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
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

New World Rugby Calendar and World Cup format

2

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,555 ✭✭✭Downlinz


    This is the most disappointing aspect of the proposal since it's effectively different rules for different teams who don't meet the status and wealth of the old guard.

    Makes it very difficult for the game to grow long term for Fiji, Japan or any future promoted team when they know no matter how well they do in the competition they could be relegated if they finish behind the other "guest" team.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,153 ✭✭✭Lost Ormond


    No I want more sides to play more games. The 6 nations and rugby championship sides need to play sides outside these competitions far more often

    This proposal doesn't do that. Reducing a world cup doesn't do that. Many of the top nations are struggling financially. They won't improve if they just keep playing the same sides and don't look to expand to newer markets/more countries. Romania and Namibia getting hammered by Ireland or New Zealand is better than them never playing these sides at all

    Rugby does have he global appeal to expand its Premier tournament and reducing its main tournaments profile certainly isn't good for the game



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,153 ✭✭✭Lost Ormond


    The problem is many of the non 6 nations/rugby championship sides already play often enough against each other. Its far more games against the Irelands, England's, new zealands of this world that they need and his proposal doesn't help with that.

    The sport needs to expand to grow. Some of the top unions are struggling financially so keeping games within those sides alone isn't a good thing. We need to get more teams up to a competitive level at the top tier. Closing off opportunities for tier 2/3 sides to play rugby championship sides and 6 nations sides won't develop the sport more or make world cup more competitive



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,713 ✭✭✭✭thebaz


    Well your wish has been answered, the WC is expanding - I just dont see what constant hammeringd does for the game in Namibia or Romania.

    Portugal made a huge effort, and were rightly rewarded.

    Meanwhile Namibia and Romania (and Italy) just showed up, made up the numbers and were fodder -

    anyway , doesnt matter decision made. and if that relegation rumour is correct that the Big 10 cant be relegated , thats is shocking and elitist.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    But there'll be fewer hammerings by dint of how there'll be fewer Pool games in the first place; and said pools will take less time so it won't feel so drawn out. Ye gods but 5 teams per Pool drew out that stage too much. Then add to that the fact 3rd place has even more value now cos of the increased knockout phase. And as a prior user showed, there won't be that many mismatches in the Last 16 either; in fact you look at those proposed games and there's lots of potential for cracking knockout games.

    Honestly I think we're looking at fewer hammerings, not more. More teams yes, but smaller pools will mean more concentrated, shorter group stages. The 4th seeds may linger but suddenly the 3rd seeds will have a clear goal to play for.

    I wouldn't despair for Italy cos there was something going on in that camp; even fans were shocked at how switched off they were. Something was up, though that's just my own view obviously. And Namibia are a convenient whipping boy but if they're the price paid for letting the actual upwardly developing teams get a better crack at the tournament, so be it. Not too excited about Africa getting another birth mind you, but we'll see where the 4 extra teams come from.

    Post edited by pixelburp on


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 27,270 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    6N/SANZAAR "own" the tier 1 competition, so there is absolutely no way they will allow any of their teams be relegated.

    It's just formalised ring-fencing of nov/summer games. Its complete horeshit.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,713 ✭✭✭✭thebaz


    agree, no consequence for poor perfomance , just elitist back slapping. As much as good performance should be rewarded , so should poor performance have consequence, regardless of what country that is - old habits die hard it seams.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    And based on the last couple of years, unless certain Unions see a restoration of fortune, that ringfencing might yet prove to be farcical when ostensible relegation candidates are saved by the rules. Imagine a repeat of, say, the 2012 6 Nations and Scotland's sitting rock bottom. Georgia or whoever would be rightly incensed they still get dropped 'cos Scotland's too "important".

    Anyway, a few years of half-empty stadia 'cos nobody wants to watch a re-do of a 6 Nations match, and you might see the format rethought quickly enough. Once the pivot is made to a global calendar, it would at least mean future wholesale changes aren't so painful.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 27,270 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    As above, I don't think there is any re-do of 6N matches. The general yearly format won't change, it will still be 6N in spring and SH matches in summer/autumn. We are just formalising that the summer and autumn matches have to come out of these other 6 teams - which is still boring.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,153 ✭✭✭Lost Ormond


    The constant hammerings will be reduced if the top unions played these sides more in between world cups.

    Portugal did make a good effort and will only improve with more games against top sides



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 27,270 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl




  • Registered Users Posts: 2,736 ✭✭✭Shehal




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,153 ✭✭✭Lost Ormond


    Yeah I know that! Some of the top unions talk good game but don't ultimately want to do what's required to expand/progress the game



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,508 ✭✭✭✭ArmaniJeanss


    One minor thing that hasn't been mentioned is that the 6 Nations seems to have been reduced by a week, with one of the rest weeks removed.

    Currently it's Game1, Game2, Rest, Game3, Rest, Game4, Game5.

    Not sure what the system will be (presumably the break will be after game 2 or game 3, or perhaps staggered breaks?). Also not clear on whether they'll start a week later or finish a week earlier - I'd hope the former so that Patricks weekend finish is still possible.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 27,270 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Yeah, it's not clear, but I think this is fine. The three week period with only one game always dragged.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,659 ✭✭✭Red Silurian


    The 42s take on it.

    Basically they believe there will be 2 conferences. One involving the 6N, the other involving the RC+2

    Every team has 7 games. Teams plays each of the teams in the other conference once and then plays one final game in November where the top in each conference play each other for the title, the second placed play for 3rd/4th etc. No team plays a game against one in their own conference

    So effectively Ireland will do 3 away games in July and 4 home games in November.

    A lot of kinks still to be ironed out



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,810 ✭✭✭✭bilston


    The argument has always been that less rest time would benefit England and France because of their resources. I think taking a rest week out is fine. But agree let's hope Paddy's weekend is still in calendar and it just starts a week later.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,810 ✭✭✭✭bilston


    That sounds kak, obviously designed by the same people who have tried to destroy the Champions Cup with its ridiculous formats over the last 4 years.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,360 ✭✭✭Jack Daw


    The Nations league thing a load of nonsense and will just result in the same teams playing each other every year over and over again in semi meaningful games and lead to boredom.

    I'd argue a far better idea would be to just have a rugby world cup every 2 years instead of creating a tournament that has no real meaning and prestige actually just have a proper world event every 2 years which has real prestige and meaning.

    International rugby is essentially about the Six Nations/Rugby Championship and World Cup.The summer/autumn internationals have become less and less interesting as time has gone on because the novelty factor of them is well gone now.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,276 ✭✭✭JMcL


    You'd hope! Not sure if the playoff in 1999 counts as a knock-out strictly speaking, but our regular Argentinian banana skin did for us https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_Rugby_World_Cup#Quarter-final_play-offs



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,276 ✭✭✭JMcL


    Exactly. France nearly learned that to their cost against Uruguay in the pools, though I think conditioning for the last quarter would probably always have won out there



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,659 ✭✭✭Red Silurian


    Few things they didn't think of, it could get messy if any team had to play SA, Argentina and Japan in July, lot of travel over 3 weeks.

    When they introduce promotion/relegation you could have a situation of a European team in the other conference so a July game in Spain or Portugal. You could also in theory have a pacific team joining the conference with Ireland, England, Italy, Scotland and France



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,916 ✭✭✭✭Kermit.de.frog


    Given the decline of union in key markets (Australia, England the most obvious in real trouble) it looks from the outside like the priorities may be misplaced. These plans look like shifting the deck chairs on the Titanic.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,450 ✭✭✭Wegians89


    Will the six nations matches be included in the total conference points?



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,450 ✭✭✭Wegians89


    From my understanding the 6n and RC teams can’t be relegated. It’s only Fiji / Japan that could be…



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,051 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    Rugby in England is not in decline. The national team are not as good as before but the popularity of the sport is certainly still on the rise.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,399 ✭✭✭✭LuckyLloyd




  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    4 prominent clubs hitting the wall isn't a particularly rosy picture though.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,051 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    I thought it was 3.

    Worchester was never a sustainable club and both Wasps and London Irish made terrible decisions regarding stadia in an attempt to cash in on the growth of the game. Victims of the games success not decline.

    It always was very much a minority game in England and some clubs over extended themselves thinking they could become Premier League soccer level clubs and paid the price. But the minority sport is certainly less minority now and the national team and 6 Nations is well ingrained now the same way that happened here.



  • Subscribers Posts: 41,831 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    ^

    You forgot about Jersey reds.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    3 top tier, but Jersey Reds also hit the wall. No doubt the WC will help, but it wasn't a win either. But I don't get the impression participation numbers are up either?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,051 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,659 ✭✭✭Red Silurian


    While I accept that it's very very unlikely that they will be relegated I'd be surprised if there wasn't at least a chance of it



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    I think there's an argument that out of Italy, Wales, Scotland and Argentina (albeit under Cheika), any one of them could see enough of a "wobble" of form or quality that they might flirt with relegation. My listing going from Most to Least likely though as you say it still remains being very unlikely - it's also not that crazy either. Though failed to get my head around the new structure so I could be missing the larger picture.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,659 ✭✭✭Red Silurian


    I don't think the new structure is fully agreed yet to be fair to you

    But even if Japan and Fiji were the only ones who could be relegated you could still potentially see two European teams take their spots. I accept this is also unlikely!

    For arguments sake lets say Portugal and Georgia (the next highest ranked European teams today) get into the top division

    Do they play in the same conference as the RC teams and have 6N teams playing away July games (nd home November games against European sides



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,810 ✭✭✭✭bilston


    Rugby is dying in front of our eyes in Australia. Something needs to be done urgently and them hosting the WC is definitely a good thing.

    England is slightly different, it is just run really badly at all levels. It's fixable once they realise that they have to change their professional domestic game in terms of competition structure and also in governance. The talks over a potential B&I League suggests the penny is beginning to drop. But we'll see...



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,450 ✭✭✭Wegians89


    The six nations and rugby Championship are the owners of the new tournament. Those ten teams are voting on it. Wales, for example would be in a serious mess if they were relegated and lost the tv revenue form being tier 1. They will absolutely be protecting themselves



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,659 ✭✭✭Red Silurian


    Not necessarily, yes they'd drop to Tier 2 of this particular competition but they'd still have the 6N, World Cup and tours in the Lions years

    Should really be an international competition in Lions years as well. Like a combined France/Italy team V a combined NZ/SA tour



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,153 ✭✭✭Lost Ormond


    France/Italy combined against new zraland South africa never would happen doubt any sides would have an interest in 8t. We need more games for sides outside of rugby championship and 6 nations not more games between these sides and certainly not any combined sides



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 27,270 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    The 6N and RC form a part of this stupid Nations League concept. There is no way one of the 10 core teams could be relegated as it is currently formatted.

    By all accounts it seems to set the slate of matches as the same every year. Christ that seems tedious in the extreme. Nothing about this seems like a good idea to me.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,659 ✭✭✭Red Silurian


    Yeah I'd love nothing more than to see some T2 nations put their money where their mouths are and organise tours to the Southern Hemisphere in July or invite them to play them in November, like the others do. But instead they'd rather cry about not being included in the 6N, so meh to them

    The 6N and RC form a part of this stupid Nations League concept

    But they clearly don't from every description given so far. Unless you have proof to the contrary that nobody else has heard of which you are free to post here



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,795 ✭✭✭✭Pudsy33


    They do, the points accumulated from the 6n carry across to the Wolrd League. Where are they supposed to fit 5 extra games into the calendar if we had to play each 6n team again?


    Edit: I'm seeing conflicting reports on this now. So we play the 6 SH teams over a year and are ranked by how we do against them against the 6n teams.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 739 ✭✭✭minitrue


    I certainly found more reports saying the 6N and RC games will count towards this than I did that the 6N/RC teams couldn't be relegated (I only read that here) but I don't see how that could work without adding the additional teams into the RC, likely making it mirror the 6N format going forward.

    I'll make my prediction here, the 11th and 12th teams will be Japan and the USA. If South Africa manage to beat Samoa tomorrow they'd nearly be able to swing calling it a unification across the men's and women's games but the Canadian and Argentinian women refuse to play ball, I wouldn't faint at them still trying to spin that though.

    Then all that will be left for them to do is figure out how to schedule every tier 1 team to play in Saudi Arabia every year.

    I actually like the concept of a regular global international league structure but the devil is in the detail and this one is already full of devil before we know all the detail. It seems perverse they managed to vote on something which appears to either be totally up in the air or at least they weren't able to publish the structure (and it doesn't appear to have leaked). I wonder just what exactly was voted on and what was just made up for an announcement and is yet to actually be decided/approved.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    To be fair, I doubt (say) Portugal would have the shekels to fund a tour of New Zealand on a whim, I daresay they can just about keep heads above water. Spain played Argentina in Madrid before the WC but IIRC they couldn't get their main players released? So some are trying to invite bigger nations to play.

    There's barely a country where rugby is the main sport at the best of times, and I speculate the T2 nations are borderline hand to mouth. Can't imagine they'd get a fair deal trying to organise a tour of any repute.



  • Registered Users Posts: 538 ✭✭✭B2021M


    Just curious as to why some people are writing off Wales as a top tier team? Surely all teams go through cycles? Did they not win a GS four years ago and a triple crown two years ago?



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 27,270 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Yeah I'd love nothing more than to see some T2 nations put their money where their mouths are and organise tours to the Southern Hemisphere in July or invite them to play them in November, like the others do. But instead they'd rather cry about not being included in the 6N, so meh to them

    They can't afford it and T1 nations refuse to tour to them where they would actually make money. The problem is not that they aren't inviting teams to visit - the PI teams in particular are constantly doing so

    But they clearly don't from every description given so far. Unless you have proof to the contrary that nobody else has heard of which you are free to post here

    Fair. It does appear they don't, but they did in the original concept when it was first mooted. It's not very clear.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,736 ✭✭✭Shehal


    I dont think it's too much of a stretch to group Wales with Italy tbh.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    I'd question the union and its structure than the existing team. There are institutional and structural problems that don't show Welsh Rugby as being in especially rude health, and there have been a few noted blips against Italy and Georgia to underline a wobble in overall quality.

    And it may be heretical to say around these parts I dunno, but what value has the Triple Crown these days in any case?



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 27,270 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    2.5 years ago now, and 3 years by the time the 6N rolls round. It's a long time ago



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,153 ✭✭✭Lost Ormond


    The top. sides have to do more.

    I dont understand why you are putting everything on the tier2 sides to force change when it should be the top sides doing more especially when so many of these tier 1 sides have major issues at home.

    We dont know if these unions havent tried get more games in summer/november but are they not entitled to ask about their exclusion from the top european competition and all that inclusion in that would bring?

    d



  • Advertisement
Advertisement