Tier 2 & 3 Rugby Forum

Americas Rugby

Posts: 559
Joined: Sun, 06 Dec 2015, 06:42
National Flag:
CanadaCanada

Re: Americas Rugby

Postby snapper37 » Fri, 24 Jul 2020, 02:11

Personally i like the ARC being the RWC qualifier. Canada will now have to field teams that actually mean something, rather than putting on has beens and nobody's. Uruguay have shown their might and deserve to compete for the America 1 spot, and personally i think they would give USA a run for their money. With Argentina potentially getting the boot from the Rugby Championship, will they now put their strongest team into the ARC? If this is the case then the there will be a real fight for the top 2 spots with Argentines taking the top and three others slightly comparable teams fighting for the other. What I like about this is it means that it's time to put on big boy undies and get real about competing for a spot.

#Canadamissesthenextworldcup

Posts: 1720
Joined: Thu, 06 Apr 2017, 17:09
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: Americas Rugby

Postby Tobar » Fri, 24 Jul 2020, 02:38

Pro(p) Kicker wrote:So if ARC is being used for qualifying won't this eliminate multiple countries from qualifying before it even began like the European qualifiers? I understand why they overhauled the qualifiers but don't know why they've done it at the expense of smaller nations.


Technically yes but these countries had next to 0 chance of making it to the RWC anyway. The countries in the ARCh have the chance to get promoted to the ARC so that is their pathway. But let’s be honest, the odds of them winning the ARC are slim to none so I don’t see this as an issue.

Posts: 1720
Joined: Thu, 06 Apr 2017, 17:09
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: Americas Rugby

Postby Tobar » Fri, 24 Jul 2020, 02:39

snapper37 wrote:Personally i like the ARC being the RWC qualifier. Canada will now have to field teams that actually mean something, rather than putting on has beens and nobody's. Uruguay have shown their might and deserve to compete for the America 1 spot, and personally i think they would give USA a run for their money. With Argentina potentially getting the boot from the Rugby Championship, will they now put their strongest team into the ARC? If this is the case then the there will be a real fight for the top 2 spots with Argentines taking the top and three others slightly comparable teams fighting for the other. What I like about this is it means that it's time to put on big boy undies and get real about competing for a spot.

#Canadamissesthenextworldcup


Uruguay got 2nd place in last year’s ARC. So based on that year alone yes, they would have been Americas 1.

Posts: 171
Joined: Tue, 13 Nov 2018, 00:10
National Flag:
ChileChile

Re: Americas Rugby

Postby ficcp » Fri, 24 Jul 2020, 03:13

victorsra wrote:The ARC 2020 would have had a Promotion/Relegation playoff and that would count as Paraguay's and Colombia's RWC path. No it is yet to be unederstood how they will access the RWC Qualy.

This is easy to solve. There will be anyway a ARC/ARCh promotion/relegation playoff in 2021. Just like REC had it in the middle of the Qualy. IMHO, it would be logical to allow a promoted team to run for the Repechage playoff in 2022. If the ARCh champions lose in the 2021 playoff, it is over.


Víctor : The ARCH has been played twice by 4 selections only. I undestand that there is a promotion/relegation system for the representative of RAN.

My question is : ¿How does WR or SAR incorporate to the 2023 RWC classification process the other countries, which do not participate in ARCH? Full members of SAR are also Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Panamá, Venezuela and Perú. They are not currently envolved in any tournament.

Posts: 2042
Joined: Thu, 23 Feb 2017, 01:37
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: Americas Rugby

Postby TheStroBro » Fri, 24 Jul 2020, 04:03

ficcp wrote:
victorsra wrote:The ARC 2020 would have had a Promotion/Relegation playoff and that would count as Paraguay's and Colombia's RWC path. No it is yet to be unederstood how they will access the RWC Qualy.

This is easy to solve. There will be anyway a ARC/ARCh promotion/relegation playoff in 2021. Just like REC had it in the middle of the Qualy. IMHO, it would be logical to allow a promoted team to run for the Repechage playoff in 2022. If the ARCh champions lose in the 2021 playoff, it is over.


Víctor : The ARCH has been played twice by 4 selections only. I undestand that there is a promotion/relegation system for the representative of RAN.

My question is : ¿How does WR or SAR incorporate to the 2023 RWC classification process the other countries, which do not participate in ARCH? Full members of SAR are also Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Panamá, Venezuela and Perú. They are not currently envolved in any tournament.


WRs qualification process is based on World Ranking for the last 8 spots and then by region. Those countries need to get into the top 30. Rugby is not soccer, it can't have the same process...but lordy can it be better!

Posts: 7467
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Americas Rugby

Postby victorsra » Fri, 24 Jul 2020, 04:05

That's a question I have too. There shoud be a South American Qualy for the ARCh.
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

Posts: 8
Joined: Fri, 12 Jun 2020, 20:38
National Flag:
CanadaCanada

Re: Americas Rugby

Postby Pro(p) Kicker » Fri, 24 Jul 2020, 05:37

Tobar wrote: Technically yes but these countries had next to 0 chance of making it to the RWC anyway. The countries in the ARCh have the chance to get promoted to the ARC so that is their pathway. But let’s be honest, the odds of them winning the ARC are slim to none so I don’t see this as an issue.


St Kitts and Nevis has no chance of qualifying for the FIFA world cup but they still get given the chance. Now obviously rugby doesn't have the popularity of soccer in most places and we can't expect it to. However if the goal is to grow the game inside these smaller nations they need to have meaningful matches to develop their players and showcase the sport to the greater public. And there is no better way to showcase it, imo, then world cup qualifying matches as no matches will be more meaningful. Unexpected runs and big upsets can get people excited and intrigued about the sport which could help grow first time participant. Instead when their biggest competition is the third or fourth division regional championship it is considerably less likely to get people to rally behind the team. The old Americas format wasn't going to work because it guaranteed the USA/Canada a spot but I don't think the new format should only benefit the big nations and tell the small nations to get lost.

Online
Posts: 1067
Joined: Thu, 12 Dec 2019, 21:26
National Flag:
EnglandEngland

Re: Americas Rugby

Postby Chester-Donnelly » Fri, 24 Jul 2020, 07:04

victorsra wrote:That's a question I have too. There shoud be a South American Qualy for the ARCh.


The fourth team in the ARCh should be the winner of a competition of Central America, South America and the Caribbean. Maybe in another mini tournament involving: ARCh last place; Caribbean champion; Central American champion; South American champion.

Posts: 7467
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Americas Rugby

Postby victorsra » Fri, 24 Jul 2020, 14:36

Chester-Donnelly wrote:
victorsra wrote:That's a question I have too. There shoud be a South American Qualy for the ARCh.


The fourth team in the ARCh should be the winner of a competition of Central America, South America and the Caribbean. Maybe in another mini tournament involving: ARCh last place; Caribbean champion; Central American champion; South American champion.

The ideal would be a 5-teams competition with teams play twice at home and twice away. But it increases costs a lot for countries in a very low development stage.

Another possibility would be:

Only 3-teams, Colombia, Paraguay and Mexico, home and away. Champions go to promotion playoff. 2nd and 3rd face relegation playoffs against a South American and a Caribbean, on geographical basis (Paraguay would always face a South American, Mexico always a Caribbean and Colombia could play both).

I think this second options is more according to present needs.
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

Posts: 1720
Joined: Thu, 06 Apr 2017, 17:09
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: Americas Rugby

Postby Tobar » Fri, 24 Jul 2020, 16:17

victorsra wrote:That's a question I have too. There shoud be a South American Qualy for the ARCh.


This is a missing link - adding a way for teams to qualify for the ARCh, rather than this pre-selected group. There is no way to get into the ARCh which then allows you to enter the ARC.

Pro(p) Kicker wrote:
Tobar wrote: Technically yes but these countries had next to 0 chance of making it to the RWC anyway. The countries in the ARCh have the chance to get promoted to the ARC so that is their pathway. But let’s be honest, the odds of them winning the ARC are slim to none so I don’t see this as an issue.


St Kitts and Nevis has no chance of qualifying for the FIFA world cup but they still get given the chance. Now obviously rugby doesn't have the popularity of soccer in most places and we can't expect it to. However if the goal is to grow the game inside these smaller nations they need to have meaningful matches to develop their players and showcase the sport to the greater public. And there is no better way to showcase it, imo, then world cup qualifying matches as no matches will be more meaningful. Unexpected runs and big upsets can get people excited and intrigued about the sport which could help grow first time participant. Instead when their biggest competition is the third or fourth division regional championship it is considerably less likely to get people to rally behind the team. The old Americas format wasn't going to work because it guaranteed the USA/Canada a spot but I don't think the new format should only benefit the big nations and tell the small nations to get lost.


I mean, they all do have the chance to make it to the RWC qualifiers. The best ARCh team can get promoted to the ARC and then fight for a chance at the RWC. If they don’t make it to the ARC then they just lost out earlier on qualification. The only way to fix that to fit what you’re saying is to basically do a huge tournament for all the Americas teams but that’s not very practical.

The only issue with the ARC pathway as it stands is what I addressed with Victor’s comment above.

Posts: 7467
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Americas Rugby

Postby victorsra » Fri, 24 Jul 2020, 16:56

But they want to use 2021+2022 ARC, like REC. I think that's the tricky issue COVID caused.
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

Posts: 1720
Joined: Thu, 06 Apr 2017, 17:09
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: Americas Rugby

Postby Tobar » Fri, 24 Jul 2020, 17:17

Ah yeah, I can see that now. So ideally they would’ve had the ARC set for the 2 years of qualification but that idea got canned with the tournament this year. I guess they’ll have to wait until 2022 for the promotion, assuming the ARC is still around.

Posts: 7467
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Americas Rugby

Postby victorsra » Fri, 24 Jul 2020, 17:59

Yes. But REC allows a team to be relegated between 2021 and 2022 - ARC will allow it too probably. This means the team relegated will be out of the RWC Qualy. But what about the promoted team? IMO a team promoted for 2022 should be allowed to play for a Repechage spot.

Let's use RWC 2015 Qualy in Europe as an exemple (as 2019 was a mess). The 3rd placed team was Russia with 28 points. This means a team promoted for the 2022 would need basicaly to be 2022 champions in order to finish 3rd. I think it is fair. The problem with the old European playoff was that the Trophy champions only needed 1 victory against a REC team to advance to the Repechage. How fair is this with, for exemple, REC's 4th placed team?

IMO, they should fully use 2021+2022 as RWC Qualy, including all matches a promoted team plays in 2022.
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

Posts: 171
Joined: Tue, 13 Nov 2018, 00:10
National Flag:
ChileChile

Re: Americas Rugby

Postby ficcp » Fri, 24 Jul 2020, 19:47

TheStroBro wrote:
ficcp wrote:
victorsra wrote:The ARC 2020 would have had a Promotion/Relegation playoff and that would count as Paraguay's and Colombia's RWC path. No it is yet to be unederstood how they will access the RWC Qualy.

This is easy to solve. There will be anyway a ARC/ARCh promotion/relegation playoff in 2021. Just like REC had it in the middle of the Qualy. IMHO, it would be logical to allow a promoted team to run for the Repechage playoff in 2022. If the ARCh champions lose in the 2021 playoff, it is over.


Víctor : The ARCH has been played twice by 4 selections only. I undestand that there is a promotion/relegation system for the representative of RAN.

My question is : ¿How does WR or SAR incorporate to the 2023 RWC classification process the other countries, which do not participate in ARCH? Full members of SAR are also Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Panamá, Venezuela and Perú. They are not currently envolved in any tournament.


WRs qualification process is based on World Ranking for the last 8 spots and then by region. Those countries need to get into the top 30. Rugby is not soccer, it can't have the same process...but lordy can it be better!


The broader issue is that Rugby Union is not only the Rugby World Cup. ¿What were the plans of SAR before March for the minnow countries of the region? With a strong development policy , some countries which are not yet in the ARCH could improve to arrive there and be in a position to participate in a broader classification process. The FIFA process has the advantage to incorporate all the countries which are members of a regional association. ¿Is your interest to keep Rugby Union as a Sport for only the best of each region? I prefer a sport which can increase the world interest continously , not only each 4 years. Regional tournaments with different divisions every two years are a must in order to keep the Sport growing. SAR has a lot to work about.

Posts: 7467
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Americas Rugby

Postby victorsra » Fri, 24 Jul 2020, 20:48

The three major factors for the demise of Sudamericano B IMO are:

- The sad decline of Venezuela;
- Ecuador's troubled Union;
- Peru deeply focused on sevens because of Lima 2019 (Pan-American Games)

I guess Sudamrica Rugby dont see Central America ready for bigger things now, or maybe they wanted to focus on sevens too (now part of their Central American and Caribbean Games), so there you are.
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

User avatar
Posts: 1372
Joined: Thu, 28 Apr 2016, 14:02
Location: Las Canteras, Uruguay
National Flag:
UruguayUruguay

Re: Americas Rugby

Postby NaBUru38 » Mon, 27 Jul 2020, 15:19

I rarely agree with Beaumont, but I support using the Americas Rugby Championship as a World Cup qualifier.

Despite North America's treason, South America should stop asking for a direct World Cup spot. There are more important things to ask, such as club player releases.

Posts: 1720
Joined: Thu, 06 Apr 2017, 17:09
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: Americas Rugby

Postby Tobar » Tue, 28 Jul 2020, 01:13

NaBUru38 wrote:I rarely agree with Beaumont, but I support using the Americas Rugby Championship as a World Cup qualifier.

Despite North America's treason, South America should stop asking for a direct World Cup spot. There are more important things to ask, such as club player releases.


You mean Canada. The US voted for Pichot and RAN split their votes due in part to influence from Canada. Don’t lump everyone together when it was just 1 country.

Posts: 8
Joined: Fri, 12 Jun 2020, 20:38
National Flag:
CanadaCanada

Re: Americas Rugby

Postby Pro(p) Kicker » Tue, 28 Jul 2020, 02:13

Why should Canada have voted for Pichot? His World league put Canada at an equal standing to Mexico, Trinidad and Tobago, and the Cayman Islands. While a team in Uruguay who had only ever qualified through Americas over Canada once got into the Second Division. He also had Hong Kong ahead of us simply do to being an asian team which is complete BS. What Pichot wanted wasn't beneficial to Canada it was beneficial to the US and South America. I don't paticulary like Beaumont either but I much prefer him to what Pichot thought of Canada.

Posts: 7467
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Americas Rugby

Postby victorsra » Tue, 28 Jul 2020, 03:09

Canada put itself in that position, not Pichot. He only created a system. Canada in the 3rd divsion was only an exemple of the system using the ranking of that moment. People misunderstod completely this, which is unbelievable. That was never the final division of teams.

The system had 12 teams in first division (6n and an expanded TRC), 10 in second division (5 in the European group, 5 in the rest of the world group). Not Pichot's fault Canada was below the ranking's Top 20 and still, if the league was approved, Canada would have years ahead to re-enter the top 20 and start in the 2nd division.
Last edited by victorsra on Tue, 28 Jul 2020, 04:36, edited 7 times in total.
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

Posts: 171
Joined: Tue, 13 Nov 2018, 00:10
National Flag:
ChileChile

Re: Americas Rugby

Postby ficcp » Tue, 28 Jul 2020, 03:26

Pro(p) Kicker wrote:Why should Canada have voted for Pichot? His World league put Canada at an equal standing to Mexico, Trinidad and Tobago, and the Cayman Islands. While a team in Uruguay who had only ever qualified through Americas over Canada once got into the Second Division. He also had Hong Kong ahead of us simply do to being an asian team which is complete BS. What Pichot wanted wasn't beneficial to Canada it was beneficial to the US and South America. I don't paticulary like Beaumont either but I much prefer him to what Pichot thought of Canada.


I agree with you that Canada is at a clear higher level than all the RAN countries, with the exception of USA. Perhaps the classification for the League was negotiable, but that competition will not exist.

¿What does Beaumont offer to Canada now? ¿Which is the path to progress you foresee under this administration? I would like to see again a competitive canadian side like it was in several RWCs. For 2003 RWC , Canada was America 1 team because they played quite well.

Posts: 2042
Joined: Thu, 23 Feb 2017, 01:37
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: Americas Rugby

Postby TheStroBro » Tue, 28 Jul 2020, 04:58

Pro(p) Kicker wrote:Why should Canada have voted for Pichot? His World league put Canada at an equal standing to Mexico, Trinidad and Tobago, and the Cayman Islands. While a team in Uruguay who had only ever qualified through Americas over Canada once got into the Second Division. He also had Hong Kong ahead of us simply do to being an asian team which is complete BS. What Pichot wanted wasn't beneficial to Canada it was beneficial to the US and South America. I don't paticulary like Beaumont either but I much prefer him to what Pichot thought of Canada.


The World League was also a Beaumont initiative. But hey, it's cool if we want to have revisionism.

Online
Posts: 1067
Joined: Thu, 12 Dec 2019, 21:26
National Flag:
EnglandEngland

Re: Americas Rugby

Postby Chester-Donnelly » Tue, 28 Jul 2020, 07:51

I don't support any structure which ignores the relative strength of teams or ignores the distances between places. That World Rugby Nations Cup video did both. I don't know how they produced that video without realising how ridiculous it was. Any structure needs to minimise mismatches. 100-0 games benefit no one. And excessive travel should be avoided. Tier 3 teams don't need to cross continents and oceans to play a similar standard team.

User avatar
Posts: 5909
Joined: Sun, 27 Apr 2014, 11:50
National Flag:
ItalyItaly

Re: Americas Rugby

Postby Canalina » Tue, 28 Jul 2020, 08:30

Pro(p) Kicker wrote:Why should Canada have voted for Pichot? His World league put Canada at an equal standing to Mexico, Trinidad and Tobago, and the Cayman Islands. While a team in Uruguay who had only ever qualified through Americas over Canada once got into the Second Division. He also had Hong Kong ahead of us simply do to being an asian team which is complete BS. What Pichot wanted wasn't beneficial to Canada it was beneficial to the US and South America. I don't paticulary like Beaumont either but I much prefer him to what Pichot thought of Canada.

Oh shut up, you traitor!

Posts: 7467
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Americas Rugby

Postby victorsra » Tue, 28 Jul 2020, 14:20

Canalina wrote:
Pro(p) Kicker wrote:Why should Canada have voted for Pichot? His World league put Canada at an equal standing to Mexico, Trinidad and Tobago, and the Cayman Islands. While a team in Uruguay who had only ever qualified through Americas over Canada once got into the Second Division. He also had Hong Kong ahead of us simply do to being an asian team which is complete BS. What Pichot wanted wasn't beneficial to Canada it was beneficial to the US and South America. I don't paticulary like Beaumont either but I much prefer him to what Pichot thought of Canada.

Oh shut up, you traitor!

At least offer a real argument and not invent one. To create a system that put everybody under the same rules is not to go against one specific country.
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

User avatar
Posts: 1372
Joined: Thu, 28 Apr 2016, 14:02
Location: Las Canteras, Uruguay
National Flag:
UruguayUruguay

Re: Americas Rugby

Postby NaBUru38 » Thu, 30 Jul 2020, 17:18

Chester-Donnelly wrote:I don't support any structure which ignores the relative strength of teams or ignores the distances between places. That World Rugby Nations Cup video did both. I don't know how they produced that video without realising how ridiculous it was.

Any structure needs to minimise mismatches. 100-0 games benefit no one. And excessive travel should be avoided. Tier 3 teams don't need to cross continents and oceans to play a similar standard team.


The Nations Cup proposal required long travels, but did not create mismatches.

PreviousNext

Return to Rugby Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 29 guests