Do we need a World cup?



  • How about having a level playing field and a more league style type of competition where the top 8 or 10 teams play each other home and away over the course of say 2 years. This in my mind eliminates travesties such as teams getting easier runs in knock out tourneys,vagaries of skitz French refs,and teams approaching test matches inbetween World cups as "friendlies". What say you?



  • No. To the above.

    Yes to WCs



  • Yes.

    The fact WR bottled the world league concept is the problem (although the comp proposed was shit) they do need to look at a global season.

    Breaks june/July and december/Jan meaning both hemispheres miss the worst of their respective summers/winters leaving c36 weeks of rugby, so addresses burnout too.



  • Can't we have both?



  • I don't mind a regular competition at the highest level, but it presents a bunch of problems:

    1. Smaller nations get locked out of showpiece events

    2. Getting everyone to agree to a global season

    3. TV rights questions over how / who gets paid, which intersects with:

    4. Getting World Rugby to agree to drop their biggest cash cow

    On the last point: we're probably going to reach a point that the IOC have with increasing demands of profitability, and leaving host nations with debt for RWC. So the model does need a rethink.



  • Yes. Events like the Olympics and the World Cup football are made for TV showpieces for their sports. A world league in some form is a good idea too though



  • As for "easier runs" - you're only going to solve that problem by improving the game globally. Rising tide lifts all boats, and we have seen it taking effect in the improved performance of smaller nations.

    Japan leading the bunch, with Georgia and countries like Uruguay also doing their bit. These nations were getting 100-point floggings not so long ago, and the biggest margins this RWC were:

    NZL v CAN - 63-0
    NZL v NAM - 71-9
    SCO v RUS - 61-0
    RSA v CAN - 66-7
    RSA v NAM - 57-3

    I think RWC could really use a "Plate" competition for the 3rd-place pool finishers - in this case Scotland, Italy, Argentina, and Fiji - in order to keep them involved another week or two. But as you can see from that list, you end up with 2 x 6N, 1 x TRC, and an unaligned nation.



  • @NTA have always liked the idea of a Plate. But for me it would be 3rd & 4th in pools.

    Could even add a Bowl for 5th placers.



  • @NTA biggest issue for a plate type comp would be the cost to these nations staying on longer



  • As for SA having an easier knockout run this time:

    They beat all three winners of the other Pools in consecutive weekends.

    I buy the 2007 run was less challenging than some, but not this time.

    Our perceptions of current Japan and Wales need to re-read somewhat I think.

    Just because they didn't beat us (who lost to the losers of the final) doesn't mean they had it easy.



  • @taniwharugby said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @NTA biggest issue for a plate type comp would be the cost to these nations staying on longer

    Isn't that paid for by the event?



  • @taniwharugby said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @NTA biggest issue for a plate type comp would be the cost to these nations staying on longer

    That will have to come out of WR's purse if they want to improve the game globally as they say 😉

    I'm backing Australia to host 2027: there will be plenty of room for visiting fans given nobody here is likely to go 🤣



  • @booboo no idea, but keeping them on longer would mean less profit for WR...



  • @taniwharugby said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @booboo no idea, but keeping them on longer would mean less profit for WR...

    But there would be more revenue from extra games?



  • @booboo said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @taniwharugby said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @booboo no idea, but keeping them on longer would mean less profit for WR...

    But there would be more revenue from extra games?

    And more development of the tier 2 teams involved, which is why WR is earning money for.



  • @booboo in Japan I reckon they'd have made it, but would other countries embrace those games as much when they had the bigger ones going on still? Would the tv rights have earned that much more for those games (to be aired in countries likely to play a plate)



  • @taniwharugby said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @booboo in Japan I reckon they'd have made it, but would other countries embrace those games as much when they had the bigger ones going on still? Would the tv rights have earned that much more for those games (to be aired in countries likely to play a plate)

    The lower tier games become the midweek fixtures, so once 40 games of pool play are over:

    WEEK 1
    Wednesday - Plate QFs
    Match 41: Pool A third v Pool C fourth
    Match 42: Pool B third v Pool D fourth
    Thursday - Plate QFs
    Match 43: Pool C third v Pool A fourth
    Match 44: Pool D third v Pool B fourth
    Friday - Cup QFs
    Match 45: Pool A winner v Pool C runner up
    Match 46: Pool B winner v Pool D runner up
    Saturday - Cup QFs
    Match 47: Pool C winner v Pool A runner up
    Match 48: Pool D winner v Pool B runner up

    WEEK 2
    Wednesday - Plate SF
    Thursday - Plate SF
    Friday - Cup SF
    Saturday - Cup SF

    WEEK 3
    Friday - Plate Final
    Saturday - Cup Final



  • A plate would be a waste of time. No one would care because it would be meaningless and if they did care it would distract from what we are meant to be focusing on. I wouldn't mind seeing an emerging nations world cup for non Rugby Championship and Six Nations teams.



  • @booboo said in Do we need a World cup?:

    As for SA having an easier knockout run this time:

    They beat all three winners of the other Pools in consecutive weekends.

    I buy the 2007 run was less challenging than some, but not this time.

    Our perceptions of current Japan and Wales need to re-read somewhat I think.

    Just because they didn't beat us (who lost to the losers of the final) doesn't mean they had it easy.

    I think my perception of the tournament was that SA, England and NZ were clearly the three strongest teams.

    Wales were a bit further back - as Mike pointed out, they had a chance to win the Cup at 16-16 vs SA - but, I think it would have been a bit of a burglary. France probably should have knocked them over in the QFs and the bronze play-off tested their depth.

    France and probably Oz the next best.

    I think whoever got the winner of Japan/Scotland should have been getting the easy pass to the Semis - except that Ireland had an awful tournament. Much the most disappointing "contender" - if they'd had a stronger team than Scotland as the second seed in their pool they wouldn't have made it out.

    I think I want to see a bit more sustained improvement by Japan. A year ago, we fielded a third string makeshift combo against them and put on 60 points.



  • @booboo said in Do we need a World cup?:

    As for SA having an easier knockout run this time:

    They beat all three winners of the other Pools in consecutive weekends.

    I buy the 2007 run was less challenging than some, but not this time.

    Our perceptions of current Japan and Wales need to re-read somewhat I think.

    Just because they didn't beat us (who lost to the losers of the final) doesn't mean they had it easy.

    lol we d give the Japs a hiding. We smacked Wales around with ease. Have you been watching at all? Im all for giving the opposition credit where its due,but this is too far man. SA got lucky,we should of thrown the pool game if we knew how it was going to go.



  • @hydro11 said in Do we need a World cup?:

    A plate would be a waste of time. No one would care because it would be meaningless and if they did care it would distract from what we are meant to be focusing on. I wouldn't mind seeing an emerging nations world cup for non Rugby Championship and Six Nations teams.

    I kind of agree, the only way to do it IMO is to have a bowl for the 4/5 place getters which leads to qualification for the next WC. That could be quite useful for these teams - 3rd place getters get qualification but 4/5 have to qualify (I believe). I’d love to watch those teams, in a pretty even competition (no Argentina or Scotland for example) going through midweek quarters and semis then a final on the friday before the main show (no3rd/4th game) or midweek if it was just added. We’d probably have seen Georgia and Tonga or Samoa playing off in the bowl and that would be a great game.

    TLDR: If the game had meaning, it would be worth having.



  • @geebee said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @booboo said in Do we need a World cup?:

    As for SA having an easier knockout run this time:

    They beat all three winners of the other Pools in consecutive weekends.

    I buy the 2007 run was less challenging than some, but not this time.

    Our perceptions of current Japan and Wales need to re-read somewhat I think.

    Just because they didn't beat us (who lost to the losers of the final) doesn't mean they had it easy.

    lol we d give the Japs a hiding. We smacked Wales around with ease. Have you been watching at all? Im all for giving the opposition credit where its due,but this is too far man. SA got lucky,we should of thrown the pool game if we knew how it was going to go.

    We didn't play Japan. So we didn't get that option.

    We lost a match that counted.

    SA didn't.

    Can I also suggest you stop being so patronising?

    Share your opinion by all means. Even start a hashtag (#notmyworldchamps). But just because you have an opinion doesn't mean you're right.



  • @booboo said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @geebee said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @booboo said in Do we need a World cup?:

    As for SA having an easier knockout run this time:

    They beat all three winners of the other Pools in consecutive weekends.

    I buy the 2007 run was less challenging than some, but not this time.

    Our perceptions of current Japan and Wales need to re-read somewhat I think.

    Just because they didn't beat us (who lost to the losers of the final) doesn't mean they had it easy.

    lol we d give the Japs a hiding. We smacked Wales around with ease. Have you been watching at all? Im all for giving the opposition credit where its due,but this is too far man. SA got lucky,we should of thrown the pool game if we knew how it was going to go.

    We didn't play Japan. So we didn't get that option.

    We lost a match that counted.

    SA didn't.

    Can I also suggest you stop being so patronising?

    Share your opinion by all means. Even start a hashtag (#notmyworldchamps). But just because you have an opinion doesn't mean you're right.

    So you are saying a test match and a good test victory against South Africa doesnt count? More reason to get rid of this current format in favour of something that makes all test matches and test caps meaningful again.

    Just because we didnt play against Japan,that all of a sudden makes them good somehow? I have a fair idea what the historical results are vs Japan,they are easybeats.



  • @geebee said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @booboo said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @geebee said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @booboo said in Do we need a World cup?:

    As for SA having an easier knockout run this time:

    They beat all three winners of the other Pools in consecutive weekends.

    I buy the 2007 run was less challenging than some, but not this time.

    Our perceptions of current Japan and Wales need to re-read somewhat I think.

    Just because they didn't beat us (who lost to the losers of the final) doesn't mean they had it easy.

    lol we d give the Japs a hiding. We smacked Wales around with ease. Have you been watching at all? Im all for giving the opposition credit where its due,but this is too far man. SA got lucky,we should of thrown the pool game if we knew how it was going to go.

    We didn't play Japan. So we didn't get that option.

    We lost a match that counted.

    SA didn't.

    Can I also suggest you stop being so patronising?

    Share your opinion by all means. Even start a hashtag (#notmyworldchamps). But just because you have an opinion doesn't mean you're right.

    So you are saying a test match and a good test victory against South Africa doesnt count? More reason to get rid of this current format in favour of something that makes all test matches and test caps meaningful again.

    Just because we didnt play against Japan,that all of a sudden makes them good somehow? I have a fair idea what the historical results are vs Japan,they are easybeats.

    Reeks of sour grapes to suggest getting rid of an entire format because we lost.



  • @Kirwan said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @geebee said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @booboo said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @geebee said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @booboo said in Do we need a World cup?:

    As for SA having an easier knockout run this time:

    They beat all three winners of the other Pools in consecutive weekends.

    I buy the 2007 run was less challenging than some, but not this time.

    Our perceptions of current Japan and Wales need to re-read somewhat I think.

    Just because they didn't beat us (who lost to the losers of the final) doesn't mean they had it easy.

    lol we d give the Japs a hiding. We smacked Wales around with ease. Have you been watching at all? Im all for giving the opposition credit where its due,but this is too far man. SA got lucky,we should of thrown the pool game if we knew how it was going to go.

    We didn't play Japan. So we didn't get that option.

    We lost a match that counted.

    SA didn't.

    Can I also suggest you stop being so patronising?

    Share your opinion by all means. Even start a hashtag (#notmyworldchamps). But just because you have an opinion doesn't mean you're right.

    So you are saying a test match and a good test victory against South Africa doesnt count? More reason to get rid of this current format in favour of something that makes all test matches and test caps meaningful again.

    Just because we didnt play against Japan,that all of a sudden makes them good somehow? I have a fair idea what the historical results are vs Japan,they are easybeats.

    Reeks of sour grapes to suggest getting rid of an entire format because we lost.

    Well sorta maybe,but with a league style format based on home and away and point differential theres no guarantee that the ABs would win that either. Its much fairer though. It eliminates the vagaries of knock out tournaments and a more worthy winner based on performance over a longer period of time is found. It does away with northern hemisphere teams attempting to send weaker squads south so its a win for the paying public.



  • @geebee said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @booboo said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @geebee said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @booboo said in Do we need a World cup?:

    As for SA having an easier knockout run this time:

    They beat all three winners of the other Pools in consecutive weekends.

    I buy the 2007 run was less challenging than some, but not this time.

    Our perceptions of current Japan and Wales need to re-read somewhat I think.

    Just because they didn't beat us (who lost to the losers of the final) doesn't mean they had it easy.

    lol we d give the Japs a hiding. We smacked Wales around with ease. Have you been watching at all? Im all for giving the opposition credit where its due,but this is too far man. SA got lucky,we should of thrown the pool game if we knew how it was going to go.

    We didn't play Japan. So we didn't get that option.

    We lost a match that counted.

    SA didn't.

    Can I also suggest you stop being so patronising?

    Share your opinion by all means. Even start a hashtag (#notmyworldchamps). But just because you have an opinion doesn't mean you're right.

    So you are saying a test match and a good test victory against South Africa doesnt count? More reason to get rid of this current format in favour of something that makes all test matches and test caps meaningful again.

    Just because we didnt play against Japan,that all of a sudden makes them good somehow? I have a fair idea what the historical results are vs Japan,they are easybeats.

    Don't get all Cathy Newman on me. You know very well what I'm saying.

    We lost a knock out match.

    The match in Pool play counted to get us the easier semi final. Which it did.

    But there are more paths to the final. One of which SA took.

    Clarify for me please: who do you think are the worthy champions? England coz they beat us? Us coz we us and smacked Wales?

    I find your bitterness somewhat perplexing.



  • @geebee said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @Kirwan said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @geebee said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @booboo said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @geebee said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @booboo said in Do we need a World cup?:

    As for SA having an easier knockout run this time:

    They beat all three winners of the other Pools in consecutive weekends.

    I buy the 2007 run was less challenging than some, but not this time.

    Our perceptions of current Japan and Wales need to re-read somewhat I think.

    Just because they didn't beat us (who lost to the losers of the final) doesn't mean they had it easy.

    lol we d give the Japs a hiding. We smacked Wales around with ease. Have you been watching at all? Im all for giving the opposition credit where its due,but this is too far man. SA got lucky,we should of thrown the pool game if we knew how it was going to go.

    We didn't play Japan. So we didn't get that option.

    We lost a match that counted.

    SA didn't.

    Can I also suggest you stop being so patronising?

    Share your opinion by all means. Even start a hashtag (#notmyworldchamps). But just because you have an opinion doesn't mean you're right.

    So you are saying a test match and a good test victory against South Africa doesnt count? More reason to get rid of this current format in favour of something that makes all test matches and test caps meaningful again.

    Just because we didnt play against Japan,that all of a sudden makes them good somehow? I have a fair idea what the historical results are vs Japan,they are easybeats.

    Reeks of sour grapes to suggest getting rid of an entire format because we lost.

    Well sorta maybe,but with a league style format based on home and away and point differential theres no guarantee that the ABs would win that either. Its much fairer though. It eliminates the vagaries of knock out tournaments and a more worthy winner based on performance over a longer period of time is found. It does away with northern hemisphere teams attempting to send weaker squads south so its a win for the paying public.

    I don't disagree with a lot of that. Hence why I think having both would be good.

    But knockout footy is what the World Cup is about. We've dealt with it for 32 years.



  • @booboo said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @geebee said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @booboo said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @geebee said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @booboo said in Do we need a World cup?:

    As for SA having an easier knockout run this time:

    They beat all three winners of the other Pools in consecutive weekends.

    I buy the 2007 run was less challenging than some, but not this time.

    Our perceptions of current Japan and Wales need to re-read somewhat I think.

    Just because they didn't beat us (who lost to the losers of the final) doesn't mean they had it easy.

    lol we d give the Japs a hiding. We smacked Wales around with ease. Have you been watching at all? Im all for giving the opposition credit where its due,but this is too far man. SA got lucky,we should of thrown the pool game if we knew how it was going to go.

    We didn't play Japan. So we didn't get that option.

    We lost a match that counted.

    SA didn't.

    Can I also suggest you stop being so patronising?

    Share your opinion by all means. Even start a hashtag (#notmyworldchamps). But just because you have an opinion doesn't mean you're right.

    So you are saying a test match and a good test victory against South Africa doesnt count? More reason to get rid of this current format in favour of something that makes all test matches and test caps meaningful again.

    Just because we didnt play against Japan,that all of a sudden makes them good somehow? I have a fair idea what the historical results are vs Japan,they are easybeats.

    Don't get all Cathy Newman on me. You know very well what I'm saying.

    We lost a knock out match.

    The match in Pool play counted to get us the easier semi final. Which it did.

    But there are more paths to the final. One of which SA took.

    Clarify for me please: who do you think are the worthy champions? England coz they beat us? Us coz we us and smacked Wales?

    I find your bitterness somewhat perplexing.

    Youre being ridiculous if you are suggesting we had the easier run,winning that pool match gave us the harder draw.



  • @booboo said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @geebee said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @Kirwan said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @geebee said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @booboo said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @geebee said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @booboo said in Do we need a World cup?:

    As for SA having an easier knockout run this time:

    They beat all three winners of the other Pools in consecutive weekends.

    I buy the 2007 run was less challenging than some, but not this time.

    Our perceptions of current Japan and Wales need to re-read somewhat I think.

    Just because they didn't beat us (who lost to the losers of the final) doesn't mean they had it easy.

    lol we d give the Japs a hiding. We smacked Wales around with ease. Have you been watching at all? Im all for giving the opposition credit where its due,but this is too far man. SA got lucky,we should of thrown the pool game if we knew how it was going to go.

    We didn't play Japan. So we didn't get that option.

    We lost a match that counted.

    SA didn't.

    Can I also suggest you stop being so patronising?

    Share your opinion by all means. Even start a hashtag (#notmyworldchamps). But just because you have an opinion doesn't mean you're right.

    So you are saying a test match and a good test victory against South Africa doesnt count? More reason to get rid of this current format in favour of something that makes all test matches and test caps meaningful again.

    Just because we didnt play against Japan,that all of a sudden makes them good somehow? I have a fair idea what the historical results are vs Japan,they are easybeats.

    Reeks of sour grapes to suggest getting rid of an entire format because we lost.

    Well sorta maybe,but with a league style format based on home and away and point differential theres no guarantee that the ABs would win that either. Its much fairer though. It eliminates the vagaries of knock out tournaments and a more worthy winner based on performance over a longer period of time is found. It does away with northern hemisphere teams attempting to send weaker squads south so its a win for the paying public.

    I don't disagree with a lot of that. Hence why I think having both would be good.

    But knockout footy is what the World Cup is about. We've dealt with it for 32 years.

    South Africa arent true world champions in my book,they are World cup winners. Theres a difference. In order to assess who the best team is,you would draw conclusions based over a longer period of time than a few weeks. A team could lose 50% of its games over the intervening 4 years between cups then make a run having an inferior draw or a biased ref. Nah thats not a champion.



  • I find it perplexing that some seem to think we were the best team at the WC but were screwed by the scheduling. We weren’t, and we weren’t.

    Pool games only get you to the main dance, where we got dumped. No one could have really predicted the cancellations or Ireland losing to Japan. If SA got an easy road, good on them. They still won 3 on the trot, which is what it takes.



  • @geebee said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @booboo said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @geebee said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @Kirwan said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @geebee said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @booboo said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @geebee said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @booboo said in Do we need a World cup?:

    As for SA having an easier knockout run this time:

    They beat all three winners of the other Pools in consecutive weekends.

    I buy the 2007 run was less challenging than some, but not this time.

    Our perceptions of current Japan and Wales need to re-read somewhat I think.

    Just because they didn't beat us (who lost to the losers of the final) doesn't mean they had it easy.

    lol we d give the Japs a hiding. We smacked Wales around with ease. Have you been watching at all? Im all for giving the opposition credit where its due,but this is too far man. SA got lucky,we should of thrown the pool game if we knew how it was going to go.

    We didn't play Japan. So we didn't get that option.

    We lost a match that counted.

    SA didn't.

    Can I also suggest you stop being so patronising?

    Share your opinion by all means. Even start a hashtag (#notmyworldchamps). But just because you have an opinion doesn't mean you're right.

    So you are saying a test match and a good test victory against South Africa doesnt count? More reason to get rid of this current format in favour of something that makes all test matches and test caps meaningful again.

    Just because we didnt play against Japan,that all of a sudden makes them good somehow? I have a fair idea what the historical results are vs Japan,they are easybeats.

    Reeks of sour grapes to suggest getting rid of an entire format because we lost.

    Well sorta maybe,but with a league style format based on home and away and point differential theres no guarantee that the ABs would win that either. Its much fairer though. It eliminates the vagaries of knock out tournaments and a more worthy winner based on performance over a longer period of time is found. It does away with northern hemisphere teams attempting to send weaker squads south so its a win for the paying public.

    I don't disagree with a lot of that. Hence why I think having both would be good.

    But knockout footy is what the World Cup is about. We've dealt with it for 32 years.

    South Africa arent true world champions in my book,they are World cup winners. Theres a difference. In order to assess who the best team is,you would draw conclusions based over a longer period of time than a few weeks. A team could lose 50% of its games over the intervening 4 years between cups then make a run having an inferior draw or a biased ref. Nah thats not a champion.

    First bold: Semantics. But correct.

    Second bold: let's look at World Rankings then...



  • @booboo said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @geebee said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @booboo said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @geebee said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @Kirwan said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @geebee said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @booboo said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @geebee said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @booboo said in Do we need a World cup?:

    As for SA having an easier knockout run this time:

    They beat all three winners of the other Pools in consecutive weekends.

    I buy the 2007 run was less challenging than some, but not this time.

    Our perceptions of current Japan and Wales need to re-read somewhat I think.

    Just because they didn't beat us (who lost to the losers of the final) doesn't mean they had it easy.

    lol we d give the Japs a hiding. We smacked Wales around with ease. Have you been watching at all? Im all for giving the opposition credit where its due,but this is too far man. SA got lucky,we should of thrown the pool game if we knew how it was going to go.

    We didn't play Japan. So we didn't get that option.

    We lost a match that counted.

    SA didn't.

    Can I also suggest you stop being so patronising?

    Share your opinion by all means. Even start a hashtag (#notmyworldchamps). But just because you have an opinion doesn't mean you're right.

    So you are saying a test match and a good test victory against South Africa doesnt count? More reason to get rid of this current format in favour of something that makes all test matches and test caps meaningful again.

    Just because we didnt play against Japan,that all of a sudden makes them good somehow? I have a fair idea what the historical results are vs Japan,they are easybeats.

    Reeks of sour grapes to suggest getting rid of an entire format because we lost.

    Well sorta maybe,but with a league style format based on home and away and point differential theres no guarantee that the ABs would win that either. Its much fairer though. It eliminates the vagaries of knock out tournaments and a more worthy winner based on performance over a longer period of time is found. It does away with northern hemisphere teams attempting to send weaker squads south so its a win for the paying public.

    I don't disagree with a lot of that. Hence why I think having both would be good.

    But knockout footy is what the World Cup is about. We've dealt with it for 32 years.

    South Africa arent true world champions in my book,they are World cup winners. Theres a difference. In order to assess who the best team is,you would draw conclusions based over a longer period of time than a few weeks. A team could lose 50% of its games over the intervening 4 years between cups then make a run having an inferior draw or a biased ref. Nah thats not a champion.

    First bold: Semantics. But correct.

    Second bold: let's look at World Rankings then...

    Rankings are all shite too,need i remind you Ireland and Wales were numero uno for periods of time leading into this cup and they certainly didnt live up to their rate. Its winning test match% and home and away that counts.



  • NZ in 2019: played 11 won 8 lost 2 drew 1 (82%)
    SA in 2019: played 12 won 10 l lost 1 drew 1 (88%)



  • The thing that irritates is that England never have a decent squad for their end of year tests away. The players schedules are such that lots are munted. It would be good if there was some genuine test ranking based on matches that involved the major nations playing each other with a consequence worth competing for within the 4 year period (every 2 years say).

    How are the seeding for World Cups determined?



  • @kev said in Do we need a World cup?:

    The thing that irritates is that England never have a decent squad for their end of year tests away. The players schedules are such that lots are munted. It would be good if there was some genuine test ranking based on matches that involved the major nations playing each other with a consequence worth competing for within the 4 year period (every 2 years say).

    How are the seeding for World Cups determined?

    World Rankings at the time of the draw, about two years out.

    Random draw in bands of 4.



  • @booboo said in Do we need a World cup?:

    NZ in 2019: played 11 won 8 lost 2 drew 1 (82%)
    SA in 2019: played 12 won 10 l lost 1 drew 1 (88%)

    Arselicking the boks. Add the results of 2016 17 and 18 as well. You know full well you cant get a comprehensive statistical analysis of home and away results in 1 year,its not physically possible to play everyone.



  • @gt12 said in Do we need a World cup?:

    I find it perplexing that some seem to think we were the best team at the WC but were screwed by the scheduling. We weren’t, and we weren’t.

    Pool games only get you to the main dance, where we got dumped. No one could have really predicted the cancellations or Ireland losing to Japan. If SA got an easy road, good on them. They still won 3 on the trot, which is what it takes.

    That doesn't mean we weren't the best team though - it just means that being the best team is meaningless.



  • @hydro11 said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @gt12 said in Do we need a World cup?:

    I find it perplexing that some seem to think we were the best team at the WC but were screwed by the scheduling. We weren’t, and we weren’t.

    Pool games only get you to the main dance, where we got dumped. No one could have really predicted the cancellations or Ireland losing to Japan. If SA got an easy road, good on them. They still won 3 on the trot, which is what it takes.

    That doesn't mean we weren't the best team though - it just means that being the best team is meaningless.

    I was in Yokohama for the SF. We were definitely not the best team the way we got owned



  • @canefan I could tell that from my lounge in Whangarei, saved thousands 🙂



  • @canefan said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @hydro11 said in Do we need a World cup?:

    @gt12 said in Do we need a World cup?:

    I find it perplexing that some seem to think we were the best team at the WC but were screwed by the scheduling. We weren’t, and we weren’t.

    Pool games only get you to the main dance, where we got dumped. No one could have really predicted the cancellations or Ireland losing to Japan. If SA got an easy road, good on them. They still won 3 on the trot, which is what it takes.

    That doesn't mean we weren't the best team though - it just means that being the best team is meaningless.

    I was in Yokohama for the SF. We were definitely not the best team the way we got owned

    For sure. It isn't obvious that we were the best team at the World Cup but it is possible to be the best team and not win it.


Log in to reply