There should be two RWCs
-
Unless there is a big financial incentive to 'qualify' for Comp A why would a team in Comp get excited about winning and going up? They would go from being winners to being ass raped.
The other point is that currently going to the big tournament in itself is the achievement and brings attention and growth locally. This is much like how when NZ qualifies for the wendyball WC junior enrolments and interest in the game rise.
It is then up to the organisations to take advantage of that and I agree that isn't always done. Not just a minnow issue though. Oz collected a nice windfall hosting in 2003 and managed to spend it on league players. -
@Crucial the Sevens comp tells me Nations are motivated to move up a tier. The US and Kenya are proof of that.
-
Promotion/relegation could never work with a comp 4 years apart.
I can't see any reason why they wouldn't do a Plate comp like in 7s. In fact I'm surprised they haven't done it yet.
-
I don’t think it would happen, but I wonder if you’d see mid-ranked teams intentionally not try (eg, select weaker sides) against the top teams with a view to not qualify, then try to win the plate? Also, as there is usually one pool of death, the ‘unlucky’ powerful team would then kill everyone through the plate semis and final (eg, England 2015, Someone this time). I could see the clubs jumping up and down if Farrell was injured in that semi and couldn’t play for 9 months.
It’s not that I don’t like the idea, I just don’t thinks it’s quite right; perhaps with a plate and bowl some of that could be dealt with (eg, just a semi and final for each) so that those competitions were done with at the same time as the ‘big’ semis.
-
@Crucial The team that wins the final of Tier 2 would be good enough and competitive enough to play in Tier 1...say Japan...they just beat 15 teams at their level...anyway in the current format their getting ass raped already so why not give them a better chance...I'd be interested to read what all the Minnow teams would think of this format.
-
@mariner4life said in There should be two RWCs:
@Crucial the Sevens comp tells me Nations are motivated to move up a tier. The US and Kenya are proof of that.
Very different example and also proves my point about financial reward. Getting into the sevens world series is a big deal as far as funding and development goes.
-
@Blackheart said in There should be two RWCs:
@Crucial The team that wins the final of Tier 2 would be good enough and competitive enough to play in Tier 1...say Japan...they just beat 15 teams at their level...anyway in the current format their getting ass raped already so why not give them a better chance...I'd be interested to read what all the Minnow teams would think of this format.
Japan would have already been in your tier 1 comp. Georgia would be the next cab according to rankings before the cup started.
-
@Crucial said in There should be two RWCs:
@mariner4life said in There should be two RWCs:
@Crucial the Sevens comp tells me Nations are motivated to move up a tier. The US and Kenya are proof of that.
Very different example and also proves my point about financial reward. Getting into the sevens world series is a big deal as far as funding and development goes.
gotcha, i misread your angle.
-
I'm not dismissing this idea out of hand and it is clear that there should be a better incentive for minnows given the gap but I also think that a plate comp would be the way to go and have been saying so going back to at least 2003.
It would need to be structured carefully though as you wouldn't want teams deliberately aiming for the plate and making the pools a waste of time. -
@Crucial said in There should be two RWCs:
and have been saying so going back to at least 2003
fucking hipsters
-
The other issue is you get movement amongst the rankings around the cutoff mark and the rankings are skewed by who you are playing.
If you took a top 12 based on current rankings Italy would be in the minnow section and Georgia would be in the top section. Italy's ranking i'm sure suffers due to being in the Six Nations similarly to Argentina's ranking suffers due to playing in TRC.
-
Hate the idea, would make more sense though if it was still 2004.
4 groups of 3, doesn't even remove the only current flaw in the tournament- the uneven group numbers meaning short turnarounds.
Shrinking even below 1987 levels? Good for climate change targets.
-
A plate comp also is not a good idea IMO.
You'll have 2 teams gutted to be there , and 6 teams happyish.
7s is happy-clappy. It works there based on the festival tradition of Hong Kong, and now the modern series points incentive.
In a RWC it would be like one giant cruel 3rd/4th playoff .
-
@Rapido said in There should be two RWCs:
A plate comp also is not a good idea IMO.
You'll have 2 teams gutted to be there , and 6 teams happyish.
7s is happy-clappy. It works there based on the festival tradition of Hong Kong, and now the modern series points incentive.
In a RWC it would be like one giant cruel 3rd/4th playoff .
but watching England go through it in 2015 would have been delicious...
-
-
@Duluth said in There should be two RWCs:
@Rapido said in There should be two RWCs:
In a RWC it would be like one giant cruel 3rd/4th playoff .
This sounds amazing. Would definitely watch
Me too. Didn't even consider the agony of a Tier 1 team have to endure it. Drama!
-
We should be making the RWC bigger not smaller. I'm not saying that should be right now, but I think world rugby should have a 20-30 year plan to expand RWCs to 24 teams (4 pools of 6) and then 32 (8 pools of 4).
Segregation won't make the '2nd tier' nations better. To be fair, neither does the RWC alone. World Rugby need to enable regular international competitions at all levels on a regular basis. The first step for that would be expanding RWC qualification. Let's toughen up auto qualifications; following the football example and only allow 2 auto qualies - the defenders and the hosts. Everyone else has to qualify. Having qualification pools stimulate international competition giving teams more regular game time. Have tiers in the qualification pools based on RWC finishes to avoid absolute mismatches but only to a point. Put seedings on the line too. So you might get an Italy-Georgia qualification match where both teams are going to qualify but it means the difference between a softer seeding and a tougher seeding. Getting the teams at the bottom of tier 1 playing the teams at the top of tier 2 more regularly will make the biggest difference to overall quality.
-
@mariner4life said in There should be two RWCs:
@Crucial the Sevens comp tells me Nations are motivated to move up a tier. The US and Kenya are proof of that.
There’s the attraction of the Olympics too .
-
@mariner4life said in There should be two RWCs:
@Crucial said in There should be two RWCs:
and have been saying so going back to at least 2003
fucking hipsters
How do you drown a hipster?
In a main stream....
