Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

New World Rugby Calendar and World Cup format

Options
«1345

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,725 ✭✭✭Jacovs




  • Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 11,533 Mod ✭✭✭✭icdg


    The move is to a 6x4 format, so only 3 group stage games for each teams, top 2 in each Group and four best runners up qualify for the last 16. They are going back to a six week window, as the four team groups now mean bye weeks aren’t a factor.

    https://www.rugbyworldcup.com/2023/news/885620/rugby-world-cup-2027-expanded-to-24-teams



  • Administrators Posts: 53,468 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    The WC format is basically the old HC format, but with more **** teams. And so the problems of that format are magnified, lots of meaningless games, no real jeopardy, no real risk of not getting out of your pool.

    The addition of the extra teams and a round of 16 might mean we finally win a knockout game though, so there is that!



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    I think it's one step forward, two back. Not sure this new tournament will amount to anything except lip service for Tier 2+ - cos as said elsewhere, there's not a hope in héll the bigger unions will risk (say) Wales getting relegated.

    Unlike others, I'm glad to see the WC extended: I don't think there's gonna be the big drop in quality some predicted, quite the opposite 'cos suddenly 3rd place has value beyond future WC qualification. There'll be fewer dead rubbers in the Pool stage, because of that + just the fewer teams.

    I am curious how the extra 4 births will be figured cos ... well. Africa rugby is shíte and far behind every other continent. Maybe they'll simply expand out the rechage tournament.



  • Administrators Posts: 53,468 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    On the nations cup thing, I am not against it.

    Tours are a bit of a relic of the amateur era, they're the traditional way of filling the gaps in the calendar but I don't think there's anything wrong with trying something new instead, and having a real competition in those windows.

    My reading is that promotion and relegation is only for the 2nd division. The top tier containing all the tier 1 teams is ring fenced.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,725 ✭✭✭Jacovs


    I would imagine it might be the only way to get the likes of USA to qualify for a world cup, especially with the 2027 world cup being the last chance before they host in 2031. If they get the USA in at 2027, then 4 years to promote the game a bit, might be more successful 2031 world cup. They really want that USA market.

    It might benefit the likes of SA and NZ more though, any team with enough depth to be able to pick and choose any of their 33 players. Because rotation becomes a bigger issue than it was at the current world cup.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,734 ✭✭✭✭Pudsy33


    Top tier is ring-fenced until 2030 is my understanding.



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,681 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    The weird bit is having a bi-annual tournament that will essentially just be all the favourites for the world cup. Kinda seems redundant.



  • Registered Users Posts: 510 ✭✭✭MangleBadger


    Not correct. From 2030 there will be promotion/relegation between tier 1 and tier 2. But it will only be the non 6nations/Rugby Championship sides which can be relegated.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Redundant outside of the bank accounts I suppose.

    So in theory then, if Wales or Australia finish in the relegation zone, they'd survive while (saY) Georgia have to get relegated? Oh man that's gonna be a fun situation if and when that happens (unless I'm misunderstanding the structure)



  • Advertisement
  • Administrators Posts: 53,468 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    No more redundant than the top teams just touring each other.



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,681 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    Ya I'm certainly not saying that as a defence of the current system.



  • Administrators Posts: 53,468 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    The issue is there's not really much else to do, since there are so few teams that play rugby competitions all ultimately being repeat fixtures.

    In theory they should play tier 2 teams more often but there's just not enough money in it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 17,758 ✭✭✭✭bilston


    It at least gives an opportunity to Tier 2 countries which presently doesn't exist, and if nothing else will give Japan and Fiji (who I assume will be Teams 11 and 12) a real lift.

    It's not a perfect system at all but to me is better than what we have.

    It also adds a more competitive element to the June and November Internationals and should raise more TV and sponsorship money.

    How seriously will the big countries take it, especially a year out from the world cup? Will it be like the Nations League in football? We won't know until it happens.

    As for the WC expansion, I like the idea of a round of 16, but obviously it creates more mis matches in the pool stage. But at least this way the pool stage will be done in 3 weeks, but there won't be a lot of jeopardy for the top 8 or so sides until the knockouts.

    Hopefully Tier 1 sides undertake to play at least one match each against a Tier 2 side each year there is no World Championship league preferably away from home. New Zealand playing in somewhere like Tblissi would give rugby a massive shot in the arm in Georgia.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,010 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets


    What a shite idea. Anything to avoid expanding existing tournaments and sorting the calendar out. Rugby really is run by **** idiots



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,391 ✭✭✭StevenToast


    Ireland will finally get to win a knockout game...there will be some serious mickey mouse last 16 games in 2027.....

    "Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining." - Fletcher



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,569 ✭✭✭Dr. Bre


    I would have preferred if it went into quarter finals rather than round of 16. The group stages would have only the group winner going through plus 2 best runners up if there was no round of 16. For me this would make the group stages more exciting.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    It'll be knockout rugby, rather than a bunch of dead rubbers we had to wait weeks on end for. You say mickey mouse, but if a Tier 1 or 1.5 get beaten by (say) Uruguay, who's gonna say the South Americans don't deserve it?



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,708 ✭✭✭ScissorPaperRock


    I like the sound of the new RWC format. The round of 16 will add more jeopardy among teams that are likely to place 3rd in the groups, as there as an opportunity to go through to knock-out rugby. This should reduce the competitiveness of the pool games, especially since only 4 of the 6 will qualify.

    On the Nations League format - I don't think it changes a huge amount, and hopefully adds to the competitiveness of tests in the autumn and summer windows. If they do in fact emphasise tests between T1 and T2 nations in the other years, as they say they will, hopefully it can be a net positive for the sport.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,159 ✭✭✭VillaMad


    As a pure exercise, using current World Rankings, this is what a potential World Cup in 2027 could look like giving presumably an extra spot to Asia and Africa.

    Group A - South Africa, Argentina, Portugal, Spain

    Group B - New Zealand, Wales, Georgia, Romania

    Group C - Ireland, Australia, Samoa, Namibia

    Group D - France, Fiji, Tonga, Chile

    Group E - England, Italy, Uruguay, Hong Kong

    Group F - Scotland, Japan, USA, Zimbabwe

    A Last 16 could look something like this:

    South Africa vs Georgia

    New Zealand vs Portugal

    Ireland vs Tonga

    France vs Samoa

    England vs Japan

    Scotland vs Italy

    Wales vs Argentina

    Australia vs Fiji

    Just something I've wrote out without looking at what regulations they will use.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Mad, I've had presume Kenya were higher ranked than Zimbabwe, given they made it as far as the repechage tourney last year; and they are shocking so I'd worry about those Pool games.

    But as to your speculative Last 16, it's as I spitballed myself in that there are far fewer "stupid" match ups than people might worry for. Obviously stuff like NZ v. Portugal is a foregone conclusion but some of those other matches have the potential for banana skins.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 18,145 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatFromHue


    Yeah initially I thought it was a bad idea but I'm beginning to think it's a better format. There'll still be some very mismatched pool games but less weeks of them. There'll be some mismatched Rd16 games but they'll be knock out ones so you're into the serious stuff quicker.

    NZ had their only competitive game first up in their pool and then 5 weeks later the QF, which is quite a long time.



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,493 ✭✭✭Red Silurian


    So taking the top 12 teams in the world for Division 1 as it currently stands. My understanding is that each team will have 11 games spread over 2 years

    Ireland for example could face

    July Year 1 - Away to NZ, Fiji and Scotland

    November Year 1 - Home to Wales, Australia and France

    July Year 2 - Away to Argentina, Japan and England

    November Year 2 Home to SA and Italy

    Week 3 of November year 2 is the final and the Promotion/Relegation playoff

    There's 2 issues I see

    1. We will end up playing some 6N teams twice a year - gets boring
    2. Potentially lot of travel in a short space of time due to the distances between the RC teams




  • Registered Users Posts: 24,681 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    Thats true. It's not actually adding more games so little harm done really.

    Not a big fan of the "some 3rd place" type tournament set ups though in any sport.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    You'll have fired-up Tier 1.5+ teams (still fresh from their own shortened Pool phase) meeting potentially misfiring Tier 1 sides in a winner-takes-all environment: I can't genuinely understand how folk don't find that exciting. Suddenly it adds a little spice to the knockout phase; 'cos even without your Portugals, you got Scotland or Italy suddenly with 80 minutes from glory - as opposed to the attritional slugfest we got now; those that nearly always cripples the lower end of Tier 1.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,992 ✭✭✭Cosmo Kramer


    Think you'll have a lot of the bigger teams putting out weakened sides in the last 16 round knowing they'll get away with it no problem. Not really how knockout world cup rugby should be.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    And if they do that, against an opponent with a point to prove, they might get turfed out by a team playing out of their skins. There are a few Tier 1 teams who, if trends continue, will not have the depth to get away with that gamble.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 18,145 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatFromHue


    When you have the number 1 ranked team up against the number 16 there's some room for leeway but I'd still expect them to put out a full strength team.



  • Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 11,533 Mod ✭✭✭✭icdg


    Re the Nations League (or whatever title it ultimately takes), the press release doesn’t actually mention how promotion and relegation will work. If only non 6N/Sanzaar sides (and at least at first the two sides concerned will be invited by Sanzaar - the Irish Times thinks they’ll be Japan and Fiji) can be relegated, then the only way promotion and relegation can work is for one team to be relegated and it to be the lower placed of the two “guest” teams. However I think in that scenario they’d be better off having no promotion and relegation at all - otherwise it raises the hypothetical if unlikely scenario that one of the “guest” teams could finish as high as runners-up and still be relegated.

    I can’t see that promotion and relegation couldn’t include the 6N/Sanzaar countries on that basis - I know the fear is what would happen if a big country had a bad season and got relegated but that fear is there in football (Everton nearly relegated last season) and they live with it. It’s a smaller church, I appreciate that, and the impact of a major team being relegated is potentially greater than in football.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 312 ✭✭roverjoyce


    Imagine some of the touring games will be held in neutral venues

    Would fill a stadium in Australia/USA/Canada for an Ireland vs any 6 nation team

    Saudi Arabia/Qatar/Dubai will be offering their stadia to host games as well

    Will be a nice money spinner for the unions



Advertisement