Tier 2 & 3 Rugby Forum

Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Are you:

For
8
13%
Against
56
88%
 
Total votes : 64
Posts: 1600
Joined: Thu, 12 Dec 2019, 21:26
National Flag:
EnglandEngland

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Postby Chester-Donnelly » Thu, 04 Feb 2021, 02:59

The original proposal from World Rugby ignored geography and ignored the relative competitiveness of teams. It ignored reality. If someone on here had come up with that proposal, they would have been ridiculed by the rest of us. It will be interesting to see what becomes of this. It's interesting that the statement says they want to keep the two international windows, rather than put them together at the end of the year. I'm not expecting anything revolutionary.

Posts: 8813
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Postby victorsra » Thu, 04 Feb 2021, 03:39

Rugby always ignored geography. "Southern Hemisphere" isn't a thing, for exemple, if we consider what matter nowadays: travel. It used to be relevant due to seasons, weather, when rugby was amateur and international tours were a mix of sport and tourism. Now, it is insane to believe New Zealand, Australia, Argentina and South Africa make any sort of geographical unity. South America and Africa are much closer to Europe than to Australasia.

Posts: 6076
Joined: Sat, 05 Jul 2014, 02:44
National Flag:
AustraliaAustralia

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Postby thatrugbyguy » Thu, 04 Feb 2021, 10:16

This proposal seems to be a bit like Freddy Kruger, every time you think its dead it comes back.

Posts: 1798
Joined: Sun, 18 May 2014, 13:27
National Flag:
AustraliaAustralia

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Postby Working Class Rugger » Fri, 05 Feb 2021, 02:45

thatrugbyguy wrote:This proposal seems to be a bit like Freddy Kruger, every time you think its dead it comes back.


Clearly there's something to it then as this recent piece suggests both clubs and players are involved in discussions.

Posts: 2174
Joined: Thu, 23 Feb 2017, 01:37
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Postby TheStroBro » Fri, 05 Feb 2021, 04:23

The International Rugby Players Association is funded by World Rugby. Not like it's a real union.

Posts: 6076
Joined: Sat, 05 Jul 2014, 02:44
National Flag:
AustraliaAustralia

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Postby thatrugbyguy » Sun, 07 Feb 2021, 12:10

Working Class Rugger wrote:
thatrugbyguy wrote:This proposal seems to be a bit like Freddy Kruger, every time you think its dead it comes back.


Clearly there's something to it then as this recent piece suggests both clubs and players are involved in discussions.

Well hopefully there are some people with common sense now.

User avatar
Posts: 339
Joined: Mon, 28 Apr 2014, 23:16
National Flag:
NetherlandsNetherlands

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Postby Silver Fox » Sun, 07 Feb 2021, 14:20

Probably the same people. But this time they are given the time to think it through.
So they can't keep stuck in the reflex that it could be a threat to the status quo on the one hand or they overrush things for the quick buck on the other.

User avatar
Posts: 339
Joined: Mon, 28 Apr 2014, 23:16
National Flag:
NetherlandsNetherlands

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Postby Silver Fox » Sun, 14 Feb 2021, 14:28

For me it is simple.
They want to keep playing against the teams they are used to play against.
They want to maintain the dates and the length of the July and November test windows.
They want to maintain the current traveling schemes but if possible more regionally clustered.

I say take the first four European nations from the WR Rankings and place them in a pool with the first four rest-of-the-world nations
Every one plays one game against a team from the other set of nations: 2 home games, 2 away games
Top league:
Code: Select all
England    South Africa
France     New Zealand
Ireland     Australia
Scotland   Argentina
Second League:
Code: Select all
Wales     Japan
Georgia   Fiji
Italy      Tonga
Spain     Samoa
and even a third league does not have a weird composition:
Code: Select all
Romania    USA
Portugal    Uruguay
     and the four best of each region:
Russia      Hong Kong
Namibia    Canada
This leaves at least one free weekend per team per window so for example Wales could still host New Zealand and play Australia away.
And also the top T1's can still play against 2 T2's a year.
Advantages:
- T2 get more media attention on par with some T1 so they will no longer be unknown entities. Important for the public opinion.
- Hopefully the notion of T1 and T2 will fade.
- We will be freed of the never ending Italy-in-the-6-Nations discussion.

The above is probably another variation on formats proposed earlier and it is beyond me why they cannot come up with something along these lines.
But again, it probably needs time to sink in and to get used to so I am happy to wait.
I hope it is now being fed to the more reluctant parties spoon by spoon rather than throwing a full dish at them.
Hope is what keeps me still a fan.
Because as a non-Brit I am getting rather bored by the repetitive mid-winter incestuous private party which is the only rugby to be seen on TV.
(apart from the World Cup. And that one is slowly becoming repetitive too)

Posts: 87
Joined: Mon, 06 Jul 2020, 04:38
National Flag:
ScotlandScotland

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Postby Rebus » Mon, 15 Feb 2021, 08:24

Problem with splits like this is , what happens after a few versions when there may be more non European teams who have earned promotion. Its difficult to keep a split as this removes a meritocracy.
Also , far too much travel to play the away games , particularly when you get down to Division 3.

If there were a league , what would be the thoughts in playing them in the July and November test windows but in a single country. Fewer teams can host a RWC , but if for example a team who is able to host a pool of matches can host them then why not. This can be based on ability or voted by the other teams in the group. After costs , split the profits evenly. Appreciate there would be a bit of horse trading , going on , particularly in the top tier when selecting the hosts, but for countries like Ireland who wont host a RWC by themselves , they have the stadium to host a 4 week window of internationals between 8 nations.

If the proposal is to host them in years where there are not RWC and Lions tours , for example 2 windows in 2004 and 2006, then it gives countries plenty time to decide who is going to host the matches in the respective summer and autumn windows.
Play all the matches across the two windows , determine the winners , losers , promotion and relegation. And then at the end of 2004 , early 2005 , you know who is going to be in each division in the next cycle , let the teams vote on who will host the competition in 2006 and repeat. The 6 Nations window isnt moving so each reagion can host a regional competion (Championship , ARC, etc) , the Lions isnt moving , so all countries can still tour if they want during that summer , so in late 2005 , countries can arrange another Autumn Cup or their own regional version . The RWC isnt moving in 2003 and 2007 from the Autumn windows so countries can use the summer window for tour / preparation matches.

Seems simple to me

Posts: 8813
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Postby victorsra » Mon, 15 Feb 2021, 19:28

Any project of a World League must have some regionalization to keep the continents balance. The problem is that rugby has a ridiculous concept of "Southern Hemisphere" being all the world except Europe. You can't properly deal with travelling this way.

Also, the project of 2 seasons split by Lions and RWC also is very limitating. If we count all July-November dates between RWCs and exclude the Lions month, there are 15 dates. Easy to see: 2024 July (3), 2024 November (3), 2025 November (3), 2026 July (3), 2026 November (3). The model could simply work with them in a more unified way. For exemple, make for T1-T2 matches in the first half of the cycle, as a 1st phase, before moving to a final phase.

Posts: 725
Joined: Fri, 15 Aug 2014, 13:57

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Postby Raven » Thu, 18 Feb 2021, 13:37

@SilverFox, your idea looks genuine with good intentions, but I don't see the difference between that and a 24 team RWC... For me, it would be basically the same countries in either one or the other. Plus I don't see how separating divisions will help grow the game, either here or in the other World League proposals.

The last Pool announcement for the RWC was mildly "mocked" as most people could already draw the entire qualified teams, even the possible Quarter and Semi-finalists... That is the tournament that needs to evolve. Even the host election is becoming a bit of a drag, there's certain concerns on the fact that not many countries want to be hosts to (what we've believed for a long time) it's the "3rd biggest World Sport event" -after Olympics and the FIFA World Cup-. Whether is still true, or if it ever was, may remain a well kept secret.

I am not particularly fond of the World League idea, I don't call myself a traditionalist but quite enjoy the 6 Nations and The Rugby Championship. I see them as annual rugby highlights, they are after all, exhibition games and are tournaments in which World Rugby has little to say or do about.

I don't think it is that easy to sell a League to (as per your example) Wales, where they are to play the PI's, Japan and 3 T2 European sides instead of their usual foes. I don't think fans will be backing the whole "spreading the rugby love with T2s" concept.

But I think we'll have to wait to see what happens with the Rugby World in the next years. South Africans joining Europe and their disenchantment with SANZAAR, may be bigger than what we expect... Japan reaching T1 status and everybody falling in love with the idea of having them in a major Tournament (Autumn Nations, TRC...); the MLR growing fast; Russia knocking the door to host a RWC, create a 3rd European Cup and build their League all at the same time; Argentina having the bigger percentage of players in Europe as they did back in 2007 (when they proposed to join the 6 Nations based in Switzerland! or Spain); the whole Southern Hemisphere acknowledging that distances are indeed an issue that cannot be put aside anymore.

July and November should offer different games than the ones we see on those annual tourneys. Couldn't care less if i.e: England plays Wales in November, or Ireland v Italy. I'd rather see England face the US, or Canada playing the Italians, Fiji v Ireland, Argentina v Scotland, etc.

Posts: 1798
Joined: Sun, 18 May 2014, 13:27
National Flag:
AustraliaAustralia

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Postby Working Class Rugger » Fri, 19 Feb 2021, 03:41

Raven wrote:@SilverFox, your idea looks genuine with good intentions, but I don't see the difference between that and a 24 team RWC... For me, it would be basically the same countries in either one or the other. Plus I don't see how separating divisions will help grow the game, either here or in the other World League proposals.

The last Pool announcement for the RWC was mildly "mocked" as most people could already draw the entire qualified teams, even the possible Quarter and Semi-finalists... That is the tournament that needs to evolve. Even the host election is becoming a bit of a drag, there's certain concerns on the fact that not many countries want to be hosts to (what we've believed for a long time) it's the "3rd biggest World Sport event" -after Olympics and the FIFA World Cup-. Whether is still true, or if it ever was, may remain a well kept secret.

I am not particularly fond of the World League idea, I don't call myself a traditionalist but quite enjoy the 6 Nations and The Rugby Championship. I see them as annual rugby highlights, they are after all, exhibition games and are tournaments in which World Rugby has little to say or do about.

I don't think it is that easy to sell a League to (as per your example) Wales, where they are to play the PI's, Japan and 3 T2 European sides instead of their usual foes. I don't think fans will be backing the whole "spreading the rugby love with T2s" concept.

But I think we'll have to wait to see what happens with the Rugby World in the next years. South Africans joining Europe and their disenchantment with SANZAAR, may be bigger than what we expect... Japan reaching T1 status and everybody falling in love with the idea of having them in a major Tournament (Autumn Nations, TRC...); the MLR growing fast; Russia knocking the door to host a RWC, create a 3rd European Cup and build their League all at the same time; Argentina having the bigger percentage of players in Europe as they did back in 2007 (when they proposed to join the 6 Nations based in Switzerland! or Spain); the whole Southern Hemisphere acknowledging that distances are indeed an issue that cannot be put aside anymore.

July and November should offer different games than the ones we see on those annual tourneys. Couldn't care less if i.e: England plays Wales in November, or Ireland v Italy. I'd rather see England face the US, or Canada playing the Italians, Fiji v Ireland, Argentina v Scotland, etc.


I always thought that the architects of the original iteration made a major mis-step with the insistence of including the RC and 6Ns in the structure. I for one, as a fan of the concept thought that it should be completely separate from the traditional structures and run exclusively in the June/July and November test windows.

That's part of the reasoning behind why I also thought it should be composed of 16 team divisions split into 4 pools of 4 or 2 pools of 8. Either way. It would see 7 pool games each (four in June/July and 3 in November with a 'Finals Weekend' featuring all 16 playing off for rankings. 1v1, 2v2 etc. Straight promotion and relegation for the loser o the 8v8 game. More nations involved. More opportunities to progress etc. While not interfering with the current financial structures.

Posts: 8813
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Postby victorsra » Fri, 19 Feb 2021, 16:30

Working Class Rugger wrote:
Raven wrote:@SilverFox, your idea looks genuine with good intentions, but I don't see the difference between that and a 24 team RWC... For me, it would be basically the same countries in either one or the other. Plus I don't see how separating divisions will help grow the game, either here or in the other World League proposals.

The last Pool announcement for the RWC was mildly "mocked" as most people could already draw the entire qualified teams, even the possible Quarter and Semi-finalists... That is the tournament that needs to evolve. Even the host election is becoming a bit of a drag, there's certain concerns on the fact that not many countries want to be hosts to (what we've believed for a long time) it's the "3rd biggest World Sport event" -after Olympics and the FIFA World Cup-. Whether is still true, or if it ever was, may remain a well kept secret.

I am not particularly fond of the World League idea, I don't call myself a traditionalist but quite enjoy the 6 Nations and The Rugby Championship. I see them as annual rugby highlights, they are after all, exhibition games and are tournaments in which World Rugby has little to say or do about.

I don't think it is that easy to sell a League to (as per your example) Wales, where they are to play the PI's, Japan and 3 T2 European sides instead of their usual foes. I don't think fans will be backing the whole "spreading the rugby love with T2s" concept.

But I think we'll have to wait to see what happens with the Rugby World in the next years. South Africans joining Europe and their disenchantment with SANZAAR, may be bigger than what we expect... Japan reaching T1 status and everybody falling in love with the idea of having them in a major Tournament (Autumn Nations, TRC...); the MLR growing fast; Russia knocking the door to host a RWC, create a 3rd European Cup and build their League all at the same time; Argentina having the bigger percentage of players in Europe as they did back in 2007 (when they proposed to join the 6 Nations based in Switzerland! or Spain); the whole Southern Hemisphere acknowledging that distances are indeed an issue that cannot be put aside anymore.

July and November should offer different games than the ones we see on those annual tourneys. Couldn't care less if i.e: England plays Wales in November, or Ireland v Italy. I'd rather see England face the US, or Canada playing the Italians, Fiji v Ireland, Argentina v Scotland, etc.


I always thought that the architects of the original iteration made a major mis-step with the insistence of including the RC and 6Ns in the structure. I for one, as a fan of the concept thought that it should be completely separate from the traditional structures and run exclusively in the June/July and November test windows.

That's part of the reasoning behind why I also thought it should be composed of 16 team divisions split into 4 pools of 4 or 2 pools of 8. Either way. It would see 7 pool games each (four in June/July and 3 in November with a 'Finals Weekend' featuring all 16 playing off for rankings. 1v1, 2v2 etc. Straight promotion and relegation for the loser o the 8v8 game. More nations involved. More opportunities to progress etc. While not interfering with the current financial structures.


Yep. Agreed.

IMO a World League doesn't need to have a champion every year. I think it is easier to make a 3-years league, like starting in 2024 and ending in 2026, with 5 windows of 3 matches = 15 matches (all Novembers and Julys, except the Lions' July). 16 teams, round robin, with relegation. 11 core teams, 5 subject to promotion-relegation (I obviously prefer all 16 teams subject to relegation, but T1 assholes won't let). 1 of the 5 to be relegated? Probably.

No complicated formulas. Let the playoffs emotion to the RWC. No problems with repeating 6N or TRC matches, it would be only 1 extra match in the 3 years-cycle against each opponent. It would even help to reduce travel. That would make some matches very special, like hosting the All Blacks only once every 8 years. If the World League's broadcast and sponsorship deals are good enough, it worths. And the Lions' month would allow free tours.

Also, the Final table could define the RWC groups, so, it will matter to finish Top 4, Top 6, etc. Exemple (for a 24 teams RWC):

A: World League Champion, WL 12th, WL 13th, Asia-Oceania 1
B: WL 2nd, WL 11th, WL 14th, Africa 1
C: WL 3rd, WL 10th, WL 15th, Americas 1
D: WL 4th, WL 9th, WL 16th, Europe 1
E: WL 5th, WL 8th, 2nd division champion, 2nd division 4th
F: WL 6th, WL 7th, 2nd division 2nd, 2nd division 3rd

Posts: 1798
Joined: Sun, 18 May 2014, 13:27
National Flag:
AustraliaAustralia

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Postby Working Class Rugger » Fri, 19 Feb 2021, 22:54

victorsra wrote:
Working Class Rugger wrote:
Raven wrote:@SilverFox, your idea looks genuine with good intentions, but I don't see the difference between that and a 24 team RWC... For me, it would be basically the same countries in either one or the other. Plus I don't see how separating divisions will help grow the game, either here or in the other World League proposals.

The last Pool announcement for the RWC was mildly "mocked" as most people could already draw the entire qualified teams, even the possible Quarter and Semi-finalists... That is the tournament that needs to evolve. Even the host election is becoming a bit of a drag, there's certain concerns on the fact that not many countries want to be hosts to (what we've believed for a long time) it's the "3rd biggest World Sport event" -after Olympics and the FIFA World Cup-. Whether is still true, or if it ever was, may remain a well kept secret.

I am not particularly fond of the World League idea, I don't call myself a traditionalist but quite enjoy the 6 Nations and The Rugby Championship. I see them as annual rugby highlights, they are after all, exhibition games and are tournaments in which World Rugby has little to say or do about.

I don't think it is that easy to sell a League to (as per your example) Wales, where they are to play the PI's, Japan and 3 T2 European sides instead of their usual foes. I don't think fans will be backing the whole "spreading the rugby love with T2s" concept.

But I think we'll have to wait to see what happens with the Rugby World in the next years. South Africans joining Europe and their disenchantment with SANZAAR, may be bigger than what we expect... Japan reaching T1 status and everybody falling in love with the idea of having them in a major Tournament (Autumn Nations, TRC...); the MLR growing fast; Russia knocking the door to host a RWC, create a 3rd European Cup and build their League all at the same time; Argentina having the bigger percentage of players in Europe as they did back in 2007 (when they proposed to join the 6 Nations based in Switzerland! or Spain); the whole Southern Hemisphere acknowledging that distances are indeed an issue that cannot be put aside anymore.

July and November should offer different games than the ones we see on those annual tourneys. Couldn't care less if i.e: England plays Wales in November, or Ireland v Italy. I'd rather see England face the US, or Canada playing the Italians, Fiji v Ireland, Argentina v Scotland, etc.


I always thought that the architects of the original iteration made a major mis-step with the insistence of including the RC and 6Ns in the structure. I for one, as a fan of the concept thought that it should be completely separate from the traditional structures and run exclusively in the June/July and November test windows.

That's part of the reasoning behind why I also thought it should be composed of 16 team divisions split into 4 pools of 4 or 2 pools of 8. Either way. It would see 7 pool games each (four in June/July and 3 in November with a 'Finals Weekend' featuring all 16 playing off for rankings. 1v1, 2v2 etc. Straight promotion and relegation for the loser o the 8v8 game. More nations involved. More opportunities to progress etc. While not interfering with the current financial structures.


Yep. Agreed.

IMO a World League doesn't need to have a champion every year. I think it is easier to make a 3-years league, like starting in 2024 and ending in 2026, with 5 windows of 3 matches = 15 matches (all Novembers and Julys, except the Lions' July). 16 teams, round robin, with relegation. 11 core teams, 5 subject to promotion-relegation (I obviously prefer all 16 teams subject to relegation, but T1 assholes won't let). 1 of the 5 to be relegated? Probably.

No complicated formulas. Let the playoffs emotion to the RWC. No problems with repeating 6N or TRC matches, it would be only 1 extra match in the 3 years-cycle against each opponent. It would even help to reduce travel. That would make some matches very special, like hosting the All Blacks only once every 8 years. If the World League's broadcast and sponsorship deals are good enough, it worths. And the Lions' month would allow free tours.

Also, the Final table could define the RWC groups, so, it will matter to finish Top 4, Top 6, etc. Exemple (for a 24 teams RWC):

A: World League Champion, WL 12th, WL 13th, Asia-Oceania 1
B: WL 2nd, WL 11th, WL 14th, Africa 1
C: WL 3rd, WL 10th, WL 15th, Americas 1
D: WL 4th, WL 9th, WL 16th, Europe 1
E: WL 5th, WL 8th, 2nd division champion, 2nd division 4th
F: WL 6th, WL 7th, 2nd division 2nd, 2nd division 3rd


It's been mentioned a number of times before but from my understanding that similar to the permanent franchises model employed in the EuroLeague Basketball competition. Which as much as many would dislike the idea is probably the best way to get the current 11 T1 nations on board from both a support and financial stand point.

I know I've suggested something similar (I've suggested a number over time) to what you have put forth. But over 2 not 3 years. Used for RWC qualification and pool assignments etc. I still think it could be biennial with the recent extension of the June/July window. I also think it will be important to maintain the current regional/showcase structures such as the RC/6Ns/REC/whatever evolves in the Americas and the PNC. Running in their current windows as a means of providing a link between the terms in differing divisions or in some circumstances not featuring at all.

So working off your suggestion the most ideal structure would be via using rankings running two 16 team divisions. Playing each other once over a 2-3 period with potentially the November window of every 2nd/3rd year operating as a finals. Straight promotion/relegation for the 16 ranked team.

Below the two 'top' divisions would be four regional competitions. Europe, Africa, Asia-Pacific (including Oceania) and the Americas. Each competition would feature 6 teams playing a home and away schedule over two years with the top 2 from each progressing to a playoff competition run during the third year to determine who earns the right to playoff with the bottomed ranked team from the 2nd division. This round would be a straight round robin for 7 games.

The rest of the teams not featuring in the playoff round in the '3rd' division would participate in a number of games against teams from other pools as means to measure development and the overall level of competition across the divisions.

It would be far from perfect. But it would offer progression. A mix of competition. And included in one way or another 56 nations. The real key would be funding. How much such a structure would be worth to broadcasters and advertisers. And how will it be distributed. I personally think that if it lucrative enough then it should be equitably shared among all participating nations but it will likely be tiered. And if so, considering the teams in the 1st division will likely demand the most it should be on the proviso that any monies received from WR from the profits should be foregone.

For the sake of argument. Say the value of this is close to the original proposal and draws in $500m(Euro)/year. It could be split with the 1st division taking 50%, the 2nd 30% and the 3rd 10%. But with WR not longer supplying funding via the RWC to the team in the 1st Div. money develop money could then be directed at those outside of the structure completely.

Posts: 8813
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Postby victorsra » Sat, 20 Feb 2021, 14:52

Yes, we can discuss the format, but what is clear for me is:

- It can only be done with the 11 T1s (Japan included) with permanent spots (or, at least, with contracts for X years) + T2s with the other spots, with promotion/relegation;

- And, if the T1s are permanent, there need to be at least 5 spots for T2s, meaning 16 teams in the top league. 12 teams would be tragic, because only 1 T2 would benefit each year, which would be a step BACK considering today Georgia and PIs are getting at least 1 match versus T1s every year.

Posts: 1798
Joined: Sun, 18 May 2014, 13:27
National Flag:
AustraliaAustralia

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Postby Working Class Rugger » Sat, 20 Feb 2021, 21:23

victorsra wrote:Yes, we can discuss the format, but what is clear for me is:

- It can only be done with the 11 T1s (Japan included) with permanent spots (or, at least, with contracts for X years) + T2s with the other spots, with promotion/relegation;

- And, if the T1s are permanent, there need to be at least 5 spots for T2s, meaning 16 teams in the top league. 12 teams would be tragic, because only 1 T2 would benefit each year, which would be a step BACK considering today Georgia and PIs are getting at least 1 match versus T1s every year.


Hard to discuss when I agree with you on both points.

Posts: 6076
Joined: Sat, 05 Jul 2014, 02:44
National Flag:
AustraliaAustralia

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Postby thatrugbyguy » Sun, 21 Feb 2021, 03:47

The more I've thought about the idea of a World League, whatever form it takes, the less I like it, because I don't believe it actually solves the underlying issues the game has. If World Rugby is looking to add more meaning to test matches, then I cannot see how this can ever truely solve it. Whatever form it takes it ends up being little more than an unofficial world cup final in between world cups. What I've never understood is if there's a sense that TV networks are willing to pay for something with more value, then why hasn't WR looked at World Cup qualifiers as the answer. I've talked about this in the past that in my mind the best option is to reformat the RWC qualifying campaign so that all teams participate, but I've never understood why this isn't an option that's been looked at. To my eyes anyway, this is not only the easiest solution to add value to test matches, it also solves the issue of getting more T1 v T2 matches on a regular basis. There's only two reasons I can see why this wouldn't be discussed - 1) It was tried in 1998 and turned out to be a bit of a waste of time, or 2) T1 nations don't like the idea of there being any risk to them not qualifying, no matter how small it may be. Wales vs Georgia 20 years ago would have been a pretty easy match for Wales. Today however even though you'd still bet on Wales to win, Georgia are a much more difficult opponent and all it would take is for Wales to have a really, really bad day on the pitch for an upset to occur. If any T1 nation were to fail to qualify for RWC, it would be a disaster. So there's more at stake, but that's exactly the point. When there's more at stake, when there's more competitiveness people are more likely to tune in. If more people tune in that increases the value of the sport. So to mean anyway, the answer is quit simple, but I'm not sure why no-one at WR has considered it.

Posts: 319
Joined: Sat, 03 May 2014, 00:22
National Flag:
New ZealandNew Zealand

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Postby Scoob » Sun, 21 Feb 2021, 04:59

Exactly what has been said is correct.
Basically everything has to run by the elite of the top 10 nations before anything happens,and you have more luck getting blood out of a stone than that ever happening.
When Scotland got Relegated from Junior world cup to the trophy,that sent shock waves through the old brigade,so mentioning relegation to any proposed competition is off all agendas

Posts: 8813
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Postby victorsra » Sun, 21 Feb 2021, 14:19

Or the real problem here is rugby needs the RWC too much. Which isn't good, because it only happens once every 4 years. It basicaly dwarfs rugby and makes T2s path to relevance harder.

In the competitive global sports environment of today, a sport needs a flagship competition every year that has the best players in the world. The reason is simple, those are the competitions capable of compete for general sports fans attention in a global scale, sell video games and etc. It is easy to follow those sports. If you are not a fan that follows everything, you can pick 1 competition. And most people fell in this category.

Soccer has the UEFA Champions League (connected to the European leagues system, which means Premier League, La Liga, Bundesliga, all connected). Basketball the NBA. Nobody doubts that the best of football and basketball (the two truly global team sports) are there.

American football has the NFL, Baseball MLB, Hockey NHL, Cricket has IPL (not sure if if has all the big names, but cricket has the Super League anyway). Cycling, Tennis, Golf, all sports have this. Except rugby. Of course those are not realy global sports, but their leagues value more than rugby's. Smaller sports went this path as well, like field hockey and volleyball.

Rugby's flagship competitions are 6N and TRC, but they aren't in this category, because they only have half of the T1s, lacking such status as "the big thing". 6N is realy important, but do we want the 6N to be the big thing? No, it would only make Old Cartelianism stronger. Champions Cup isn't this as well, because, well, Super Rugby TT exists. Rugby lacks global valuable competitions.

This said, a World League can't and won't harm the RWC. We are talking about a competition that will have 3 rounds in July and 3 in November. It is still pretty poor to harm the RWC, but better than playing valueless tests. If the RWC is harmed by this, the RWC has a serious problem.

This is basicaly UEFA's path. The Nations League isn't harming the UEFA Euro. If you want to know what happens, just look UEFA. It doenst' harm because those are different logics. RWC is a big happening not only because it defines the world champions, but because of the event itself.

Not only a world league wouldn't harm the RWC, but rugby needs more than the RWC. Butrugby needs something that opens T2s opportunity every year, not another Old Cartellian business.

User avatar
Posts: 2234
Joined: Thu, 26 Jun 2014, 05:56
Location: Zemo Vera, Tbilissi, GEORGIA

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Postby FLIDTA RISXVA » Sun, 21 Feb 2021, 14:43

Could I second You to WR Coincil :thumbup:

Joy to read your reasoning on GLOBAL rugby matters -- clear and convincing :!:

Hence, do NOT waste your talent | time | knowledge on petty counter-trolling

:::

Posts: 2174
Joined: Thu, 23 Feb 2017, 01:37
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Postby TheStroBro » Sun, 21 Feb 2021, 20:50

The World League is just a value extraction by World Rugby to generate more cash for the game, because Tier 1 Nations need it. When you look at the major economies in Rugby, compare them to the major economies in Soccer. There is a dramatic difference. Except instead of trying to develop Rugby Economy in those major economic countries were' focused on making sure New Zealand and Wales have money.

Posts: 8813
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Postby victorsra » Sun, 21 Feb 2021, 22:09

That's why a World League is only good if it has proper space for T2 rugby. Otherswise, it could become a step back.


Hence, do NOT waste your talent | time | knowledge on petty counter-trolling


You are right, I should be wiser.

Posts: 87
Joined: Mon, 06 Jul 2020, 04:38
National Flag:
ScotlandScotland

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Postby Rebus » Sun, 21 Feb 2021, 22:43

I believe the SH teams need the World League more than European teams do. Outside the World Cup the jewel in the crown is the 6 Nations and the best club competitions are in Europe . Why break it up for altruism ? It would be nice to say the 6 Nations would do that and we can speculate how they will do it , but the reality is European Rugby will call the shots on this .

It would be far easier for the European Nations to promote their own game and slowly cherry pick to enhance their own brand. Possible include Argentina and SA into an expanded 6 Nations , Jaguares and SA clubs into the PRO league , develop rugby into lucrative commercial markets in Europe like Sapin , Russia and Germany.

Sure USA and Japan have larger potential for growth but they will take a generation just to get a sniff of the standards of Europe. In the meantime , throw them a bone of a World Club championship and the occassional summer tour , possibly an invitation to an Autumn Cup , but the World League will solve nothing. Once you get down to the 2nd and 3rd division , the standard will be low and their will be no interest in the tv and corporate aspect to support htis , the game just isnt strong enough globally to warrant a compettion like this.

Posts: 8813
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Postby victorsra » Sun, 21 Feb 2021, 22:45

Because 6N and European club rugby don't have all best players in the world. Very different from European soccer. It is not a global crown jewel. It is yet to do what NBA does for basketball or UEFA Champions League does for soccer. Or MLB to baseball, or NHL to Ice Hockey, etc etc. There is no charity being discussed. You haven't got the key point.

Posts: 8813
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Postby victorsra » Sun, 21 Feb 2021, 23:04

This is definitly what explains better what I man: https://50mm.sportspromedia.com/properties/ Not a single rugby brand makes the list, not even RWC, 6N or All Blacks. Not even here: https://www.sportspromedia.com/analysis ... ot-hundred

People in rugby think about competitions, brands, etc, with a rugby community mind. What is needed is to think in terms of a global sports industry perspective. If you compete for people's attention (and we live in the 21st century, when people have A LOT of options) you need something that can somehow break bubbles from time to time. Rugby doesn't do that. It is a small sport, whose idols are not realy famous (outside the T1 bubble) and whose brands need a much better structure to grow. It is very problematic that RWC or 6N are not realy that valuable. Something went wrong. As a small sport, rugby needs one strong brand that does the job needed, with a taste of universality.

Then, I question: doesn rugby need to be that big? Well, indeed, it doesn't. What's the problem of being small? But the less competitive in a global industry it is, more trouble it will face in the future.

Rugby's competition are not valuable, that's the problem.

PreviousNext

Return to Rugby Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests