Nations Championship?
-
one thing I heard Rob NIchol say - 5 matches on consecutive weekends in potentially 5 different country....
Yeah the players will be keen AF!
-
@barbarian said in World League Rugby:
@rotated No. But there needs to be some sort of middle ground between Tonga hosting six tests and the Pacific Island teams being locked out for 10 years while the USA and Japan get a full dance card of games each year.
Not to mention Georgia, Romania, Canada, Uruguay.
Current rankings have Fiji 9th, Georgia 12th.
States are at 13, Italy 15.
That 10th to 20thish band is what needs the investment.
-
@booboo plus WR need to really apply some pressure to sort out the shitty leadership and admin happening in some of the PI unions. If they are any chance to engage/negotiate with NH clubs v their best players they have to sort that shit out. Not to mention having their players getting paid for international duties. Otherwise 'poaching' will turn into a professional rugby welfare system, where there would be zero incentive for any island nation player to pursue international rugby for their nation.
-
@taniwharugby said in World League Rugby:
one thing I heard Rob NIchol say - 5 matches on consecutive weekends in potentially 5 different country....
Yeah the players will be keen AF!
The last 5 tests the All Blacks played were in a row with more travel than is proposed here. They played five in a row last season. As far back as 2008 they played 5 consecutive weekends and then 6 in 2009. This is the new normal. BTW - they used to these things called tours where they would play twice a week.
The ABs will do more travel to the Bledisloe fixture in Perth this year than they would do in five consecutive weekends in Europe.
-
@rotated depends on the quality of player required for the 5 weeks in a row though I guess...I mean playing Aus, SA, Argentina, England & IReland on consecutive weekends all over the show would be a much tougher ask than Aus & Japan in Japan and then onto Europe.
-
@taniwharugby said in World League Rugby:
@rotated depends on the quality of player required for the 5 weeks in a row though I guess...I mean playing Aus, SA, Argentina, England & IReland on consecutive weekends all over the show would be a much tougher ask than Aus & Japan in Japan and then onto Europe.
These are going to be played in brackets though right? So we will play the SH teams over what is now TRC period and the NH teams and final over what is EOYT. This proposal does not read as though we will be playing Italy in Rome one week and then Japan in Dunedin the next.
I do disagree with the concept of a semifinal though. It should be the top NH conference team vs top SH+USA+Japan team.
-
I'm not against it if they can get the structure right. I made the disclaimer before and I'll make it again - this is from an Aussie perspective, and other nations may not see it this way...
The international game is spluttering a bit here. We have great moments (last year's series vs Ireland), but then we have years where we really struggle to draw crowds.
The Rugby Championship is a bit stale, and yes a part of that is due to our team, but the structure plays a role too.
And then we go to the NH where the games are broadly meaningless, played at 3am and only the hardcore even know they are happening.
If we could get some sort of underlying Global League competition, which sees a variety of games that actually have meaning, then it could be great. COULD be great. I'm certainly willing to give it a try.
The international nature of our game is what makes it great, with competitive sides all over the world. At it's best, this comp would play to that strength really well, and provide a compelling reason to watch games throughout the year.
-
Statement from NZ Rugby Chief Executive Steve Tew
New Zealand Rugby continues to advocate for an international rugby calendar that ensures the future growth of the game in New Zealand and around the world, including the Pacific. New Zealand (NZR) Chief Executive Steve Tew said no decisions have been made about the future format for international rugby, with the most recent proposals less than 24 hours old when it was made public.
“World Rugby and the national unions including New Zealand Rugby have been working hard to increase the meaning and value of international Test matches. It is well documented that the game is under pressure to grow revenues so the game from the community level up can thrive. It is obvious that here in New Zealand we are under pressure to retain our top talent as the international player and coach market continues to be challenging. In addition we have a huge opportunity to grow the woman’s game in this country that will also require new resources. “We are all working hard to find a balance between a model that delivers what fans are demanding, the welfare of our players, while at the same time ensuring we are preserving the integrity of rugby and providing a pathway for the smaller and developing nations here in Oceania but all around the world to develop and participate. “It is fair to say that taking all of that into account, managing multiple stakeholders is complex. We cannot go into the detail of any of the proposals because there is a layer of commercial sensitivity to these discussions as we are trying to introduce new capital to our game.
"Having said all that there are some fundamentals that New Zealand Rugby has made very clear from the outset. Any new competition must have a pathway for new and developing countries to join including our pacific neighbours. That is not only fair and the right thing to do, but it also preserves the integrity of any competition. We can not add to the work load burden of our players with out making other adjustments and we are also mindful of the role of our other competitions Investec Super Rugby and Mitre 10 Cup. "World Rugby have been proactive and bought an idea to the table, we have been refining it over several months and a positive spin off has been some real commercial interest in backing it. "Having said that nothing has been decided, we have not agreed to anything at this stage and have always been working to the March World Rugby meetings as the next opportunity to discuss the details. “There’s no simple solution to this, but New Zealand Rugby remains committed to working through the proposals with the right people in the room.”
http://www.allblacks.com/News/33774/statement-from-nz-rugby-chief-executive-steve-tew
-
@barbarian while i can sort of understand your position, Australia's biggest problem can't be fixed. Essentially, you are killed by competing with two football codes with broad coverage that run 9 games a weekend, every weekend, for 6 months of the year. And, for a huge amount of fans, they can expect a win on any given weekend.
There is no way Rugby can compete with that. You have 4 teams. At some point you have to play away, which means 4.30pm kicks off if they are in NZ (currently for Qld) or yes, the dreaded overnight games.
I can't see how this format will change that. You won't get any more home tests, you still have to play in NZ and Europe, the best is an extra test in the Asia timezone.
One test v NZ, that might not even be in Aus, is going to force Rugby Aus to change its entire marketing approach as well.
-
@barbarian but as noted in a few places it has huge potential to mess with the domestic or club level game. Where attendance is already an issue, not to mention the death of day time games to promote viewing. All for new ideas but to spike such push back from players associations doesn't speak well for WR consultation.
-
@Nepia said in World League Rugby:
@rotated You seem to be the only one who is looking at this positively - what are your reasons?
Primarily because it is the best model I've seen presented and it's superior to the status quo.
Even if the ABs make the semi-finals and final they will play 1 test less than their current non-RWC year schedule. What's more, the brutal Argentina -> South Africa road trip will be either eliminated or happen bi-annually. Player welfare arguments fall on deaf ears to me - this is a net player welfare improvement at least from a NZ perspective.
It seemingly would decouple the revenue streams from TRC and Super Rugby and potentially lead to a rationalization of the domestic competitions over time.
I am absolutely open to other proposals, but IMO if you are going to criticize a model for leaving the PIs behind at this point you need to propose something that can incorporate them. They bring no revenue and no domestic infrastructure or growth potential - no model I have seen can overcome those obstacles.