The Fallout from RWC 2015

[Rugbynutter39]

Looks like none of the pacific island nations will finish in the top 3 of their groups - so won't automatically qualify for 2019.

There's only one regional qualifier, and one repechage spot, so one of Samoa, Fiji and Tonga will not make 2019 if the format stays the same.

Not sure who gets sacked, but there will be some very disappointed people out there if that happens

hmm would be a pity

 

[Braveheart81]

South America, North America and Central America all compete in the Americas qualification where there were two automatic spots (one of which was only contested by USA and Canada) (presumably because USA and Canada are the top two ranked teams there). The third spot proceeds to the repechage.

South America only had the chance for one team to qualify in 2015 but they could have done it without going through to the repechage event.

I love it how most of the discussion is generally about World Rugby needing to do more to support the three Pacific Island teams and now people are saying it will be unfair if all three are able to qualify for the 2019 RWC!

Any way you look at it, the qualifying is always set up so that teams in the top 16 get a pretty good road to qualifying because World Rugby wants them at the RWC and they deserve to be there. They also don't force countries to play loads of pointless test matches. Fiji qualified through the Oceania group for 2015 but they only contested the final after the other teams played a little tournament. They won that final by 100 points.

Anyway, let's wait and see. I just think there is almost no chance World Rugby will retain a situation that makes it impossible for three teams that all sit inside the top 15 in the rankings not to be able to qualify. It would be farcical.

 

[Omar Comin']

True, but North and South America actually have separate regional unions (Central American unions sit within one or the other). South America is the only regional union in the world without its own qualifying spot.

I think it would be more farcical for Asia to lose its automatic spot for an Asian World Cup.

I'm all for supporting the islanders, but they have themselves to blame for not doing well enough in this tournament. 1 extra spot makes sense...2, for the least populated region in the world, not really IMO. Rankings are just one consideration. Another is that it's a world cup that should embrace all corners.

 

[boyo]

FIFA does manipulate things.

Fixed

 

[TOCC]

I'd like to see a second Asian team at the Japan RWC


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[wamberal]

South Korea is probably the next best nation. They used to be relatively strong, fantastic tackling in particular. I used to love watching them when I lived in Hong Kong.


Hong Kong is not a nation, but maybe they could form the nucleus of a PRC team.


Then it's daylight.

 

[Braveheart81]

South Korea is probably the next best nation. They used to be relatively strong, fantastic tackling in particular. I used to love watching them when I lived in Hong Kong.


Hong Kong is not a nation, but maybe they could form the nucleus of a PRC team.


Then it's daylight.

Hong Kong participate in RWC qualifiers so there is no reason they can't qualify in their own right.

 

[wamberal]

Hong Kong participate in RWC qualifiers so there is no reason they can't qualify in their own right.

Well, I hope they never get into the draw. Special treatment of this former colony is an aberration.


When the transition occurred in 1997, the territory of Hong Kong was granted certain minor privileges for a period of 50 years. Maybe that is the justification for allowing them to compete, although it probably does also have something to do with the PRC wanting to "normalise" Taiwan's status as a separate competitive sporting entity.


Reunification with the Republic of China (Taiwan) is the main game. Maybe the PRC will continue to turn a blind eye to Hong Kong's rugby status, or maybe this will inhibit any possible growth opportunities in the PRC.

 

[Braveheart81]

Well, I hope they never get into the draw. Special treatment of this former colony is an aberration.


When the transition occurred in 1997, the territory of Hong Kong was granted certain minor privileges for a period of 50 years. Maybe that is the justification for allowing them to compete, although it probably does also have something to do with the PRC wanting to "normalise" Taiwan's status as a separate competitive sporting entity.


Reunification with the Republic of China (Taiwan) is the main game. Maybe the PRC will continue to turn a blind eye to Hong Kong's rugby status, or maybe this will inhibit any possible growth opportunities in the PRC.

Is it really that different from England, Wales and Scotland competing as separate countries in rugby rather than as the UK?

Hong Kong weren't far off in 2015. They made it to the last four of the repechage tournament which Uruguay eventually won.

 

[RunnerGunner]

Coaches will come and go..

But i think the biggest fallout will be, or should be that the 'Pool of Death' never happens again. It's fine for us Aussie fans to be lauding the demise of England, but it's not healthy for the competition. The Quarter Finals should feature the 8 strongest teams in the world, yet the way this RWC has panned out i don't think that will be the case.

Like FIFA, World Rugby should decide the pools closer to the tournament which sees an even division of the strongest teams. Its unfortunate that a team like Fiji, who could have in reality reach the QF had they been in another pool had to face 3 of the top ranked teams in the world.

It's very healthy for the competition and whilst England going out in the group stages is bad for ITV in the short term, the very difficult group provided an early surge in ratings.

If anything it gives credence to the competition and World Rugby's aims. People often criticise rugby for having a limited number of nations involved and a limited number of nations who have made the knockouts. Here we have a host nation and previous champion and three times finalist out of the competition early on based on performance. The draw was as a result of performances of others. Wales lost to Argentina and Samoa at home so the draw was earned. The pre tournament competition is now working and is delivering a cycle where international games are not just "Test" matches.

Likewise in Japan's pool we have the 4th seed beating the 1st and 2nd seeds in their group. If Japan qualify they will be the 13th nation to qualify for the quarter finals. This is very exciting for rugby and speaks of increasing competitiveness.

We are always going to have "pools of death" from now on- we've had them since 2003 in reality. Argentina in hindsight had a strong side in 2003 and were just pipped by Ireland. There were several close games in that group. In 07 again Ireland and Argentina were in the same group along with France, 2 of the sides from that group ended up in the semi finals.

World Rugby will be hoping for another major milestone to happen (alongside Japan's upset win and England crashing out); Japan qualify for the QFinals for the first time, Ireland make the semi finals (first time) or one nation who haven't made the final get there (Ireland, Wales, Argentina having a small chance each).

The more competitive the tournament and the greater perception of competitiveness there is of it the better. Just look at what rugby league have had to do with their group stages to avoid batterings and to get a couple of early competitive matches (which are largely irrelevant anyway given the way you qualify for groups). The IRB/WR (World Rugby) have done very well to get a competitive competition out there given the minnows aren't spared their blushes against the big guns and the transition to professionalism

 

[wamberal]

Is it really that different from England, Wales and Scotland competing as separate countries in rugby rather than as the UK?

Hong Kong weren't far off in 2015. They made it to the last four of the repechage tournament which Uruguay eventually won.

It looks a bit different to me, hard to imagine Hong Kong ever being allowed (or wanting) to have a vote for independence like Scotland just did.

They are strong because they import a lot of Westerners of working age, some of them play rugby there for a few years.

I really fail to see how the inclusion of Hong Kong in a World Cup would achieve anything.

Getting China in, one way or another, could have huge benefits in the future.

 

[Omar Comin']

Well Hong Kong is pretty well off and has a bigger population than half of this year's world cup participants!

Surely a 2nd Asian team in the tournament, even if it's Hong Kong, would be beneficial for growing the game in Asia.

 

[Jagman]

I really fail to see how the inclusion of Hong Kong in a World Cup would achieve anything.

Getting China in, one way or another, could have huge benefits in the future.

Hong Kong are ranked 24th in the world. And even with such a high ranking you'd expect it would be quite difficult for them to get into a 20 team tournament. China are ranked 67th in the world. To put that into perspective their 2 spots behind Luxemburg.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Dewald Nel]

I'd rather have Tonga at the world cup than Hong Kong/Korea/The Dalai Lama's. Teams which are able to lose by 150 points will mean jack for the development of rugby in that area.

 

[Beer Baron]

It must be tough for World Rugby to not throw all their eggs into the USA, Japan, Russia baskets.... Part of me thinks they should (USA and Japan are already benefiting from the Pacific Nations cup) - not sure what regular competition Russia has.
What to do with the P.I countries???.... Talent aplenty, no money, at war with the Euro clubs and even if Samoa/Tonga does get their act together - there's no money in it for World Rugby.

 

[Pfitzy]

Olympic funding for 7s rugby will help minority sports in big countries. But then World Rugby need an inquest into "WTF happened to Samoa" asap.

 

[Tahtrajic]

Olympic funding for 7s rugby will help minority sports in big countries. But then World Rugby need an inquest into "WTF happened to Samoa" asap.

Like Tonga & Fiji they are losing a lot of there young schoolboy players (scholarships) to Aus, NZ and now more and more are going to England, France, Italy as young players. So they then qualify to play for those countries.

 

[TOCC]

Tier 1 nations receive a £7.5million RWC participation fee.
Tier 2 nations receive a £150 thousand RWC participation fee.

Tier 1 nations receive such a high figure as compensation for lost test matches, which is true you only need to examine the annual reports of SANZAR nations to see the drop in earnings, however some of the Pacific Island players have to sacrifice their club wages to attend the RWC and they subsequently receive minimal wages from their unions.

Surely this needs to change, i don't expect Tier 2 nations to receive £7.5million, but they need to find a more equitable middle ground and at least provide them with a figure which allows respectable wages for the duration.

 

[the plastic paddy]

I think people are being a bit overly down on England's performance. I wholeheartedly agree that they got their tactics wrong in that their game plan relied on having a dominant set piece. All they had was a dominant goal kicker.

They just lost to Wales after being ahead for most of the match and generally being in control. Wales' try was pretty fortunate and of the ball had bounced a different way they wouldn't have scored.

The Wallabies played their best test in about a decade to knock England off. Even then, there were only 7 points in it with 10 minutes to go.

I don't think things were a huge distance away from England being undefeated and Australia and Wales playing off for the other quarter final spot next weekend.

We will know more after Saturday, but I don't think Aus had to be very good to beat England last weekend.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

Tier 1 nations receive a £7.5million RWC participation fee.
Tier 2 nations receive a £150 thousand RWC participation fee............

But that's not the full story. Tier 1 nations receive a participation fee after each Cup, Tier 2 nations receive a lesser fee (agreed, the gap between them is way too big) AND ongoing funding every year between Cups: Samoa for example get something like $US500K for their High Performance Program each year (which they have never had to account for, hence people like Mahonri Scwalger asking questions as to where the money goes).