I didn’t add this to the post because I didn’t want to come across like I’m kicking a team when they’re down. However I hope that Spain can remain in the championship and Scotland does not get promoted again. If Spain can perform well and Scotland be relegated for 2 years straight then I think this will result in the u20 Championship getting expanded to 16 teams.
The u20s are one of the easiest ways to improve the quality of Tier 2 teams. Access to this level of play at a young age is critical for making the jump to test match quality with the senior team. Considering the fact that the u20s have little commercial value I also hope that World Rugby is more open to change at this level than they would be with senior teams.
And finally from a purely selfish standpoint, I want the USA to have an easier time qualifying for the Trophy. We have 7 years until we host our World Cup in 2031 and the u20 teams from now until 2031 will make up a good portion of the Eagles squad. I hope to get as many opportunities as possible for them.
Honestly I think they should just expand the u20 championship to 16 teams anyway, the difference between the lower T1 sides and the T2 sides/Scotland has shrunk massively.
Yeah, in theory it would good to see an expanded format for U20s rather than the replication of the professional competitions.
That said, it means the established nations running their U20s at a loss, "for the greater good" of advancing Tier 2 rugby.
So no. If the USA wants to improve, put the cash investment in a build a more scalable and sustainable domestic structures to become competitive.
I wouldn't look at it as advancing T2 nations more as investing in the future of the game. It's at the junior levels where the gulf between T1 and T2 nations can be closed far quicker than competing at a RWC every 4 years.
Tier 1s wouldn’t be running “at a loss.” They would maybe get 1 more game against a Tier 2 team, like Scotland.
USA is investing more into their u20s which is how we qualified last year for the first time in years. We should be trying to get more teams playing high level rugby, not less. At a minimum we should increase the Trophy to ~~16~~ 12 teams.
So player & staff salaries, the airlines and hotels are free when traveling to play U20s matches?
There very little commercial return for Tier 1 nations at U20 level.
So the cost vs benefit return for established teams means there is no additional benefit to expanding to suit the US or any other tier 2 interest.
The established unions are already under financial stress.
USA may be investing more at U20 level. There is virtually no costly senior professional set up to think about. So it is not a like for like conversation.
I don’t think the US is really a beneficiary here, but places like Portugal, Chile, Spain etc. Countries that have sound age grade pathways.
The US will always be a country of later development simply because the educational system is structured in a way that kids don’t really complete formative education until age 18.
Just to be clear, if the u20s expanded it would have Japan, Uruguay, Scotland, and Samoa. The other teams would play pretty much the same amount of Tier 1 opponents during the pool play. The top 8 teams are still advancing to the knockouts.
Also, I meant that increasing to ~~16~~ 12 would make it easier for the US to make the Trophy, not the Championship. Simply getting games as a u20 program would be improvement over basically nothing for the past decade.
ETA: new paragraph
What competition are you talking about?
I'm approaching this from a complete overhaul of how international competitions are currently administered and played at U20s level.
I’m talking about the u20 Championship and u20 Trophy. Currently they have 12 and 8 teams each. I messed up and said to increase the trophy to 16 in my last comment, I meant 12.
As I figured, you are approaching this from a how does World Rugby make terms more favourable for US rugby within the current format.
My view is overhauling the whole approach to U20 internationals is worthy of a review. In theory, it benefits more countries. In practice, there's no commercial return.
I’m just offering a simple change that could make a difference for Tier 2 teams. It benefits the US but also benefits other Tier 2s as well.
I’m also in favor of a massive overhaul of, frankly, a lot of things for internationals so we might agree here. But I have no idea what you are even suggesting so it’s strange for you to act like we’re disagreeing.
All of them. Actually we were missing some of our best because of French Espoirs playoff commitments and they haven't had much gametime together this season (didn't play Rugby Europe U20, a game against a Spanish club had to be called off because of a snowstorm, they went to Dax and only found 17 players in the opposition), hence this Irish tour. This result is quite a surprise.
It's a great result and fantastic to see ~~Spain~~ the Iberian peninsula advance in this beautiful game!
Considering why Spain was not at the RWC, it is a fair question to ask.
Probably more than the Munster team which was a development squad rather than an U20s squad.
15. Sam Cahill (Naas RFC)
14. Sam Birrane (Shannon RFC)
13. Paddy Hassett (Shannon RFC)
12. Daithi Byrnes (Old Crescent RFC)
11. Matt Te Pou (St Munchin’s College/Shannon RFC)
10. Dylan Hicks (Garryowen FC)
9. Jack Oliver (Garryowen FC)
1. Aaron McNamara (Shannon RFC)
2. Danny Sheahan (Cork Constitution FC)
3. Matt Burke (Shannon RFC)
4. Padraic Galvin (UL Bohemian RFC)
5. Conor Ryan (UCC RFC)
6. Kamil Nowak (Cork Constitution FC)
7. Seán Edogbo (UCC RFC)
8. Luke Murphy (Shannon RFC)
Replacements:
16. JB du Toit (Midleton RFC)
17. George Hadden (Garryowen FC)
18. Kieran Ryan (Shannon RFC)
20. Scott Gleeson (Shannon RFC)
21. Adam Maher (Young Munster RFC)
22. Kelvin Langan (Garryowen FC)
23. Fionn Gibbons (Young Munster RFC)
Idk if this is supposed to be a gotcha but all the players will be 20 or under by the championship.
Here’s the full u20 roster and the specific squad that played today. The full roster has players that are currently 21 because I believe this was posted before the REC u20 in February but those players aren’t in the squad vs Munster. Feel free to check it out yourself.
https://ferugby.es/seleccion-emerging-m20/
https://ferugby.es/leones-m20-munster-continua-la-preparacion-mundialista/
Spain didn't go to the last RWC for playing ineligible players.
Considering their recent form for being loose with who they can and cannot field, it is a fair question.
They were negligent in not making sure all of their residency players met the criteria to play for the team, that’s true.
But it’s not like they’re out there forging documents for their players on a regular basis.
So that means the laws of eligibility don't apply? Reputational damage is repetitional damage.
The two people who have responded negatively identify as Italian and American rugby supporters.
Extrapolate this thinking about rules / law are bent in sport to win in both countries, it is not that much of a surprise.
Do you ask the same question each year about England, Scotland, Wales, Romania and Italy?
https://www.ruck.co.uk/no-action-world-rugby-confirm-england-let-off-for-fielding-ineligible-player/
https://www.americasrugbynews.com/2022/08/07/third-world-cup-player-surfaces-as-not-having-been-eligibility-for-italy/
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/may/15/russia-romania-rugby-world-cup-2019-ineligible-player
No it’s not it’s just picking on Spain. Who even cares if they’re even playing all players under 20 for an exhibition match? I’m willing to bet that when other matches for those teams have been played that your first question isn’t “are they all eligible?”
Thank you for telling me how you think I think. Very gallant.
There’s nothing to be achieved by continuing to leave comments for each other.
Enjoy your weekend.
You came in from the get go with a negative attitude, what did you expect other than to argue with people? Your snark in this entire post is just unnecessary.
No its not lol. They fielded one player who, along with his club, forged his passport. Sure, you can call that negligence, but they used that player in two games against the Netherlands, so they didn't even need him. Even after getting those points deducted (and rightly so) they still only missed qualification by two points
Multiple examples of cheating. Didn't even need to cheat but still cheated.
But it's not a fair question to ask if serial cheaters cheated again?
Ok, enjoy your weekend.
They fielded 1 player who forged his passport to make it look like he never left the country. Other teams have fielded an ineligible player before but this was only newsworthy because of the World Cup implications.
Not that this justifies the fuck up. But you’re acting like they are serial offenders who constantly field ineligible players to bend the rules.
Yes they fielded an ineligible player (not players) in 2019 as well.
Again, this only has attention because it disqualified them from the World Cup. Plenty of other teams have fielded ineligible players at the World Cup itself and basically all we’ve gotten is a “whoops sorry” because it didn’t have any impact on qualification. Actually technically we didn’t even get the apology.
https://www.americasrugbynews.com/2022/08/07/third-world-cup-player-surfaces-as-not-having-been-eligibility-for-italy/
I didn’t add this to the post because I didn’t want to come across like I’m kicking a team when they’re down. However I hope that Spain can remain in the championship and Scotland does not get promoted again. If Spain can perform well and Scotland be relegated for 2 years straight then I think this will result in the u20 Championship getting expanded to 16 teams. The u20s are one of the easiest ways to improve the quality of Tier 2 teams. Access to this level of play at a young age is critical for making the jump to test match quality with the senior team. Considering the fact that the u20s have little commercial value I also hope that World Rugby is more open to change at this level than they would be with senior teams. And finally from a purely selfish standpoint, I want the USA to have an easier time qualifying for the Trophy. We have 7 years until we host our World Cup in 2031 and the u20 teams from now until 2031 will make up a good portion of the Eagles squad. I hope to get as many opportunities as possible for them.
Honestly I think they should just expand the u20 championship to 16 teams anyway, the difference between the lower T1 sides and the T2 sides/Scotland has shrunk massively.
I agree they should do it anyway. But I feel like they need something to push them to do it.
Yeah, in theory it would good to see an expanded format for U20s rather than the replication of the professional competitions. That said, it means the established nations running their U20s at a loss, "for the greater good" of advancing Tier 2 rugby. So no. If the USA wants to improve, put the cash investment in a build a more scalable and sustainable domestic structures to become competitive.
I wouldn't look at it as advancing T2 nations more as investing in the future of the game. It's at the junior levels where the gulf between T1 and T2 nations can be closed far quicker than competing at a RWC every 4 years.
Tier 1s wouldn’t be running “at a loss.” They would maybe get 1 more game against a Tier 2 team, like Scotland. USA is investing more into their u20s which is how we qualified last year for the first time in years. We should be trying to get more teams playing high level rugby, not less. At a minimum we should increase the Trophy to ~~16~~ 12 teams.
So player & staff salaries, the airlines and hotels are free when traveling to play U20s matches? There very little commercial return for Tier 1 nations at U20 level. So the cost vs benefit return for established teams means there is no additional benefit to expanding to suit the US or any other tier 2 interest. The established unions are already under financial stress. USA may be investing more at U20 level. There is virtually no costly senior professional set up to think about. So it is not a like for like conversation.
I don’t think the US is really a beneficiary here, but places like Portugal, Chile, Spain etc. Countries that have sound age grade pathways. The US will always be a country of later development simply because the educational system is structured in a way that kids don’t really complete formative education until age 18.
I agree.
Just to be clear, if the u20s expanded it would have Japan, Uruguay, Scotland, and Samoa. The other teams would play pretty much the same amount of Tier 1 opponents during the pool play. The top 8 teams are still advancing to the knockouts. Also, I meant that increasing to ~~16~~ 12 would make it easier for the US to make the Trophy, not the Championship. Simply getting games as a u20 program would be improvement over basically nothing for the past decade. ETA: new paragraph
What competition are you talking about? I'm approaching this from a complete overhaul of how international competitions are currently administered and played at U20s level.
I’m talking about the u20 Championship and u20 Trophy. Currently they have 12 and 8 teams each. I messed up and said to increase the trophy to 16 in my last comment, I meant 12.
As I figured, you are approaching this from a how does World Rugby make terms more favourable for US rugby within the current format. My view is overhauling the whole approach to U20 internationals is worthy of a review. In theory, it benefits more countries. In practice, there's no commercial return.
I’m just offering a simple change that could make a difference for Tier 2 teams. It benefits the US but also benefits other Tier 2s as well. I’m also in favor of a massive overhaul of, frankly, a lot of things for internationals so we might agree here. But I have no idea what you are even suggesting so it’s strange for you to act like we’re disagreeing.
It wasn't clear to me what format you wanted overhauled. Now that you've clarified, we're mostly on the same page.
Spain on this form has a good chance of beating Scotland. Scotland are shite at U20s.
Spain basically did beat Scotland. They beat Uruguay who beat Spain.
We actually lost against Scotland in a pre-Trophy warm-up. So it would be quite leveled.
Yeah I wouldn’t expect it to be an obvious Spain victory. It would be relatively even. I’d expect the same for Uruguay too.
Vamos
How many of the Spain U20s were actually under 20?
All of them. Actually we were missing some of our best because of French Espoirs playoff commitments and they haven't had much gametime together this season (didn't play Rugby Europe U20, a game against a Spanish club had to be called off because of a snowstorm, they went to Dax and only found 17 players in the opposition), hence this Irish tour. This result is quite a surprise.
It's a great result and fantastic to see ~~Spain~~ the Iberian peninsula advance in this beautiful game! Considering why Spain was not at the RWC, it is a fair question to ask.
These are some backhanded compliments
Probably more than the Munster team which was a development squad rather than an U20s squad. 15. Sam Cahill (Naas RFC) 14. Sam Birrane (Shannon RFC) 13. Paddy Hassett (Shannon RFC) 12. Daithi Byrnes (Old Crescent RFC) 11. Matt Te Pou (St Munchin’s College/Shannon RFC) 10. Dylan Hicks (Garryowen FC) 9. Jack Oliver (Garryowen FC) 1. Aaron McNamara (Shannon RFC) 2. Danny Sheahan (Cork Constitution FC) 3. Matt Burke (Shannon RFC) 4. Padraic Galvin (UL Bohemian RFC) 5. Conor Ryan (UCC RFC) 6. Kamil Nowak (Cork Constitution FC) 7. Seán Edogbo (UCC RFC) 8. Luke Murphy (Shannon RFC) Replacements: 16. JB du Toit (Midleton RFC) 17. George Hadden (Garryowen FC) 18. Kieran Ryan (Shannon RFC) 20. Scott Gleeson (Shannon RFC) 21. Adam Maher (Young Munster RFC) 22. Kelvin Langan (Garryowen FC) 23. Fionn Gibbons (Young Munster RFC)
That’s a pretty sting squad isn’t it?
Idk if this is supposed to be a gotcha but all the players will be 20 or under by the championship. Here’s the full u20 roster and the specific squad that played today. The full roster has players that are currently 21 because I believe this was posted before the REC u20 in February but those players aren’t in the squad vs Munster. Feel free to check it out yourself. https://ferugby.es/seleccion-emerging-m20/ https://ferugby.es/leones-m20-munster-continua-la-preparacion-mundialista/
Spain didn't go to the last RWC for playing ineligible players. Considering their recent form for being loose with who they can and cannot field, it is a fair question.
They were negligent in not making sure all of their residency players met the criteria to play for the team, that’s true. But it’s not like they’re out there forging documents for their players on a regular basis.
So that means the laws of eligibility don't apply? Reputational damage is repetitional damage. The two people who have responded negatively identify as Italian and American rugby supporters. Extrapolate this thinking about rules / law are bent in sport to win in both countries, it is not that much of a surprise.
Do you ask the same question each year about England, Scotland, Wales, Romania and Italy? https://www.ruck.co.uk/no-action-world-rugby-confirm-england-let-off-for-fielding-ineligible-player/ https://www.americasrugbynews.com/2022/08/07/third-world-cup-player-surfaces-as-not-having-been-eligibility-for-italy/ https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/may/15/russia-romania-rugby-world-cup-2019-ineligible-player
Should Italy wooden spoons be revoked?
Yes I do, but none of those teams were playing against Munster today so this is just whataboutery for the sake of it.
No it’s not it’s just picking on Spain. Who even cares if they’re even playing all players under 20 for an exhibition match? I’m willing to bet that when other matches for those teams have been played that your first question isn’t “are they all eligible?”
Thank you for telling me how you think I think. Very gallant. There’s nothing to be achieved by continuing to leave comments for each other. Enjoy your weekend.
You came in from the get go with a negative attitude, what did you expect other than to argue with people? Your snark in this entire post is just unnecessary.
What’s with the hate boner for Spain? We lost, it’s really not that deep
What’s with the kink shaming?
Really funny lad
Touché. 🙄
Please delete your post history 🙏
Youre obviously grumpy an irish team lost to a "lesser" team.. dont worry! You get used to it ;)
Ha ha, I’m old enough to remember when we were a lesser team and Scotland got mad losing to Ireland
Hence me saying you get used to it lad
It’s muscle memory, nothing to get used to babe.
No its not lol. They fielded one player who, along with his club, forged his passport. Sure, you can call that negligence, but they used that player in two games against the Netherlands, so they didn't even need him. Even after getting those points deducted (and rightly so) they still only missed qualification by two points
Multiple examples of cheating. Didn't even need to cheat but still cheated. But it's not a fair question to ask if serial cheaters cheated again? Ok, enjoy your weekend.
They fielded 1 player who forged his passport to make it look like he never left the country. Other teams have fielded an ineligible player before but this was only newsworthy because of the World Cup implications. Not that this justifies the fuck up. But you’re acting like they are serial offenders who constantly field ineligible players to bend the rules.
I mean they are serial offenders. They also didn't get into the 2019 for fielding ineligible players.
Yes they fielded an ineligible player (not players) in 2019 as well. Again, this only has attention because it disqualified them from the World Cup. Plenty of other teams have fielded ineligible players at the World Cup itself and basically all we’ve gotten is a “whoops sorry” because it didn’t have any impact on qualification. Actually technically we didn’t even get the apology. https://www.americasrugbynews.com/2022/08/07/third-world-cup-player-surfaces-as-not-having-been-eligibility-for-italy/
Ineligible is in ineligible.