Jump to content


TotalRL.com Shop Alert: Last Ordering Date for Free Pre-Xmas Delivery within UK: 2pm Thursday 18th December!!
Rugby League Yearbook 2014/15 The Forbidden Game League Express League Express Gift Card Rugby League World Rugby League World Gift Card
Buy Now £14.99 / Kindle Buy Now £14.99 / Kindle Print / Digital Subscription Gift Cards Print / Digital Subscription Gift Cards



Photo
- - - - -

RLWC 2017 format?


  • Please log in to reply
44 replies to this topic

#21 Gruff

Gruff
  • Coach
  • 655 posts

Posted 18 November 2013 - 09:39 AM

I like the format for this one - the only unforeseeable is how many NRL/SL players will switch allegiance to the minnow teams come world cup time.  This results in weaker teams becoming stronger, so skews the format.  This also means we will not see many blow-outs from now on - the biggest one this years was 62 points - not too bad given the teams involved.

 

If for 2017 we have more of the same, and personally i think we will as the International teams get bigger I would like to see 4 groups of 4 (for this example lets say Lebanon and Jamaica get through as they will be able to draw from NRL/SL players)

 

Group 1 - Australia, Samoa, Wales, Italy

Group 2 - NZ, France, Tonga, PNG

Group 3 - Eng, Scot, CI, Leb

Group 4 - Fiji, USA, Ireland, Jam

 

Sure, Aus, NZ, Eng should come through the group stages unbeaten and putting 30-40 points on each team, but like we have seen with this WC the most exciting matches involve the other teams.  All groups will be really competitive for the second place spot and would see some cracking match ups.

 

QF's would see

 

Aus vs France 

NZ vs Samoa

Eng vs USA

Fiji vs Scot

 

Once again some cracking matches there, with only the Aus/France a walkover

 

Semi's - Aus/NZ, Eng/Fiji

 

Final  - could be any two of these 4.

 

We need to expand - slowly - but also have a one country rule.



#22 BenGilesRL

BenGilesRL
  • Twitter
  • 41 posts

Posted 18 November 2013 - 10:10 AM

Quite like that

#23 Aucks Warriors

Aucks Warriors
  • Coach
  • 236 posts

Posted 18 November 2013 - 10:42 AM

Lets just spread all teams up like other world cups (FIFA, RUWC) so we don't get the same situation where France loss two games and won one and still make the QF.



#24 westlondonfan

westlondonfan
  • Coach
  • 518 posts

Posted 18 November 2013 - 11:46 AM

Too many one-sided matches.( twelve in group stages and then QFs if 16 teams).

#25 Number 16

Number 16
  • Coach
  • 6,324 posts

Posted 18 November 2013 - 12:53 PM

I'm happy with this competition's set up - I think it's worked well. Sure, three of the QFs were fairly one-sided, but that's going to happen whatever, given the superiority of the leading three nations.

 

My only tweaks would be to increase Groups C&D to four nations each, with no cross-fixtures, and, as now, with only the Group winners progressing. 

 

Also, the big downside to this year's Group A is that the third placed team was effectively decided in Round 1 when Fiji defeated Ireland: next time, in the Group with two of the big three, I'd have the two lower ranked nations play last. 


SOUTH LONDON STORM - 1997-2014


#26 Lesmets

Lesmets
  • Coach
  • 115 posts

Posted 18 November 2013 - 04:44 PM

RLWC 8 teams Max teams can be decided via qualifiers forget all these made up teams in country's RL doesn't exist like Ireland,Italy,Scotland etc .the game didn't catch on in 100+ years it's not gonna happen now!!

2x Groups of 4

Major Group
Australia
England
New Zealand
France

Minor Group
Fiji
Samoa
PNG
USA

1 and 2 in Major group into Semis 3 and 4 playoff against 1 and 2 from minor group ,similar to NRL Finals System

Quarter Finals

Major 3 v Minor 4
Minor 3 v Major 4

Winners meet Major 1 and 2 in Semis

#27 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,912 posts

Posted 18 November 2013 - 05:03 PM

Did it work for Ireland (hiding to nothing, poor crowd),
France (great crowds little to cheer),
PNG (hiding to nothing),
Italy (deserved more games),
Scotland (almost didn't qualify undefeated, left with a hiding),
USA (left with a hiding)

3 Quarter Finals one sided

To name a few?

Not saying this current format is or or isn't the way to go, just opening it up for discussion.

 

PNG weren't on a hiding to nothing.  They should have gone through.  Ireland probably suffered for doing well last time out.

 

To be honest, your system is no better as a guarantee that there'll be no teams leaving with a hiding. At some point along the line, Australia, England and NZ are going to have to meet smaller nations.


"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#28 statties

statties
  • Coach
  • 278 posts

Posted 18 November 2013 - 05:14 PM

I know its not over but now we're into the semis and can reflect on the tournament positives and weaknesses, I thought of this...

Group A:Australia, England, New Zealand

Top 2 to Semi-Final

Group B, Group C, Group D (all four teams)

Top 2 of each group into next round.

Top Group B plays 2nd Group C.
Top Group C plays 2nd Group D.
Top Group D plays 2nd Group B.

Quarter-Finals

Highest ranked winner v Next highest ranked winner

3rd Group A plays lowest ranked winner.

Semi-Finals

1st Group A v QF lowest ranked winner
2nd Group A v QF highest ranked winner

Final.

15 teams, possibility of only 2 big scores - one in QF one in Sf.

What do you think?


So the top two from group A play two goes before semis. The teams from other groups will play five games before semis.

Fans only get to see top teams play four games. They will not bother watching the rest of the games. Resulting in lower income, less TV coverage and less sponsors.

This is a very poorly thought out competition

#29 GeordieSaint

GeordieSaint
  • Coach
  • 5,050 posts

Posted 18 November 2013 - 05:20 PM

Keep it the same. Competitive competitions never work for everyone. This competition has given some of the minnows a good crack AND an opportunity to play against the big boys. Something we lack is continuity and strive for perfection; it won't happen. Stop meddling!


Kings Lynn Black Knights Rugby League Club - http://www.pitchero....nnblackknights/


#30 BladeHearts

BladeHearts
  • Coach
  • 93 posts

Posted 18 November 2013 - 05:20 PM

I have stated on previous threads that the QF stage is probably the weakest link of an otherwise excellent tournament format.

 

However, I dont agree with dropping to 8 teams and feel that we should probably stick to the current format albeit with better seedings re group allocation.

 

Ultimately what the World Cup needs is for Fiji to progress to the stage where if they play well and one of the big 3 (or maybe even just Eng/NZ) play poorly they can win. We also need PNG and France to start punching their weight.

 

In an ideal world the QFs would look something like this

 

1. Australia

2. England

3. New Zealand

4. Fiji

5. France (Albeit built on more than just the Catalans Dragons.  The inclusion of Toulouse and maybe even a 3rd French side is of immeasurable strategic importance to our game)

6. Papua New Guinea (We really need a PNG side in the NRL)

7. Tonga

8. Samoa

 

It would be great to see Wales homegrown efforts come to fruition, but any side based on part-time Championship players is (and quite rightly so) going to struggle badly on the world stage.

 

The beauty of the current format is that it gives the minor RL nations a chance to come to the party and be competitive, the difficulty is when you try and merge the minnows and giants together at the QF stage, but the only solution to this problem is for the minnows to improve.


Edited by BladeHearts, 18 November 2013 - 05:22 PM.


#31 Mumby Magic

Mumby Magic
  • Coach
  • 3,198 posts

Posted 18 November 2013 - 05:22 PM

It doesn't matter if there are one sided games!!!! It's does happen you know.


Lilly, Jacob and Isaac, what my life is about. Although our route through life is not how it should be, I am a blessed man.


#32 bobbruce

bobbruce
  • Coach
  • 6,178 posts

Posted 18 November 2013 - 05:29 PM

Group A: England, Australia, New Zealand (top 2 to semis)

Group B: France, Scotland, Tonga, Cook Islands

Group C: Samoa, PNG, USA, Wales

Group D: Fiji, Ireland, Italy, Canada?

Top 2 from B C D qualify for next round

Winners of these games = 3 teams.

Best two play each other, worst ranked plays 3rd group A.

Winners enter semis, worst ranked plays 1st Group A, best ranked plays 2nd Group A.


So say Aussies and NZ top the group they would then have to wait going on for 3 weeks for another game. Surely you want the top teams playing to keep the interest going.

#33 BladeHearts

BladeHearts
  • Coach
  • 93 posts

Posted 18 November 2013 - 05:30 PM

It doesn't matter if there are one sided games!!!! It's does happen you know.

 

I've no problem with one sided games and as a Scot, its been fantastic to see Scotland making a QF and playing against the Kiwis.

 

However, ideally what you want is a situation, where even a heavy favourite knows that its possible to lose if they play poorly and the oppostion plays out of their skins.

 

With the greatest respect the first 3 QFs didnt fall into this category and we were fairly fortunate that the matches were as close they were.



#34 Jonty

Jonty
  • Coach
  • 3,048 posts

Posted 18 November 2013 - 06:19 PM

Keep it the same - it has worked fine this time.

 

Maybe expand to 16 by growing Pool C and Pool D, whilst doing away with the cross-over game.


disques vogue

The club where Eurovision isn't a dirty word. A waltz through the leopard skin lined world of Tom Jones, Bert Kampfert and Burt Bacharach. Step out to the sound of the happy hammond and swing to the seductive sounds of the samba.

DJ's, raffles, cocktails and wide collars. Please dress smart. Gentlemen might like to wear a suit.

Same price. Same music. Same rubbish prizes.

#35 yipyee

yipyee
  • Coach
  • 1,362 posts

Posted 18 November 2013 - 10:58 PM

Could reverse the groups, presumin the same teams qualify....

Group A, Aus, Eng, Fiji
Group B NZ, France, Samoa

One crossover game, top 2 go through,

Group C Scotland, Italy, Tonga, Ireland
Group D US, Wales, PNG, Cooks

Top 2 through,

Bearing in mind PNG and Ireland didnt get tonked by too much the quarters should work out better
The crossover games from the A&C should be more intense as well!

#36 bobbruce

bobbruce
  • Coach
  • 6,178 posts

Posted 18 November 2013 - 11:10 PM

Could reverse the groups, presumin the same teams qualify....

Group A, Aus, Eng, Fiji
Group B NZ, France, Samoa

One crossover game, top 2 go through,

Group C Scotland, Italy, Tonga, Ireland
Group D US, Wales, PNG, Cooks

Top 2 through,

Bearing in mind PNG and Ireland didnt get tonked by too mucho the quarters should work out better
The crossover games from the A&C should be more intense as well!


You can't have two tough groups and have the same number of teams qualifying as from the easier groups. You would end up with the team that is clearly the fourth best team Fiji with virtually no chance of making the quarters.

#37 paulmac

paulmac
  • Players
  • 35 posts

Posted 19 November 2013 - 12:13 AM

The only thing I'd consider changing would be separating the big teams from being in the same group, but instead having them in a cross group game.

I.e.

Group A - Australia(1), Samoa(5), Ireland(12)
Group B - New Zealand(2), Scotland(6), Cook Islands(11)
Group C - England(3), France(7), Italy(10), PNG(13)
Group D - Fiji(4), USA( 8), Tonga(9), Wales (14)

Cross group games between 1&2, 6&12, 5&11.
Top two from each group go through.

Think that would be a lot simpler to understand and a fairer system (whilst also giving a slight handicap for the other sides disguised as a cross-group game that could also be the opening game).

*Just to note, the rankings aren't official by any stretch. I'm just going off how well the sides did in this WC (or how I think they'll do from here!)

This is how it should be done.Replace Cook Is with Tonga so that we can get a tasty cross pool match and fix the draw so that Australia play England in a semi rather than a minnow and you would have the perfect world cup.Well done Wellsy.



#38 yipyee

yipyee
  • Coach
  • 1,362 posts

Posted 19 November 2013 - 12:14 AM

You can't have two tough groups and have the same number of teams qualifying as from the easier groups. You would end up with the team that is clearly the fourth best team Fiji with virtually no chance of making the quarters.

Good point although would Scotland or US have beat fiji?
Are they really the fourth best, would france have beat them?
Additionally if the cross game was NZ vs AUS then it would set up winner takes all with fiji vs england, france vs Samoa these would be more meaningful than the doesnt matter we have both qualified games we saw after this years first round!! (France & fiji wins....)

#39 BenGilesRL

BenGilesRL
  • Twitter
  • 41 posts

Posted 19 November 2013 - 08:27 AM

@statties

"So the top two from group A play two goes before semis. The teams from other groups will play five games before semis.

Fans only get to see top teams play four games. They will not bother watching the rest of the games. Resulting in lower income, less TV coverage and less sponsors.

This is a very poorly thought out competition"

Not if they play each other twice - four games, one week off. Great rugby league throughout.

#40 westlondonfan

westlondonfan
  • Coach
  • 518 posts

Posted 19 November 2013 - 10:10 PM

I'm happy with this competition's set up - I think it's worked well. Sure, three of the QFs were fairly one-sided, but that's going to happen whatever, given the superiority of the leading three nations.
 
My only tweaks would be to increase Groups C&D to four nations each, with no cross-fixtures, and, as now, with only the Group winners progressing. 
 
Also, the big downside to this year's Group A is that the third placed team was effectively decided in Round 1 when Fiji defeated Ireland: next time, in the Group with two of the big three, I'd have the two lower ranked nations play last.

This seems right to me.There are other minnows who could take those two extra spots like Lebanon, Canada, Jamaica and South Africa for example. Having any of those countries (except Canada)would give the WC a bigger geographical spread and make it even more of a WORLD cup.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users