep, and France was the auto-pick for the last one.

So, if we were going to start it next year then whoever won this year's Euro Cup would get the spot. Because there is no Pac Cup this year then we'd probably have to give PNG the auto-pick and send them to Europe in 2011.

Unless someone has other ideas? Cook got to the final in last year's Pac Cup so maybe make them play PNG sometime in the next year and the winner goes? Maybe, just for something different, whoever wins the Samoa v Tonga match at Parra Stadium?

Whatever happens, if you play a Five Nations next year then you'd probably have to have some unfair choice in order to send a Pacific side. But from then on you'd be able to have the choices made fairly by running the Pac and Euro Cups every year.

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

I'd also like to suggest that Pac and Euro Cups be played as curtain raisers to 5N when possible.

It cuts down on running costs and would boost attendances. I originally suggested playing 5N double headers but it might be better to combine 5N and Pac/Euro Cups.

For example, France v PNG won't be a drawcard in Aus but combine it with Tonga v Samoa and play it at Parra Stadium and you've got more enticement for the Western Sydney Islanders to come out and support the game.

NZ v PNG wouldn't draw in Europe but combine it with Ireland v Wales and you get to take real internationals to the Welsh and let them see their own team play as well as a game at the highest international level.

Constant meaningful international competition across 3 tournaments, giving players a reason to align with minnow nations (and locking them in there for at least a short while). Promotion and relegation to give teams something to fight for. Double headers to draw crowds. Increased TV appeal.

All we'd have to do is find some way to get the "Atlantic" nations involved and we'd have a real structure.

 

[jim_57]

So it looks like we're bouncing between the 4th nation in the 4N coming from Nth and Sth hemisphere - which ever location the tournament is being played.

Surely this means that we consider both the Pacific and Euro to have teams worthy of lining up against the Big 3?

Wouldn't it then make logical sense to just have them both in every year?

You'd play both Pacific and Euro Cups every year and the winner of these two comps would then play whichever nation had just played in the 4N. Winners go on to next year's 4N.

All of a sudden you have a reason for players to declare for the smaller nations and stick with them. Tonga, Samoa, Fiji, PNG, Cook Is., Ireland, Scotland, Wales and France are now competing for something every single year.

This would also be better for the likes of these smaller nations as the 4N match against their equivalent from the opposite hemisphere would be a realistic chance of a win in the 4N as opposed to these smaller nations most likely losing their 3 matches under the current scenario.

Now, whilst PNG v France may not be a real drawcard when played in Aus/NZ, it could easily be joined with, say, NZ v Eng and played as a double header over in NZ (just like Eng v PNG will be this year). Similarly, Aus v PNG won't be a drawcard in Europe but you can join it with France v NZ and play a double header in France.

Thoughts?

I'd like to think they'll go with a system exactly like this after the next World Cup. IMO it's kind of pointless only having the chance to be there every second year if you don't play for the big 3.

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

Well, I don't see the use in waiting until 2014 to start this up. We can get one in the Pacific and one in Europe over the next two years which makes it fair to both groups. These top 12 nations don't have to qualify for the WC so it wouldn't disrupt any 2013 preparations.

France put on a decent show last year and if PNG can do the same this year then I don't see any reason why we shouldn't go straight into a 5N tournament in 2011. The only sticking point would be deciding who gets to go from the Pacific nations.

 

[RedVee]

Or stay with 4 Nations and have an Annual match between the Euro and Pacific Cup winners to take the 4th spot??? As you say, perhaps in time the Atlantic Cup can join this process and play off for the 4th spot, or perhaps the 3 Cup winners play off for 4th & 5th in the 5 Nations???

Either way is better than what we have had up to now. Lets get these nations some games.

 

[roughyedspud]

nope...cos it'll take 5 weeks to complete...



next

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

Adding one game per team to the calendar is a small price to pay for the benefits that the smaller nations would get from the increase in importance to their schedule.

A small, small price.

 

[roughyedspud]

its very possible that the 4th side in the current format of the 4 nations could be different for every tournament (ie a different euro cup winner & different pacific cup winner each time)..such is the competition in the 2nd tier

the worst of the big 3,even on a very bad day, would still batter any euro or pacific cup winner....so why dilute the current 4 nations by adding a 5th weaker nation??...its fine the way it is..

instead we need to develop the euro & pacific cups....like bringing in the USA to the pacific cup for example...

 

[wain]

Im still a fan of the 6 nation concept. 3 from each hemisphere. Also means you can split into 2 groups of 3 (2 games per team over 3 weeks) with top team from each group playing in final. Finished in 4 weeks. Could also throw in games on last weekend for placings.

Split the groups by seeding:

a)
NH 1 (eg. Eng - host games)
SH 2 (eg. NZ)
NH 3 (eg. Wales - host games)
b)
SH 1 (eg. Aus)
NH 2 (eg. France - host games)
SH 3 (eg. PNG)

2 top from each group (eg. Aus/NZ and Eng/Fra auto qualify for tournament while 3 place is taken from previous years Euro/pac nations.

Games hosted by the teams in each group who are the 'home' hemisphere. In the example given, NH hosts, therefore their teams host games.

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

Adding one game per team to the calendar is a small price to pay for the benefits that the smaller nations would get from the increase in importance to their schedule.

A small, small price.

Tell that to the ARL, RFL and NZRL who own the 4Nations. Its a miracle that its even a 4Nations now.

 

[Fonzie]

I think gaining the loyalty of our Top Pac Islands players to their home nations is the key important factor as we go on.

Guys like Uate should NOT be turning out for Australia. The reason they are? Because there is no real chance of regular representation on the big stage.

As such I think that for atleast 3 years a Pacific United team should be in the five (or 6 nations). To represent Pacific though you would have to make yourself available to your home nation (eg. Fiji, PNG etc) For a start the team could also be more legitimate as well possibly being largely born in the pacific rather than children of immigrants to Australia or NZ as is the case with the top string sides Samoa and Tonga particularly turn out at times such as the World Cup.

A united powerful Pacific side would also be within range of giving NZ, Eng and Aus a race for their money (as opposed to any of the other sides) Also the other sides at peak strength rarely actually have home nation reps (eg. Samoa in the World Cup had only one or two Samoan born and bred players)

Give the Pac Island players the chance to be on the Big stage EVERY YEAR and you will strengthen the home nations behind it. Even if it is only a short term solution it is better than losing the likes of Uate to Australia. Guys like Lote also could have turned out this year if Pac were playing and I am pretty sure such a side is far easier to promote then PNG.

Note: this idea has already been put forward by reps in PNG and Fiji

Absolutely agree that a 'Pacifica' side is the only viable way forward for the pacific nations to compete on the big stage. I would probably keep PNG separate from Fiji, Samoa, Tonga and the other though - I think a different strategy is required for PNG (but thats a post for another thread).

Rather than expanding the 4 nations, at this stage I would introduce an annual tri-series between Pacifica, NZ and PNG mid-season (at the same time as Origin), with 4Ns places up for grabs. When the 4Ns is in the UK, the winner of the tri-series joins Aus as the Southern Hemisphere reps; when the 4Ns is in Oz/Nz, the top two qualify to take part with Aus.

For scheduling reasons the tri-series would probably have to be three games (each plays the other once) with no final; the winner is first past the post (on for and against if needed).

Aside from giving Pacifica and PNG meaningful internationals, it would also give the Kiwi's some good tough mid season hit-outs, and nullify the advantage Origin gives Aussie players.

As a separate but related point, I would change the residency rule from 3 years to say 6 years. The residency rule overwhelmingly favours Australia at the expense of the pacific nations and NZ, and the last thing the international game needs at the moment is rules that favour Australia.

 

[RedVee]

Absolutely agree that a 'Pacifica' side is the only viable way forward for the pacific nations to compete on the big stage. I would probably keep PNG separate from Fiji, Samoa, Tonga and the other though - I think a different strategy is required for PNG (but thats a post for another thread).

Rather than expanding the 4 nations, at this stage I would introduce an annual tri-series between Pacifica, NZ and PNG mid-season (at the same time as Origin), with 4Ns places up for grabs. When the 4Ns is in the UK, the winner of the tri-series joins Aus as the Southern Hemisphere reps; when the 4Ns is in Oz/Nz, the top two qualify to take part with Aus.

For scheduling reasons the tri-series would probably have to be three games (each plays the other once) with no final; the winner is first past the post (on for and against if needed).

Aside from giving Pacifica and PNG meaningful internationals, it would also give the Kiwi's some good tough mid season hit-outs, and nullify the advantage Origin gives Aussie players.

As a separate but related point, I would change the residency rule from 3 years to say 6 years. The residency rule overwhelmingly favours Australia at the expense of the pacific nations and NZ, and the last thing the international game needs at the moment is rules that favour Australia.

While I agree that residency needs to be increased from 3 years, I don't necessarily agree that NZ are disadvantaged by this compared to Australia. Many Islanders emigrate to NZ, plus other nationalities, some as a first step in order to finally move to Australia - others as their full move. Many NZers that emigrate to Australia retain their desire to rep NZ, witness SBW & Benji as just 2.

 

[paulmac]

Play the Euro and Pacific Cups pre season with the winners progressing to the post season 5 nations.

 

[docbrown]

Definitely think a pacific side should be introduced. When it's play in Australasia, it should be:

AUSTRALIA
ENGLAND (basically a touring team)
NEW ZEALAND
PAPUA NEW GUINEA
PACIFIC ISLANDS

When played in Northern Hemisphere:
AUSTRALIA (touring)
ENGLAND
FRANCE
NEW ZEALAND (touring)
Top Euro Cup team - LEBANON/WALES/SCOTLAND/IRELAND

The other teams can play each other once, but AUS/NZ/ENG should be playing each other twice so we can award the Ashes/Anzac/Baskerville.