Nations Championship?
-
@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.
-
@Stargazer said in World League Rugby:
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.
Why wouldn't some of those teams play the MAB as a warmup before competition games? I don't see any restriction against doing that, and in fact since all the competion games have so much riding on them now (especially for teams like Fiji, Japan and the US) any squad experimentation will have to be done outside of the comp.
-
@Stargazer good, they are an anachronism that should only be wheeled out on the odd occasion.
I've sort of turned on this format now, and Kirwan's post below struck a cord with me. Be nice to watch something different all the time.
And a move away from 4-year world cup cycles ups the ante on players and coaches not to just fuck around with tests matches with an eye to the future.
-
I really like this idea, it adds meaning to the June tests and the November tests. The Rugby Championship is boring and I like the idea of having to play England and Ireland every year. In fact if we win our conference it is likely we will play Ireland,Wales or England twice a year.
Whilst some say it will diminish RWC I don't think it will. That Tournament has plenty of history and is exciting enough to stand on its own. Think Athletics or most sports that have a World Championships between the Olympics, the Olympics hasn't lost its meaning. Soccer also has the Euro competition as well.
If this allows better funding to the growing nations then I am all for it. If Fiji do in fact qualify for RC in the first season they will get one hell of a financial injection.
I have no doubt the All Blacks will play at least an additional 2 tests each year, 1 vs the Wallabies in Sydney for the cash and perhaps a game vs a t2 nation prior to the first June test. In theory we could play England, Wales and Ireland in June.
-
If the 6N sell to CVC it's dead in the water tho. Although I have no idea who the 6N will play in Nov as, if sold to CVC, they won't be part of the World Rugby reciprocal tests that is current and/or some new world league. They'd have to pay us to play, which wouldn't be bad, and they might not even come down south. CVC will be a total disaster for WR.
-
can someone explain that to me please? How can the 6N sell themselves? What is the asset?
-
The current set up is SANZAAR unions have agreed to pool their games for money in RC, 6N pool their games for money. OUtside of that there is the June/Nov tests, which are have been agreed to by the individual unions and WR. Once those agreements are over, there is no Jun/Nov tests, I don't know when the agreement is signed to. The unions own their games, not WR, but have agreements with WR for someof them, and agreements with SANZAAR/6N Rugby for others.
-
@Stargazer said in World League Rugby:
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.
The MABs might learn to scrum playing Brazil more often.
-
Different angle:
Nations Championship a hard sell for SANZAAR
Nations Championship a hard sell for SANZAAR
The SANZAAR unions may be in complete agreement on World Rugby's Nations Championship, but trickle-down economics may be a hard sell for their constituents.
-
@Stargazer How, this looks like a better deal for SANZAAR nations every way you look at it. Article seems to be written from a European pespective
-
-
@Stargazer it’s an interesting point to consider what’s going to happen to the next level down. But I would counter that the next level down, worldwide, has been wrecking international Tests for quite a while now.
So maybe this a step to address that imbalance (clubs not releasing players, for example).
The variety of the proposed comp, and the pathway for the Tier 2 & 3 countries to improve is just a benefit, it’s hard not to support it.
If I understand the structure right, doesn’t it mean that the lower Tier countries go from a handle for tests to a regular 11 tests a year? If so, that alone is going to improve teams massively.
As for the NPC and Super Rugby, maybe we need to merge those, bring back the tribalism and consolidate our resources?
