Tier 2 & 3 Rugby Forum

Increase the RWC to 24 teams

Posts: 539
Joined: Mon, 03 Jun 2019, 19:53
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: Increase the RWC to 24 teams

Postby Edgar » Thu, 07 Nov 2019, 17:18

Might be a little outdated now, but as far as I knew Germans were supposed to be the largest single ethnic group in the US, 50 million of them or 16%, dominating in particular the Midwest from the Great Lakes to the Rockies. The Irish card tends to be overplayed a little, 33 million claim it or 10%, for it lends a false sense of victimhood to the reality of a colonial legacy. Only 9% claim English/Welsh ancestry.

The biggest immigrant group are classified as Hispanics, who now account for 17% of the population or around 52 millions. The term is a misnomer in more ways than one, however. Hispanics come in many different varieties, as different to one another as Germans, Irish and British - and often considerably more so. The vast majority are predominantly Native Americans from south of the US, and just happen to speak the Spanish language. Terms like Hispanic and Latinos give them the appearance of foreigners, which is very ironic indeed.

So how to get the so-called Hispanics on board? Perhaps Argentina could help out there. A world class team from so-called Latin America. Easy to say, of course, but hypothetically-speaking wouldn't it be great if they could play a few high-profile tests on American soil? I'm not talking about their domestic team in ARC either. Pumas vs Ireland would be a good place to start, for instance.

As for the expanded format, I think it should come with an expanded repechage. Two pools of 4 leading to semis and a final. Perhaps there could be two spots at stake with the winner being awarded the easier of the two berths - technically, according to the rankings. But wait, a FIFA-style random draw live on TV would be even better, allowing for seedings and geographical divides, of course.

Posts: 1402
Joined: Thu, 06 Apr 2017, 17:09
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: Increase the RWC to 24 teams

Postby Tobar » Thu, 07 Nov 2019, 19:19

There are only around 120,000 Argentinians in the entire country with the majority being in Florida (57,000) and California (44,000). Basically, not enough to really make a difference unless they were feeing super patriotic. But if you had games in Miami surely you will get loads of Argentina fans from South America showing up for that. But everything else should just be done wherever.

The English and Irish games will easily draw the biggest crowds wherever they are but especially if they’re on the east coast. I’d say you could fill an NFL stadium quite easily even for a pool game.

Posts: 5544
Joined: Sat, 05 Jul 2014, 02:44
National Flag:
AustraliaAustralia

Re: Increase the RWC to 24 teams

Postby thatrugbyguy » Fri, 08 Nov 2019, 00:52

Is that 120,000 expats or people with Argentinian heritage? I must say I'm surprised there isn't more South Americans expats living in the US. What about Pacific Island and Japanese population? In 2003 the World Cup down here was organised in a way where games were taken to where the largest expat communities were. So games with Italy and New Zealand were played in Melbourne, games with Japan were played in Townsville, games with South Africa and England were played in Perth, etc. Perhaps that is the best solution for the US.

Posts: 1402
Joined: Thu, 06 Apr 2017, 17:09
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: Increase the RWC to 24 teams

Postby Tobar » Fri, 08 Nov 2019, 04:25

Dunno, got this from Wikipedia and all it says are “Argentine Americans.” There are tons of South Americans in the US just not specifically Argentina.

There are more islanders in Utah and California as well as more Japanese in Washington/California. So those would definitely be west coast games to hope to catch them though tbh I don’t know how large those communities are.

Posts: 344
Joined: Sun, 21 May 2017, 09:02
National Flag:
PolandPoland

Re: Increase the RWC to 24 teams

Postby rey200 » Fri, 08 Nov 2019, 08:16

Argentina was once the wealthiest country in the world. I don't think it's very surprising that you don't have that many of them in the US
Ceterum censeo Sex Nationes esse augendas.

Posts: 3006
Joined: Wed, 14 Oct 2015, 13:30
National Flag:
GermanyGermany

Re: Increase the RWC to 24 teams

Postby RugbyLiebe » Fri, 08 Nov 2019, 08:48

rey200 wrote:Argentina was once the wealthiest country in the world. I don't think it's very surprising that you don't have that many of them in the US


You mean in the region, right? And yeah I also see no big reason why a lot Argentinians should have moved there. Especially with the long history of US politics trying to screw them over whenever they had a government a bit to US-sceptic for their taste.
How to grow rugby worldwide?
Look at the world ranking in July. Teams ranked 1-10 have to play one team from 11-20 (they don't play in a regular competition) away the next year. 11-20 play 21-30 away and so on. Yes, it really is that simple.

Posts: 3755
Joined: Tue, 06 Oct 2015, 22:54
National Flag:
SpainSpain

Re: Increase the RWC to 24 teams

Postby Armchair Fan » Fri, 08 Nov 2019, 09:27

No, maybe not the richest but Top 5 in the world easily in the late XIXth century.

Posts: 344
Joined: Sun, 21 May 2017, 09:02
National Flag:
PolandPoland

Re: Increase the RWC to 24 teams

Postby rey200 » Fri, 08 Nov 2019, 10:10

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_ ... _Argentina

ok, I think I know the source of my mistake (german wiki version...), still, my point stands
Ceterum censeo Sex Nationes esse augendas.

Posts: 3006
Joined: Wed, 14 Oct 2015, 13:30
National Flag:
GermanyGermany

Re: Increase the RWC to 24 teams

Postby RugbyLiebe » Fri, 08 Nov 2019, 12:02

Armchair Fan wrote:No, maybe not the richest but Top 5 in the world easily in the late XIXth century.




They pop up in 1895 as the 16th in the top20 and never make it in the top10. Still impressive.
How to grow rugby worldwide?
Look at the world ranking in July. Teams ranked 1-10 have to play one team from 11-20 (they don't play in a regular competition) away the next year. 11-20 play 21-30 away and so on. Yes, it really is that simple.

Posts: 105
Joined: Tue, 13 Nov 2018, 00:10
National Flag:
ChileChile

Re: Increase the RWC to 24 teams

Postby ficcp » Fri, 08 Nov 2019, 12:12

Armchair Fan wrote:No, maybe not the richest but Top 5 in the world easily in the late XIXth century.


Armchair : check also the WW II and postwar periods from 1940 to 1955. It was certainly top 10 in the world only 70 years ago. There are several argentinian posters who can explain why the the economic position changed so much.

Posts: 3755
Joined: Tue, 06 Oct 2015, 22:54
National Flag:
SpainSpain

Re: Increase the RWC to 24 teams

Postby Armchair Fan » Fri, 08 Nov 2019, 12:18

RugbyLiebe wrote:
Armchair Fan wrote:No, maybe not the richest but Top 5 in the world easily in the late XIXth century.




They pop up in 1895 as the 16th in the top20 and never make it in the top10. Still impressive.

But Top 3 per capita according to that very same video.

Posts: 3006
Joined: Wed, 14 Oct 2015, 13:30
National Flag:
GermanyGermany

Re: Increase the RWC to 24 teams

Postby RugbyLiebe » Fri, 08 Nov 2019, 13:31

Armchair Fan wrote:But Top 3 per capita according to that very same video.


That's what I meant with impressive. ;)

Still why threre aren't more there nowadays is that Argentinians face comparatively stright travel restrictions in the USA (like you even need a full-on-visa you can only get personal in the embassy in Buenos Aires for only changing flights in the US).
How to grow rugby worldwide?
Look at the world ranking in July. Teams ranked 1-10 have to play one team from 11-20 (they don't play in a regular competition) away the next year. 11-20 play 21-30 away and so on. Yes, it really is that simple.

Posts: 1402
Joined: Thu, 06 Apr 2017, 17:09
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: Increase the RWC to 24 teams

Postby Tobar » Fri, 08 Nov 2019, 17:39

Edgar wrote:Might be a little outdated now, but as far as I knew Germans were supposed to be the largest single ethnic group in the US, 50 million of them or 16%, dominating in particular the Midwest from the Great Lakes to the Rockies. The Irish card tends to be overplayed a little, 33 million claim it or 10%, for it lends a false sense of victimhood to the reality of a colonial legacy. Only 9% claim English/Welsh ancestry.

The biggest immigrant group are classified as Hispanics, who now account for 17% of the population or around 52 millions. The term is a misnomer in more ways than one, however. Hispanics come in many different varieties, as different to one another as Germans, Irish and British - and often considerably more so. The vast majority are predominantly Native Americans from south of the US, and just happen to speak the Spanish language. Terms like Hispanic and Latinos give them the appearance of foreigners, which is very ironic indeed.

So how to get the so-called Hispanics on board? Perhaps Argentina could help out there. A world class team from so-called Latin America. Easy to say, of course, but hypothetically-speaking wouldn't it be great if they could play a few high-profile tests on American soil? I'm not talking about their domestic team in ARC either. Pumas vs Ireland would be a good place to start, for instance.

As for the expanded format, I think it should come with an expanded repechage. Two pools of 4 leading to semis and a final. Perhaps there could be two spots at stake with the winner being awarded the easier of the two berths - technically, according to the rankings. But wait, a FIFA-style random draw live on TV would be even better, allowing for seedings and geographical divides, of course.


Don't know how I missed this one - German is still the highest ethnic group, however the vast majority of people with German ancestry don't associate at all with their heritage. There were large German communities in the US and up until the 30s/40s they were still speaking German in schools but after World War I and World War II, the German heritage took a huge hit.

As for Hispanics - as you said it, the term is extremely wide ranging and refers to anyone from Mexicans to Guatemalans all the way to Argentinians. I don't need to tell most of the people here that the diversity is far ranging and most don't associate with other countries. However, I know from speaking to current South American rugby fans that many of them support Argentina as the South American Tier 1 team, though this may not be the case for non-rugby fans. But at the very least, having Argentina as one of the teams could get a draw from people familiar with them as good at soccer....maybe an Argentina vs Uruguay match in Miami could work, though I typically don't like the use of neutral grounds.

Posts: 5737
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Increase the RWC to 24 teams

Postby victorsra » Fri, 08 Nov 2019, 22:24

Predictable? https://www.bbc.com/sport/rugby-union/50345644

Australia 2027 and USA 2031 are a likely scenario indeed.

USA in 2031?

Meanwhile World Rugby is desperate for the sport to catch fire in the USA, and a bid for the 2031 showpiece would allow more time for rugby union to develop in the States, with Sweeney adding that there was "a massive opportunity for the game to kick off" there.

Hosting in 2031 rather than 2027 would also avoid the rugby showpiece being sandwiched between the Football World Cup in 2026 - which is hosted by the USA, Canada and Mexico - and the Los Angeles Olympics in 2028.

The governing body is also open to a joint bid from the USA and Canada, while a South American Rugby World Cup - revolving around Argentina and Uruguay - is another intriguing option.

With the bidding process starting in November 2020, the host nations for 2027 and 2031 World Cups will be announced together at some point in 2021.


Save Australia and give time to build solid rugby success in North America.
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

Posts: 151
Joined: Tue, 05 Jul 2016, 04:18
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: Increase the RWC to 24 teams

Postby eal22 » Fri, 08 Nov 2019, 22:47

I am not sure RWC will actually save the game in Australia. Australians will turn out for any sport if they are hosting a World Cup and they have a chance of winning it all. Rugby Union in Australia needs a total rebuild from the ground up, I fear hosting a RWC will lead to building from the top down which hasn't really worked.

Posts: 5737
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Increase the RWC to 24 teams

Postby victorsra » Fri, 08 Nov 2019, 22:50

I am more thinking about financial situation. But it won't save if the res of the job isn't done, of course.
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

Posts: 5544
Joined: Sat, 05 Jul 2014, 02:44
National Flag:
AustraliaAustralia

Re: Increase the RWC to 24 teams

Postby thatrugbyguy » Sat, 09 Nov 2019, 04:47

eal22 wrote:I am not sure RWC will actually save the game in Australia. Australians will turn out for any sport if they are hosting a World Cup and they have a chance of winning it all. Rugby Union in Australia needs a total rebuild from the ground up, I fear hosting a RWC will lead to building from the top down which hasn't really worked.


A world cup down here will be supported, but even if it is it's not going to do anything for the game down here unless the structures are fixed first and foremost. It's hard to believe at one stage in the early 2000's rugby was very close to being the number 2 sport in this country. Super Rugby was going fantastic, the Wallabies were the best team in the world, test matches were being played all over the country for the first time, preparations were being made for a proper nation club competition, and the World Cup was a roaring success. Everything was set up for the game to cement itself at the top of the sporting landscape. The NRL was still healing from the Super League war, and even the AFL were worried because even though they had strong domestic competitions the international appeal and status of rugby concerned them the most. Everything was in place for rugby to capitalise. And then the ARU blew it.

Posts: 5737
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Increase the RWC to 24 teams

Postby victorsra » Sun, 10 Nov 2019, 15:46

Nice podcast https://soundcloud.com/user-523674328/7 ... w-richards About how was the creation of the RWC, who opposed, and etc. Interestingly Ireland and Scotland were against it (like they are against the Nations Championship).
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

Posts: 105
Joined: Tue, 13 Nov 2018, 00:10
National Flag:
ChileChile

Re: Increase the RWC to 24 teams

Postby ficcp » Sun, 10 Nov 2019, 17:08

IRB and former Management of WR were so coservative¡¡¡¡¡. RWC 87 realisation was decided by NZRU and ARU, IRB took a back seat when the tournament was on the move.

If international activity would depend on the old administrators, the only test matches would be tours of the big 3 SH teams to the north and the british lions to the south. The international windows have not even satisfied the need of the big teams to play one each other with a minimal frequence (example : N. Zealand vs England).

Posts: 61
Joined: Thu, 11 Oct 2018, 20:38
National Flag:
IrelandIreland

Re: Increase the RWC to 24 teams

Postby Rugga » Sun, 10 Nov 2019, 17:28

victorsra wrote:Nice podcast https://soundcloud.com/user-523674328/7 ... w-richards About how was the creation of the RWC, who opposed, and etc. Interestingly Ireland and Scotland were against it (like they are against the Nations Championship).


The Irish Union were very staunchly against anything that would be a move towards professionalism. Tony ward a fly half was shunned for doing interviews and wasn't allowed set up a rugby camp ( all the other home nations allowed their players to have camps).

Posts: 3006
Joined: Wed, 14 Oct 2015, 13:30
National Flag:
GermanyGermany

Re: Increase the RWC to 24 teams

Postby RugbyLiebe » Mon, 11 Nov 2019, 10:45

Rugga wrote:
victorsra wrote:Nice podcast https://soundcloud.com/user-523674328/7 ... w-richards About how was the creation of the RWC, who opposed, and etc. Interestingly Ireland and Scotland were against it (like they are against the Nations Championship).


The Irish Union were very staunchly against anything that would be a move towards professionalism. Tony ward a fly half was shunned for doing interviews and wasn't allowed set up a rugby camp ( all the other home nations allowed their players to have camps).


How would you describe them now? From a total outsider's view, they seem to do a good job especially at grass roots rugby. The ALDI sponsorship was (for me) a surprising thing and showed that they really grew a lot in the last years. Are the other views still extremely conservative or is it about to change?
How to grow rugby worldwide?
Look at the world ranking in July. Teams ranked 1-10 have to play one team from 11-20 (they don't play in a regular competition) away the next year. 11-20 play 21-30 away and so on. Yes, it really is that simple.

Posts: 5
Joined: Sun, 10 Nov 2019, 01:15
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Increase the RWC to 24 teams

Postby Rarofra » Mon, 11 Nov 2019, 14:32

About the format of an eventual 24 teams RWC, why not an intermediate proposal between 8 or 16 teams playoff?

My Idea is first stage with 6 pools of 4. The fisrt 2 teams of each group qualify for round 2 and next RWC. They would form 4 pools of 3, with the winners playing semifinals and finals.

Also, the 3rd ranked teams of first stage could qualify for a "bowl" tournament. They would be set in 2 pools of 3 with the winners playing for 13th place and a direct place in the next RWC.

This would increase the total number of matches from 48 to 59 but the top ranked teams would keep playing 7 games, so the duration wouldn't need to change. Also the battle for 13th would give extra motivation for tier two nations and even the possibility of classify 3rd and play 2 extra matches at least would also motivate the weakest teams.

I know many people hate pools of three and that a bowl tournament could face strong opposition from pro leagues, but I believe this format would be the one which real objectives to all teams and emotions to fans would be most democratically spread.

Also the 6 lowered ranked teams would play just 3 games but all 18 reamaining teams would play 5 games at least (12 would play 5, 2 would play 6 and 4 would play 7).

Posts: 3006
Joined: Wed, 14 Oct 2015, 13:30
National Flag:
GermanyGermany

Re: Increase the RWC to 24 teams

Postby RugbyLiebe » Mon, 11 Nov 2019, 14:49

Rarofra wrote:My Idea is first stage with 6 pools of 4. The fisrt 2 teams of each group qualify for round 2 and next RWC. They would form 4 pools of 3, with the winners playing semifinals and finals.

I know many people hate pools of three and that a bowl tournament could face strong opposition from pro leagues, but I believe this format would be the one which real objectives to all teams and emotions to fans would be most democratically spread.


The problem with this is, that it takes 7 days longer and/or creates again the disadvantage of massively uneven turnarounds. It was also abonded in soccer, because the two teams playing the last match know exactly which score they need to advance. I know a lot of people say, that it won't be a problem in rugby, but if a team knows they need a bonus point, it will massively alter their game plan, as they will i.e. always take the penalty kick to the lineout to score that 4 tries.

Also 16 teams playing in the knock-out-phase and not for the golden pineapple (German idiom about two teams playing irrelevant games) is way better. I am more than happy to see 4 teams having one less game for the 4 more teams being part of the RWC. I couldn't care less about those ranking games as well. For me the more teams that are still in theory able to win the RWC the better.
How to grow rugby worldwide?
Look at the world ranking in July. Teams ranked 1-10 have to play one team from 11-20 (they don't play in a regular competition) away the next year. 11-20 play 21-30 away and so on. Yes, it really is that simple.

Posts: 5544
Joined: Sat, 05 Jul 2014, 02:44
National Flag:
AustraliaAustralia

Re: Increase the RWC to 24 teams

Postby thatrugbyguy » Mon, 11 Nov 2019, 15:38

What if we did things slightly differently.

8 groups of 3 (top 2 progress)
4 groups of 4 (winners progress)
Semi-final
Final

Teams still play a maximum of 7 games. We still have the issue of short turnaround times in the first round, however, if it can be scheduled so there’s at least 5 days break between group matches it might be workable.

Posts: 5
Joined: Sun, 10 Nov 2019, 01:15
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Increase the RWC to 24 teams

Postby Rarofra » Mon, 11 Nov 2019, 15:46

RugbyLiebe wrote:
Rarofra wrote:My Idea is first stage with 6 pools of 4. The fisrt 2 teams of each group qualify for round 2 and next RWC. They would form 4 pools of 3, with the winners playing semifinals and finals.

I know many people hate pools of three and that a bowl tournament could face strong opposition from pro leagues, but I believe this format would be the one which real objectives to all teams and emotions to fans would be most democratically spread.


The problem with this is, that it takes 7 days longer and/or creates again the disadvantage of massively uneven turnarounds. It was also abonded in soccer, because the two teams playing the last match know exactly which score they need to advance. I know a lot of people say, that it won't be a problem in rugby, but if a team knows they need a bonus point, it will massively alter their game plan, as they will i.e. always take the penalty kick to the lineout to score that 4 tries.

Also 16 teams playing in the knock-out-phase and not for the golden pineapple (German idiom about two teams playing irrelevant games) is way better. I am more than happy to see 4 teams having one less game for the 4 more teams being part of the RWC. I couldn't care less about those ranking games as well. For me the more teams that are still in theory able to win the RWC the better.


Yeah, I get your point, but pools of 3 are more disturbing when 2 teams qualify for next round (as It happens in volleyball frequently) because the teams sometimes can make an informal "deal" and find a result that qualifies both. However with just one team advancing, I think this issue is reduced. If you are in the last game playing for a draw, that's because you had a better performance before and deserved it.

On the other hand I always felt the formats with best 3rd ranked qualifying or creating unbalanced pools by default are much more 'unfair' because it seems the fate of the intermediate level teams is much more dependent of the draws than in a format where all pools give the same number of spots.

About the lenght, the current RWC already have bye rounds with the pool of 5 format, so I believe it wouldn't be really affected.

PreviousNext

Return to Rugby Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: BigG, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot] and 16 guests