Tier 2 & 3 Rugby Forum

Rugby World Cup 2023 Qualifying

Posts: 14
Joined: Tue, 04 Feb 2020, 17:22
National Flag:
FranceFrance

Re: Rugby World Cup 2023 Qualifying

Postby theDarky » Tue, 04 Feb 2020, 17:30

Concerning France, we will finish our championship very late this year and like every world cup year so the national team will have a short tour in Argentina ^^

But the French Barbarians (this team is perfect to test new players) will play both USA and Canada this summer too.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_July ... nion_tests

User avatar
Posts: 1313
Joined: Thu, 28 Apr 2016, 14:02
Location: Las Canteras, Uruguay
National Flag:
UruguayUruguay

Re: Rugby World Cup 2023 Qualifying

Postby NaBUru38 » Thu, 06 Feb 2020, 21:20

Hernan14 wrote:
Canalina wrote:It's not a perfectly democratic council like the FIFA one, ok, but it's a meritocratic one and is seems good to me


If it were meritocratic, Canada should have more council members than Ireland...based on the historical performances of the teams in the global competitions (RWC, WRWC, Sevens Series & Olympic games) :D

That's an interesting side. The voting criteria lean heavily on men's rugby.

Posts: 6356
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Rugby World Cup 2023 Qualifying

Postby victorsra » Thu, 06 Feb 2020, 21:55

The only thing that matters in the Council is the Men's RWC, which stopped in time, contracting the WR itself (as they are all the time talking about sevens and women's rugby). At least Olympic Sevens (Men's and Women's), Sevens World Series (as core team, maybe attached to the Olympic participation or even the RWC Sevens?) and women's RWC participation should count (3 in a row like the RWC?). This would basicaly mean at least Kenya and Spain should have a vote for their consistence in sevens (if they pass the governance criterea, that I if I'm not wrong prevents Tonga and Namibia to vote).
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

Posts: 6356
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Rugby World Cup 2023 Qualifying

Postby victorsra » Thu, 06 Feb 2020, 22:15

victorsra wrote:The only thing that matters in the Council is the Men's RWC, which stopped in time, contracting the WR itself (as they are all the time talking about sevens and women's rugby). At least Olympic Sevens (Men's and Women's), Sevens World Series (as core team, maybe attached to the Olympic participation or even the RWC Sevens?) and women's RWC participation should count (3 in a row like the RWC?). This would basicaly mean at least Kenya and Spain should have a vote for their consistence in sevens (if they pass the governance criterea, that I if I'm not wrong prevents Tonga and Namibia to vote).


I would have it more open, but knowing that it isn't realistic to expect radical changes in the Council, I'd see fairer something like this:

- 1 vote for men's national teams performances: 2 RWC's in a row or 2 Olympics in a row;

- 1 vote for women's national teams performances*: 2 RWC's in a row or 2 Olympics in a row;
*WR already reserves 1 vote for women when the country has 2 or 3 vote. Make it reflect local women's rugby situation!

- 1 vote for professional leagues: country with a full professional league or at least 2 professional franchises in international full professional leagues;

And all conditioned to governance (regular elections with power rotation, open accounts...). If the country doesn't pass governance standards, it should have no votes.

For regional unions, we could have:
- 1 vote for promoting anual 15-a-side senior men's competitions with at least X% of full members involved + at least 1 senior women's competition;
- 1 vote for promoting anual 15-a-side junior competitions with at least X% of full members involved;
- 1 vote for promoting anual sevens with at least X tournaments and X% of full members involved;

This would make everybody work much more properly.
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

Posts: 3191
Joined: Wed, 14 Oct 2015, 13:30
National Flag:
GermanyGermany

Re: Rugby World Cup 2023 Qualifying

Postby RugbyLiebe » Fri, 07 Feb 2020, 08:10

victorsra wrote:
victorsra wrote:The only thing that matters in the Council is the Men's RWC, which stopped in time, contracting the WR itself (as they are all the time talking about sevens and women's rugby). At least Olympic Sevens (Men's and Women's), Sevens World Series (as core team, maybe attached to the Olympic participation or even the RWC Sevens?) and women's RWC participation should count (3 in a row like the RWC?). This would basicaly mean at least Kenya and Spain should have a vote for their consistence in sevens (if they pass the governance criterea, that I if I'm not wrong prevents Tonga and Namibia to vote).


I would have it more open, but knowing that it isn't realistic to expect radical changes in the Council, I'd see fairer something like this:

- 1 vote for men's national teams performances: 2 RWC's in a row or 2 Olympics in a row;

- 1 vote for women's national teams performances*: 2 RWC's in a row or 2 Olympics in a row;
*WR already reserves 1 vote for women when the country has 2 or 3 vote. Make it reflect local women's rugby situation!

- 1 vote for professional leagues: country with a full professional league or at least 2 professional franchises in international full professional leagues;

And all conditioned to governance (regular elections with power rotation, open accounts...). If the country doesn't pass governance standards, it should have no votes.

For regional unions, we could have:
- 1 vote for promoting anual 15-a-side senior men's competitions with at least X% of full members involved + at least 1 senior women's competition;
- 1 vote for promoting anual 15-a-side junior competitions with at least X% of full members involved;
- 1 vote for promoting anual sevens with at least X tournaments and X% of full members involved;

This would make everybody work much more properly.


Hm, I think this is too complicated. Also imho, votes should never be based on how good you compete.
Have your national union pay a certain amount per member (or the "voting level" you reach) to World Rugby. Then allocate votes passed on number of members. By this you make sure, that numbers won't be inflated on purpose to gain more votes. Also you get serious numbers about your Union's members.

1) You get one vote, when:
a) You have over 5k, but under 20k members in your Union
b) you have active men's XV and 7s and women's teams (here 7s is enough). At least four games/ one 7s tournament a year is a must.
c) have an active national league system in men's XV with at least 20 active clubs taking part in various levels
d) you have active U18 and U20 sides (2 games per year per age group mandatory)
e) you have fulfilled all of the above for at least 5 years.

2) You get three votes, when
a) you fulfill all of the above and have over 100k members
b) have competed in a RWC, a Women's RWC or the World 7s Series in the past

3) You get 4 votes, when
a) you fulfill all of the above and have over 500k members

You get 5 votes, when
a) you fulfill all of the above and have over 1000k members

There is a review process on a set month every year. If a Union doesn't fullfil the requirements anymore, they are put on review (1e obviously is only for initial qualification). If they don't fullfil all the requirements for a second year, they lose their vote (or some of them).
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: 6356
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Rugby World Cup 2023 Qualifying

Postby victorsra » Fri, 07 Feb 2020, 13:15

RugbyLiebe wrote:
victorsra wrote:
victorsra wrote:The only thing that matters in the Council is the Men's RWC, which stopped in time, contracting the WR itself (as they are all the time talking about sevens and women's rugby). At least Olympic Sevens (Men's and Women's), Sevens World Series (as core team, maybe attached to the Olympic participation or even the RWC Sevens?) and women's RWC participation should count (3 in a row like the RWC?). This would basicaly mean at least Kenya and Spain should have a vote for their consistence in sevens (if they pass the governance criterea, that I if I'm not wrong prevents Tonga and Namibia to vote).


I would have it more open, but knowing that it isn't realistic to expect radical changes in the Council, I'd see fairer something like this:

- 1 vote for men's national teams performances: 2 RWC's in a row or 2 Olympics in a row;

- 1 vote for women's national teams performances*: 2 RWC's in a row or 2 Olympics in a row;
*WR already reserves 1 vote for women when the country has 2 or 3 vote. Make it reflect local women's rugby situation!

- 1 vote for professional leagues: country with a full professional league or at least 2 professional franchises in international full professional leagues;

And all conditioned to governance (regular elections with power rotation, open accounts...). If the country doesn't pass governance standards, it should have no votes.

For regional unions, we could have:
- 1 vote for promoting anual 15-a-side senior men's competitions with at least X% of full members involved + at least 1 senior women's competition;
- 1 vote for promoting anual 15-a-side junior competitions with at least X% of full members involved;
- 1 vote for promoting anual sevens with at least X tournaments and X% of full members involved;

This would make everybody work much more properly.


Hm, I think this is too complicated. Also imho, votes should never be based on how good you compete.
Have your national union pay a certain amount per member (or the "voting level" you reach) to World Rugby. Then allocate votes passed on number of members. By this you make sure, that numbers won't be inflated on purpose to gain more votes. Also you get serious numbers about your Union's members.

1) You get one vote, when:
a) You have over 5k, but under 20k members in your Union
b) you have active men's XV and 7s and women's teams (here 7s is enough). At least four games/ one 7s tournament a year is a must.
c) have an active national league system in men's XV with at least 20 active clubs taking part in various levels
d) you have active U18 and U20 sides (2 games per year per age group mandatory)
e) you have fulfilled all of the above for at least 5 years.

2) You get three votes, when
a) you fulfill all of the above and have over 100k members
b) have competed in a RWC, a Women's RWC or the World 7s Series in the past

3) You get 4 votes, when
a) you fulfill all of the above and have over 500k members

You get 5 votes, when
a) you fulfill all of the above and have over 1000k members

There is a review process on a set month every year. If a Union doesn't fullfil the requirements anymore, they are put on review (1e obviously is only for initial qualification). If they don't fullfil all the requirements for a second year, they lose their vote (or some of them).

Forget any idea of using number of players. There isn't a real global census to control it. Some Unions totaly lie about them.

Btw, who counts as a player? This definition doesn't exist as a parameter to the census, which makes it MUCH more complicated. And how to be sure everybody will properly do it every year (and who will pay?).

The strenght of the national team is defintly not realy fair, but no rupture will be possible. So it is the only realistic measure in the moment that is feasible to use and that could be accepted (or do you believe those Cartel Nations would accept to have the same number of votes than Madagascar?). It is the easiest control.
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

Posts: 301
Joined: Thu, 12 Dec 2019, 21:26
National Flag:
EnglandEngland

Re: Rugby World Cup 2023 Qualifying

Postby Chester-Donnelly » Mon, 10 Feb 2020, 13:02

Ireland (who have never made it to a World Cup semi final) are currently one of the top seeds for the RWC2023 draw, thanks to World Rugby's flawed rankings system and their decision to use that flawed system for seeding.

Posts: 5640
Joined: Sat, 05 Jul 2014, 02:44
National Flag:
AustraliaAustralia

Re: Rugby World Cup 2023 Qualifying

Postby thatrugbyguy » Mon, 10 Feb 2020, 14:33

I just don't understand why you can't do the draw 12-18 months out. This thing about needing to give people to have enough time to book accomodation is frankly bull shit. If you cannot sell the 2 million tickets within 12-18 months then something is wrong with the event.

Posts: 3191
Joined: Wed, 14 Oct 2015, 13:30
National Flag:
GermanyGermany

Re: Rugby World Cup 2023 Qualifying

Postby RugbyLiebe » Mon, 10 Feb 2020, 16:13

victorsra wrote:Forget any idea of using number of players. There isn't a real global census to control it. Some Unions totaly lie about them.

Btw, who counts as a player? This definition doesn't exist as a parameter to the census, which makes it MUCH more complicated. And how to be sure everybody will properly do it every year (and who will pay?).

The strenght of the national team is defintly not realy fair, but no rupture will be possible. So it is the only realistic measure in the moment that is feasible to use and that could be accepted (or do you believe those Cartel Nations would accept to have the same number of votes than Madagascar?). It is the easiest control.


My idea is, that you can implement a global census with this. Unions won't lie about it, if it costs them money. I don't care about playing numbers. I care about membership numbers. Is it realistic? I don't thing a lot of change is realistic with the way World Rugby is acting anyway.
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: 6356
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Rugby World Cup 2023 Qualifying

Postby victorsra » Mon, 10 Feb 2020, 16:41

Many unions lie, but the problem for them is not intentionaly lie. Is the criteria. Who is considered a player? Think about this. You need to have played a competition match to enter? Which tournaments? Only those organized by national unions? But what about local unions, community rugby? Many countries operate with regionalization. And Sevens too? How do you control this? Online match sheets? How do make this happen in realy poor countries? And who will be in charge of this in totaly amateur organizations with barely any budget? What about realy amateur rugby, are you going to make it bureaucratic? And what about junior rugby? And tag, touch, beach? If you go for online control, will WR provide an universal system? And how you consider a player inactive? Who will control the exclusion of former players?

Too complicated.
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

Posts: 3191
Joined: Wed, 14 Oct 2015, 13:30
National Flag:
GermanyGermany

Re: Rugby World Cup 2023 Qualifying

Postby RugbyLiebe » Mon, 10 Feb 2020, 16:48

victorsra wrote:Many unions lie, but the problem for them is not intentionaly lie. Is the criterea. Who is considered a player? Think about this. You need to have played a competition match to enter? Which tournaments? Only those organized by national unions? But what about local unions, community rugby? Sevens too? How do you control this? Online match sheets? How do you this in realy poor countries? What about realy amateur rugby, are you going to make it bureaucratic? And what about junior rugby? And tag, touch, beach? If you go for online control, will WR provide an universal system? And how you consider a player inactive? Who will control the exclusion of former players?

Too complicated.


Again, I don't care about playing numbers, I want Union member numbers. Would be interesting therefore how you do this in other countries. When you play rugby, you register with your union right. If you stop playing but are still a member in your club, you are still registered within the national union, right? That's how things are done in Germany. My club has to tell the state sports federation as well as the state's rugby federation and the national rugby federation our club's member numbers annually i.e.. You don't like to cheat there as you get i.e. state money per member.
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: 6356
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Rugby World Cup 2023 Qualifying

Postby victorsra » Mon, 10 Feb 2020, 18:24

What you mean by Union playing numbers? There is no point on using random numbers without any way to make sure they are right. There's no such thing as being a "member" of a club or being "registered" by your union in most countries. People stop playing and stay "registered". Most people play in regional unions tournaments, not national ones, and therefore are out of the national union control. What happens in one country doesn't happen in another. A country can simply "register" every tag playing kid and fuck off the liability of the data.

My club has to tell the state sports federation as well as the state's rugby federation and the national rugby federation our club's member numbers annually i.e.. You don't like to cheat there as you get i.e. state money per member.

:lol: This is valid for your country, not others.

In many countries "clubs" are not clubs, just a bunch of people playing together without a club house, a field, nothing. And we are talking about top divisions, national championships.

The only way to start making it possible is WR creating an universal register system for match sheets (like the World Rugby Passport that you use for the Rugby Ready stuff) that all national unions must use for official competitions, giving access for all regional unions in regionalized countries. With this , the census would be players in match sheets in the system. But again, in very poor countries, is this realistic? And countries that already have their systems will migrate? I have defended this in the past, however right now in unrealistic.
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

Online
Posts: 4065
Joined: Tue, 06 Oct 2015, 22:54
National Flag:
SpainSpain

Re: Rugby World Cup 2023 Qualifying

Postby Armchair Fan » Mon, 10 Feb 2020, 20:57

You are under the assumption that World Rugby wants to know the real playing numbers. They know the data given by unions is unreliable. Best case, because of different methodologies. Worst case, plain fantasy stats to maintain funding. But it wouldn't be a good look if their claims of 9 millions players became 5 or 6 the following year. That's what happens when good guys caring about the development of the sport clash with media and marketing needs. The very same reason why we've had to swallow the joke of women's rugby rankings, with inactive teams as high as 14th.

I know how many teams Spain has playing in senior men and women rugby, as well as U18, U16 and U14 every season for the past four years. There is no way in this world that the data released by our union and others, then published in World Rugby reports, match reality. It's impossible that a 1 to 10 ratio in U18 becomes a 1 to 4 ratio in global stats. And I say this not because I'd like to show off how much rugby there is in my country, you can have a small pool of players and be highly competitive or have lots of amateur rugby and national teams who are shambles. I say it with sadness because of a real interest in these things.

Posts: 6356
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Rugby World Cup 2023 Qualifying

Postby victorsra » Mon, 10 Feb 2020, 21:17

Armchair Fan wrote:You are under the assumption that World Rugby wants to know the real playing numbers. They know the data given by unions is unreliable. Best case, because of different methodologies. Worst case, plain fantasy stats to maintain funding. But it wouldn't be a good look if their claims of 9 millions players became 5 or 6 the following year. That's what happens when good guys caring about the development of the sport clash with media and marketing needs. The very same reason why we've had to swallow the joke of women's rugby rankings, with inactive teams as high as 14th.

I know how many teams Spain has playing in senior men and women rugby, as well as U18, U16 and U14 every season for the past four years. There is no way in this world that the data released by our union and others, then published in World Rugby reports, match reality. It's impossible that a 1 to 10 ratio in U18 becomes a 1 to 4 ratio in global stats. And I say this not because I'd like to show off how much rugby there is in my country, you can have a small pool of players and be highly competitive or have lots of amateur rugby and national teams who are shambles. I say it with sadness because of a real interest in these things.

Au contraire, I think it is ridiculous to use the number of players WR gives for anything. It is totaly useless the way it is for any purpose. Brazilian and propably Chinese numbers are bad jokes and defintly more countries have bizarre fictions. To use it as criterea for the Council is absolutely undoable.
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

Posts: 268
Joined: Wed, 16 Apr 2014, 23:39
National Flag:
AustraliaAustralia

Re: Rugby World Cup 2023 Qualifying

Postby antlat » Tue, 11 Feb 2020, 07:44

Brave Blossoms head coach Jamie Joseph in middle of conflict between JRFU, World Rugby



An escalating spat between World Rugby and the Japan Rugby Football Union was behind Brave Blossoms coach Jamie Joseph’s recent comments about the timing of a new domestic league, a source close to the matter has told Kyodo News.
In his first press conference since signing on for another four years, Joseph surprised many on Jan. 29 by saying he favored a domestic league that ran from January to May.
He also rued the demise of the Sunwolves and said university rugby was not ideal preparation for test matches.
The source said the reason for the comments was that Joseph had been blindsided by the JRFU’s decision to push ahead with an August/September to January season that would not only limit the time Joseph has with national team players but create overlaps when they are required by both club and country.

In the short term, it would conflict with a new tournament proposed by World Rugby, that Joseph and his staff supported at a recent meeting in London.
In the long term, it could have repercussions if reports Saturday that South Africa is joining the Six Nations from 2024 prove to be true, as this could open the door for Japan to play in a revamped Rugby Championship, which runs from August through the end of September.

As far as World Rugby is immediately concerned, following the collapse last year of its proposed Nations Championship — which would have seen the likes of Japan playing Tier 1 nations in a 12-team competition — the sport’s governing body is hoping to launch a worldwide tournament for the top emerging nations by 2021.
“Enhancing competition opportunity, meaning and competitiveness for our unions outside of the Six Nations and The Rugby Championship is critical to the future growth, prosperity and sustainability of the global game,” World Rugby Chairman Bill Beaumont said in a recent press release.
High performance and coaching staff from Tier 2 nations including Canada, Fiji, Georgia, Japan, Namibia, Romania, Russia, Samoa, Spain, Tonga, Uruguay, and the United States, as well as representatives from all six World Rugby regions, SANZAAR and the Six Nations met in London to discuss how to bridge the gap between developing and elite sides.
“The key outcome from the meeting was alignment in principle on exploring a competition model that will bring greater context and structure to the international calendar for emerging nations, providing a merit-based process for linking the pathway from the regional tournaments in to a high performance level global competition,” World Rugby said in a press release.


It is believed the new tournament would be regionally based with games to be played in August through October. But the JRFU, the source says, has requested the Asia/Pacific teams play their games from March to May.

This is said to have angered Joseph, who made it clear that player welfare and success of the national team should be the JRFU’s main priority and that the Brave Blossoms should be together from June to November to ensure they are fully prepared for the July and November tests and whatever competitions they play during the summer.
As Joseph pointed out, if the JRFU continues with its plan to run domestic rugby along the traditional August/September to January season, then there will be times when there is a direct conflict between a player’s commitments to his club and his country.
This year the Top League runs from January to May after the 2019-2020 season was delayed five months for the Rugby World Cup.
The national team will then meet up in late May to prepare for a test against Wales on June 27 that falls outside the official test window. Joseph will then have his players through November, during which time they will also play England (twice), Scotland and Ireland in tests organized by World Rugby and against the All Blacks at the end of October (outside the test window and arranged by the JRFU and New Zealand Rugby).

“Having the national players together for that time and then giving them December off is perfect in terms of player welfare,” the source said.

The JRFU is currently in the process of trying to formulate a new league that will start in 2021, following an expanded Top League from December 2020 to March 2021 that will be part of the process to determine which teams play in the new competition.
However, confusion remains the order of the day with corporate team coaches (not to mention Joseph) and players still unsure what the future holds, in either the short or long term.
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/sports/202 ... kJS6TEzaUk

A bit more info on the Tier 2 tournament by World Rugby in bold.

I like the concept as there will be a link between the regional tournaments and the new global tournament.
Hopefully it gets up.

Posts: 3191
Joined: Wed, 14 Oct 2015, 13:30
National Flag:
GermanyGermany

Re: Rugby World Cup 2023 Qualifying

Postby RugbyLiebe » Tue, 11 Feb 2020, 08:00

Rugbyliebe wrote:Again, I don't care about playing numbers, I want Union member numbers.

victorsra wrote:What you mean by Union playing numbers?


Honest question, for the third time, you answer as if I wrote playing numbers. Why? I wrote "member numbers" not "playing numbers"
I never ever wrote playing numbers, but deny it now for the third time. I fully agree that playing numbers are useless.
Member numbers are a valid number as those create influence, if Old Boys i.e. stay connected etc.

I am well aware, that we Germans along with some others do love our numbers, but every serious national federation needs to know how many members their clubs have. Afaik FIFA makes it possible (though, there they don't need it with 1 vote per country, funwise they justify it with human rights about equality and the UN charter).
Last edited by RugbyLiebe on Tue, 11 Feb 2020, 08:06, edited 1 time in total.
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.

User avatar
Posts: 5238
Joined: Sun, 27 Apr 2014, 11:50
National Flag:
ItalyItaly

Re: Rugby World Cup 2023 Qualifying

Postby Canalina » Tue, 11 Feb 2020, 08:02

I'm fine with the current council format, but if they wanted to make it more "democratic" they could simply give one other vote to the continental confederations, instead of including single nations like Madagascar or Sri Lanka. Currently every continental confederation has two votes, and this seems already too much for an entity like RAN, that is the union of little national federations (the two RAN members in the council come from Bermuda and Mexico). Let's remember again the council structure, even if we are quite off topic respect to the RWC qualifying argument. If it appears you too oligarchic, remember that the georgian, romanian, fijian, samoan... members have been included in these last years (if I'm not wrong); so the system is slowly becoming more inclusive

Chairman
Bill Beaumont

Vice-Chairman
Agustín Pichot

Argentina
Sol Iglesias
Marcelo Rodriguez

Australia
Raelene Castle
Cameron Clyne
Brett Robinson

Canada
Pat Parfrey

England
Deborah Griffin
Bill Sweeney
Jonathan Webb

Fiji
Francis Kean

France
Brigitte Jugla
Bernard Laporte
Serge Simon

Georgia
George Nijaradze

Ireland
Susan Carty
John O’Driscoll
Philip Orr

Italy
Alfredo Gavazzi
Nino Saccà
Susanna Vecchi

Japan
Kensuke Iwabuchi
Naoko Saiki

New Zealand
Deb Robinson
Mark Robinson
To be appointed

Romania
Alin Petrache

Samoa
Tuilaepa S. L. Malielegaoi

Scotland
Mark Dodson
John Jeffrey
Lesley Thomson

South Africa
Mark Alexander
Vanessa Doble
Jurie Roux

USA
Bob Latham

Wales
Robert Butcher
Gareth Davies
Julie Paterson

Asia Rugby
Terence Khoo
Ada Milby

Oceania Rugby
Richard Sapias
Cathy Wong

Rugby Africa
Khaled Babbou
Rolande Boro

Rugby Americas North
Dennis Dwyer
Cristina Flores

Rugby Europe
Octavian Morariu
Veronika Muehlhofer

Sudamerica Rugby
Claudia Betancur
Sebastian Piñeyrua

User avatar
Posts: 5238
Joined: Sun, 27 Apr 2014, 11:50
National Flag:
ItalyItaly

Re: Rugby World Cup 2023 Qualifying

Postby Canalina » Tue, 11 Feb 2020, 08:07

I noted just now that Argentina has only two members. Is that because they have Pichot vice-chairman or is it their normal number of council members? It would be a bit unjust considering that they are stronger and with an older history and probably with more players than Italy, for example

Posts: 3191
Joined: Wed, 14 Oct 2015, 13:30
National Flag:
GermanyGermany

Re: Rugby World Cup 2023 Qualifying

Postby RugbyLiebe » Tue, 11 Feb 2020, 08:38

Canalina wrote:I'm fine with the current council format, but if they wanted to make it more "democratic" they could simply give one other vote to the continental confederations, instead of including single nations like Madagascar or Sri Lanka. Currently every continental confederation has two votes, and this seems already too much for an entity like RAN, that is the union of little national federations (the two RAN members in the council come from Bermuda and Mexico).


I don't see RAN that much as a problem, as they also represent Canada and the USA and they would "deserve" more votes. Good on them to allow two smaller nations to send their delegates. Not sure if smart to give one vote to a British (?) from Bermuda. Would like to see how this guy votes.
I prefer the country option and oppose everything based on merit as I oppose every form of aristocracy in real life. Giving nations more votes based on their success, when a lot of that comes from forming closed shops first, is not the right thing to do.

Canalina wrote:I noted just now that Argentina has only two members. Is that because they have Pichot vice-chairman or is it their normal number of council members? It would be a bit unjust considering that they are stronger and with an older history and probably with more players than Italy, for example

I remember that I also realized this some months ago and someone wrote, that the Vice-chairman doesn't get an extra seat - so he actually represents Argentina.
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: 6356
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Rugby World Cup 2023 Qualifying

Postby victorsra » Tue, 11 Feb 2020, 13:35

To be fair, the vast majority of nations only play inside their continents and there's no reason for them to think about matches outside their continents. Therefore who ahould have more votes are the continental unions and in those continental unions each country should have 1 vote. The true interest of most of the countries lie in their regions and the growth of those unions is more important than anything.
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

Posts: 3191
Joined: Wed, 14 Oct 2015, 13:30
National Flag:
GermanyGermany

Re: Rugby World Cup 2023 Qualifying

Postby RugbyLiebe » Tue, 11 Feb 2020, 13:39

victorsra wrote:To be fair, the vast majority of nations only play inside their continents and there's no reason for them to think about matches outside their continents.


Ehm, you are aware that the laws they play under a written by World Rugby. Every single game is affected what World Rugby does.
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.

User avatar
Posts: 1313
Joined: Thu, 28 Apr 2016, 14:02
Location: Las Canteras, Uruguay
National Flag:
UruguayUruguay

Re: Rugby World Cup 2023 Qualifying

Postby NaBUru38 » Tue, 11 Feb 2020, 14:05

Perhans European tier 2 unions don't care about inter-continental test matches. But they are eseential to tier 2 teams elsewhere.

Posts: 3191
Joined: Wed, 14 Oct 2015, 13:30
National Flag:
GermanyGermany

Re: Rugby World Cup 2023 Qualifying

Postby RugbyLiebe » Tue, 11 Feb 2020, 14:11

NaBUru38 wrote:Perhans European tier 2 unions don't care about inter-continental test matches. But they are eseential to tier 2 teams elsewhere.

European non-cartel-nations, even the non-World-Cup-teams are probably the unions playing most inter-continental-matches. Germany i.e. visited Brazil, Namibia, Kenya and Samoa in the last decade and hosted Hong Kong, the USA as well as Chile and Uruguay and again Samoa and Brazil. So they played against teams from ALL continents in XVs.

But a World federation's job is much more than just organize test matches. Every decision has a direct impact on all Unions globally.
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: 6356
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Rugby World Cup 2023 Qualifying

Postby victorsra » Tue, 11 Feb 2020, 14:17

And you do know FIFA's council, for exemple, doesn't have power of the game rules? It is the International Board. The should must be in the hands of an independent body... perhaps composed only by the 6 continental unions. Not the council. The council is about politics.
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

Posts: 301
Joined: Thu, 12 Dec 2019, 21:26
National Flag:
EnglandEngland

Re: Rugby World Cup 2023 Qualifying

Postby Chester-Donnelly » Tue, 11 Feb 2020, 15:01

I think World Rugby should rethink its continental unions. Is that the best way to organise tournaments? Many tournaments span continents. What chance is there of Asia having any kind of coordinated commercial competition, covering so many time zones? It would make much more sense to have three regional unions (Americas, EMEA, Asia Pacific) and then for there to be sub-regional unions within those unions (e.g. Europe, north Africa, west Asia, west Africa, Eastern and Southern Africa). With tournaments for the stronger tier 2 teams organised at regional level, like ARC and Pacific Nations Cup. Rugby in Asia quite rightly seems focused on the Asia Pacific region.
As north African and Middle Eastern teams develop, they should have the opportunity to play in European tournaments. There should still be an African Nations Cup, maybe every other year, with subregional tournaments in the years between, such as the Victoria Cup. How about a Mediterranean Cup?

PreviousNext

Return to Rugby Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Armchair Fan and 9 guests