-
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
P
PeeJay
Guest
So basically it's a way to stop either France, Ireland or Argentina having to go through the qualifying process, am I right? Same applies to the group with New Zealand, Scotland and Italy in.
J
Juggernaut
Guest
The old boys looking out for each other..
E
ecks tartan army
Guest
yipee! 
ive been a nervous reck since i realised scotland were in italys group - i can relax now.
ive been a nervous reck since i realised scotland were in italys group - i can relax now.
R
Rugby_Cymru
Guest
Sounds like a cop out to me.
If i were in the same group as ireland or scotland now, i'd be happy with the decision, but you've got to admit its just the easy way out.
If i were in the same group as ireland or scotland now, i'd be happy with the decision, but you've got to admit its just the easy way out.
C
Cusker
Guest
Don't sound fair to me, won't make it interesting to watch
B
Bullitt
Guest
IRB plan to cut World Cup
The IRB are ready to cut the number of teams competing in future World Cups from 20 to 16.
In an innovative move aimed at culling the number of heavily one-sided matches, the IRB plan to make this year's tournament the last 20-team competition.
World Cup 2003 saw scorelines of 142-0 and 145-17 as the likes of Namibia and Japan were hammered, making somewhat of a mockery of the group stages.
Under the new system, four groups of four teams would compete, with the carrot of automatic qualification to the next World Cup the reward for finishing in the top three.
Such a move would be highly beneficial to the likes of Samoa, Fiji, Italy and Argentina, while it almost guarantees England, South Africa, Australia, Wales, New Zealand, Scotland, France and Ireland entry to the competition.
"In recognition of the amount of rugby now being played and the implications on the establishment of an integrated season the RWC board has decided that there should be 12 automatic qualifying places for future tournaments," IRB chairman Syd Millar said.
"This will serve to reduce the potential number of international matches that would have to be played in the years before a tournament by those teams who did not make the quarter-finals of the previous RWC, reducing fixture congestion.
"With the top three teams in each pool qualifying directly to the next RWC, this new process raises the prospect of several Tier Two unions obtaining automatic qualification.
"This does not happen at present, and it will add excitement and relevance to more pool matches at each tournament, including the 2007 World Cup."
http://home.skysports.com/list.aspx?hlid=4...ugby+Union&
The IRB are ready to cut the number of teams competing in future World Cups from 20 to 16.
In an innovative move aimed at culling the number of heavily one-sided matches, the IRB plan to make this year's tournament the last 20-team competition.
World Cup 2003 saw scorelines of 142-0 and 145-17 as the likes of Namibia and Japan were hammered, making somewhat of a mockery of the group stages.
Under the new system, four groups of four teams would compete, with the carrot of automatic qualification to the next World Cup the reward for finishing in the top three.
Such a move would be highly beneficial to the likes of Samoa, Fiji, Italy and Argentina, while it almost guarantees England, South Africa, Australia, Wales, New Zealand, Scotland, France and Ireland entry to the competition.
"In recognition of the amount of rugby now being played and the implications on the establishment of an integrated season the RWC board has decided that there should be 12 automatic qualifying places for future tournaments," IRB chairman Syd Millar said.
"This will serve to reduce the potential number of international matches that would have to be played in the years before a tournament by those teams who did not make the quarter-finals of the previous RWC, reducing fixture congestion.
"With the top three teams in each pool qualifying directly to the next RWC, this new process raises the prospect of several Tier Two unions obtaining automatic qualification.
"This does not happen at present, and it will add excitement and relevance to more pool matches at each tournament, including the 2007 World Cup."
http://home.skysports.com/list.aspx?hlid=4...ugby+Union&
S
shiznit
Guest
does anyone remember when only the top 3 and the home team automatacly qualified. that was in '99.
then they changed it when the all blacks finnished 4th in the '99 cup. im not saying it was FOR the all blacks but it happended to change when they finnished 4th.
i was dissapointed at the time as i really wanted to see them play in the islands on qualification games.
then they changed it when the all blacks finnished 4th in the '99 cup. im not saying it was FOR the all blacks but it happended to change when they finnished 4th.
i was dissapointed at the time as i really wanted to see them play in the islands on qualification games.
R
Ripper
Guest
We'd sure have shown the Northampton Fans how to really go on a Demolition Tour.
R
Rugby_Cymru
Guest
:lol:
Were they actually afriad that New Zealand wouldn't qualify?
Strange....
Were they actually afriad that New Zealand wouldn't qualify?
Strange....
B
BigTen
Guest
"...Such a move would be highly beneficial to the likes of Samoa, Fiji, Italy and Argentina, while it almost guarantees England, South Africa, Australia, Wales, New Zealand, Scotland, France and Ireland entry to the competition..."
I think that the fact that England, South Africa, Australia, Wales, New Zealand, Scotland, France and Ireland are the strongest eight nations in the world (maybe Italy and Argentina should also be included) then it would be almost impossible for any of them to fail to qualify for a world cup.
This move by the IRB is irrelevant and no-one should really care too much. I would rather have an eight or ten team world cup in which every single game was critical and close and competitive rather than seeing teams winning by more than 100 points. Even winning margins of greater than 50 are unhealthy.
I'd rather see a second-string world cup running concurrently with the world cup with automatic qualification to the main tournament for the winner. This would be a lot better for some of the second string teams as it would mean that they would be more competitive rather than getting smashed in every game.
At least the IRB is looking at the qualifying process and working to develop an honest and fair system for everyone.
I think that the fact that England, South Africa, Australia, Wales, New Zealand, Scotland, France and Ireland are the strongest eight nations in the world (maybe Italy and Argentina should also be included) then it would be almost impossible for any of them to fail to qualify for a world cup.
This move by the IRB is irrelevant and no-one should really care too much. I would rather have an eight or ten team world cup in which every single game was critical and close and competitive rather than seeing teams winning by more than 100 points. Even winning margins of greater than 50 are unhealthy.
I'd rather see a second-string world cup running concurrently with the world cup with automatic qualification to the main tournament for the winner. This would be a lot better for some of the second string teams as it would mean that they would be more competitive rather than getting smashed in every game.
At least the IRB is looking at the qualifying process and working to develop an honest and fair system for everyone.
W
Wellycane
Guest
If the IRB let this go ahead, then it is likely the top 12 of New Zealand, France, South Africa, England, Australia, Ireland, Wales, Italy, Scotland, Samoa, Fiji and Argentina will certainly appear in nearly every world cup from now on. Countries who could possibly make up the remaining 4 would be Tonga, Romania, Canada and USA. I don't see any other country who could pass these guys so what I am concerned about is the fact that we could be watching the same countries competing in the same competition every 4 years. This is a one-way traffic for tier 1 and 2 nations.
No more Namibia, Portugal, Japan etc. for possibly the next 20 or so years unless they win the rights to host the RWC competition or not (I wonder what Japan's reaction is to this situation now). It is their (tier 3 nations) dream of playing at the World Cup, even Portugal can't wait to play the All Blacks...lol...and they are so happy to represent their country at one of the most biggest sporting events in the world.
No more Namibia, Portugal, Japan etc. for possibly the next 20 or so years unless they win the rights to host the RWC competition or not (I wonder what Japan's reaction is to this situation now). It is their (tier 3 nations) dream of playing at the World Cup, even Portugal can't wait to play the All Blacks...lol...and they are so happy to represent their country at one of the most biggest sporting events in the world.
B
Boggle
Guest
I think it's unfair really.
Look we don't really want teams like Namibia or Portugal to get trashed 140-0 but it's quite arguebly the highlight of these nations' rugby calenders.
if they don't play top oposition every now and then they just arn't going to get better, and what we really want is for this to turn into the spectacular show that is the Fifa world cup (*minus the fakeness of course*) where anyone has a realistic chance of winning the cup (*well not everyone, but more than there is in Rugby*).
Let's face it, the chance of Scotland winning this world cup isn't that great, yet we still accept them as being a second tier nation (*which they righfully are*) that allmost automatically deserve to qualify for the world cup.
why then can't we just let the other teams play aswell ?
If anyone can give me a well constructed arguement on this subject I'd be willing to listen, but I just think it's unfair to countries like Namibia, japan, Portugal, etc.
Look we don't really want teams like Namibia or Portugal to get trashed 140-0 but it's quite arguebly the highlight of these nations' rugby calenders.
if they don't play top oposition every now and then they just arn't going to get better, and what we really want is for this to turn into the spectacular show that is the Fifa world cup (*minus the fakeness of course*) where anyone has a realistic chance of winning the cup (*well not everyone, but more than there is in Rugby*).
Let's face it, the chance of Scotland winning this world cup isn't that great, yet we still accept them as being a second tier nation (*which they righfully are*) that allmost automatically deserve to qualify for the world cup.
why then can't we just let the other teams play aswell ?
If anyone can give me a well constructed arguement on this subject I'd be willing to listen, but I just think it's unfair to countries like Namibia, japan, Portugal, etc.
R
Rugby_Cymru
Guest
Sorry, what's this?
Erm...i don't accept them as a 2nd tier nation, and i'm sure every scottish rugby fan would be insulted by your claims.
1st tier nations:
• Argentina
• Australia
• England
• France
• Ireland
• Italy
• New Zealand
• Scotland
• South Africa
• Wales
Second tier nations:
• Canada
• Fiji
• Japan
• Romania
• Samoa
• Tonga
• United States
P
Prestwick
Guest
Japan will still get in, remember that the fixtures they usually play to get in are in the Asia part of the world so they usually play Korea, China, Hong Kong, etc to get their shot at getting into the world cup.
Japan will get in, so you'd better add a fifth team to that list of 2nd tier nations Welly.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE("Boggle")</div>
Japan will get in, so you'd better add a fifth team to that list of 2nd tier nations Welly.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE("Boggle")</div>
R
Ripper
Guest
Didn't Japan beat the US at the last World Cup when Hercus missed the sideline conversion right at the end?
P
Prestwick
Guest
Yup that is true, and they've improved bit by bit since then. They've been stalled for the last year or so though.
What they've needed though was a serious boot up the arse and John Kirwan has delivered that in spades. Fitness fitness and yet more fitness, Kirwan is just what Japan needs right now.
Rest assured guys, if Japan do hit the big time in Rugby, they'll turn Rugby into some kind of ultra cute, modern and quintessentially Japanese creation. Out go the Hakas and the All Blacks and Johnny Wilkinson and in come cat girls, 9 year olds looking adorably cute, Samurais and Mount Fuji along with really hip and modern J-Pop and Rock.
Looking forward to that?
What they've needed though was a serious boot up the arse and John Kirwan has delivered that in spades. Fitness fitness and yet more fitness, Kirwan is just what Japan needs right now.
Rest assured guys, if Japan do hit the big time in Rugby, they'll turn Rugby into some kind of ultra cute, modern and quintessentially Japanese creation. Out go the Hakas and the All Blacks and Johnny Wilkinson and in come cat girls, 9 year olds looking adorably cute, Samurais and Mount Fuji along with really hip and modern J-Pop and Rock.
Looking forward to that?
W
Wellycane
Guest
Oh yeah Pressie you are right about Japan making it in. They are the most successful team from the Asia qualifying nation, I now realise. Can't think of any other tier 2 nation oh but Georgia could be added in, I guess.
M
Melhor Time
Guest
No, that was Mike Hercus missing a conversion on full time after the USA had scored a try against Fiji.
The USA defeated Japan in the 2003 World Cup.
D
DC
Guest
The irb are f***ing dumbasses. Cutting the pool from 20 to 16 is a horrible thing to do unless they decided to create a world cup 'b' division to replace it. Cutting the number will kill the chance for rugby to expand in a lot of countries, what are they thinking?
