Next World Cup (16 Teams)

flsghujslkuo

Firstly what the KIWI's think the world cup rankings:

1 New Zealand
2 South Africa
3 France
4 Argentina
5 Ireland
6 Australia
7 England
8 Wales






Paul Rees
Wednesday March 7, 2007
The Guardian


The number of countries competing in the 2011 World Cup finals may be cut by 20% to avoid mismatches between the leading professional nations and some emerging nations who cannot even afford to pay their players expenses. Twenty teams will take part in this autumn's tournament in France, including Namibia, who were thrashed by Australia 145-0 in the 2003 tournament, but the International Rugby Board is considering cutting the number to 16 when New Zealand hosts the event in four years.

"We are looking at whether amateur sides should be playing against the professional teams," said the IRB chairman Syd Millar ."We will be holding a strong review of the tournament and where we should be heading after this year's World Cup."

The IRB has been meeting in New Zealand this week, ostensibly to join the support lobby for Eden Park to stage the final in 2011, but heading the agenda has been the idea of achieving an integrated season to alleviate the demands on players, an issue which has again come to the fore in England this year with the overlap between international and club fixtures generating a number of casualties. "Unions have been reluctant to give up power, but I think that is changing," said Millar, who is arguing for fewer and more competitive internationals.

"We are looking for a consensus about the best way to unravel what are congested seasons in the two hemispheres. We need relevant competitions to grow and sustain the sport, not revenue-generating exercises such as games which involve World XVs." There will also be a review of the laws, with Millar concerned that the game is becoming too prescriptive, lacking stimulation."Good coaching is about reducing the complexity to simplicities and we need to reduce that complexity," he said."We also need referees to apply the laws rather than manage games."

davyjose

flsghujslkuo wrote:

Firstly what the KIWI's think the world cup rankings:

1 New Zealand
2 South Africa
3 France
4 Argentina
5 Ireland
6 Australia
7 England
8 Wales

That looks about right to me - I'm not convinced argentina are a better side than us, but certainly we have not made a good example of ourselves in World Rugby this year. As Zinzan brooke said in his BBC article, we're chokers. Hard to argue with.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Sabre0001

Don't like the 16 team idea at all...The only way to get better is to play people better than you. Remember Italy have been thrashed in 6 nations but are improving all the time.

Also, some of these 'poorer' nations put it up to the bigger teams last time out. England only scrapped through because Johnny just kicked everything til fitness won through and they ran in easy tries. The factors seperating the two tiers are fitness levels and conduct.

Also, Ireland should be ahead of Argentina in rankings. This WC will rectify or solidify rankings...

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Sabre0001

It's not always about knocking out - a (close) scare or some entertainment is needed in sport...

I love watching the underdogs sometimes...Even if they get thrashed at least there is entertainment there - I don't want every game in the WC to be about who can give away fewer penalties and kick points from anywhere...At least against lesser nations, teams like France and NZ can play open, fast, amazingly entertaining rugby.

If I wanted tight boring matches, I'd watch soccer more...

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

buck65

What about a pre-qualifying tournament for the weaker nations?
With NZ SA Aus Fra Ire Wal Eng Sco Arg Ita Fiji Samoa Tonga for eg guaranteed entry and have a mini tournament where the next best 2 or 3 teams qualify from the next best 10 teams played a year previously? Or something like that and have a B World Cup final at the end of that tournament.

Diamondmaker

I dont agree with any guaranteed entry!

Why should if any team slips in form so badly over a period, to fall in the rankings to such an extent that a "lesser" nation is performing better at that time. Why should this team still get in.

Its like seeding based on the previous WC. Ire Fr and Arg are all top 5 world team in 1 group based on 4 year old data.

Entry shoulkd be based on standing on rankings at a point closer to WC.

If Ire slip to 10 and Canada go to 7 why should we get an auto entry and they Qyalify??

buck65

Agreed

buck65

Will you give me a chance this creating a new World cup is tough work I'll get there

davyjose

Diamondmaker wrote:

Its like seeding based on the previous WC. Ire Fr and Arg are all top 5 world team in 1 group based on 4 year old data.

even at that, it was obviously an unfair group. argentina and Ireland were perhaps not the sides they are now, but they were still effectively within the Top 8 in the world.

Diamondmaker

davyjose wrote:

even at that, it was obviously an unfair group. argentina and Ireland were perhaps not the sides they are now, but they were still effectively within the Top 8 in the world.

Dont follw you on this??

davyjose

Basically picking up on your point about the Ireland/France/Argie group being seeded from rankings from 4 years ago, I'm saying that even with those rankings, it is still an unfair group - for instance, we had the hardest group in 2003, becuase the Argentinians IMO weren't regarded as highly as they should have been!!!!

hardCopy

buck65 wrote:

What about a pre-qualifying tournament for the weaker nations?
With NZ SA Aus Fra Ire Wal Eng Sco Arg Ita Fiji Samoa Tonga for eg guaranteed entry and have a mini tournament where the next best 2 or 3 teams qualify from the next best 10 teams played a year previously? Or something like that and have a B World Cup final at the end of that tournament.

I think some kind of mini tournie for the last 1 or 2 spots with decent prize money would be a good idea. This way whatever amatuer nation makes it through won't have to bankrupt themselves to get there.