World League Rugby / Nations Championship
-
The official decision hasn't been taken yet, but if this article in the NZH is correct, the decision about the new format will be made next month.
Essentially the new format will require all 12 nations to play each other once in the calendar year, with a semi-final and final to be played in late November, possibly early December. The 12 nations will be the current Six Nations – England, France, Italy, Scotland, Ireland and Wales – the current Rugby Championship sides of New Zealand, Australia, South Africa and Argentina plus Japan and USA who are going to be invited to join the Rugby Championship. There will be no promotion or relegation from either the Six Nations or Rugby Championship which means the likes of Fiji, Samoa and Tonga have been left out in the cold for at least 10 years. From an All Blacks perspective, the international season will kick off in July with three home test as per usual.The Six Nations will travel south to each play three tests. These will be randomly allocated so England, for example, could find themselves playing Japan, Australia and New Zealand while Wales could be off to Argentina then South Africa and New Zealand. The Rugby Championship will then kick off in August and will be a straight round-robin. The World League will then be completed by the southern sides travelling north in November to play the three teams they didn't play in July. The top four teams on the table will then play a semi-final and final in the Northern Hemisphere. The proposal suggests that the playoffs could take place in major grounds such as the Nou Camp in Barcelona or Soldier Fields in Chicago where the All Blacks have played twice before.If this is all agreed it will mean the All Blacks will have a guaranteed 13 tests a year in non-World Cup seasons. They have played 14 tests in each of the last three years. But while the actual number of games could be less – NZR may still want to negotiate another Bledisloe Cup fixture as the new format will only see the All Blacks clash once with the Wallabies – the amount of travel could be significantly higher. There will also be concerns about the All Blacks potentially playing five big tests in Europe at the end of each season, plus the fact the season could drag into December will be a concern.https://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=12208175
-
Three of my main issues with this format are:
- there won't be any room for tests against the Pacific nations and other tier 2/3 nations, regardless of their ranking
- devaluation of the RWC
- devaluation of Bledisloe Cup (in principle, only one test)
-
@Stargazer said in World League Rugby:
devaluation of Bledisloe Cup (in principle, only one test)
Australia have been steadily devaluing it for 16 years
-
@mariner4life True, but that doesn't mean it will stay that way.
-
Can't say that cementing in such a structural divide between tier one and two is going to help grow the game.
Not particularly interested in having a finals series every year either.
That being said, if I can't have tours anymore, a broader Championship is a beneficial move. Utterly sick of playing Australia, South Africa ad nauseum.
-
Assuming this proposal is going to go ahead I would prefer it was home and home (in alternating years) rather than round robin. There is something to be said for keeping some air between tests between certain countries to build anticipation rather than trotting out the same fixture sheet every year - the Rugby Championship took less than four years to get old.
Also... no mention of the Lions - seems like a somewhat significant detail.
edit: realized the home and home proposal wouldn't work as it would eliminate the 6N as we know it and that wouldn't be allowed to happen (perhaps rightly so)? Playing Australia and South Africa in alternating two-test braces would be refreshing though.
-
I may have asked these questions when it was first mooted, but I've already forgotten any provided answers
What is the motivation for the change?
What is the desired outcome? -
@mariner4life said in World League Rugby:
I may have asked these questions when it was first mooted, but I've already forgotten any provided answers
What is the motivation for the change?
What is the desired outcome?
And some bs about season alignment, player welfare etc.
-
@antipodean my thoughts were an attempt by the Unions to wrest back control of their players and their game from the Clubs?
-
So if, for ex, the ABs make semi and final games - they'll be playing them in NH for half the profit (minus whatever World Rugby take - I wonder how much?) which is nice for money.
Shit for tier 2 teams, esp after the just trumpeted increased games between tier 1 and 2/3
-
So Italy, Scotland, Japan and USA all get preference over Fiji, Samoa & Tonga?
With all due respect, but annual fixtures against the above teams (we never play those tight Scots anyway) is hardly gonna do the game any good!
-
@taniwharugby Yup. Of those 4 countries, only Scotland would still be interesting for me to watch. I really am not interested in games against Italy, Japan and the USA; much rather watch games against Fiji, Samoa and Tonga.
-
@Stargazer yeah the Jocks have a bit of appeal purely cos we never play them.
-
Yeah the Pacific Islands are getting the screw job, yet again.
I am not opposed to giving the concept a shot. Outside of the Lions and RWC the international game (in Australia) stumbles from year to year. You have bursts of interest (series like Ireland, the first 20 minutes of Bled 1), and then weeks of nothing much.
Having some sort of binding narrative to the season, plus a wider variety of opponents could be a good thing. All the better if it puts more money in the bank.
I am very uncomfortable locking it down for 10 years though. That's a big red flag right there. Give it 2-3 years and then go from there. But of course that would be a logical decision, which is not really World Rugby's forte...
-
@barbarian yep, by all means give it a shot, but 10 years is an eternity. And shutting out the Pacific Islands for 10 years is a death sentence.
3 years. Bottom team gets rissoled for highest ranked team not involved.
Given November's "test" against Japan their fixture in NZ should be a massive earner. Fuck what happens if you get the US and Japan at home in the same year?
-
@barbarian opens the door for plenty of 'poaching'
-
Tests against Japan and USA in NZ:
Negative: more fringe ABs players will be capped, who would not make the squad for the interesting test matches against better opposition
Negative: these tests won't be more than warm-up matches for tests against stronger opposition
Positive: smaller stadiums will get test matches
-
@Stargazer Except the first ones a positive, it will help with depth. As it won't be like the one off EXTRA tests where we have to swap around people like last year, just play a lot more B team- who can be needed come the real games.
-
@Stargazer said in World League Rugby:
Tests against Japan and USA in NZ:
Negative: more fringe ABs players will be capped, who would not make the squad for the interesting test matches against better opposition
Why is that a negative?
-
@barbarian said in World League Rugby:
Yeah the Pacific Islands are getting the screw job, yet again.
Are you proposing Nukuʻalofa have six tier one tests a year or something?
I'm yet to see a model that can integrate the Pacific Islands. It is a false indignance as well; their national teams performance is absolutely not built on the strength of their national union - quite the opposite.
-
-
I can't see the Home Nations voting for this. The 6 Nations and the current November internationals are enormous money-generators for them. Why risk compromising those successful products? No mention of the B&I Lions. The treatment of Fiji, Samoa and Tonga is shameful.
-
@Hooroo said in World League Rugby:
@Stargazer said in World League Rugby:
Tests against Japan and USA in NZ:
Negative: more fringe ABs players will be capped, who would not make the squad for the interesting test matches against better opposition
Why is that a negative?
For the same reason as several Ferners considered it a negative that players were capped in the 2018 test in and against Japan. Players may be capped only to play these games, but may never play against stronger opposition.
I guess we'll have to wait and see what the selection "policy" for these games will be.
-
@barbarian said in World League Rugby:
@rotated No. But there needs to be some sort of middle ground between Tonga hosting six tests and the Pacific Island teams being locked out for 10 years while the USA and Japan get a full dance card of games each year.
How are they going to be locked out? This model accounts for 11 fixtures per year. New Zealand have played 14 tests every non-RWC year since 2009 (in 2008 they played 15). I do not envision a set up where test teams are playing less rugby - so where are those additional fixtures coming from?
I am almost certain there will be provision for additional discretionary tests. I'm not naive to think one won't be an additional Bledisloe, but I can see the appeal of scheduling fixtures against the PIs for a good hit out too.
Looking at how the US College Football is scheduled; it seems a likely model. They play 10 conference games (same every year) and then four discretionary games out-of-conference which are ideally tune up games. A potential play-off game after all of that.
-
@rotated said in World League Rugby:
@barbarian said in World League Rugby:
@rotated No. But there needs to be some sort of middle ground between Tonga hosting six tests and the Pacific Island teams being locked out for 10 years while the USA and Japan get a full dance card of games each year.
How are they going to be locked out? This model accounts for 11 fixtures per year. New Zealand have played 14 tests every non-RWC year since 2009 (in 2008 they played 15). I do not envision a set up where test teams are playing less rugby - so where are those additional fixtures coming from?
I am almost certain there will be provision for additional discretionary tests. I'm not naive to think one won't be an additional Bledisloe, but I can see the appeal of scheduling fixtures against the PIs for a good hit out too.
Looking at how the US College Football is scheduled; it seems a likely model. They play 10 conference games (same every year) and then four discretionary games out-of-conference which are ideally tune up games. A potential play-off game after all of that.
Five games against TRC teams
Six games agains 6N teams
Possibly a semi-final and final
Probably a second Bledisloe testThat would be 12-14 tests, depending on whether the ABs play the semi-final and final.
-
-
Welp some people don't like it, who have a better idea than me
-
Perhaps this could be used to give NZ players more money to keep them in NZ. If they somehow used the extra income to pay the players more it may help to get them interested.
It really needs some sort of relegation system but it will never happen because imagine if Scotland/France/Australia has a shocker and somehow end up in the bottom 2, it would be financial suicide for those unions the following year.
This also makes it extra hard for that end of year tour, imagine 5 hard games in a row for the eventual winner. I understand they want the money but perhaps a simple round robin would be better.
Each SH team, well the ones with a shot at the top 4 would have to take almost WC level squads to manage 5 games in a row.
Maybe do this like Euro in soccer where it is every 4 years which would be in between World Cups.
Did they say what happens to this tournament in World Cup years? Disregard, doesn't happen in WC years.
-
@Machpants said in World League Rugby:
Welp some people don't like it, who have a better idea than me
Read says ""Fans want to see meaningful games; they don't want to see fatigued players playing a reduced quality of rugby as part of a money-driven, weakened competition that doesn't work for the players and clubs."
Is he talking about the current June tests and the meaningless end of year tours or the new format?
-
Statement IRP (International Rugby Players):
PLAYERS HIGHLIGHT “MAJOR CONCERNS” AROUND PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL SEASON
The world’s top players have warned of serious “player welfare and integrity concerns” around World Rugby’s proposed competition structure for the global game. While senior players have consistently voiced their support for the concept, ongoing concerns exist around the detail of the competition format that has been taken to market in recent months. The International Rugby Players Council of almost 40 players spoke via conference call on Tuesday night (GMT) to discuss the potential 12-year deal, with nine of the world’s top ten international team captains dialing in. Senior players from around the globe were united in their concern about the proposed format, in relation to: * Player load challenges from multiple top-level test matches in different countries and time-zones in consecutive weeks * Increased long-haul travel in short time frames * A lack of real opportunities for Tier Two nations to progress * Increased conflicts between country and club demands and Regulation 9 release periods * Potential impact on Rugby World Cup and Lions tours * The long-term quality and integrity of the international game It’s believed that World Rugby bosses are seeking to ratify the deal in the coming weeks, which has raised concerns among the Player Council.Response: World Rugby Statement
World Rugby recognises and values the importance of player considerations and input into the annual international competition discussions. However, the manner the International Rugby Players (IRP) organisation has expressed these is surprising given regular engagement throughout this ongoing process. World Rugby’s commitment to player welfare matters is unwavering and we will continue to engage and give full consideration to the welfare of players within the ongoing discussions. It is inappropriate to comment on specifics whilst wider stakeholder consultation, including with IRP, is ongoing. However, it is important to note that some assumptions made in the statement regarding the proposed competition structure are inaccurate and that important matters such as playing load and emerging nation opportunities are at the heart of constructive dialogue on the overall concept. Consumer research confirms a structured annual competition would make fans and new audiences more likely to watch, attend and engage with international rugby, exposing the sport to new fans worldwide. There is also no doubt that a structured annual international competition would deliver significantly greater long-term global media revenue for reinvestment in the global game. This project has at its heart long-term growth and stability, not short-term wins, and that includes greater opportunity for players. As instructed by our Executive Committee and the Unions, we remain committed to a process of constructive dialogue with all stakeholders, including the IRP, to deliver a model that ensures the best-possible competition and commercial outcomes for all and a truly exciting and meaningful annual international competition structure that is great for players, clubs, fans and unions. -
@Stargazer said in World League Rugby:
Statement IRP (International Rugby Players):
PLAYERS HIGHLIGHT “MAJOR CONCERNS” AROUND PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL SEASON
Consumer research confirms a structured annual competition would make fans and new audiences more likely to watch, attend and engage with international rugby, exposing the sport to new fans worldwide. There is also no doubt that a structured annual international competition would deliver significantly greater long-term global media revenue for reinvestment in the global game. This project has at its heart long-term growth and stability, not short-term wins, and that includes greater opportunity for players.Not sure if I'm out of touch or not, but I'm of completely the opposite view. I've really enjoyed the 3-match end of season tours we've had from NH opposition last few years.
The very last thing I want to watch is us playing the same 11 teams every year.
-
That WR statement is so typical.
'We are surprised that the players have spoken in public about their concerns as we have always involved them and will continue to pay lip service to their concerns because this is our unwavering point of view which we will force on them...'
We will also have a situation whereby the NH fans will complain that their teams have to do a globe-trotting exercise at the end of their season because of the distances between games while the SH fans will complain that their teams have to play 5 tests during a period that they usually struggle with playing 3 or 4.
It is quite an unbalanced proposal as far as workload/flights etc etc goes which just leaves it open for the types of fan arguments that made the changes to Super Rugby a competition killer.
Ask fans if they would like to see a world comp and they would likely say yes.
Ask if they still want to see one that that wasn't balanced and they may have a different view.(hang on I think I got that from the Brexit thread
) -
Fuck this. I'll take what he says with a grain of salt but Nichols spoke well and very fairly on breaky radio today. The various national players unions and rep, plus their international team have been in talks for ages with WR around this. Sounds like they feel there is support for their position from national unions, but it's not getting traction at WR.
Nichols mentioned about 4-5 meetings to discuss this concept through 2018 and early this year, then noted they'd (player reps etc) had been excluded from the most recent meeting. Then they find out WR want to get it locked in asap and we start down this 'fake news', no, no, no you misunderstand our plans kind of messaging from Pichot.
To be fair Nichols said they are taking a partnership approach, better to be talking and listening to each other etc, but ultimately if the cattle ain't keen... (my words, not his).
Pichot is proving to be pretty fucking snakey imo. Will have to do some digging to see how many folks in the WR leadership team have held active roles at national level. Hmmm where is Amazon based again?? Surely that's just a co-inky-dink aye?!
-
one thing I heard Rob NIchol say - 5 matches on consecutive weekends in potentially 5 different country....
Yeah the players will be keen AF!
-
@barbarian said in World League Rugby:
@rotated No. But there needs to be some sort of middle ground between Tonga hosting six tests and the Pacific Island teams being locked out for 10 years while the USA and Japan get a full dance card of games each year.
Not to mention Georgia, Romania, Canada, Uruguay.
Current rankings have Fiji 9th, Georgia 12th.
States are at 13, Italy 15.
That 10th to 20thish band is what needs the investment.
