IRB Boosts Argentina’s Tri-Nations Hopes
Agustin Pichot of Argentina shakes hands with Schalk Burger of South Africa after the Springboks defeated Argentina 37-13 at the 2007 Rugby World Cup.
Sanzar has welcomed an International Rugby Board (IRB) rule change which clears the way for Argentina to join a new Four Nations competition in 2012.
At its council meeting this week, the IRB decided to alter regulation nine which governs the release of players for international duty, thereby meeting a condition set by Sanzar that Argentina were required to field their best players to participate in the Four Nations tournament.
The change, set to take effect from June 1, 2012, will ensure that the release period for the new Four Nations aligns with the new dates for the competition from late August through until early October.
At present Argentina’s players with European clubs are only released for the June and November international test windows and the Pumas are the only team in the world’s top 10 who do not compete in an annual international tournament.
“This is the merit of a lot of people, a lot of history written on the pitch and especially in 2007 because it was the catalyst to open this opportunity,” former Pumas captain Agustin Pichot, who was at the meeting, was quoted as saying.
Pichot led the Pumas to third place in the World Cup in France, a result that helped speed up effort to get Argentina their much sought-after place on the annual international calendar.
“There was a lot of hard work for this…I personally feel today that a struggle of many years has been closed, today we’re part of the world, as we deserved,” UAR ambassador Pichot said.
Pumas coach Santiago Phelan, referring to the Tri-Nations, said: “What a great challenge to play against the best teams and players in the world. We’re going to have to continue preparing to improve constantly.
“The Tri-Nations is the toughest tournament in the world, physically and tactically. We have to get to 2012 in the best shape possible and we’re on it since our great objective today is the 2011 World Cup.”
In September, Sanzar issued an invitation to the Pumas to join the competition from 2012, subject to several conditions which have now been resolved.
Negotiation of a participation agreement with Argentina Rugby (UAR) remains the last hurdle for inauguration of the new competition alongside the All Blacks, Wallabies and Springboks.
“Now we must keep working because there are still many things to do and we have to be ready,” said Manuel Galindo, head of the UAR’s High Performance subcommittee.
Sanzar and New Zealand Rugby Union chief executive Steve Tew described the change as an exciting step for Sanzar and for world rugby
“… it confirms Argentina’s participation in a top-flight rugby competition, which they thoroughly deserve, and will add a dynamic new element to the current Tri-Nations, which is already regarded as one of the world’s toughest tournaments.
“We now need to finalise a participation agreement with the UAR so we can move to full planning for the introduction of Argentina in 2012.”
The IRB confirmed in March that it would match Sanzar and provide an investment of $US2.5 million (R18.7 million) per annum from 2012 to 2015.
Sanzar also confirmed today that the three Sanzar unions and their Super rugby teams will work with the UAR to look at providing greater opportunities for Argentinean players to play in Super rugby teams as part of the lead-up to the new Four Nations.
IRB chairman Bernard Lapasset welcomed the likelihood of Argentina joining the competition.
“Today’s announcement represents an historic milestone in the process of Argentina’s integration into an expanded Tri-Nations tournament and is an extremely exciting development for UAR and rugby around the world.”
With thanks to Stuff.co.nz
Funding Boost For Pumas
Argentina are poised to receive $10million in funding from the International Rugby Board to assist their bid to join an expanded Tri-Nations in 2012.
The IRB had set up a Working Accord to pace the way for Argentina to either join the RBS Six Nations or the Tri-Nations.
And the board’s executive committee have now agreed to a financial package for the Pumas to play in the Tri-Nations – with the funding to be split into four annual payments from 2012-2015.
IRB chairman Bernard Lapasset said: “This announcement represents another significant milestone in the process of Argentina’s integration into the Tri Nations and is an extremely exciting development for the Union Argentina de Rugby (UAR) and rugby fans around the world.
“The IRB recognises the substantial strategic financial and operational commitment that the SANZAR Unions are making to assist Argentina’s inclusion and we will continue to work in close collaboration with all stakeholders to ensure a sustainable financial platform to make Argentina’s transition as smooth as possible.”
Despite agreeing the funding, Argentina’s inclusion in the tournament alongside South Africa, New Zealand and Australia still has to be ratified, with certain issues over their entry still to be ironed out.
For starters, the UAR and SANZAR want the IRB to amend the regulations over player availability for the tournament – something the IRB have agreed to look into at the council meeting on May 12.
“It is now essential that all elements are delivered, including the participation of Argentina’s top players. I would like to express my thanks to SANZAR for its continued commitment to the process,” added Lapasset.
With thanks to Sky Sports.co.uk
Pumas To Join Tri Nations
An agreement in principle has been reached for Argentina to join Australia, New Zealand and South Africa in the Tri Nations by 2012.
The Pumas, who finished third in the 2007 World Cup, are to receive funding from the International Rugby Board to ease their introduction into the tournament, with IRB chairman Bernard Lapasset saying they will provide a one-off financial contribution of around US $2 million (R14.9 million).
“It is done,” Lapasset told www.thesportbriefing.com at the Global Sports Forum in Barcelona. “The principle is to support the cost of the introduction of Argentina into the Tri Nations.
“It will be a one-off payment of around US Dollars 2 million. The principle is agreed, and we just need the IRB Council to confirm at the next meeting (scheduled for May 12).
“It will be done so Argentina can enter in 2012.
“We have an agreement with South Africa, New Zealand and Australia for the financial programme that is now in place, and the three existing nations are supportive.”
Have your say: Do you think the inclusion of Argentina into the Tri Nations is good or bad for the competition?
With thanks to SkySports.co.uk
Don’t Expect Miracles With New Rules
New Super 14 rules affect scrum engagement, tackles and formation of a maul.
Top New Zealand referee Bryce Lawrence warns not to expect instant miracles from the new law interpretations for Super 14 kickoff.
Lawrence believes the new laws will ultimately improve a product desperately in need of help.
Lawrence and Sanzar referees manager Lyndon Bray didn’t hold back when they described the state of the game that dominated last year.
Dire, shambles and mess were all fitting descriptions for a game, with scrum resets dominating, the breakdown remaining a murky area and kick and chase tactics being adopted as a safety net by teams.
Lawrence believes the new interpretations favour the attacking side can really help rugby as a spectacle but stresses it will require a buy-in from everyone across the three countries involved in the Super 14.
“I’m not expecting miracles. I think it’s going to be gradual. But I definitely think it’s going in the right direction,” said Lawrence, who has been a Super 14 ref since 2005 and has 13 tests to his credit.
Difficulties of New Rules
Bray said the referees were aware of the pressures on them to guide the new look.
“That famous word consistency is very difficult,” he said of the biggest pressure on the referees.
“We are going to have 16 or 17 refs from three different countries. It’s hard to get one week to the next consistent. I think we need the main philosophy consistent. There will be the odd human error but my biggest doubt going into the competition is whether we can consistently deliver the same product.”
“There is a concern that it might take a while to adjust, so we might see a bit of that in the first couple of weeks.
“For the sake of the competition, we really need some good games where people can say, hey, it does work and I loved that night out at that game.”
Lawrence sensed teams were still trying to find the best way to optimise the new interpretations.
“We need more games like Marseille. I’m not saying they are going to happen every week. But it would be nice to have one or two around that were a similar type of game.
“If one team wants to play it and the other doesn’t, it won’t happen.”
With the World Cup just over a year away, this is a crucial time for rugby. The laws can’t be changed but the way they are interpreted can still allow for a better style of rugby.
Sanzar have been proactive with this and how the next three months unfold will be watched closely by the IRB.
If it is to have a global influence, the teams from South Africa, New Zealand and Australia need to show the way forward.
Bray said it was important for his referees to make their mark early in matches. Look for penalties to be used to get their message across and for little tolerance with repeat offenders.
Courtesy of stuff.co.nz
HAVE YOUR SAY: What are you hoping the new rules to do? Do you expect any change?
When And Why Was Rucking Outlawed?
Early versions of the Step Master just never took off ...
Over the past few months I have been conducting a strange and secret test.
With whispered conversations in the corners of quiet rooms; during lonely hours in the garden office replaying old VHS tapes and hours watching ESPN classics at unseemly times of night; far from the prying eyes of the International Rugby Board law makers and their acolytes, I have been investigating the greatest taboo in rugby.
I was trying to answer two questions – at what point did ‘old-fashioned’ rucking become illegal and what was the real evidence of serious injury that led to its removal?
First of all let us be exact about what I mean by rucking. Many people I spoke to remember the injuries JPR Williams and Phil de Glanville suffered during rucks, but their lacerations were not caused by rucking, but by illegal stamping/raking above the neck. What I mean by rucking is the removal of prone players on the wrong side of the ball by the backward use of the foot; not stamping and not contact with the knee and ankle joints.
Every person I have spoken to thought that they ought to be able to recall incidents whereby rucking, which looks to the outsider to be a dangerous practice, had caused a serious injury, yet nobody could cite one. As above they could refer to incidents of foul play but then they had to agree that those acts were illegal and not proper examples of rucking.
From this comes the question – on what evidence of serious risk or injury to players was this practice removed? Was it based on hard evidence or, as I strongly suspect, was it based on perception and the fact that it might scare off would-be participants (of which there was no evidence either)?
Given the figures for injuries in the tackle and scrum areas that are deemed to be acceptable as part of a game involving repeated violent collisions, you would have expected that rucking must have produced similar or worse figures. Surely the IRB would not have simply removed an effective part of the game without reliable evidence?
Those against the return of rucking should be made to produce their evidence of its nefarious effects before they are allowed to go any further with their refusal even to discuss the return of a measure which was universally popular and remains so with the majority of rugby people.
To read Brian Moore’s full column at the Telegraph, CLICK HERE
Related articles by Zemanta
- Moore reveals sexual abuse ordeal (news.bbc.co.uk)
Loading ...
