Rugby World Cup 015

[ProfessorDavey]

Rather that getting closer to the SH teams those from the north seem to be going backward.

Not sure about that. Having reviewed the results from previous RWC's, it seems clear to me that the main problem is that the two major NH forces in previous years didn't show up. England and France are going backwards but, on the other hand, Wales put in a good showing with a second string team and Scotland nearly made the semis but for a 78th minute penalty kick.

So perhaps rather than the same old tired 6 nations format every year

You still haven't said why it is tired.

we should develop a new slimmed down global tournament every two years. Eight teams - top four from previous years 6 nations qualify, top 3 from SH championship. Final place is a play-off between 4th in SH and 5th in 6 nations. Proper tournament rules - two groups of 4, top two go through to knock out. Seeding into groups based on 6 nation and SH championship placing.

You still have the problem of income. The Six Nations is a massive money spinner.

I certainly think more competitive rugby between NH and SH sides is needed. I also think we need to figure out a way for this to happen at a club level.

The 6 nations is tired as a format because it fails to develop NH national teams to the highest level - i.e. so they are able to compete credibly to win the world cup. It is tired in the manner that the football home nations championship became tired.

On income - I'm not convinced. Why would a more global event, such as the one I suggested, be any less of a money spinner? I would have thought that South Africa vs England in a major tournament would be just as much of a big money draw than Scotland vs England in a global market. And there is the problem of familiarity breeds contempt in the 6 nations. Why should I get so excited about Wales vs England in the 6 nations next spring - it doesn't really mean anything and won, lose or draw they'll be another along in 12 months. If you check out the viewing figures for the 6 nations they aren't great at all - certainly not what you'd expect for a major sporting event - but that isn't surprising as the 6 nations isn't a major sporting event.

Cut the sentimentality, shake it up, make it competitive and mean something and focus on ensuring that NH sides are given the opportunity more than once every four years to play against the very best in a proper tournament. Do this and you just might see England, France, Wales etc actually competing to win the world cup.

[Hope]

On income - I'm not convinced. Why would a more global event, such as the one I suggested, be any less of a money spinner? I would have thought that South Africa vs England in a major tournament would be just as much of a big money draw than Scotland vs England in a global market. And there is the problem of familiarity breeds contempt in the 6 nations. Why should I get so excited about Wales vs England in the 6 nations next spring - it doesn't really mean anything and won, lose or draw they'll be another along in 12 months. If you check out the viewing figures for the 6 nations they aren't great at all - certainly not what you'd expect for a major sporting event - but that isn't surprising as the 6 nations isn't a major sporting event.

Cut the sentimentality, shake it up, make it competitive and mean something and focus on ensuring that NH sides are given the opportunity more than once every four years to play against the very best in a proper tournament. Do this and you just might see England, France, Wales etc actually competing to win the world cup.

PD, in view of the mismatch of seasons between the northern and southern hemispheres, how would you organise such a global event.  After all, even football doesn't manage a 2-yearly global event.

[ProfessorDavey]

On income - I'm not convinced. Why would a more global event, such as the one I suggested, be any less of a money spinner? I would have thought that South Africa vs England in a major tournament would be just as much of a big money draw than Scotland vs England in a global market. And there is the problem of familiarity breeds contempt in the 6 nations. Why should I get so excited about Wales vs England in the 6 nations next spring - it doesn't really mean anything and won, lose or draw they'll be another along in 12 months. If you check out the viewing figures for the 6 nations they aren't great at all - certainly not what you'd expect for a major sporting event - but that isn't surprising as the 6 nations isn't a major sporting event.

Cut the sentimentality, shake it up, make it competitive and mean something and focus on ensuring that NH sides are given the opportunity more than once every four years to play against the very best in a proper tournament. Do this and you just might see England, France, Wales etc actually competing to win the world cup.

PD, in view of the mismatch of seasons between the northern and southern hemispheres, how would you organise such a global event.  After all, even football doesn't manage a 2-yearly global event.

I can't see it as a problem, given that we already have the autumn internationals with SH sides, which although valuable don't really provide genuinely competitive tournament sport.

I don't think football is unable to have a global tournament more frequently than every four years, rather it chooses not to. And from a european perspective there isn't a need. The European championship is an exceptionally competitive competition at the highest level. Teams competing in it have won the past three world cups so it is great 'training' competition for future world cup success. By contrast the 6 nations isn't - from a global quality perspective it is a second tier tournament - you have no confidence that the winners will come close to being competitive in the world cup - all the evidence suggests they aren't.

[BashfulAnthony]

So sad to see Scotland go out like that;  and to see Ireland hammered.  I won't get over it for a long time...     

[jeremyp]

On income - I'm not convinced. Why would a more global event, such as the one I suggested, be any less of a money spinner?

You are suggesting it happens only every two years. The Six Nations delivers 15 matches every year.

[Rhiannon]

A new format would also presumably mean qualifying - bye bye England - and persuading SH teams to travel, or persuading NH fans that Adelaide is just as accessible as Twickenham.

[Nearly Sane]

I'm not really clear what is being proposed by the Prof. Is it that there would continue to be a world cup every four years, and then a sort of world cup every even year? Wouldn't this essentially devalue the world cup?

[Rhiannon]

I don't think there are enough world class teams. In football the UEFA cup is always a challenge to win - RU just doesn't have the teams to stage a tournament of an equivalent standard.

I think if we look at cricket the 'gold standard' was the Ashes, in part because it was rarely held. Now that it is played far more frequently than before the fans are getting fed up with both the standard of play and the prices they are charged - and the Ashes have been devalued by playing it too often, it's not that big a deal anymore. If I were heading up rugby I wouldn't want to make the same mistake.

[ProfessorDavey]

A new format would also presumably mean qualifying - bye bye England - and persuading SH teams to travel, or persuading NH fans that Adelaide is just as accessible as Twickenham.

Yes it would mean qualifying - but this would be from the previous 6 nations and SH championship, so England would be likely to qualify except in a terrible year. And this would also have the advantage of making the later games in the 6 nations interesting with most teams (probably all) actually playing for something - either to win, or to ensure qualification.

But the SH teams already travel - they are touring round europe every autumn, but for a series of one off games that don't really mean anything. Replace that tour with a genuine tournament.

I'm not actually suggesting this tournament would even be in the SH, because it would be an every other year replacement for the 6 nations with is a NH tournament. But lets face it there are plenty of NH rugby fans you trot off for the British lions every so often - so I don't think that would be an issue. And also this would tap into SH fans who might be more interested in England vs NZ that another match vs Argentina for example.

[ProfessorDavey]

I'm not really clear what is being proposed by the Prof. Is it that there would continue to be a world cup every four years, and then a sort of world cup every even year? Wouldn't this essentially devalue the world cup?

It seems to have worked OK in cricket where there is the larger World Cup and a much more focussed (8 team) ICC champions trophy.

So I have no problem with a large and completely global World Cup every four years and then a four year cycle of traditional 6 nations (as a qualifying tournament) for a 'super-8' (call it what you will) involving the best in europe and the best in the SH.

In reality I'm not sure what the best modified format would be, but the desperately poor showing of the 6 nations sides in the world cup must act as a wake up call for change. The 6 nations isn't (and actually hasn't been for a long time) a tournament that helps nurture the best in the world - teams competitive in the world cup. There is no fundamental reason why the NH sides cannot be as good as the SH, but unless the relevant authorities commit to make them as good we will continue to have a tired and sentimental second tier tournament every single year (the 6 nations) and then the NH teams will be way off the pace when they face the SH teams in the world cup and that tournament will continue to be shared around the SH teams. If that's what you want, fine, but I don't - I'd like to the NH teams really competing in the world cup.

[Nearly Sane]

Has it worked well in cricket? I am only a casual observer but I used to know which year an actual world cup was and who were the winners, now it just seems blurred. Also not helped particularly by the addition of 20/20 world cups. I couldn't tell you a current holder of such things, and who has what bit of it. I suspect die hard geek fans but they can tell you who won the second division on things.

I am reminded of boxing with its innumerable titles issued by by various sets of acronyms. What used to be clear becomes an endless blur.


Also as with cricket, there is a worry that in moving to a system to make it elitist at points that you dilute any ability of increasing the global spread - if we simply make more teams second tier will that set up more barriers?

[Hope]

The 6 nations isn't (and actually hasn't been for a long time) a tournament that helps nurture the best in the world - teams competitive in the world cup.

I would disagree; after all this is the first time that there has been no European representation in the semi finals, and we have had a European representative in the final in every previous tournament bar 2007 (England 3 times, and France 3 times).

We also see that the way the rues are interpreted differs across the hemispheres, with the attacking team getting far more positive calls at the breakdown in the South, than here in the North.

At the same time, I believe that the rules need honing.  In the Southern hemisphere (and to an extent Wales) players are encouraged to dispossess the ball-carrier more than by most European nations.  When a ball is knocked out of a player's hand(s) in the tackle and goes 'forward', it is automatically deemed a knock-forward.  In reality, what often happens is that the tackler knocks the ball out of the carrier's hands and back towards his own players.  That should be acknowledged by allowing play to continue.

I'd like to the NH teams really competing in the world cup.

As some have done every time except this one.

[Outrider]

We also see that the way the rues are interpreted differs across the hemispheres, with the attacking team getting far more positive calls at the breakdown in the South, than here in the North.

That's not a difference in interpretation of the rules, it's just that the Southern Hemisphere teams in the tournament this time have been much, much better at choosing how to enter the contact area - even the Fijians and Samoans (and the Japanese, who play those sides more often than the 'Northern' hemisphere sides).

If you watch them go into contact they take the tackler with them if they're aiming to recycle a ruck, if they try to get tackled past the man then they're looking to off-load and the support runners know that. The Northern hemisphere sides have forwards taking the ball static and trying to drive the ruck forward (with the exception of Scotland, which was why they ran Australia so close), but the Northern hemisphere sides are always trying to break through or loose too early, and their backs aren't looking to make contact outside of the 10-12 channel.

It's not that the decisions have gone against them, it's just that they haven't played to the same standard.

O.

[Hope]

We also see that the way the rues are interpreted differs across the hemispheres, with the attacking team getting far more positive calls at the breakdown in the South, than here in the North.

That's not a difference in interpretation of the rules, it's just that the Southern Hemisphere teams in the tournament this time have been much, much better at choosing how to enter the contact area - even the Fijians and Samoans (and the Japanese, who play those sides more often than the 'Northern' hemisphere sides).

O, I was only reflecting something someone speaking on behalf of 'World Rugby' said in an interview yesterday afternoon (on Radio 5 iirc)

[ProfessorDavey]

The 6 nations isn't (and actually hasn't been for a long time) a tournament that helps nurture the best in the world - teams competitive in the world cup.

I would disagree; after all this is the first time that there has been no European representation in the semi finals, and we have had a European representative in the final in every previous tournament bar 2007 (England 3 times, and France 3 times).

Sounds vaguely OK until you realise that:

1. Although NH teams have made the final on 6 occasions they have only won it once.

2. There are only 3 major SH sided, yet in every world cup final one of them has been present, and in one (probably 2 cases both finalists have been one of the big 3 SH teams. Often the reason why there weren't 2 SH sides in the final was because they ended up in the same half of the draw knocking each other out (see 3).

3. Of those 6 finalists from the NH on two occasions (2003 and 2011) the NH team progressed through the knockout stage to the final without actually having to play one of the big 3 SH sides.

4. In the entire history of the tournament NH sides have only knocked out big 3 SH sided on 5 occasions - just last weekend in the space of just over 24 hours SH sides knocked out 4 of the big NH sides. You have to go back 18 world cup knock-out matches - back to 2007 for the last time a NH side knocked out a SH side (and yes that includes Argentina, not just the big 3).

[ProfessorDavey]

Has it worked well in cricket? I am only a casual observer but I used to know which year an actual world cup was and who were the winners, now it just seems blurred. Also not helped particularly by the addition of 20/20 world cups. I couldn't tell you a current holder of such things, and who has what bit of it. I suspect die hard geek fans but they can tell you who won the second division on things.

I am reminded of boxing with its innumerable titles issued by by various sets of acronyms. What used to be clear becomes an endless blur.


Also as with cricket, there is a worry that in moving to a system to make it elitist at points that you dilute any ability of increasing the global spread - if we simply make more teams second tier will that set up more barriers?

I don't think the challenge in cricket is the presence of the world cup and ICC champions trophy, rather the difficulty is the multiple forms of the game (test, 50 overs, 40 overs - does that still exist, 20:20). That really means there are several variants.

The same doesn't really exist in rugby so I can't see why there shouldn't be a world cup (more teams more global, less frequently) and a more focussed super-8 - top SH and top NH sides playing in a tournament more frequently and qualifying via their own respective 6 nations and SH championship.

[jeremyp]

I thought of an great idea for a mini tournament.

Generally speaking the top three SH sides always tour the NH in the autumn (I assume this year will be an exception on account of the RWC), so why not make it a proper tournament: the top two ranked NH sides against the top two ranked SH sides in a league plus maybe a final between the top two placed teams. That's three matches for all teams plus another one for the top two, which is the same number, roughly as they play now. The tournament could be alternated with the South, but the NH sides' home grounds are conveniently close to each other.

I've arrived at almost the same idea as PD but mine is smaller scale and can accommodate the Six Nations every year. In fact, if the qualifying NH sides are the winners and runners up in the previous 6N, it adds something to that tournament.

I'd really like to see some sort of tournament at club level too, but I can't see that being financially viable.

[ProfessorDavey]

I thought of an great idea for a mini tournament.

Generally speaking the top three SH sides always tour the NH in the autumn (I assume this year will be an exception on account of the RWC), so why not make it a proper tournament: the top two ranked NH sides against the top two ranked SH sides in a league plus maybe a final between the top two placed teams. That's three matches for all teams plus another one for the top two, which is the same number, roughly as they play now. The tournament could be alternated with the South, but the NH sides' home grounds are conveniently close to each other.

I've arrived at almost the same idea as PD but mine is smaller scale and can accommodate the Six Nations every year. In fact, if the qualifying NH sides are the winners and runners up in the previous 6N, it adds something to that tournament.

I'd really like to see some sort of tournament at club level too, but I can't see that being financially viable.

The details are of course open to debate.

But I think there needs to be a proper tournament more regularly than every 4 years that allows NH and SH sides to compete against each other in a genuinely competitive manner. And give that the SH sides can always find the time to be here in the Autumn every year then replacing this rather strange and random set of Autumn internationals with something genuinely competitive.

I think making the 6 nations a qualifying tournament also makes a lot of sense as it would give more sides something to be playing for in the later rounds, which (lets face it) can often become a bit of a training exercise for sides that cannot win the tournament by that stage.

[ProfessorDavey]

I thought of an great idea for a mini tournament.

Generally speaking the top three SH sides always tour the NH in the autumn (I assume this year will be an exception on account of the RWC), so why not make it a proper tournament: the top two ranked NH sides against the top two ranked SH sides in a league plus maybe a final between the top two placed teams. That's three matches for all teams plus another one for the top two, which is the same number, roughly as they play now. The tournament could be alternated with the South, but the NH sides' home grounds are conveniently close to each other.

I've arrived at almost the same idea as PD but mine is smaller scale and can accommodate the Six Nations every year. In fact, if the qualifying NH sides are the winners and runners up in the previous 6N, it adds something to that tournament.

I'd really like to see some sort of tournament at club level too, but I can't see that being financially viable.

I guess the key question is whether the SH teams would play ball, so to speak.

Given that they are totally dominant in world terms and have been for many years there isn't any incentive for them to change the format of their tournaments and preparations for the world cup in a manner that might improve the quality of the NH sides.

I guess what would help would be money, and some of the Autumn internationals are currently a bit of a damp squibb in terms of attendance etc, so something more competitive might be able to generate more income.