2015 IRB Junior Rugby World Cup - Italy

[Hugh Jarse]

The caravan returns to Italy for the second time next year.

At this stage the pools are most likely to be:

Pool A
England
France
Wales
Japan (Qualifier from Junior World Trophy)

Pool B
South Africa
Australia
Samoa
Italy

Pool C
New Zealand
Ireland
Argentina
Scotland



We are likely to see the following veterans return for the Green and Gold in 2015:

Cameron ORR
Sam CROKE
Lolo FAKAOSILEA
Andrew KELLAWAY
Conrad QUICK
Jonah PLACID
Fereti SA'AGA (Samoa 2014)
Cameron SKELTON (Samoa 2014)
Matthew SANDELL (late call up as injury cover)

 

[tranquility]

I'll give you two names who will also be there. Greene & Gunn.

 

[TOCC]

The QRU U20's program will no doubt take a few points from NSW's U20 program after the QLD U20's teams under-performed and were poorly represented at the national level. Overall the U20's program was vastly improved on last year, the byproduct is that we should see a few of these guys feature in the Inaugural NRC season as well.

 

[Forcefield]

I think three of the WA guys from the Southern States team will be eligible next year:

Oscar Backhouse (ginger lock)
Angus Taylor (scrum-half)
Tim Koiatu (outside back)

They might come into consideration.

 

[Hawko]

The caravan returns to Italy for the second time next year.

At this stage the pools are most likely to be:

Pool A
England
France
Wales
Japan (Qualifier from Junior World Trophy)

Pool B
South Africa
Australia
Samoa
Italy

Pool C
New Zealand
Ireland
Argentina
Scotland

Once again the pools are not very even, because the pools this year gave Ireland a leg up and they retain it for next year.

To get the loser spot in the semi-finals you have to do the following:

1. Beat both bottom-rated sides in your group with a bonus point.
2. Get a bonus point loss to the top team in your pool.

If you draw a line through the form this year, (dodgy I know, but less dodgy than any other criteria) then Ireland only have to get a losing bonus point from NZ, while Australia and France have to get their losing point from South Africa and England respectively. From the performances this year you'd rather be the coach for Ireland than the coach of France or Australia.

To be fairer it needs to be restructured into four pools and quarter finals, so that one loss by 8 points doesn't put you out of the competition immediately and you can work your way back into contention through winning your quarter final.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

To be fairer it needs to be restructured into four pools and quarter finals, so that one loss by 8 points doesn't put you out of the competition immediately and you can work your way back into contention through winning your quarter final.

4 x 3 or 4 x 4? If the latter, are there another 4 countries who could ( a) afford to send a team & (b) be competitive? This may be heresy but why not borrow from the League WC & have two strong pools with 2 automatic qualifiers, a less-strong pool with 1 qualifier, have the 3rd-placed sides from the strong pools play off & give the strong pool winners a QF bye?

 

[Omar Comin']

4 x 3 or 4 x 4? If the latter, are there another 4 countries who could ( a) afford to send a team & (b) be competitive? This may be heresy but why not borrow from the League WC & have two strong pools with 2 automatic qualifiers, a less-strong pool with 1 qualifier, have the 3rd-placed sides from the strong pools play off & give the strong pool winners a QF bye?

Then you get the problem that the 4th team in the strong pools would be better off in the weak pool. Do you put the top 8 seeds in the 2 strong pools? That'd be unfair to the teams seeded 7th and 8th. Do you put a couple of weaker teams in the strong pools? That's unfair to them.

I think there would be another 4 teams at a similar level to the lower ranked teams in the 12. The question is whether the IRB can afford it. Japan (will be in the 2015 tournament), USA, Canada, Georgia, Tonga etc. It would benefit these countries if their juniors were playing against the big boys most years rather than just against each other.

 

[Highlander35]

Okay then.

So we add Tonga, Japan, USA and Uruguay (top 4 of JWRT) into the JRWC.

Assuming they're not too far off Argentina, Scotland, Italy and Fiji, that's fine, we get 2 sets of competitive quarter finals.

And then We've got to find another 4 teams to play in the JRWT. So we get 4 of Kenya, Romania, Russia, Zimbabwe, Chile, Solomon Islands etc. to join.

Does that significantly impact the quality of either tournament? Group stages, probably yes, but it ends up with a more potentially exciting finals series for both, especially in the in the JWC itself.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

Okay then.

So we add Tonga, Japan, USA and Uruguay (top 4 of JWRT) into the JRWC.

Assuming they're not too far off Argentina, Scotland, Italy and Fiji, that's fine, we get 2 sets of competitive quarter finals.

And then We've got to find another 4 teams to play in the JRWT. So we get 4 of Kenya, Romania, Russia, Zimbabwe, Chile, Solomon Islands etc. to join.

Does that significantly impact the quality of either tournament? Group stages, probably yes, but it ends up with a more potentially exciting finals series for both, especially in the in the JWC itself.

No argument in on-field terms, just wonder if they'd be up to it financially. Unless of course IRB decide to do their job for a change & maybe forgo a board meeting in Dubai or wherever & spend the cash on promoting the game. Radical idea I know but give it a whirl, I reckon.

 

[Highlander35]

I'd agree with with all that. Currently, 20 teams play "Top" Junior Rugby each year, that's only the same as the number of teams that play in the World Cup itself. For the Sake of Development surely its important that they play more often.

I mean, you say, Rugby Championship, Six Nations, Pacific Cup, that's 16 teams already across 2 competitions, leaving only 4 more teams to add. Adding another 4 to make 8 would very much help.

 

[Omar Comin']

No argument in on-field terms, just wonder if they'd be up to it financially. Unless of course IRB decide to do their job for a change & maybe forgo a board meeting in Dubai or wherever & spend the cash on promoting the game. Radical idea I know but give it a whirl, I reckon.

I can't imagine those unions would have less money than the Samoan union. And those teams all play in the Junior World Trophy every year, so I imagine the costs would be pretty similar if a few more of them played in the JWC instead. I think the IRB must cover a lot of the costs.

Maybe the JWC could go to 16 and the JWT fall back to 8 teams in the short term, so that while the cost of the JWC (to the IRB) would increase, the cost of the JWT would decrease.

I guess the only real increase in cost for the 4 extra teams would be the greater investment they'd need in their programs to improve their level. I think you'd have a couple of years where the quality of the pool games would decrease a little from the 12 team tournament, but that it would soon level out again as the programs of the lower teams adapt and improve. In particular I think the likes of USA, Canada, Japan and Georgia could improve considerably.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

I can't imagine those unions would have less money than the Samoan union. And those teams all play in the Junior World Trophy every year, so I imagine the costs would be pretty similar if a few more of them played in the JWC instead. I think the IRB must cover a lot of the costs.

Maybe the JWC could go to 16 and the JWT fall back to 8 teams in the short term, so that while the cost of the JWC (to the IRB) would increase, the cost of the JWT would decrease.

I guess the only real increase in cost for the 4 extra teams would be the greater investment they'd need in their programs to improve their level. I think you'd have a couple of years where the quality of the pool games would decrease a little from the 12 team tournament, but that it would soon level out again as the programs of the lower teams adapt and improve. In particular I think the likes of USA, Canada, Japan and Georgia could improve considerably.

Bear in mind Samoa get a cut of the RWC cash which the next tier you mention probably wouldn't. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see your scenario happen & as previously posted don't see too many on-field issues, but that said I'm still cautious lest over-ambitious admin fuck things up even if with the best of intentions at heart.

 

[Omar Comin']

Bear in mind Samoa get a cut of the RWC cash which the next tier you mention probably wouldn't. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see your scenario happen & as previously posted don't see too many on-field issues, but that said I'm still cautious lest over-ambitious admin fuck things up even if with the best of intentions at heart.

I think they do. Those teams are all designated as 'tier 2' teams and high performance unions - same as Samoa.

(Though it does seem ridiculous that Samoa are considered in a lower tier than Scotland and Italy).

 

[Highlander35]

Of course it's ridiculous. We play like semi pros onfield, and off field it's almost amateur.

But money, historical success, and geographical location all play parts. We do hold the most 5 nations titles you know.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

Of course it's ridiculous. We play like semi pros onfield, and off field it's almost amateur.

But money, historical success, and geographical location all play parts. We do hold the most 5 nations titles you know.

Really? Didn't know that, always assumed it was the filthy poms. Anyhoo, is there any prospect that Scotland may rise from what appear be the ashes of their own making & send anyone homeward tae think again? Gotta say I miss you guys being a team we had to at least think about beating rather than wondering by how many. Have the Hastings brothers not bred by now? Or if not them the Leslie's?

 

[Highlander35]

To put it bluntly, the shamateur era suited Scotland Plently.

We were the first NH country to have a formalised national league, improving the player base.

About half our players came from the borders, a big farming region, where the ones playing for the big clubs like Gala, Melrose and Hawick, were all farm boys who's employers made sure they had plenty of time for training. Most of the rest came from Edinburgh, who were either Uni boys or employed by club sponsors, who all made sure they had plenty of time to train.

Realistically? I don't see us seriously competing for at least a decade.

We've finally got the money to improve both the club level rugby and the development of players at Junior level, thanks to the BT deal.

I think we need to be looking to the 20/21 European season and be saying: we will introduce a third side (whether Caledonia or Borders) then. We need to develop sufficient sponsorship and player base to support the team by then.

Sorry. I rambled. The short answer is not in the immediate future, the local development has been too poor, both on and off the field.

 

[Hawko]

4 x 3 or 4 x 4? If the latter, are there another 4 countries who could ( a) afford to send a team & (b) be competitive? This may be heresy but why not borrow from the League WC & have two strong pools with 2 automatic qualifiers, a less-strong pool with 1 qualifier, have the 3rd-placed sides from the strong pools play off & give the strong pool winners a QF bye?

My proposal is only for 4X3. It means each team plays twice in group play. Because there is a wide disparity in class between 1 & 12, its unlikely that group play will end with all teams in a group having one win. The bottom four teams play off for positions 9-12 as they do now. Teams 1-8 play off in quarter finals. Losers in those games go into the 5-8 position games as they do now. Winners go to semi-finals and then to final or 3rd/4th play-off. Four less games for the bottom four that would allow them a few days break to recover before their two positional finalisation games games.

 

[Omar Comin']

My proposal is only for 4X3. It means each team plays twice in group play. Because there is a wide disparity in class between 1 & 12, its unlikely that group play will end with all teams in a group having one win. The bottom four teams play off for positions 9-12 as they do now. Teams 1-8 play off in quarter finals. Losers in those games go into the 5-8 position games as they do now. Winners go to semi-finals and then to final or 3rd/4th play-off. Four less games for the bottom four that would allow them a few days break to recover before their two positional finalisation games games.

With that format one team will have an unfair advantage in each pool. The team that plays in both the 1st and 3rd match in the pool will get double the amount of days between their 2 matches compared to the other 2 sides.

 

[Hawko]

With that format one team will have an unfair advantage in each pool. The team that plays in both the 1st and 3rd match in the pool will get double the amount of days between their 2 matches compared to the other 2 sides.

Agreed. I'd schedule it so that the lowest seeded team got the long break. It ain't perfect, just better than the current system IMO.

 

[15tc]

Anybody got an idea of the timing and scheduling of this event next year? Its possible I will be in the vicinity.