Rugby World Cup 2019

[Johnnyp]

21 minutes ago, snowychap said:

When have mismatches (especially involving the Kiwis against minnows) not been the case in rugby world cups?

2019 NZ 71 Namibia 9

2019 NZ 63 Canada 0

---------------------------------

1987 NZ 70 Italy 6

1995 NZ 145 Japan 17

1999 NZ 101 Italy 3

2003 NZ 91 Tonga 7

2003 NZ 70 Italy 7

2003 NZ 68 Canada 6

2007 NZ 108 Portugal 13

2007 NZ 85 Romania 8

2011 NZ 83 Japan 7

2011 NZ 79 Canada 15

2015 NZ 58 Namibia 14

 

Edit: Looking at it, 1991 was the one with the fewest hugely one-sided first round games but still it had Scotland beating Japan 47-9 and Zimbabwe 51-12 and Japan beating Zimbabwe 52-8.

 

There are some predictably one sided games, i agree, but i think its what happens outside world cup years that will make the lesser nations more competitive. There is no other sport apart from rugby union i think where there as many barriers to entry in terms of getting to play good teams consistently. Take Namibia for instance, id be very surprised if they have played more than 1 or 2 tier one nations since the end of the 2015 RWC and the start of this one. Union is still elitist. No question about that. Georgia are talking about starting a franchise team similar to the jaguares in super rugby to gain entry into the pro 14. The pro 14 is an expansion league, that's allowed 2 South African teams so they would have a great chance. It's the only way they'll get into the six nations. I'd they start a franchise side that plays and is competitive with Irish, Welsh and Scottish sides they can't continue to be ignored then.

[snowychap]

9 minutes ago, Johnnyp said:

There are some predictably one sided games, i agree, but i think its what happens outside world cup years that will make the lesser nations more competitive. There is no other sport apart from rugby union i think where there as many barriers to entry in terms of getting to play good teams consistently. Take Namibia for instance, id be very surprised if they have played more than 1 or 2 tier one nations since the end of the 2015 RWC and the start of this one. Union is still elitist. No question about that. Georgia are talking about starting a franchise team similar to the jaguares in super rugby to gain entry into the pro 14. The pro 14 is an expansion league, that's allowed 2 South African teams so they would have a great chance. It's the only way they'll get into the six nations. I'd they start a franchise side that plays and is competitive with Irish, Welsh and Scottish sides they can't continue to be ignored then.

I very much agree with all of that - I think the lack of internationals was also made by the commentary team about the Tonga side during today's game with France.

I'm not saying that there aren't many one-sided games and that they're not particularly enjoyable for neutrals (I'll watch them if they're on but I wouldn't make a point of doing so) - just that it has ever been so in World Cup tournaments.

[Johnnyp]

5 minutes ago, snowychap said:

I very much agree with all of that - I think the lack of internationals was also made by the commentary team about the Tonga side during today's game with France.

I'm not saying that there aren't many one-sided games and that they're not particularly enjoyable for neutrals (I'll watch them if they're on but I wouldn't make a point of doing so) - just that it has ever been so in World Cup tournaments.

The only saving grace is that when it gets to the last 8 we'll have some very competitive games. Next week is where it gets good from my perspective. I'm Irish, we aren't through yet. Should beat Samoa. Scotland - Japan could be a cracker. France are just been typically French. They've put in performances like the Tonga one this morning, in the past. It's what they do. They are bare minimum against the lesser sides. Might even get hockeyed against England next week but they are a dangerous team in knockout rugby. They have the ability to pull a performance out of nowhere. They won't care if they come first or second after next weekend. They'll believe they can beat Wales or Australia. Just the way they are.

[bickster]

It still kind of has to be this way, RU is a minority but growing sport around the world. It needs to expand, hell it wants to expand but it can't do that at the expense of the big spectacle games, you can't stiffle the 8 big teams (I discount Italy) to bring the others up, the game would die amongst its growing non traditional audience

The way I see it is, the WC gives a platform to the lesser teams but if those lesser teams were instantly pulled up to the level the RUWC would be a grueling affair, the easy games for the big teams serve as competitive training matches in reality and a chance for the minnows to see how far they've got to go.

Its what happens between the World Cups. I can see an argument for Argentina and Japan to be included in a 5 team S Hemisphere tournament BUT look at Italy... how much better are they for getting pummelled by most teams in the 6 nations every year? they've improved but not really that much, they're only really there to make the fixture list pretty and give every team a game in every round. In the N Hemisphere there should be a Second tier with promotion and relegation imo. Sure Italy would probably yo-yo every other year but the other year someone else would get a go.

The S Hemisphere teams could do something similarI guess but they'd need to get more teams up to speed for the top tier

[LondonLax]

1 hour ago, bickster said:

It still kind of has to be this way, RU is a minority but growing sport around the world. It needs to expand, hell it wants to expand but it can't do that at the expense of the big spectacle games, you can't stiffle the 8 big teams (I discount Italy) to bring the others up, the game would die amongst its growing non traditional audience

The way I see it is, the WC gives a platform to the lesser teams but if those lesser teams were instantly pulled up to the level the RUWC would be a grueling affair, the easy games for the big teams serve as competitive training matches in reality and a chance for the minnows to see how far they've got to go.

Its what happens between the World Cups. I can see an argument for Argentina and Japan to be included in a 5 team S Hemisphere tournament BUT look at Italy... how much better are they for getting pummelled by most teams in the 6 nations every year? they've improved but not really that much, they're only really there to make the fixture list pretty and give every team a game in every round. In the N Hemisphere there should be a Second tier with promotion and relegation imo. Sure Italy would probably yo-yo every other year but the other year someone else would get a go.

The S Hemisphere teams could do something similarI guess but they'd need to get more teams up to speed for the top tier

It’s more feasible in the northern hemisphere where you are really just talking about Europe. 

The ‘Southern Hemisphere’ includes South America, South Africa, Australia, NZ and even Japan. The logistics including flights and time zones makes it very difficult to arrange matches that will hold peoples interest. You are not going to get people waking up at 3am to watch Japan vs Uruguay or even NZ vs Namibia etc  

[Qwpzxjor1]

I'm all for including lesser nations of course.. I'm not a huge rugby fan but I'm putting the same logic to cricket.. also an elitest sport, played very well by a select few countries and a big big step down to the lesser nations. 

When the cricket World Cup had the number of teams reduced I wasn't happy.. how do you expect the likes of Netherlands, Scotland, Zimbabwe, etc.. when you limit it to only 2 qualifying spots (which were always going to go to West Indies and Afghanistan) to get better if they can't take part in the biggest competition.  But then the World Cup happened, and it was fantastic, every game was close and even the lowest ranked team Afghanistan held their own and although they lost every game they were more than competitive in every match.

Contrast that to this World Cup, where there's an abundance of lower ranked teams, and they are just not holding their own.

It annoys me that the dull matches in this RWC have proven the ICC correct. I don't want it to be the case, but limiting the World Cup to genuinely the best teams improves the quality of the tournament. In the case of Rugby and Cricket that unfortunately means a lot of nations have the ladder kicked away.

[WhatAboutTheFinish]

I actually think the tournament would benefit from a secondary competition after the group stages. With the knockout stages meaning only Saturdays/Sundays have games, maybe they could fill in the Tuesday/Wednesday slots with a ‘World Bowl’ consisting of the 3rd and 4th placed teams from the groups.

Should make more group games mean something, give the lesser teams something to aspire to and put the lower ranked tier 1 nations on a perch on which they can be shot at! 

[Johnnyp]

8 hours ago, bickster said:

It still kind of has to be this way, RU is a minority but growing sport around the world. It needs to expand, hell it wants to expand but it can't do that at the expense of the big spectacle games, you can't stiffle the 8 big teams (I discount Italy) to bring the others up, the game would die amongst its growing non traditional audience

The way I see it is, the WC gives a platform to the lesser teams but if those lesser teams were instantly pulled up to the level the RUWC would be a grueling affair, the easy games for the big teams serve as competitive training matches in reality and a chance for the minnows to see how far they've got to go.

Its what happens between the World Cups. I can see an argument for Argentina and Japan to be included in a 5 team S Hemisphere tournament BUT look at Italy... how much better are they for getting pummelled by most teams in the 6 nations every year? they've improved but not really that much, they're only really there to make the fixture list pretty and give every team a game in every round. In the N Hemisphere there should be a Second tier with promotion and relegation imo. Sure Italy would probably yo-yo every other year but the other year someone else would get a go.

The S Hemisphere teams could do something similarI guess but they'd need to get more teams up to speed for the top tier

Argentina have been part of an expanded tri nations for 7 years. Georgia have won 10 out of the last 11 European nations cup ( essentially a B six nations ) I don't think Italy should be part of the six nations. I don't think the appetite for the game is huge in Italy and they haven't progressed since they got into the six nations 19 years ago. But i don't think Georgia should be part of it either. Lots of people say they've earned their right because they've won the secondary competition. They haven't. Beating Russia, Romania and Belgium doesn't give you the right to compete against the big 5 in the Northern hemisphere. Georgia need to get a franchise team into the pro 14. That's how they will grow. They aren't ready.

[Johnnyp]

7 hours ago, Qwpzxjor1 said:

I'm all for including lesser nations of course.. I'm not a huge rugby fan but I'm putting the same logic to cricket.. also an elitest sport, played very well by a select few countries and a big big step down to the lesser nations. 

When the cricket World Cup had the number of teams reduced I wasn't happy.. how do you expect the likes of Netherlands, Scotland, Zimbabwe, etc.. when you limit it to only 2 qualifying spots (which were always going to go to West Indies and Afghanistan) to get better if they can't take part in the biggest competition.  But then the World Cup happened, and it was fantastic, every game was close and even the lowest ranked team Afghanistan held their own and although they lost every game they were more than competitive in every match.

Contrast that to this World Cup, where there's an abundance of lower ranked teams, and they are just not holding their own.

It annoys me that the dull matches in this RWC have proven the ICC correct. I don't want it to be the case, but limiting the World Cup to genuinely the best teams improves the quality of the tournament. In the case of Rugby and Cricket that unfortunately means a lot of nations have the ladder kicked away.

Barriers to entry in union are terrible. In fairness to world rugby they did propose a new international league. Wasn't surprising that the six nations dug their heels in and it got scrapped. 

[mikeyp102]

Some of scheduling is a bit unfair going into the quarters. South Africa will have had a 12 day break whereas whoever they face will have had either 7 or 6 days. That’s a massive difference. Yes, everyone has had periods where they’ve had a short or long period between games but going into the knock outs seems unfair.

I also don’t understand the losing bonus point rule, don’t see the benefit of that 

[WhatAboutTheFinish]

12 minutes ago, mikeyp102 said:

I also don’t understand the losing bonus point rule, don’t see the benefit of that 

Such a shame Japan weren’t street smart enough with it!  7 points up with a minute to play against Ireland and a 5m scrum right under the posts, all logic dictated to see the time out and try to drop a goal. Their failure to do so gave Ireland the BP that effectively guarantees a quarter final spot and sadly makes the Japanese passage through so much harder. 
 

I guess that is the benefit. In a tight game like that, Japan should have been motivated to score again whilst Ireland were both motivated to get level or when/if they felt the game was gone...to stay in touch.

[Johnnyp]

1 hour ago, mikeyp102 said:

Some of scheduling is a bit unfair going into the quarters. South Africa will have had a 12 day break whereas whoever they face will have had either 7 or 6 days. That’s a massive difference. Yes, everyone has had periods where they’ve had a short or long period between games but going into the knock outs seems unfair.

I also don’t understand the losing bonus point rule, don’t see the benefit of that 

Losing bonus point is got if a team lose by less than 7 points. It's very important. Take Pool A. If Ireland had not got the losing bonus point against Japan they would of needed to beat Samoa and get the bonus point also to assure qualification. Not so much now. A win of any description against Samoa will do. Will put them on 15. Most Scotland can reach is 15. Goes head to head. Ireland beat them. Scotland have more of a chance of dumping Japan out than they do Ireland. Beat Japan and in the process deny them a losing bonus point and they'll go through.

[mikeyp102]

2 hours ago, Johnnyp said:

Losing bonus point is got if a team lose by less than 7 points. It's very important. Take Pool A. If Ireland had not got the losing bonus point against Japan they would of needed to beat Samoa and get the bonus point also to assure qualification. Not so much now. A win of any description against Samoa will do. Will put them on 15. Most Scotland can reach is 15. Goes head to head. Ireland beat them. Scotland have more of a chance of dumping Japan out than they do Ireland. Beat Japan and in the process deny them a losing bonus point and they'll go through.

I know why it’s awarded but it makes no sense. In the scenario you’ve said, Japan who beat the Irish, have an arguably harder passage to progress than the Irish. The Irish without that point would have to get a bonus point in beating Samoa, as would Scotland in beating Japan. 

I get the bonus, for 4 tries, as it encourages attacking play, but personally I think being awarded points for losing is wrong.

[theboyangel]

Looks like the England vs France game is being cancelled due to the typhoon Hagibis, with confirmation due later today. 

No official word on the Japan vs Scotland match, due to be played at the same stadium 24hrs later. If this is also abandoned, Scotland will be eliminated from the tourno ! 

I'm sure the organisers would rather this game be played as there's actually something riding on the result (unlike the England match) but then again, they'd probably would love to have Japan in the quarters ensuring the interest of the host nation. 

[LondonLax]

Italy NZ was also cancelled and technically there was something riding on that game. A bit of a shame really. 

[mikeyp102]

3 matches cancelled so far, they’ll review and confirm Sunday 

[Johnnyp]

Fair play to Parisse, saying what everyone thinks. If NZ needed the points, World Rugby would of found a way. Italy going out doesn't even register in their country. Imagine if NZ went out like this. The country would go into meltdown.

[BOF]

Just came in to congratulate Italy on their stunning draw with the All Blacks

[Chindie]

9 minutes ago, BOF said:

Just came in to congratulate Italy on their stunning draw with the All Blacks

Children in Tuscany will talk of this day for decades.

[BOF]

1 minute ago, Chindie said:

Children in Tuscany will talk of this day for decades.

Maybe they'll be taken more seriously now!