Nations Championship?
-
Jersey sponsors is a dying revenue stream, although not as much as naming rights. See the struggles in 6N and Euro Cup up north. Companies realise it is orders of magnitude cheaper to use various forms of social media. However being in the Tier 2 comp, regularly, is going to be better for those than current, I certainly agree with that, incl jersey sponsors.
-
Along with getting 6N to agree with relegation, there's this small road bump..
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/rugby/news/article.cfm?c_id=80&objectid=12210817
-
@Machpants That's what happens if you allow clubs having too much power and there's so much money involved.
Edit: ... and when your club seasons are too long.
-
@Machpants Well if the french had more french players there wouldn't be a problem as they would never make the finals anyway.
As a side note, does this make NZ players even more valuable as they do not play internationals? Well until they qualify this is.
-
@Stargazer said in World League Rugby:
Amended proposal (no more semi-finals):
Perfect - exactly what I was calling for earlier in the thread.
The only tweak I would make is that the tables should be NH conference and SH conference and the top of each conference making the final. It will give conference titles a little bit of meaning, but more importantly you avoid South Africa vs New Zealand first week of December in Paris or something.
-
Heard on the radio that Scotland and Ireland aren't keen - at least in terms of the home nations. Interesting as I would have bet the house on England blocking things. I can get Scotland being a bit worried about the relegation side of things, but would have assumed higher revenue could go some way to help them fund development and high performance stuff. I.e the things you need to do to avoid being relegated!
Haven't caught the latest from the players perspective, will be interesting to see if the latest plans get a different flavour of response.
-
So from our perspective, does this mean the end of multiple games against SA and Australia? Or is that competition the same?
I do like that there is more regular contact with all the NH teams, no silliness of years between playing someone like Scotland, and we will see them more regularly in NZ.
-
@Kirwan said in World League Rugby:
So from our perspective, does this mean the end of multiple games against SA and Australia? Or is that competition the same?
It would be the end of home/away TRC format, yes. From comments when it first came out nations would still have the ability to add tests outside that window - whether it is an official WR window or like the out-of-window tests NZ/Wales etc put on remains to be seen.
-
@rotated said in World League Rugby:
@Kirwan said in World League Rugby:
So from our perspective, does this mean the end of multiple games against SA and Australia? Or is that competition the same?
It would be the end of home/away TRC format, yes. From comments when it first came out nations would still have the ability to add tests outside that window - whether it is an official WR window or like the out-of-window tests NZ/Wales etc put on remains to be seen.
Ok, that’s a big plus for me. Much more variety of opponents, no more friendlies, more regular games with tier 1 teams, and a pathway for teams to be promoted on merit.
Travel seems to be the only major downside, or am I missing something?
-
@Kirwan said in World League Rugby:
@rotated said in World League Rugby:
@Kirwan said in World League Rugby:
So from our perspective, does this mean the end of multiple games against SA and Australia? Or is that competition the same?
It would be the end of home/away TRC format, yes. From comments when it first came out nations would still have the ability to add tests outside that window - whether it is an official WR window or like the out-of-window tests NZ/Wales etc put on remains to be seen.
Ok, that’s a big plus for me. Much more variety of opponents, no more friendlies, more regular games with tier 1 teams, and a pathway for teams to be promoted on merit.
Travel seems to be the only major downside, or am I missing something?
Each NH team will have to play 3 away games in June v SH teams. This sin't actually any different to what was occurring before 3 match series were returned in 2012. Although now they count.
The logical divide would be:
- Argentina
- South Africa
- Australia
- Japan
- Fiji
- NZ
It's only the Arg, Saf, Aus schedule that would be difficult.
- One team would do it in a nice order following the earths turn
- another would do it in reverse
- 1 poor bastard team would have to zigzag. Starting in SAF, going right or left, then zagging halfway back again (or keep on going but skipping NZ)
-
TBH I like it. It also provides a pathway for tier 2 nations and currently Fiji get a massive opportunity to take that next step.
-
-
@Stargazer said in World League Rugby:
I'm not too fond of this new competition. It's too similar to the World Cup.
Perhaps the World Cup has outlived its purpose. We're a generation into professionalism and the RWC has been funding World Rugby. This is a better model which does what everyone's been arguing for; providing clear support and pathway into Tier One.
Besides, if the ABs do a three-peat, no one will care about the RWC anymore.
-
@antipodean This new comp will be more or less the same each year. That will become boring even faster.
What I also don't like is that the final - due to it taking place in November - will always be played in Europe/NH. We'll never be able to watch the final live here in NZ, or even the SH.
-
@Stargazer I don't think playing every nation will become boring for at least a decade. What's boring is the Rugby Championship. It's got to the point I'm sick of beating Australians, well until one of them shows a glimmer of hope.
The timing and location of the final is a bit shit admittedly, but how would you address it?
-
@antipodean esp when the driver is money...playing in NH where the money is will mean more eyeballs, which means more $$$.
if this gives NZR extra cash which will assist from grass roots and upper player retention then it is good...in theory.
-
@Stargazer said in World League Rugby:
@antipodean This new comp will be more or less the same each year. That will become boring even faster.
What I also don't like is that the final - due to it taking place in November - will always be played in Europe/NH. We'll never be able to watch the final live here in NZ, or even the SH.
The boring aspect is playing a team multiple times in a year. Having to wait a year to get revenge for a loss is part of what makes the Six Nations such a good competition.
If we can get the NZRU to make the Bledisloe a one off game instead of a series, that might generate more interest in Australia too.
I agree it sucks about the location of the final, but if we get 50% of the gate that will help fund our game, so I can accept that.
-
I hadn't thought about this before, and some won't find this important, but the Maori All Blacks will also have to face the consequences of this new comp. If indeed - as proposed - all tier 1 and a large group of tier 2/3 nations will be involved in this comp (2 divisions), that reduces the number of possible opponents for the MABs, unless one (or more) of those countries is willing to add another test to their schedule.
If not, the MABs will only be able to play tier 2 and 3 nations not involved in the new comp, meaning they won't play countries like Japan, USA, Fiji, Samoa and Tonga anymore, but will have to play more countries at the level of Brazil and Chile; so less competitive games.
That's unless they organise games against the Barbarians and second XV teams like the French Barbarians, England Saxons, Argentina XV etc.
