The short version
- World Rugby chief executive Alan Gilpin stated the organization would support moving Six Nations fixtures to the United States to capitalize on growing commercial interest.
- Recent sellouts in Baltimore and Chicago demonstrate that high-profile rugby matches can generate significant revenue, challenging previous assumptions about market barriers.
- Critics argue that American sports culture favors established rivalries and that relocating historic European tournaments could alienate traditional fanbases without guaranteeing long-term growth.
World Rugby has signaled a willingness to assist any participating nation in relocating a Six Nations match to the United States, marking a significant shift in the global governing body’s strategy for expanding the sport’s footprint in North America. Alan Gilpin, the chief executive of World Rugby, indicated that the organization is prepared to facilitate such moves as part of a broader effort to increase the game’s prestige and commercial viability across the Atlantic. This proposal comes amid heightened anticipation for future major tournaments, including the men’s and women’s Rugby World Cups scheduled for 2031 and 2033 respectively, both of which will be hosted in the United States.
The push to transplant European fixtures is driven by recent commercial successes that have challenged long-held beliefs about the financial risks of playing rugby in the American market. Gilpin pointed to the recent series between South Africa and New Zealand, known as the Greatest Rivalry, which sold out the 71,000-capacity M&T Bank Stadium in Baltimore. He compared the match-day economics of this Test series to those of a typical Six Nations encounter, suggesting that financial return is no longer the primary obstacle to staging high-profile games in the United States. This view is supported by previous events, such as Ireland’s landmark victory over New Zealand at Soldier Field in Chicago in 2016 and a similarly successful rematch in 2025, which drew large crowds and demonstrated strong commercial potential.
Gilpin argued that leveraging the substantial expatriate communities of Irish and Italian fans in cities like Boston and New York could drive significant economic returns. He suggested that while such moves might face criticism from fans in Europe who prefer to watch matches domestically, the overall benefit of engaging diaspora populations could outweigh these concerns. The strategy relies on the premise that these fans are still supporting their national teams, even if they are not physically present in Ireland or Italy. This approach aims to balance the interests of traditional supporters with the opportunity to grow the game’s audience in a lucrative new market.
However, the proposal faces skepticism from within the rugby community regarding its long-term sustainability and cultural fit. John Mitchell, head coach of the England women’s team and a former coach of the United States men’s national team, expressed doubt about whether American sports culture is ready to embrace new rivalries or franchises in the same way other countries might. He noted that American sports are deeply rooted in established rivalries, making it difficult for rugby to gain traction without significant investment and time. Mitchell questioned whether the early investments in the sport would yield substantial returns, describing rugby union as a difficult challenge for large parts of America.
Mitchell also raised concerns about the visibility and impact of moving women’s matches, such as those involving England’s Red Roses, to the United States. He argued that the European market currently offers greater visibility for these teams, which is crucial for gradual growth. Rather than making huge investments in markets with uncertain potential, he suggested focusing on strengthening the game’s presence in Europe where it already has a strong following. This perspective highlights a tension between aggressive expansion strategies and the need for steady, organic development of the sport.
Historical precedents for relocating Six Nations matches are limited and largely irrelevant to the current proposal. Wales played home matches at London’s Wembley Stadium in 1998 and 1999 while their national stadium was under construction, but this was a temporary measure within Europe. Moving a fixture thousands of miles away would be unprecedented in the tournament’s 143-year history. Such a move would require careful consideration of the logistical challenges and the potential backlash from fans who view the Six Nations as a distinctly European competition.
While World Rugby is prepared to support such initiatives, the final decision rests with the individual national unions involved. These teams must weigh the potential financial gains against the consternation that could arise from transplanting historic fixtures to a new continent. The 2027 schedules for both men’s and women’s tournaments have already been set, meaning any changes would likely apply to future editions. As World Rugby continues to explore ways to grow the game in the United States, the debate over relocating Six Nations matches underscores the complex balance between commercial ambition and sporting tradition.
The broader context of rugby’s expansion in the United States includes various efforts by international teams to establish a presence in the country. New Zealand has staged multiple matches against the United States and Fiji in cities like Washington and San Diego, drawing tens of thousands of fans. These events have helped build a foundation for future growth, but they also highlight the challenges of maintaining consistent interest in a market dominated by other major sports. The success of these initiatives will depend on whether rugby can create compelling narratives and rivalries that resonate with American audiences.
Sources behind this briefing
Go to the original reporting
- BBC News↗Switch Six Nations fixture to USA to grow game – World Rugby
