Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

BenGilesRL

RLWC 2017 format?

45 posts in this topic

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 (play each other twice)

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?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stick with similar to this, it worked for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stick with similar to this, it worked for me.

 

This. It works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep what we have it works fine and all those teams deserved a crack at the big lads and we got 57k turning up! The only issue is ranking properly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

 

Many of the group formats for this year were done on guess work. The top 2 groups will be formed on 2 years of international competition this time. Any quarter final involving Australia or New Zealand has the potential to be a blow out.

 

Aus 52 Eng 4

NZ 49 Eng 6

Aus 50 Fiji 0

 

These are scores from the previous 2 World Cups. As for PNG, Samoa and France - they all had an opportunity to go through to the QFs this time. I'm sure the USA boys have had the time of their lives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

 

You can shuffle the deck, but certain teams, for now, have the aces. Later rather than earlier they will come in to play.

 

The early rounds in this format provided a lot of energy to the competition, which provided momentum.

 

It worked, don't try and fix it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We should leave Australia out of it altogether. It's all beneath them. We could have 4 great pools of 4 with fairly evenly matched teams, filled with enthusiastics leaguies. The winner could play Australia at a place and time of their convenience with NRL refs. :)

I back the organisers to come up with something similar, having learnt a great deal from their experience this time round.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This 14-team format has been fantastic; I really hope they have the sense to stick with it.

The only thing that has let things down has been the seeding (eg, making Ireland one of the top ranked teams!). If they sort that out, this format has been fine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The concept I've stated provides the early rounds in spades. In fact you would have every team providing drama and excitement, and it is a 15 team concept, so allows for one more inclusion.

It also disposes of the need for cross group fixtures, with every team playing the three others in their league, and allows progression for more of those minnows, as well as a perceived successful campaign.

This tournament was good - but it wasn't perfect. If you're not trying to progress you're resting on your laurels and that's dangerous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep it the same as this year, just give teams more matches over the next few years, so that the seeding is more informed in 2017.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This tournament was good - but it wasn't perfect. If you're not trying to progress you're resting on your laurels and that's dangerous.

 

 but if you change what works for the sake of it then you change for the worse.

 

See if what you have continues to grow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is this changing for the sake of it?

It keeps the groups of minnows but includes the clubs that struggled against the top sides so there are even more competitive matches.

And it makes every game matter for the big three as top 2 will go straight to semis, other one will have to play an in form minnow.

It takes what worked well from this tournament and makes it better - maybe it isn't explained clearly enough?

Example groups:

Group A: England, Australia, New Zealand

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

Anyway now it's explained this is assuming things will be as they are now. Maybe there will be four more clubs that can challenge the three in 2017, and I would love for that to be the case - but if things remain as they are this could provide even more meaningful matches and I am surprised at the negative reaction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is this changing for the sake of it?

It keeps the groups of minnows but includes the clubs that struggled against the top sides so there are even more competitive matches.

And it makes every game matter for the big three as top 2 will go straight to semis, other one will have to play an in form minnow.

It takes what worked well from this tournament and makes it better - maybe it isn't explained clearly enough?

Example groups:

Group A: England, Australia, New Zealand

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

Anyway now it's explained this is assuming things will be as they are now. Maybe there will be four more clubs that can challenge the three in 2017, and I would love for that to be the case - but if things remain as they are this could provide even more meaningful matches and I am surprised at the negative reaction.

Am I missing something don't you end up with 7 teams in the quarters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tweaks.

2008 format was very good.

2013 is better.

No reason to just stay as we are for the sake of it.

Principle of keeping minnows playing each other is an excellent one. As long as this is retained we'll be reet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to see it expanded to probably 16 teams.  I think it could provide a major boost to a few countries, e.g. Lebanon, Serbia, if they were involved in a World Cup with a good selection of local players.  

 

Lebanon in particular appear promising - they have a league going with some backing from sponsors and media.  Plus Union has made minimal inroads into the Middle-East, and there is a shared identity between Arabic countries, which means it could boost others too.  In contrast if e.g. Japan were to get to the World Cup this would be unlikely to spark anything in China or S.Korea.  As an aside is there any indication of what level the Lebanese league may be?  

 

If they could fit 16 into a similar format to this time that would be great.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We should leave Australia out of it altogether. It's all beneath them. We could have 4 great pools of 4 with fairly evenly matched teams, filled with enthusiastics leaguies. The winner could play Australia at a place and time of their convenience with NRL refs. :)

I back the organisers to come up with something similar, having learnt a great deal from their experience this time round.

This is like the famous Wigan Walk only in reverse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.