Tier 2 & 3 Rugby Forum

World Rugby announces historic agreement on long-term calend

Posts: 388
Joined: Wed, 11 Jun 2014, 07:45
National Flag:
ArgentinaArgentina

Re: World Rugby announces historic agreement on long-term ca

Postby carbonero » Mon, 22 May 2017, 19:28

sk 88 wrote:With Super Rugby's contraction hopefully this stupid switch of internationals from June to July can be booted into the long grass where it belongs.

Not really. Super Rugby will have one extra round in 2018.

Posts: 1351
Joined: Thu, 23 Feb 2017, 01:37
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: World Rugby announces historic agreement on long-term ca

Postby TheStroBro » Mon, 22 May 2017, 21:51

dropkick wrote:A 10 month season for professional rugby players is insanity.

Aviva and Pro 12 have 12 sides, their season should contract immensely. No reason to play as much as they do.

I can't believe I read that stuff this morning...owners at Aviva are idiots.

Posts: 11
Joined: Thu, 28 Jul 2016, 13:49
National Flag:
PolandPoland

Re: World Rugby announces historic agreement on long-term ca

Postby tellchar » Sat, 03 Feb 2018, 23:11

I hope that July window for tests means that european club season will start at October instead of September, and players will have 2 months for rest and pre-games. But in my opinion the best solution is to make one 5-6 week window for tests in Sept-Oct, as I wrote in thread:
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1431&start=25

User avatar
Posts: 199
Joined: Mon, 28 Apr 2014, 23:16
National Flag:
NetherlandsNetherlands

Re: World Rugby announces historic agreement on long-term ca

Postby Silver Fox » Sun, 11 Mar 2018, 19:33

Pfjuuw, I finally figured it out.

People have been complaining consistently about the lack of opportunities to play against T1 nations.
If that happens I can't help thinking of the announcement last year of the agreement on a global calendar for 2020 to 2031.
Among other things it mentioned an increase of 39% of tier2 against tier1 matches based on merit.

At the time I was very sceptical. Why? Because 6 matches in November has been the case for years, so nothing new there. Tours to Japan and the Americas also had been part of the annual schedule already. And furthermore because part of the expansion was visiting and hosting the Pacific Islanders where historically already over 70% of all t1-t2 matches have been involving the PI's and Japan. So, much more of the same and I didn't see a significant improvement.
On top of that, this fixing of the status quo was agreed for a period of 12 (!!) years.

At the time I was sceptical but, I have to admit, without having been able to look at the specifics.
So I looked up the article and tried to put all the tids and bits together to figure out what it was that was agreed upon.
https://www.worldrugby.org/news/232038

Here is a summary of all the hints that are given in the article.
General bla bla:
- Emerging rugby powers will be integrated into the July and November windows, providing annual opportunities against the SANZAAR and Six Nations unions across July and November.
- annual opportunities for the Pacific Islands, USA, Canada, Japan and the European nations, including Georgia and Romania.

Cocerning the schedule:
- SANZAAR Unions committed to hosting tier two nations in July window.
- France and England to tour the Pacific Islands while USA, Canada and Japan also host tours
- Georgia and Romania to host matches against Six Nations unions within the July window
- a rotation principle that includes emerging rugby powers
- I read a comment by Steve Tew somewhere (but can't find the article anymore) that there will be more diversity to the July program to make the schedule more attractive to the public. And: they will not be giving up too many T1 tests because revenues need to stay garanteed.
- Six Nations unions to collectively host a guaranteed minimum of six tier two fixtures in each November window

Concerning numbers:
- Six Nations unions to collectively host a guaranteed minimum of six tier two fixtures in each November window
- Tours to SANZAAR nations immediately after a Rugby World Cup year will be reduced to two matches, promoting player welfare the year after rugby’s biggest event
- July window comprises three tests (with the exception of the year after Rugby World Cup when SANZAAR unions will host two-test series)
- Record minimum of 110 tier one v tier two matches over the period as emerging rugby nations are integrated into the schedule throughout the period (a 39 per cent increase on the previous schedule)

And for me the crucial one:
- Ability for rankings to determine inclusion of tier two teams in the schedule after Rugby World Cup 2019 and 2023 tournaments to ensure top emerging teams at the time are provided with tier one opportunities based on merit

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

So in July Japan, the Americas, the Pacific Islands and Europe host 6N tours and the RC teams are hosting 1 t2 team each.
How does this work out and how do the figures add up?

Let's first take a look at the schedule as it is now. The most representative is that of 2016:
In brackets the ranking per Januari 1st of that year.
The colours obviously present the region a nation is from.
Image

We see that in 2016 11 T1 vs T2 matches have been played, 4 in June and 7 in November.
Drawing up the same schedules for the last 2 full RWC cycles (2012-2015 and 2106-2019) we come up with 36 and 40 matches respectively.

When the 4 RC unions exchange 1 of their T1 matches for a T2 match that would also leave 4 6N teams with a slot to tour a T2 nation. That's 8 additional matches each year.
So I reckon 2 teams will do an American tour with a match in Argentina and 2 against the best 2 of the region.
1 Team will still do a Japan tour and 3 will visit the remaining RC nations. My reckoning is also that 2 of these 4 will visit a T2 European nation while the other 2 make a stop on the Islands.
With the emphasis on using world rankings while determining inclusion in the schedule at the time the hosting T2 nations should be the 2 best qualified of each region.

As for the visiting teams it should be the best ranked teams. In July Japan and American teams should be excluded. They already have 2 T1 fixtures and at home at that.

Which gives me as a possible schedule (14 + 7 = 21 matches):
Image

Or for a post RWC year, given that it will only have 2 weekends in July (4 + 7 = 11 matches):
Image

Checking the numbers:
The last 2 RWC cycles we saw 76 matches between T1 and T2.
The above schedule gives us 11 (post RWC) + 21 + 21 + 0 in a RWC year = 53 matches per cycle.
2 Times 53 is 106 matches (approx. 110) which is 39% more than 76.
I guess that makes my above guesses fairly educated.

I'd say: look up your favorite team and decide if you like what's in it for you and if you like how the calendar might look like.
Remember that I left out possible Tier2 vs Tier2 matches and Tier2 vs Tier3 possibilities.

I hope World Rugby will be very strict about giving 'opportunities based on ranking at the time' and use the rankings at a certain date (e.g. January 1st of the year in question). That will bring extra incentive to being in the region's top 2. And some nations are close together. Romania-Spain-Russia, Tonga-Samoa, Uruguay-Canada.
Furthermore it should be a challenge to be in the top 16. The likes of USA, Romania, Uruguay, Spain should really challenge the PI's to steel that T1 November and July tests from them.
But now I start speculating based on assumptions. :roll:

Do I still need to be sceptical?
If it turns out to be like I have guessed, then with current rankings, still 60% of all the matches concerned will be with Japan and the PI's, with all the withcoming advantages for them.

So, is anything changing for the better?
Unlikely in the short term. But within WR's possibilities there is possibly little more they can do.
The positive thing though is that it is in the tier2's own hands to enlarge their possibilities.

Personally I just have to trust that the professional structures that are developing here and there will improve the rankings of the emerging nations and make the balance shift rather sooner than later.
Because if you ask me, the future of global rugby should not be on some tiny islands somewhere in the Pacific.
Last edited by Silver Fox on Mon, 12 Nov 2018, 23:34, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Posts: 199
Joined: Mon, 28 Apr 2014, 23:16
National Flag:
NetherlandsNetherlands

Re: World Rugby announces historic agreement on long-term ca

Postby Silver Fox » Sun, 10 Jun 2018, 13:05

I know it is still way beyond the horizon and incredibly premature but with the June tests going on I can't help watching the World Rugby rankings with the post World Cup T2 schedules in mind.
Knowing that the rankings will be decisive in who gets T1 tests post RWC2019 the results of T2 tests will gain in significance.
After this June there will be only one November series, one more regional championship, one June series and of course the World Cup itself to gain ranking points.
Especially where interregional matches are concerned, there are not going to be more than a handfull of games left.

So, with current standings and assuming I figured out how it is going to work correctly (see my previous post), who is going to get T1 tests?
Code: Select all
JULY 2020
Oceania:        Fiji            Runners up: Tonga, Samoa
Japan:           Japan
Europe:         Georgia      Runners up: Romania, Russia
Americas:      USA           Runners up: Uruguay, Canada

NOVEMBER 2020
Fiji, Japan, Georgia, Tonga, USA, Samoa      Runners up: Romania, Uruguay

In 2021 there will be more opportunities for T1 tests in July but eitherway it will be interesting to see if any of these teams succeed in securing these opportunities.
Can Samoa overtake Tonga?
Can Russia take Romania's position?
Will Canada bounce back to become America's number two again?
And internationally: Will Romania or Uruguay be able to overtake Samoa or even Tonga to gain a November T1 test?

Posts: 2312
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 09:18
Location: Bucharest
National Flag:
RomaniaRomania

Re: World Rugby announces historic agreement on long-term ca

Postby amz » Sun, 23 Sep 2018, 21:58


Posts: 298
Joined: Mon, 12 Mar 2018, 02:19
National Flag:
EnglandEngland

Re: World Rugby announces historic agreement on long-term ca

Postby Blurandski » Sun, 23 Sep 2018, 22:12

amz wrote:https://www.sarugbymag.co.za/pichot-proposes-nations-league/

And back to closed shop


Not really, first off it's 12 teams (USA & Japan). Secondly they could add new divisions relatively easily, and since it's merit based with promotion and relegation it offers T2 countries a clear pathway to regular T1 competition. Lastly it could also lead to T1 being merit based, i.e top 2 divisions (12 teams) or the like.

Posts: 2312
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 09:18
Location: Bucharest
National Flag:
RomaniaRomania

Re: World Rugby announces historic agreement on long-term ca

Postby amz » Sun, 23 Sep 2018, 22:40

Could you please take a look at the beginning of this thread to see how was approached the new calendar? Thanks

Posts: 298
Joined: Mon, 12 Mar 2018, 02:19
National Flag:
EnglandEngland

Re: World Rugby announces historic agreement on long-term ca

Postby Blurandski » Sun, 23 Sep 2018, 22:53

amz wrote:Could you please take a look at the beginning of this thread to see how was approached the new calendar? Thanks


As far as I see there's no reason why the stipulations in the GCA couldn't co-exist with the Nations League.

> Tier one tours to Pacific Islands, Japan, Canada, USA, Georgia and Romania

Could happen outside the NL, or happen as part of the fixtures.

> 39 per cent increase in tier one v tier two fixtures with emerging nations integrated on merit

Ditto

> Long-term agreement creates commercial certainty for all unions

Will improve.

If anything this is better, for the 12th ranked union could have to have a playoff with the 13th ranked nation in the world each year.

The GCA is better for the T1.5 teams, but ultimately putting a system in place for teams to rise is better than one-off improvement (see: implementing pro/rel w/6N v adding another team).

Posts: 1296
Joined: Sun, 18 May 2014, 13:27
National Flag:
AustraliaAustralia

Re: World Rugby announces historic agreement on long-term ca

Postby Working Class Rugger » Mon, 24 Sep 2018, 00:07

Blurandski wrote:
amz wrote:https://www.sarugbymag.co.za/pichot-proposes-nations-league/

And back to closed shop


Not really, first off it's 12 teams (USA & Japan). Secondly they could add new divisions relatively easily, and since it's merit based with promotion and relegation it offers T2 countries a clear pathway to regular T1 competition. Lastly it could also lead to T1 being merit based, i.e top 2 divisions (12 teams) or the like.


I'd like it to be split over two divisions but with at least 16 teams in each division. Four pools of 4 teams. Promotion and relegation with a full business plan backing it up.

Posts: 388
Joined: Wed, 11 Jun 2014, 07:45
National Flag:
ArgentinaArgentina

Re: World Rugby announces historic agreement on long-term ca

Postby carbonero » Mon, 24 Sep 2018, 05:53

Blurandski wrote:As far as I see there's no reason why the stipulations in the GCA couldn't co-exist with the Nations League.

The original report says that the June/July window would be axed for the tournament > https://www.rugbyrama.fr/rugby/internat ... tory.shtml

I call bullshit. I don’t see how this makes it past the council. The TV money won’t be enough to offset the matchday income of each union. It is not a coincidence that the Home nations are not mentioned in the report.

Posts: 15
Joined: Tue, 27 Jun 2017, 09:37
National Flag:
BelgiumBelgium

Re: World Rugby announces historic agreement on long-term ca

Postby bolleje » Mon, 24 Sep 2018, 08:15

If they go for the top 12 nations for the Nations League based on the rankings, that currently would leave Italy out (in favour of T2 countries Fiji, Japan and Tonga). For the near future, Georgia, USA and Samoa could realistically make the tournament too, so I wouldn't call it a closed shop. If it's really based on world rankings, then it is really the opposite...

User avatar
Posts: 514
Joined: Sat, 05 Jul 2014, 11:27

Re: World Rugby announces historic agreement on long-term ca

Postby ihateblazers » Mon, 24 Sep 2018, 10:15

Looking at t1 perspective having 6 nations teams in the same pool and ditto with rugby Championship sides would be pretty boring. Pools of 3 with 1 RC (+Japan and Fiji), 1 6N and 1 T2/T3 might be more interesting. You'd have to have 18 teams for that though...

Edit:
Or I guess you could have inter pool matchs in order to avoid that.

Posts: 1834
Joined: Sun, 20 Apr 2014, 16:57
Location: Leicester
National Flag:
Great BritainGreat Britain

Re: World Rugby announces historic agreement on long-term ca

Postby sk 88 » Mon, 24 Sep 2018, 10:46

Rugby administrators have little imagination and no ambition beyond self preservation.

"People say international rugby is boring because we just play the same sides over and over. I know let's have a new competition where we play the same sides again!"

If we want more competitions then we should be looking at proper continental championships for Asia-Oceania (Japan, Korea, HK + Aus, NZ, Samoa, Fiji, Tonga), for Europe (12 team to start or 16 doesn't matter in big picture) and for Americas (either 6 or 8 doesn't make a massive difference). Africa would be less competitive on the field and probably less lucrative off it too but well worth doing if the will was there.

This proposal under cuts the World Cup and largely cuts out T2 nations, increases matches for players, which brings conflict to the world game and doesn't even solve the problems it has identified and tried to fix.

So it will definitely happen.

Posts: 975
Joined: Tue, 27 May 2014, 20:40
Location: Europe
National Flag:
Great BritainGreat Britain

Re: World Rugby announces historic agreement on long-term ca

Postby Thomas » Mon, 24 Sep 2018, 11:44

I think it went along this lines over dinner:

WR: We are going to reform world Rugby...
T1 Europe : Will this affect 6 N?
WR: Yes
T1 Europe: Vetoed
WR: oh ok...
WR: The VP (Pichot) proposes a Nations League in November:
T1 Europe: Will it affect our matches? and TV Money?
WR: No but you must host a T2 Nation for a match
T1 Europe: yeah whatever as long as it doesn't affect our income stream
WR: As a bonus you get ranking points
T1 EUROPE: DEAL!

I hope is not ratified as I don't see how T2 is benefiting from this.

User avatar
Posts: 2187
Joined: Wed, 30 Apr 2014, 16:57

Re: World Rugby announces historic agreement on long-term ca

Postby 4N » Mon, 24 Sep 2018, 12:04

This is all because T1s are losing money playing the same opponents over and over, the public is losing interest in watching Australia beat Wales for a 30th time in a row. I thought tours were supposed to boost revenue and revive interest according to these people. :roll:

Posts: 298
Joined: Mon, 12 Mar 2018, 02:19
National Flag:
EnglandEngland

Re: World Rugby announces historic agreement on long-term ca

Postby Blurandski » Mon, 24 Sep 2018, 12:42

Yeah, holding a continental championship (June and/or November in Lions years?) is the way to go. The European one would be great, and the SH one even better, for Fiji/Samoa/Tonga/Japan/Uruguay/Namibia/Brazil/Kenya/HK etc never get to play the SH sides.

Posts: 4326
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: World Rugby announces historic agreement on long-term ca

Postby victorsra » Tue, 25 Sep 2018, 14:14

Not really, first off it's 12 teams (USA & Japan). Secondly they could add new divisions relatively easily, and since it's merit based with promotion and relegation it offers T2 countries a clear pathway to regular T1 competition. Lastly it could also lead to T1 being merit based, i.e top 2 divisions (12 teams) or the like.


Yes. If there are 2 divisions of 12 teams with the same format and playoffs between divisions it isn't a closed shop.

If the top teams of each group will play the SFs, we could have the runners ups of each group facing a promotion/relegation playoff against the runners ups of the 2nd division groups and the bottom teams of each group facing the winners of second division groups, meaning teams ranked between 13 and 20 would play T1s every year.

Exemple (using the current ranking):

1st division

A: NZ, SCO, FRA
B: IRE, ARG, FIJ
C: WAL, AUS, JAP
D: ENG, SA, TON


Playoffs:
Group A winner vs Group D winner - NZL vs ENG
Grupo B winner vs Group C winner - IRE vs WAL

2nd division

E: GEO, SPA, CAN
F: ITA, URU, GER
G: USA, RUS, KEN
H: SAM, ROM, HKG

1st-2nd division Promotion/Relegation Playoffs
Group A 2nd vs Group E 2nd - SCO vs SPA @SCO
Group B 2nd vs Group F 2nd - ARG vs URU @ ARG
Group C 2nd vs Grupo G 2nd - AUS vs RUS @AUS
Group D 2nd vs Group H 2nd - SA vs ROM @SA
Grupo H winner vs Group A 3rd - GEO vs FRA @GEO
Group G winner vs Group B 3rd - ITA vs FIJ @ITA
Group F winner vs Gruop C 3rd - USA vs JAP @USA
Group E winner vs Group D 3rd - SAM vs TON @SAM

2nd-3rd division relegation playoffs
Bottom teams of the 2nd division group facing the best teams of 4 regional championships: Europe, Americas, Africa and Asia-Oceania. Exemple: BEL, BRA, KOR, UGA;

BRA vs HKG @BRA
BEL vs KEN @BEL
KOR vs GER @KOR
UGA vs CAN @UGA
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

User avatar
Posts: 968
Joined: Thu, 28 Apr 2016, 14:02
Location: Las Canteras, Uruguay
National Flag:
UruguayUruguay

Re: World Rugby announces historic agreement on long-term ca

Postby NaBUru38 » Tue, 25 Sep 2018, 15:07

More matches between Six Nations teams? Bad idea.

More matches between Rugby Championship teams? Bad idea.

Test matches at neutral venues? Bad idea.

Posts: 4326
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: World Rugby announces historic agreement on long-term ca

Postby victorsra » Tue, 25 Sep 2018, 15:15

I am just trying to see how Pichot's project could be organized. But if I were planning a World League I would do it in a another way.
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

Posts: 1351
Joined: Thu, 23 Feb 2017, 01:37
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: World Rugby announces historic agreement on long-term ca

Postby TheStroBro » Tue, 25 Sep 2018, 15:20

victorsra wrote:I am just trying to see how Pichot's project could be organized. But if I were planning a World League I would do it in a another way.

A much better idea...Pumas in the ARC...

User avatar
Posts: 968
Joined: Thu, 28 Apr 2016, 14:02
Location: Las Canteras, Uruguay
National Flag:
UruguayUruguay

Re: World Rugby announces historic agreement on long-term ca

Postby NaBUru38 » Tue, 25 Sep 2018, 15:20

If World Rugby wants an annual tier 1 tournament, it must prevent neutral venues and intra-continental matches.

I'd suggest a double six-pack tournament.

Group World 1: New Zealand, Argentina, Fiji.
Group World 2: Australia, South Africa, Japan.

Group Europe 1: France, Ireland, Scotland.
Group Europe 2: England, Wales, Italy.

World 1 teams play Europe 1 teams, and World 2 teams play Europe 2 teams.

Europe hosts the tournament every other edition.

Posts: 4326
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: World Rugby announces historic agreement on long-term ca

Postby victorsra » Tue, 25 Sep 2018, 15:46

IIf a 12-teams World League goes one that way they should place only 1 TRC team in each group and 1 or 2 6N teams. It woudn't be that bad 2 6N teams in the same group as it would mean 2 matches between those countries in one year (the same number of matches TRC teams play against each other). And playoffs is another thing.

Not sure how bad playoff in neutral venues would be. The venues selection would be the major problem, as there'll be very few time for fans to travel.

A much better idea...Pumas in the ARC...


Won't happen. There is no chance to see Pumas playing 6 TRC matches + 5 ARC matches + 6 tests (or 5 according to Pichot's project) + all 16-19 Super Rugby matches (as Jaguares). You'd be the first one to call this amount of matches madness. And I'd fully agree with you.
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

Posts: 1351
Joined: Thu, 23 Feb 2017, 01:37
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: World Rugby announces historic agreement on long-term ca

Postby TheStroBro » Tue, 25 Sep 2018, 18:07

victorsra wrote:Won't happen. There is no chance to see Pumas playing 6 TRC matches + 5 ARC matches + 6 tests (or 5 according to Pichot's project) + all 16-19 Super Rugby matches (as Jaguares). You'd be the first one to call this amount of matches madness. And I'd fully agree with you.

Yes, yes I would.

This world league thing sounds pretty farcical as it will probably just pit T1s against each other. What about a Confederations Cup type deal?

6N-1
RE-1
RAN-1
SANZAAR-1
Oceania-1
Rugby Asia-1
Rugby Africa-1
Sud-America Rugby-1

Posts: 1296
Joined: Sun, 18 May 2014, 13:27
National Flag:
AustraliaAustralia

Re: World Rugby announces historic agreement on long-term ca

Postby Working Class Rugger » Wed, 26 Sep 2018, 02:05

TheStroBro wrote:
victorsra wrote:Won't happen. There is no chance to see Pumas playing 6 TRC matches + 5 ARC matches + 6 tests (or 5 according to Pichot's project) + all 16-19 Super Rugby matches (as Jaguares). You'd be the first one to call this amount of matches madness. And I'd fully agree with you.

Yes, yes I would.

This world league thing sounds pretty farcical as it will probably just pit T1s against each other. What about a Confederations Cup type deal?

6N-1
RE-1
RAN-1
SANZAAR-1
Oceania-1
Rugby Asia-1
Rugby Africa-1
Sud-America Rugby-1


I like the concept of a 'World League' but not in the form its been proposed. More as a means to help grow the game (and ideally opportunities to earn and develop) in the bottom half of T2 and top T2 nations. The top end of T2 could and should be getting more generalised exposure to T1 opposition via the current system with teams altering their travel plans to include them.

So on year Aus and NZ could go to Europe via the US and Canada. The next via Japan and Georgia and even every third year via Sth America. The NH team could do likewise.

A 'World League' should be pursued for those not in the Top 20 at present and could be reasonably easily achieved using current structures. Break it down to four regions:

Asia-Pacific,
Africa,
Americas and
Europe.

Set it up so that it includes 6 teams in each region. So for Asia-Pacific you'd have Korea, Hong Kong, Malaysia, Sri-Lanka etc. Europe would have Germany, Belgium, Netherlands, Portugal perhaps even Spain and the next best ranked team. Africa and the Americas much the same. They could either play home and away over the course of one or two years for 10 games with the top two from each progressing to a Cup tournament held centrally. WR can work with the local Unions to boost exposure, sponsorship etc. of the competition.

PreviousNext

Return to Rugby Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Armchair Fan, ficcp, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Gorbeh, sammo and 48 guests