Tier Two+Three World Cup Fantasy

[die_mole]

So this obviously would never happen but I was thinking of ways to get more nations involved in top level rugby.

So expanding the world cup right now would be stupid *cough* FIFA *cough* since really only 9 teams have a chance to make the quarterfinals anyway.

*My idea is to have a knockout stage for all crap teams. It would be 16 teams involving all of those that didn't qualify for the quarter finals plus other teams that I will describe later. I know two tier 1 teams will be involved whatever it's gonna be Italy + an unlucky nation from the group of death (god this tournament is so predictable). Those countries could opt out of this against so either 6 or 4 spots would be available for other countries. Those spots would be filled up by tier two and three countries who didn't qualify for the major tournament. Two groups, 5 teams would be awesome but whatever, with whatever amount of teams required for the bracket to have 16 teams advancing.

Would give us **** nations something to play for at the world cup (although I will continue to root against the United States as long as Clever and Barrett get caps) and allow countries to get games against countries others than those they play ever single year. Besides, if Italy decides to participate their players may know what it's like to win something.

*Really tried hard to avoid starting three sentences in a row with "so"

 

[Welshdragon2000]

I like the idea of having a plate kind of competition. It just gives teams that extra opportunity to win something because let's face it, Namibia or Canada aren't going to win the main competition anytime soon. They may as well be given something else to play for.

 

[Toko_11]

I like the idea of having a plate kind of competition. It just gives teams that extra opportunity to win something because let's face it, Namibia or Canada aren't going to win the main competition anytime soon. They may as well be given something else to play for.

The idea has been pitched before and most tier 2 nations aren't fond of it, to put it mildly.

 

[Welshdragon2000]

The idea has been pitched before and most tier 2 nations aren't fond of it, to put it mildly.

Why is that then?

 

[Toko_11]

Why is that then?

It wouldn't mean much, Tier 2 nations can play amongst themselves outside rwc anyway. Plus there are way more finances involved with a lot less reward. Injuries also wouldn't be worth it, etc etc. In short, after you're knocked out it's better to go home and start planning for the next one, for the players it's better to go on a well-deserved rest. Most of the players cut their summer vacations in RWC years and get them after the tournament instead, so the rest time afterward is pretty much essential for their well bieng, especially for Tier 2 teams who are short on players.

TL;DR Not worth the effort and resources.

Also personally I've never been a fan of consolation and participation trophies. If you lose, you lose. better luck next time.

 

[die_mole]

A lot of tournaments are consolation tournaments. Rugby European championship is a consolation for teams not included in six nations. Six nations and rugby championship should mean nothing since they are just leading up to world cups. There is no tangible difference between the tournaments just the importance that people choose to place on it.

Tier two and three nations usually only play nations close to them geographically. If Georgia thinks they are too good for it they dan opt out, who cares. It could be great for counties that don't get to play different opponents.

 

[Toko_11]

Sorry mate most of what you're saying is wishful thinking and really far from reality. Pacific Islands and Japan have regularly toured Europe and Americas. NA teams have toured Europe and Pacific, Georgia has gone to both NA and Pacific, This summer they will Visit North and South America. Even Tier 3 is touring now, Uruguay, HK, Germany, Namibia.

Rugby Europe championship isn't a Consolation it's the best available tournament for the involved parties. If they were given the choice of 6N or REC I think we all know what they'd choose.

As for the original point, I'm not speaking on behalf of Georgia. It would be virtually pointless for every party involved except the fans.

Increasing number of teams competing would do far more good.

 

[amz]

Increasing number of teams competing would do far more good.

I used to be against this because I thought that may be overkill for some T2/T3 teams but seeing the progress some teams made last two years I am tempted to think that this could actually be a good thing for rugby in the respective countries.

 

[Wendigo7]

Im against it only because watching amateur teams get routed by England/NZ doesn't do any country any good.

I like the idea of a plate competition though. More games... suits me

 

[Brigantine]

Wouldn't it make better sense to have this new tournament as part of qualification for the RWC, rather than the other way around? So just take the current repechage tournament of 4 teams with 1 winner, and expand it to e.g. 4 groups of 4 with 2 qualifiers from each group. Every team qualifies for the RWC either automatically (by placing in the top 3 last time), or through repechage. I'm guessing it would be a year or two before the RWC, probably in November.

The 4 group winners do a semi and final, and the winner gets a bronze cup. Naturally they try to upgrade it the following year.

There wouldn't be any need to have repechage qualifying for the repechage tournament, you just take the 16 highest ELO ranked teams that aren't automatically qualified. (or 10 highest + next highest from each continent)

 

[die_mole]

Sorry mate most of what you're saying is wishful thinking and really far from reality. Pacific Islands and Japan have regularly toured Europe and Americas. NA teams have toured Europe and Pacific, Georgia has gone to both NA and Pacific, This summer they will Visit North and South America. Even Tier 3 is touring now, Uruguay, HK, Germany, Namibia.

Rugby Europe championship isn't a Consolation it's the best available tournament for the involved parties. If they were given the choice of 6N or REC I think we all know what they'd choose.

As for the original point, I'm not speaking on behalf of Georgia. It would be virtually pointless for every party involved except the fans.

Increasing number of teams competing would do far more good.

nah, you think the status quo is much better than it is

since 2010 the following countries have played the following percentage of matches against teams in their region:

Chile: 78%
Samoa: 30%
Namibia: 38%
Spain: 82%
England: 43%

but yeah, the non world cup nations totally get as many games against non-local opponents as the big dogs /s

and the world cup plate would be the best available tournament for those teams, the only difference between REC and 6N is cognitive dissonance

 

[Toko_11]

nah, you think the status quo is much better than it is

since 2010 the following countries have played the following percentage of matches against teams in their region:

Chile: 78%
Samoa: 30%
Namibia: 38%
Spain: 82%
England: 43%

but yeah, the non world cup nations totally get as many games against non-local opponents as the big dogs /s

and the world cup plate would be the best available tournament for those teams, the only difference between REC and 6N is cognitive dissonance

I don't know what those %s are supposed to show?

With the new test schedule Tier 2/3 will get more opportunities

 

[die_mole]

Just that tier 3s play most of their games against teams in their continental association.

 

[Toko_11]

Just that tier 3s play most of their games against teams in their continental association.

I don't see a problem there, If those associations are on par or stronger. Also Tier 3 outside Namibia and Uruguay wouldn't benefit from the World Cup Sheild either way.

Germany played Brazil and Uruguay last year. Canada played Spain. As they improve they'll get more tests. I don't know why ERC would be bad for Spain, They've never won it which means there's still progress for them to be made there. Tier 3 would benefit more from increasing the number of teams on the world cup. If they were to add 4 teams it'll open doors for teams like Chile, Spain, Germany, Hong Kong, Korea, Madagascar, Zimbabwe, Brazil.

 

[dragos03]

I have to agree that such a plate competition would be quite pointless and only put more strain on Tier 2 squads, causing injuries for no real gain. Tier 2 nations need more Tier 1 matches, not more between them.

Same goes for Tier 3 nations, they should get more Tier 2 fixtures. I wouldn't mind if Romania played one match per year against the likes of Brazil or Kenya to help them develop.

 

[barkinghooker]

It wouldn't be a pointless competition if the rewards are worth it. The idea of all of this is about development and world growth.
World Rugby pump loads of money in to development tournaments.

A development competition inside a world cup surely is a winner. Don't just give them a "pointless cup" but financial incentive for the respective federations.

Perhaps give the plate competition teams opportunity to swap fatigued players?

 

[Scotty]

Top 2 going through and bottom 3 dont does work. If we were to change that then id have the 3rd place team in each group to play a semi and a final for a plate.

3rd Pool A vs C
3rd Pool B vs D
Plate final and 3rd place final.

Likely this year to be
Japan
Italy
France
Fiji.

No point the bottom teams playing extra games but the these teams are worth watching and would get good attendance meaning is worth the financial risk of extra games.

Any thoughts on this?

 

[barkinghooker]

If it's just going to be for 3rd place finishers then dump the losers play off game and just give the outright winner qualification for the next world cup and free up three other spots for world cup qualification.

 

[Scotty]

If it's just going to be for 3rd place finishers then dump the losers play off game and just give the outright winner qualification for the next world cup and free up three other spots for world cup qualification.

Exactly, gives something to fight for for the tier 2 teams that have no realistic chance of getting to the actual final. And wouldnt mind seeing a Fiji vs japan plate final.

Also this year if japan provide an upset over say scotland and then there would be guarenteed either eng arg or fra in this. So some top class teams in there can only be a good thing IMO and good for these tier 2 nations.

 

[Brigantine]

How would this have played out in 2015?

Plate final: England beat Italy to earn RWC 2019 qualification. Japan qualify as hosts, Georgia easily qualify as 1st in REC even before all the scandals and disciplinaries and point deductions. Italy has to beat Germany to qualify.

In 2011?

Plate final: Scotland beats Samoa or Italy. Italy has to play Russia in a RWC 2015 qualifier. Fiji and Samoa qualify through the 2014 PNC, Tonga has to play the Cook Islands in a qualifier.

Maybe if rugby was a game where the favourites won more often it would work better, but looking at that^ I don't see that it really adds anything