Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="nickdnz" data-source="post: 465596" data-attributes="member: 38640">No. I just mean each pool has one extra team than the current set up (so yes, 6 teams in four pools). I think with an additional four teams, it will stake make it very hard for many teams to qualify (at the moment it is too hard for new teams to qualify). At the moment there have only been 25 teams that have qualified for the Rugby World Cup in the history of the tornement. What it would do, is give a team like Russia the chance to play someone near to their skill level, and they may actually record a win at the Rugby World Cup.Schedualing is the big issue, obviously. But if Samoa can play four matches in 16 days, there is obviously enough squeezing room, or better yet, expand the tornement by a week (yes it will put some of the French and South African teams out a further week, but I&#039;m sure it will do more for the game on the whole).As for the FIFA reference, that is true, but they have 32 teams. I&#039;m suggesting adding another four teams.My point is, I just don&#039;t think it is fair to expact the sport to become truly global, when a majority of the nations that play rugby, have no chance of making it to a Rugby World Cup, especially considering over half the teams gain automatical qualification and the other half already have resources enough for the game to be competitive. Maybe a solution around this would be to make all teams have to qualify for the RWC except the hoast. You&#039;d end up with a very similar tornement, but it would guarentee that even the smaller teams like Chile and Zimbabwe would get exposure to top level competition on a regular basis.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="nickdnz, post: 465596, member: 38640"] No. I just mean each pool has one extra team than the current set up (so yes, 6 teams in four pools). I think with an additional four teams, it will stake make it very hard for many teams to qualify (at the moment it is too hard for new teams to qualify). At the moment there have only been 25 teams that have qualified for the Rugby World Cup in the history of the tornement. What it would do, is give a team like Russia the chance to play someone near to their skill level, and they may actually record a win at the Rugby World Cup. Schedualing is the big issue, obviously. But if Samoa can play four matches in 16 days, there is obviously enough squeezing room, or better yet, expand the tornement by a week (yes it will put some of the French and South African teams out a further week, but I'm sure it will do more for the game on the whole). As for the FIFA reference, that is true, but they have 32 teams. I'm suggesting adding another four teams. My point is, I just don't think it is fair to expact the sport to become truly global, when a majority of the nations that play rugby, have no chance of making it to a Rugby World Cup, especially considering over half the teams gain automatical qualification and the other half already have resources enough for the game to be competitive. Maybe a solution around this would be to make all teams have to qualify for the RWC except the hoast. You'd end up with a very similar tornement, but it would guarentee that even the smaller teams like Chile and Zimbabwe would get exposure to top level competition on a regular basis. [/QUOTE]

Verification