Minnows facing cull

[BO'D is GOD]

how do they ever expect to spread rugby round the world? stupid people!!!!!!!!!

[IsraeliTiger]

Agreed, for me some of the highlights of this world cup were seeing some of the supposed minnows performing much better than expected. (Romania losing by six points to Italy, Portugal scoring a try against the top team in the world by far, Georgia losing by only four against Ireland)

Also, this doesn't make sense when you consider that four teams in this world cup have lost by zero, and that two of those teams are Scotland and England!

[Ads677]

Wasn't this broadly what the RFU proposed a few years ago in their submission for this year's RWC and it put the cat amongst the pigeons (especially in France)?

[toriya]

I've really enjoyed the so called 'Minnows' play this year. They've played their hearts out, and in some cases played better than the big teams. How can you encourage rugby around the world, when you limit who can play in the World Cup.

[Jeremy Anderson]

On current world rankings that means Tri nations, six nations, Argies, Tonga and Fiji would be seeded and Samoa, Canada and USA would need to qualify.

Not sure seeting Samoa on some the weaker teams in a qualifying comp is the best plan. Not the least because Samoa may struggle to get their players released and funded.

[Dave Angel]

Jeremy, the 12 seeds would not be based on IRB rankings but on on the top 3 finishers from each pool in this RWC.


As for forcing Samoa to play in a qualifying tournament, that already happens! Currently, only the quarter finalists from the previous RWC qualify automatically & all of the remaining places have to be earned via qualifying tournaments.

Player release & funding would be no more of an issue for Samoa under the changed system than it is under the current one.

[Kinoulton]

This is bad timing in the extreme.

Just when the so-called minnows are starting to put up a decent fight in the majority of matches, they come up with this.

[Jeremy Anderson]

Thanks Dave, did not really appreciate that. So any team that might not make the qtrs in this last round will have to qualify under current rules.

We had better beat Tonga then!

Also one from Italy and France, one from Ireland and France and one from Fiji or Wales will all have to qualify.

As 86 nations took part in qualifying are the 'better' teams fed into the mix later on? I have no idea how many extra games it would mean for a 6 nations country to go through qualifying.

[Dave Angel]

Not quite Jeremy. According to the IRB, the automatic qualifiers for 2011 will be the top 3 from each of the 2007 RWC pools, regardless of any changes they are proposing for the 2011 competition at present.

Therefore Ireland, France & Argentina should all qualify, as should Scotland & Italy, Wales & Fiji and both England & Tonga.

This was a previously announced change from the policy 4 years ago when only the quarter-finalists qualified and was introduced to give 3rd placed teams this year something to fight for (and seems to have worked successfully!)


Regarding your question about better teams being introduced later in the qualifying stages, yes that is correct.

At present, the lowliest teams start the qualifying route the year after the previous RWC ends in geographically based tournaments. The bset teams then progress to the next level/round of qualifying and so on with better/higher-ranked countries joining at each higher stage until all of the RWC qualifiers are known.

Details of the qualifying route used for the 2007 RWC can be found here:

http://www.rugbyworldcup.com/home/qualifying/info.html

[Jeremy Anderson]

Thanks Dave

[chipnchase]

After watching some of the smaller nations i'm in favour of upping RWC to 32 teams split into 8 pools with a 2nd round knock out before the 1/4 finals. That way more nations will be involved increasing the revenue of the unions which can only lead to developing rugby at the grass roots and bringing media hype to countrys (such as portugal)where rugby is not a major support.

Thoughts?

[Dave Angel]

After watching some of the smaller nations i'm in favour of upping RWC to 32 teams split into 8 pools with a 2nd round knock out before the 1/4 finals. That way more nations will be involved increasing the revenue of the unions which can only lead to developing rugby at the grass roots and bringing media hype to countrys (such as portugal)where rugby is not a major support.

Thoughts?

...and thereby extending the length of the tournament even further into the domestic season?

Your proposed RWC would require 64 games to complete, compared to 2007's 48.

It would require an extra clear week between 2nd round & QF to allow sufficient rest & fairness for all competing sides. (You wouldn't gain a whole week back for the saved 4th pool game for each side as it would probably just reduce by 1 mid-week game)

It would need far more stadia to cope with the additional games...and some countries don't have the facilities large enough to cope with that demand (NZ especially).

You couldn't use the same number of stadia but play more games in the same time frame as pitches need ime to recover & will often tear up if used on consecutive (or near consecutive) days.


Moving to an 8 pool, 32 team tournament would almost certainly result in more players being away from their clubs for more weeks of the domestic season.

Is that a proposal likely to be widely popular with club rugby fans?

[Bill W]

This is bad timing in the extreme.

Just when the so-called minnows are starting to put up a decent fight in the majority of matches, they come up with this.

But of course. As Marx expounded the production processes seek to maintain the status quo.

[Kinoulton]

Ey, yer can have a right clever discussion on here, can't you?

Have you ever been on a footie chatroom, Bill? You'd be chucked off for being a smart a**e!