WC every 2 years

[Man of Kent]

1 minute ago, Rupert Prince said:

No.  May I suggest you are being blinkered?

The RFUs great prize is the 6 Nations.  A big sporting media event. Held every year.  Do they get bored with it.

We have no significant international footprint.  The only one we had was an Australia tour every 4 years with us visiting there in between.

The change to summer might well have been a good idea. but in reality it has stuffed our only credible international event. 

I suggest a World Series event every 2 years.  Top 8 in a round robin. Possibly leading to semis and a final.   8 (or any chosen number) lower tier teams in a parallel competition.

One's man's blinkered is another's cloud-hopping dreamy dreamer...

[Scubby]

If we aren't going to bother with any other formal international tournaments between WCs, then a WC every 3 years is not a wild idea. It seems like a long time has passed since the 2017 tournament. Two years is too soon. 

[John Drake]

I think if you want a well delivered, professionally organised World Cup, you have to allow enough time to put all the logistics in place to ensure it is a success.

It will be a momumentally complex (and expensive) exercise in project management to ensure everything runs smoothly. 

It's not just a case of knocking out a fixture list and off you go.

RLWC2021 is benefitting from significant government financial backing. Such things are not guaranteed and would take months if not years of negotiation to secure, with all the inevitable safeguards and obligations required when it comes to receiving public money.

I think every two years would be a completely unachievable timescale, even if it were desireable (which personally I don't think it is).

The gaps inbetween World Cups need to be filled with other international events, but the difficulty of ever delivering any of those illustrates how problematic it is to achieve anything at this level in Rugby League, and why we should maintain the World Cup as it is, rather than risk killing the one tournament every nation really does want to take part in.

[AB90]

59 minutes ago, John Drake said:

I think if you want a well delivered, professionally organised World Cup, you have to allow enough time to put all the logistics in place to ensure it is a success.

It will be a momumentally complex (and expensive) exercise in project management to ensure everything runs smoothly. 

It's not just a case of knocking out a fixture list and off you go.

RLWC2021 is benefitting from significant government financial backing. Such things are not guaranteed and would take months if not years of negotiation to secure, with all the inevitable safeguards and obligations required when it comes to receiving public money.

I think every two years would be a completely unachievable timescale, even if it were desireable (which personally I don't think it is).

The gaps inbetween World Cups need to be filled with other international events, but the difficulty of ever delivering any of those illustrates how problematic it is to achieve anything at this level in Rugby League, and why we should maintain the World Cup as it is, rather than risk killing the one tournament every nation really does want to take part in.

I would agree with you if it was held in the same place every two years but that's not the case as it would only be held in the UK every 4 years (rotating with Aus/NZ).

I may be naive, but surely 4 years to get the logistics, funding etc sorted is more than enough time.

Its not exactly a global event where fans from all over the world flood into the country. I imagine that over 95% of fans that attend games at next years WC will be from England.

[Davo5]

8 minutes ago, AB90 said:

I would agree with you if it was held in the same place every two years but that's not the case as it would only be held in the UK every 4 years (rotating with Aus/NZ).

I may be naive, but surely 4 years to get the logistics, funding etc sorted is more than enough time.

Its not exactly a global event where fans from all over the world flood into the country. I imagine that over 95% of fans that attend games at next years WC will be from England.

What makes you think Australia would want to stage a World Cup every 4 yrs,let's just leave it as it is and sort out an international calendar for the intervening years.

[Moove]

I think you could get part of the feel of a World Cup more regularly simply by looking beyond tests against Aus and NZ in the intervening years with a little imagination.

Bringing Tonga, Fiji and PNG over for a Pacific Islands 'friendly' series against England would be competitive and likely attractive for crowds and TV. Double header in London to kick off then a game either side of the pennines the following two weeks. Give each team a pre-series friendly against France/Wales/Ireland/Scotland too before they play a European series in parallel. Just take my money already!

Of course as with everything international RL, funding to get things off the ground and player availability from the NRL would no doubt be a challenge but something like that would go some way to improving the perception of international RL without the overheads of a larger tournament.

[John Drake]

43 minutes ago, AB90 said:

I would agree with you if it was held in the same place every two years but that's not the case as it would only be held in the UK every 4 years (rotating with Aus/NZ).

I may be naive, but surely 4 years to get the logistics, funding etc sorted is more than enough time.

Its not exactly a global event where fans from all over the world flood into the country. I imagine that over 95% of fans that attend games at next years WC will be from England.

I think you underestimate what's involved in planning and delivering a major multi-nation tournament.

RL perpetually struggles to get England and Australia on the field against each other, let alone other nations that don't have revenue streams generated from thriving domestic competitions to draw on in order to fund their international teams.

We have to acknowledge that there aren't vast spare resources available to our sport that could be used to fund the travel and accomodation costs for multiple nations to convene in one place more frequently than they already do.

And the sort of government support RLWC2021 is receiving this time round would not be there if the tournament was held in this country multiple times in a much shorter timescale than at present. 

There's also the danger, even if it were logistically and financially possible, that the World Cup would no longer be viewed as that special anymore. Holding it more frequently that every four years is the international equivalent of shoehorning more and more derby fixtures into the Super League calendar, because 'derbies are popular, therefore more derbies will be more popular' yet the opposite is true. Once they become ten a penny, they're no longer quite as unmissable.

You say the World Cup is 'not exactly a global event where fans from all over the world flood into the country', but that's exactly what we should be aiming to turn it into! Give fans four years to save and plan, and we can do that.

The history of the RLWC is littered with false starts, missed opportunities and even complete financial calamity as recently as 2000.

Now we have it on a regular four year cycle, which has taken us over 50 years to achieve, and it is something players and fans all look forward to being involved in, that also returns a profit for the sport, let's build on that, not risk diminishing it again through lack of planning, lack of money and over familiarity.

[RP London]

1 hour ago, AB90 said:

I would agree with you if it was held in the same place every two years but that's not the case as it would only be held in the UK every 4 years (rotating with Aus/NZ).

I may be naive, but surely 4 years to get the logistics, funding etc sorted is more than enough time.

Its not exactly a global event where fans from all over the world flood into the country. I imagine that over 95% of fans that attend games at next years WC will be from England.

I cant see governments wanting to put funds into something so regularly either to be honest. once every 8 years is one thing, and even then we can struggle depending on how the wind is blowing.

[AB90]

1 hour ago, John Drake said:

I think you underestimate what's involved in planning and delivering a major multi-nation tournament.

RL perpetually struggles to get England and Australia on the field against each other, let alone other nations that don't have revenue streams generated from thriving domestic competitions to draw on in order to fund their international teams.

We have to acknowledge that there aren't vast spare resources available to our sport that could be used to fund the travel and accomodation costs for multiple nations to convene in one place more frequently than they already do.

And the sort of government support RLWC2021 is receiving this time round would not be there if the tournament was held in this country multiple times in a much shorter timescale than at present. 

There's also the danger, even if it were logistically and financially possible, that the World Cup would no longer be viewed as that special anymore. Holding it more frequently that every four years is the international equivalent of shoehorning more and more derby fixtures into the Super League calendar, because 'derbies are popular, therefore more derbies will be more popular' yet the opposite is true. Once they become ten a penny, they're no longer quite as unmissable.

You say the World Cup is 'not exactly a global event where fans from all over the world flood into the country', but that's exactly what we should be aiming to turn it into! Give fans four years to save and plan, and we can do that.

The history of the RLWC is littered with false starts, missed opportunities and even complete financial calamity as recently as 2000.

Now we have it on a regular four year cycle, which has taken us over 50 years to achieve, and it is something players and fans all look forward to being involved in, that also returns a profit for the sport, let's build on that, not risk diminishing it again through lack of planning, lack of money and over familiarity.

All very valid and appreciate I may underestimate the logistics.

I just think it would generate a bit of international momentum that we have never had due to our inconsistent international calender. 

The whole 'it will no longer feel special' line i don't buy. Realistically it's hardly that special now. Theres barley an appetite for it in the southern hemisphere. It may be significant in England but 7 of the top 8 ranked rugby league playing nations are from the southern hemisphere where interest from fans is minimal.

A two year gap is still a long time between tournaments that only go for 6 weeks. Completely different to Wigan v Saints 5 times a year.

[AB90]

3 hours ago, Davo5 said:

What makes you think Australia would want to stage a World Cup every 4 yrs,let's just leave it as it is and sort out an international calendar for the intervening years.

I don't.

'Sort out an international calendar for the intervening years' - haven't we been trying to do this for the past 20 years? I unfortunately don't have much faith in the current system.

[JM2010]

4 hours ago, AB90 said:

I would agree with you if it was held in the same place every two years but that's not the case as it would only be held in the UK every 4 years (rotating with Aus/NZ).

I may be naive, but surely 4 years to get the logistics, funding etc sorted is more than enough time.

Its not exactly a global event where fans from all over the world flood into the country. I imagine that over 95% of fans that attend games at next years WC will be from England.

Plus, if the nations knew where the next one is being held even before the current one then they have plenty of time to organise. 

How much notice have Qatar had?

[Hela Wigmen]

Qualification begins two and a half years before the tournament begins, it’s almost unworkable to squeeze that into a calendar year so that the RLWC can be organised, marketed and scheduled in enough time. 

[AB90]

1 minute ago, Hela Wigmen said:

Qualification begins two and a half years before the tournament begins, it’s almost unworkable to squeeze that into a calendar year so that the RLWC can be organised, marketed and scheduled in enough time. 

Qualification lol. Come on. Just hand pick the best 16 teams. 

[Hela Wigmen]

1 minute ago, AB90 said:

Qualification lol. Come on. Just hand pick the best 16 teams. 

Let’s leave the bigotry and shunning to Rugby Union. 

[Tommygilf]

7 minutes ago, AB90 said:

Qualification lol. Come on. Just hand pick the best 16 teams. 

You can pick the top 9 maybe, but after that its a lottery. USA lost out to Jamaica this time, Greece beat Serbia to the punch. 

[JM2010]

Some good points being made as a counter argument to my OP. Some of the logistical issues may be hard to overcome. 

Unfortunately RL nations in the NH can't compete with England so we need another competition which challenges England but also gives tier 2 nations the opportunity to play each other regularly and also play tier 1 nations more often.

[Tommygilf]

33 minutes ago, JM2010 said:

Some good points being made as a counter argument to my OP. Some of the logistical issues may be hard to overcome. 

Unfortunately RL nations in the NH can't compete with England so we need another competition which challenges England but also gives tier 2 nations the opportunity to play each other regularly and also play tier 1 nations more often.

I think thats where a confed cup/8 team comp in the 2 years between world cups and European/Oceania cups (including the big teams) and tours can be ideal.

That's before you get to England playing either a match before the season kicks off or mid season against France, Wales or even Scotland or Ireland.

[John Drake]

15 hours ago, AB90 said:

All very valid and appreciate I may underestimate the logistics.

I just think it would generate a bit of international momentum that we have never had due to our inconsistent international calender. 

The whole 'it will no longer feel special' line i don't buy. Realistically it's hardly that special now. Theres barley an appetite for it in the southern hemisphere. It may be significant in England but 7 of the top 8 ranked rugby league playing nations are from the southern hemisphere where interest from fans is minimal.

A two year gap is still a long time between tournaments that only go for 6 weeks. Completely different to Wigan v Saints 5 times a year.

 

14 hours ago, AB90 said:

Qualification lol. Come on. Just hand pick the best 16 teams. 

Your arguments don't add up.

On the one hand, you want a World Cup every two years, apparently to increase the amount of international RL that gets played, at the same time as wanting to hand pick the finalists and ditch all the qualifying games, which would significantly reduce the amount of international RL that gets played.

You'd end up destroying interest in the World Cup altogether as fans got bored with it every two years and no nations could afford to stage it that often, as well as destroying any incentives for emerging nations to even play the game at all.

[Griff]

14 hours ago, AB90 said:

Qualification lol. Come on. Just hand pick the best 16 teams. 

Oooh - a bit like franchising, then.

No-one liked franchising when we had it in $uperleague.   Now some daft 'aporth comes up with it for the World Cup.

What happened to "winning your place on the field of play" ?

[AB90]

3 minutes ago, Griff said:

Oooh - a bit like franchising, then.

No-one liked franchising when we had it in $uperleague.   Now some daft 'aporth comes up with it for the World Cup.

What happened to "winning your place on the field of play" ?

Base qualification off the previous tournament. One up one down. Two up two down (whatever you want). Sorted.

My point was, the success of the WC isn't determined if Greece or Serbia qualify. 

And lot of these nations that win there place will have considerably different teams when the world cup rolls round when all the English, Aussie and Kiwi players start checking their grandparents birth certificates. 

So what would you like in between WC's? A four nations? I can't recall any qualification matches for that.

[Bramstein]

The European Nations or Oceania cup that was running alongside the 4 nations acted as the qualification tournament for the next addition.

The thing that saddens me about this is that people want more international RL in between world cups and a lot of suggestions are based around a 4 nations idea. Which is something we had up and running. If you look at the way tournaments develop over time our 4N could have been huge asset to our game had we stuck with it.

EDIT: The only time I don't think a proper tournament was used for qualification purposes for the 4N was in 2014 when Samoa played Fiji in a one off game. The 2014 tournament was superb. Good crowds, Australia didn't win despite the usual pre-event claims that they'd steamroller everyone and every game was a cracking watch.

[Tommygilf]

8 minutes ago, AB90 said:

Base qualification off the previous tournament. One up one down. Two up two down (whatever you want). Sorted.

My point was, the success of the WC isn't determined if Greece or Serbia qualify. 

And lot of these nations that win there place will have considerably different teams when the world cup rolls round when all the English, Aussie and Kiwi players start checking their grandparents birth certificates. 

So what would you like in between WC's? A four nations? I can't recall any qualification matches for that.

It is determined for those nations though! The opportunity to qualify is a big thing for these emerging nations in their own countries which gets good media coverage.

The two years prior European and Pacific Championships were qualifiers for the 4th nation in the 4 nations. That was literally the only reason Scotland were in in 2016 for example.

[AB90]

21 minutes ago, John Drake said:

 

Your arguments don't add up.

On the one hand, you want a World Cup every two years, apparently to increase the amount of international RL that gets played, at the same time as wanting to hand pick the finalists and ditch all the qualifying games, which would significantly reduce the amount of international RL that gets played.

You'd end up destroying interest in the World Cup altogether as fans got bored with it every two years and no nations could afford to stage it that often, as well as destroying any incentives for emerging nations to even play the game at all.

Have qualifications. Or a one up down. Realistically fans are not that bothered if the 16th team is Greece, Serbia, Canada etc. It doesn't make or break a WC.

I strongly disagree that interest will decline as you play different teams every tournament. Your comparison with to msny local derby's is not a like for like comparison. In football, when the euros come round people don't say - 'we just had a better version of this two years ago. Not watching'.

But what are the alternatives? As it stands if your Wales, Ireland, Scotland you literally only play 3 proper, meaningful games (telivised on national tv) every four years (assuming they don't get out of the group stage). 

[John Drake]

2 minutes ago, AB90 said:

Have qualifications. Or a one up down. Realistically fans are not that bothered if the 16th team is Greece, Serbia, Canada etc. It doesn't make or break a WC.

I strongly disagree that interest will decline as you play different teams every tournament. Your comparison with to msny local derby's is not a like for like comparison. In football, when the euros come round people don't say - 'we just had a better version of this two years ago. Not watching'.

But what are the alternatives? As it stands if your Wales, Ireland, Scotland you literally only play 3 proper, meaningful games (telivised on national tv) every four years (assuming they don't get out of the group stage). 

The whole point of a World Cup is teams like Greece, Serbia, Canada, jamaica etc qualifying to play in it. We've spent 50 years getting to this point, where we have a regular tournament cycle with qualifiers and you just want to bin it off again? By far the most interesting games in any World Cup are those involving the teams you don't otherewise get to see playing on your doorstep very often. That's what makes those games special.

You simply cannot compare RL to football. They are chalk and cheese on every conceivable level, from participation, global reach, support base, sponsorship, TV deals and so on. 

The alternatives? Those are only limited by the sport's own creativity and ability to finance them (and you can't have one without the other). But the World Cup is the jewel in the crown. The one international tournament we have with a long and proud (if often chaotic and uncertain) history and which now has a vibrant future with countries queuing up to take part and which generates a profit for the International Board. We mess with that at our peril. 

[AB90]

7 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

It is determined for those nations though! The opportunity to qualify is a big thing for these emerging nations in their own countries which gets good media coverage.

The two years prior European and Pacific Championships were qualifiers for the 4th nation in the 4 nations. That was literally the only reason Scotland were in in 2016 for example.

Have qaulifiers then. I'm not to fussed. It's a hypothetical tournament.

Re four nation - Scotland may of 'qualified' but it was a hand picked qualification to have a northern hemisphere team in it. Which goes against some opinions on here about must having a 'fair' qualification process. They were not the fourth best team in the world at that time.

Aus, NZ, Eng didn't have to play qualifying matches. So we're happy to 'franchise' them.