Immediately Rassie Erasmus goes into top gear....thinking and reading sign with wide eyed national coaches all over the globe watching and wondering!😅 Clive Woodward heating up his little typewriter ready to criticize. That little Beaumont guy, sweating and suffocating, wondering where Rassie is going to out-fox him yet again!!😂😂😂
I think the format has some promise but like others here I’d love to see the 8 teams that a/ lose in the round of 16 play off for a bowl and b/ the 8 teams that don’t qualify for the round of 16 play of for a shield…that way they get more equitable game time and we get to see more competitive games across 3 parallel semi/quarter/final paths… Not unlike the way sevens does it
We can only hope that the smaller teams get the preferred schedule. It's a crime how lower teams get less recovery time than the big teams. Namibia this year was put in such a difficult schedule. Let's see the big teams with 4 or 5 day turnarounds rather than the minnows.
I like these changes a lot. I would have loved the chance to see more of Portugal, Uruguay, Georgia etc. in this RWC. Those pools look pretty tasty! Can we just use these? 😂 Fewer pool games also mean there’s less opportunity for big teams to take those easy and more incentive for smaller teams to go hard (try to take a big name down and improve their ranking). Am I missing a downside?
People are crying out for a plate competition. Sure it's more planning and logistics. But there's an appetite for it. Imagine seeing a plate competition a few weeks ago with Portugal, Uruguay, Italy, Samoa etc. This would give some of these lower ranked teams more meaningful and competitive games, more exposure on a world stage, greater revenue for them and the sport. It seems like world Rugby are doing everything possible to supress their growth
I want the game to grow like the FIFA WC so this is great. Love the extra knockout round! Even of there are blowouts...that's the only way they learn like Japan 1995!!! Want to see 32 teams in 2031 lol.
Excellently summerised and I agree it’s a great improvement to its present format. But what isn’t an improvement is your head gear this morning. Take it you’ve been out in the rain or it’s time to switch on the central heating.😂😂😂
Excellent! I was thinking of this exact format myself. Same as the football Euros. Good to see World Rugby had the same plans. Yes, there’s always a “group of death”, but there are too many one sided and dead rubber games in the current format. With the potential to qualify in 3rd, that will virtually eliminate dead rubbers. It will also give more teams the chance to play a knockout game. Plus I’ve always thought the group stage tended to drag on too long, so also support shortening it. I think there was enough evidence from the recent tournament that the overall standard of non-tier 1 sides has improved enough to bring in the extra 4 teams. 👍👍👍👍
I welcome the changes. More akin to the Football tournaments. Maybe a little one sided but some of the best games this year were between the minnows! The more the merrier I say
As a Scotland fan this is definitely a positive imho as it means we SHOULD get out of the pool for the first time in 3 world cups and also, it's more exposure for smaller tier nations to follow in Portugal's footsteps which can only be good for nations such as Georgia and Fiji etc.
I think, no matter how scew the initial draw is, because even a year out, things can also drastically change: apply the following: After group matches, list the last 16 in accordance with current rankings. Then play 1vs16, 2vs15, 3vs14, 4vs13, 5vs12, 6vs11, 7vs10, 8vs9. Repeat so you will always have no1 vs no2 play the final if both goes through.
They should add an Extra substitute on the bench. 24 teams, 24 players starting from 2024. Maybe thats opening a 8-1 split for Rassie and crew and it makes us unique in that in the 23 player era, with 8 players, we won with 7 forwards...
Much better format. It's a win win, to my eyes, when you ensure the major nations have a higher chance of getting through to the knockouts (better for TV, gate receipt etc.) while, at the same time, giving emerging/second tier nations a higher chance of playing a knockout game and causing an upset. Can not see a downside.
I wonder how they will decide which pool winners play a 3rd place team and which play a runner up. In your scenario it could be the difference between playing Australia or Spain.
It actually looks like fewer games for the "minnows" (apologies) to play against the top teams. So they don't play top 12 teams in the qualifying, and there's only 3 pool games. Smaller nations on the whole get less rugby. Personally, I'd rather world rugby forcet everyone yo qualify, top teams having to play h&a matches against minnows, leads to a 16 team rwc, but at least it forces 6n and rc teams to go to the islands, or Uruguay and Portugal and Georgia. You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one
Another thing that should be done is to change the bonus point. To get it the team has to score 4 tries MORE than the opposition. For example if a team scores 2 tries the other team needs to score 6 tries. This will make the winning team DEFEND MORE to prevent the opposition from scoring a third try to take THAT BONUS POINT away from the winners. This 2023 RWC saw teams slowed down after they scored 4 tries and defended less. Another thing also is in the KNOCKOUT ROUNDS, the team that scores more tries wins. If both teams have the same number of tries scored, the team with BEST DISCIPLINE wins. Also the RED CARD SHOULD BE 20 min. sin bin. The culprit of that red card CAN'T come back on, but CAN be replaced by one of the reserve players of the line up.
The 8 none qualifying sides only get 3 guaranteed matches, instead of current 4. Not sure how that's helping second tier nations development. These 8 sides need a play off, as currently in 7s & U20s. These will be much bettered matched, against similar opponents, giving real development opportunity. World Rugby missing a great opportunity again and too much focus on the old school set up at the top. They've fooled you. 🎣
It's seems good at first glance but as the teams are so spread there will be more huge losses for some of the lower ranked teams making for boring games...plus the knock out games will just see the same old names making it through with an easish win...Will they be truly match fit for the quarters and finals after so many easy wins? Will there be the games of the magnitude we have seen in the last WC....hope it goes well and the games are close but might not be.
Further to @etsidan7003's comment, what if the bottom 8 played off for a "Sheild", & the losing 8 from the Rnd of 16, play off for a "Plate"! Those games are likely to be more evenly matched (unless you get a boil over from the Rnd of 16), & then you could probably ditch the 3rd & 4th playoff game, that no one really wants to play anyway.
We just had one of the best World Cups. It isn't broken. Don't change it. By the way I support Scotland who were one of the teams that were most unlucky with the draw this time. I don't like pools where "best third place" go through as that just means "third place team in pool with weakest fourth place team" goes through. You might as well draw lots for which third placed team goes through in that scenario.
I always refer to the FA Cup in these cases; when the top level teams enter the competition at the 5th round there is no seeding etc. For example, Manchester City might be drawn against Liverpool, thus eliminating one of the best teams. This is how knock out competitions ran when I played years ago. Nowadays television and sponsorship dictate that those teams which attract most support etc are given the best opportunity to stay in. These proposals would go towards providing a proper knockout competition allowing the lower ranked sides more challenging games, whilst probably keeping the higher ranked teams in. So, I’m in favour of changes that potentially allow teams to be eliminated in single games, which is more exciting than pool games where top sides can rest players and look to pile up points. Of course every team should be playing a few games to reward them coming to the tournament and to get into top form, but, a competition should be competitive 😉.
How will they select the four "best 3rd place" teams? It's going to become complicated and potentially unfair. And I can definitely see teams manipulating their games before the RWC draw to try and end up in an easier pool.
As I mentioned Australia as the hosts muck this up a bit, AUS as the host would automatically be placed as a seeded team and they are currently 9th so that means it would bump Scotland down into the 2nd group of seeds.
I would much rather if it was left at 4 pools of 6 teams the winner of each pool given a week rest while 2nd from group A would play 3rd from another group in a round Robin to advance to the quaterfinals, we would see much more of the smaller nations when they have 5 matches as opposed to this new format of 3, they would also have more chance to actually qualify 3rd. Let's say if Portugal had another game against USA they could have finished 3rd and gone through
It takes more days nevertheless, because the current politics is that no two games are played at the same time, so that theoretically every game can be watched live on TV (which from my point of view is ideal). And more than 3 games a day make no sense (two only are better anyway), meaning 4 days for each of the 3 group-rounds and six when there are only 2 games a day, which would be best for fans and the press. - But, I also think that the poorer teams should continue to have the chance to play at least 4 games. It takes a lot of budget and hardship for them to participate at all, so they should not go home after just 3 weeks. With one game less, there is also one chance less to play against somebody of approximately the same level. In your format, they just have one game where they stand a proper chance to win. While in the current they have two. Theoretically at least, but they have. And they can only improve when playing more games against teams they usually not meet in their hemisphere.
Please have a competition for the quarter final losers. A wooden cup. IRELAND will be the longest holder in the history of the competition. Said with respect
This format will result in even more one sided games both in the Group Stage and Round of 16 with the possibility of upsets virtually zero. The top 10 teams: SA, NZ, Ireland, France, Scotland, England, Argentina, Wales,. Australia and "Fiji" are simpky too strong for the remaining 14 teams in the new RWC Format. The top 10 teams must be divided into two groups of 5 each with the top two teams of each group qualifying for the semi finals. We will then witness 20 highly competitive games in the Group Stage. The other 14 teams {should be reduced to 10) should also similarily be devided.into two groups of 5 teams each with the teams in the Second Tier Finals been afforded the opportunity to play knock out games against the two teams placed last in the First Tier Group's for promotion to the First Tier in the next RWC.
Not a fan of this format I think its making the pools too easy - those example pools dont look good (i know theyre just examples) thre are like 3 good match ups of tier 1 nations and the rest of the games either mean nothing or are basically pre determined. Also the round of 16 would just be whipping games for the most part except maybe 1-3 of them. This is a similar issue to Super rugby pacific where the quaters in the tournament are all blow outs cause they have too many teams in the knockouts. You can’t have a knoocket bracket that includes 70% of the teams. Makes it lose the value. The ild format is much better i think
fifa makes the draw for football world cup around 6 months before the tournament - no reason why rugby couldnt do the same. The arguments the dinosaurs come up with against a later draw - that it makes it harder for 'commercial interests' to plan for the tournament are nonsense.....football is a much bigger game than rugby (with vastly more money involved) yet it (and the 'commercial interests' around football) manage perfectly well by holding the draw near to the world cup
Maybe the best World Cup ever. So, of course, change the format. Because, "growth". Everything must always "grow". Apparently that's lesson one in the management course that all wannabe leaders of organisations go on. Does "growth" make the game more exciting? No, it doesn't. Just as a thought experiment, take "growth" to its ultimate limit. So everyone in the world loves rugby and plays rugby and plays to the best of their ability. Result, the Chinese will win every World Cup for ever. It's simple mathematics. I have nothing against the Chinese, but the idiosyncrasies of life are what gives it it's flavour. The aim of "growth" is to remove all the nuances of life. You think Fiji will be a thing in rugby if rugby achieves ultimate "growth"? The likes of Fiji and Portugal are able to do wonderful things on the rugby world stage precisely because who plays rugby, and who doesn't, is such a complex nuanced thing.
That's fine, but they need to add a plate comp for those not making it to the main knockout.
Immediately Rassie Erasmus goes into top gear....thinking and reading sign with wide eyed national coaches all over the globe watching and wondering!😅 Clive Woodward heating up his little typewriter ready to criticize. That little Beaumont guy, sweating and suffocating, wondering where Rassie is going to out-fox him yet again!!😂😂😂
Not good news for Ireland. An extra knockout game they need to get through...stressful.
I think the format has some promise but like others here I’d love to see the 8 teams that a/ lose in the round of 16 play off for a bowl and b/ the 8 teams that don’t qualify for the round of 16 play of for a shield…that way they get more equitable game time and we get to see more competitive games across 3 parallel semi/quarter/final paths… Not unlike the way sevens does it
Amazing! Just what the RWC needs! This will only improve the game! Fantastic news!!!!
We can only hope that the smaller teams get the preferred schedule. It's a crime how lower teams get less recovery time than the big teams. Namibia this year was put in such a difficult schedule. Let's see the big teams with 4 or 5 day turnarounds rather than the minnows.
Not "less" but "fewer" team matches. Less sand, less applause, etc. If you can count what you are describing you use "fewer."
I like these changes a lot. I would have loved the chance to see more of Portugal, Uruguay, Georgia etc. in this RWC.
Those pools look pretty tasty! Can we just use these? 😂
Fewer pool games also mean there’s less opportunity for big teams to take those easy and more incentive for smaller teams to go hard (try to take a big name down and improve their ranking).
Am I missing a downside?
Love that you have New Zealand and Namibia in the same group. 😂
People are crying out for a plate competition. Sure it's more planning and logistics. But there's an appetite for it. Imagine seeing a plate competition a few weeks ago with Portugal, Uruguay, Italy, Samoa etc. This would give some of these lower ranked teams more meaningful and competitive games, more exposure on a world stage, greater revenue for them and the sport. It seems like world Rugby are doing everything possible to supress their growth
I want the game to grow like the FIFA WC so this is great. Love the extra knockout round! Even of there are blowouts...that's the only way they learn like Japan 1995!!! Want to see 32 teams in 2031 lol.
Excellently summerised and I agree it’s a great improvement to its present format. But what isn’t an improvement is your head gear this morning. Take it you’ve been out in the rain or it’s time to switch on the central heating.😂😂😂
Excellent!
I was thinking of this exact format myself. Same as the football Euros.
Good to see World Rugby had the same plans.
Yes, there’s always a “group of death”, but there are too many one sided and dead rubber games in the current format.
With the potential to qualify in 3rd, that will virtually eliminate dead rubbers.
It will also give more teams the chance to play a knockout game.
Plus I’ve always thought the group stage tended to drag on too long, so also support shortening it.
I think there was enough evidence from the recent tournament that the overall standard of non-tier 1 sides has improved enough to bring in the extra 4 teams.
👍👍👍👍
I welcome the changes. More akin to the Football tournaments. Maybe a little one sided but some of the best games this year were between the minnows! The more the merrier I say
Lots of changes? Scotland to play South Africa then Ireland to progress!
death, taxes and ireland knocking scotland out of world cups
As a Scotland fan this is definitely a positive imho as it means we SHOULD get out of the pool for the first time in 3 world cups and also, it's more exposure for smaller tier nations to follow in Portugal's footsteps which can only be good for nations such as Georgia and Fiji etc.
I think, no matter how scew the initial draw is, because even a year out, things can also drastically change: apply the following:
After group matches, list the last 16 in accordance with current rankings. Then play 1vs16, 2vs15, 3vs14, 4vs13, 5vs12, 6vs11, 7vs10, 8vs9. Repeat so you will always have no1 vs no2 play the final if both goes through.
They should add an Extra substitute on the bench. 24 teams, 24 players starting from 2024. Maybe thats opening a 8-1 split for Rassie and crew and it makes us unique in that in the 23 player era, with 8 players, we won with 7 forwards...
You've been kind putting Scotland in as a 3rd place team.
What about the third placed teams playing for a plate and the fourth placed teams playing for a shield? Would there be support for these matches?
Much better format. It's a win win, to my eyes, when you ensure the major nations have a higher chance of getting through to the knockouts (better for TV, gate receipt etc.) while, at the same time, giving emerging/second tier nations a higher chance of playing a knockout game and causing an upset. Can not see a downside.
I wonder how they will decide which pool winners play a 3rd place team and which play a runner up. In your scenario it could be the difference between playing Australia or Spain.
Pool A. Group of Death 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥Lets Go
It actually looks like fewer games for the "minnows" (apologies) to play against the top teams. So they don't play top 12 teams in the qualifying, and there's only 3 pool games. Smaller nations on the whole get less rugby. Personally, I'd rather world rugby forcet everyone yo qualify, top teams having to play h&a matches against minnows, leads to a 16 team rwc, but at least it forces 6n and rc teams to go to the islands, or Uruguay and Portugal and Georgia. You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one
As an SA fan i like the idea.
Another thing that should be done is to change the bonus point. To get it the team has to score 4 tries MORE than the opposition. For example if a team scores 2 tries the other team needs to score 6 tries. This will make the winning team DEFEND MORE to prevent the opposition from scoring a third try to take THAT BONUS POINT away from the winners. This 2023 RWC saw teams slowed down after they scored 4 tries and defended less. Another thing also is in the KNOCKOUT ROUNDS, the team that scores more tries wins. If both teams have the same number of tries scored, the team with BEST DISCIPLINE wins. Also the RED CARD SHOULD BE 20 min. sin bin. The culprit of that red card CAN'T come back on, but CAN be replaced by one of the reserve players of the line up.
Sounds like good changes to me.
None of it matters if the TMO/ ref are going to continue to influence the games.
I'm Argie. ... now its responsibility of all the unions ....more kids playing= more positive result.
The 8 none qualifying sides only get 3 guaranteed matches, instead of current 4. Not sure how that's helping second tier nations development.
These 8 sides need a play off, as currently in 7s & U20s. These will be much bettered matched, against similar opponents, giving real development opportunity.
World Rugby missing a great opportunity again and too much focus on the old school set up at the top. They've fooled you.
🎣
It's seems good at first glance but as the teams are so spread there will be more huge losses for some of the lower ranked teams making for boring games...plus the knock out games will just see the same old names making it through with an easish win...Will they be truly match fit for the quarters and finals after so many easy wins? Will there be the games of the magnitude we have seen in the last WC....hope it goes well and the games are close but might not be.
Further to @etsidan7003's comment, what if the bottom 8 played off for a "Sheild", & the losing 8 from the Rnd of 16, play off for a "Plate"!
Those games are likely to be more evenly matched (unless you get a boil over from the Rnd of 16), & then you could probably ditch the 3rd & 4th playoff game, that no one really wants to play anyway.
Your example gave Scotland…. Ireland and South Africa again - I wonder how that would unfold… 🫣🫣🫣 🙂
We just had one of the best World Cups. It isn't broken. Don't change it. By the way I support Scotland who were one of the teams that were most unlucky with the draw this time.
I don't like pools where "best third place" go through as that just means "third place team in pool with weakest fourth place team" goes through. You might as well draw lots for which third placed team goes through in that scenario.
Put Siri in the bunker and Spot on the field. This last WC was a farce.
I always refer to the FA Cup in these cases; when the top level teams enter the competition at the 5th round there is no seeding etc. For example, Manchester City might be drawn against Liverpool, thus eliminating one of the best teams. This is how knock out competitions ran when I played years ago. Nowadays television and sponsorship dictate that those teams which attract most support etc are given the best opportunity to stay in. These proposals would go towards providing a proper knockout competition allowing the lower ranked sides more challenging games, whilst probably keeping the higher ranked teams in. So, I’m in favour of changes that potentially allow teams to be eliminated in single games, which is more exciting than pool games where top sides can rest players and look to pile up points. Of course every team should be playing a few games to reward them coming to the tournament and to get into top form, but, a competition should be competitive 😉.
Great chance now for Ireland to win a knockout game in the round of 16.
How will they select the four "best 3rd place" teams? It's going to become complicated and potentially unfair. And I can definitely see teams manipulating their games before the RWC draw to try and end up in an easier pool.
"Top six seeds go into separate pools" yet you pool South Africa (#1) and Scotland (#6) in the same pool. OKAY.
As I mentioned Australia as the hosts muck this up a bit, AUS as the host would automatically be placed as a seeded team and they are currently 9th so that means it would bump Scotland down into the 2nd group of seeds.
Would’ve loved to see your hypothetical predictions till the finals. Boks for 4th World Cup. 😅
5th lol.
I would much rather if it was left at 4 pools of 6 teams the winner of each pool given a week rest while 2nd from group A would play 3rd from another group in a round Robin to advance to the quaterfinals, we would see much more of the smaller nations when they have 5 matches as opposed to this new format of 3, they would also have more chance to actually qualify 3rd. Let's say if Portugal had another game against USA they could have finished 3rd and gone through
🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆
It takes more days nevertheless, because the current politics is that no two games are played at the same time, so that theoretically every game can be watched live on TV (which from my point of view is ideal). And more than 3 games a day make no sense (two only are better anyway), meaning 4 days for each of the 3 group-rounds and six when there are only 2 games a day, which would be best for fans and the press. - But, I also think that the poorer teams should continue to have the chance to play at least 4 games. It takes a lot of budget and hardship for them to participate at all, so they should not go home after just 3 weeks. With one game less, there is also one chance less to play against somebody of approximately the same level. In your format, they just have one game where they stand a proper chance to win. While in the current they have two. Theoretically at least, but they have. And they can only improve when playing more games against teams they usually not meet in their hemisphere.
Ireland v Scotland, again? 😂 But seriously I think it’s what the tournament needed, and the draw being made as late as possible.
They should have 8 pools of 3 teams..loose 2 games and then out saves some teams getting 4 70 nil thrashings..then a last 16 knockout.
Let's play touch rugby with no swearing.
same number of matches overall with one week less. so from start to finish one game per week...less recovery time for players.
Finally World rugby is helping some nations break their quater final curse...🤣 Thanx world rugby! 🤣🤣🤣
Please have a competition for the quarter final losers. A wooden cup. IRELAND will be the longest holder in the history of the competition. Said with respect
Now Ireland can win their first world cup knock-out game.
Good guess😂
This format will result in even more one sided games both in the Group Stage and Round of 16 with the possibility of upsets virtually zero.
The top 10 teams:
SA, NZ, Ireland, France, Scotland, England, Argentina, Wales,. Australia and "Fiji" are simpky too strong for the remaining 14 teams in the new RWC Format.
The top 10 teams must be divided into two groups of 5 each with the top two teams of each group qualifying for the semi finals. We will then witness 20 highly competitive games in the Group Stage.
The other 14 teams {should be reduced to 10) should also similarily be devided.into two groups of 5 teams each with the teams in the Second Tier Finals been afforded the opportunity to play knock out games against the two teams placed last in the First Tier Group's for promotion to the First Tier in the next RWC.
Not a fan of this format
I think its making the pools too easy - those example pools dont look good (i know theyre just examples) thre are like 3 good match ups of tier 1 nations and the rest of the games either mean nothing or are basically pre determined. Also the round of 16 would just be whipping games for the most part except maybe 1-3 of them. This is a similar issue to Super rugby pacific where the quaters in the tournament are all blow outs cause they have too many teams in the knockouts. You can’t have a knoocket bracket that includes 70% of the teams. Makes it lose the value. The ild format is much better i think
I think itll just result in more one sided games because the smallewr nations arent given a chance to get better between world cups.
fifa makes the draw for football world cup around 6 months before the tournament - no reason why rugby couldnt do the same. The arguments the dinosaurs come up with against a later draw - that it makes it harder for 'commercial interests' to plan for the tournament are nonsense.....football is a much bigger game than rugby (with vastly more money involved) yet it (and the 'commercial interests' around football) manage perfectly well by holding the draw near to the world cup
Maybe the best World Cup ever. So, of course, change the format. Because, "growth". Everything must always "grow". Apparently that's lesson one in the management course that all wannabe leaders of organisations go on. Does "growth" make the game more exciting? No, it doesn't.
Just as a thought experiment, take "growth" to its ultimate limit. So everyone in the world loves rugby and plays rugby and plays to the best of their ability. Result, the Chinese will win every World Cup for ever. It's simple mathematics. I have nothing against the Chinese, but the idiosyncrasies of life are what gives it it's flavour. The aim of "growth" is to remove all the nuances of life. You think Fiji will be a thing in rugby if rugby achieves ultimate "growth"? The likes of Fiji and Portugal are able to do wonderful things on the rugby world stage precisely because who plays rugby, and who doesn't, is such a complex nuanced thing.