Where Should the 2029 World Cup be held?

[Big Picture]

1 hour ago, Gerrumonside ref said:

By 2029 the Australian rugby league public might have perked up if we can take the trophy off them beforehand?  We say it’s insularity but I think they got bored of winning too.

It’s difficult to consider a country as a major rival if you keep beating them.  Now is our time!  We’ll never get a better chance to win it.

And in 2029 let’s defend it wherever the Australian organisers want to play it, that’s factoring in back to back victory now and in France.

This tournament will likely play out very similarly to 1995, with Australia and New Zealand playing each other in one Semi-Final while England has another opponent in the other.  For the Kiwis to win their Semi-Final will likely take everything they have just like beating England in the 2013 Semi-Final did, England's chances of beating them in the Final would be very high then.

We'll just have to wait and see if that's how it plays out.

[SuperNoob]

Ireland, Wales & Scotland should host it. They have the stadiums plus would be good to grow the games there. You can throw Italy in the mix as well. England, Australia & NZ should avoid hosting it after France.

[Anita Bath]

Leigh….at least it wouldnt be affected by train strikes

[Young Blood]

Canada can't have Europe host it 3 times in a row. US is still a mess and as seen with the Wolfpack there is some interest for the game. Announce it now, give them time to prepare and perhaps the government may spend some money of grassroots there to have a competitive team there.

[RugbyLeagueGermany]

Qatar -- no Joke

 

Since League can make the breakthrough in Germany by then, I think the 2029 World Cup can only take place in Germany.

[Colin James]

France. 

We never back anything up in this sport. We want France to grow, hopefully develop a professional domestic league and provide meaningful NH opposition to England. We won't do that by hosting a World Cup there and then not seeing another top class international game for at least another decade. Allow them to learn from any mistakes in 2025 and put on an even better show.

[Dave T]

10 hours ago, Dave T said:

I think we may need to be creative around what our world cups are and how we stage them. 

Maybe a World Cup should be across the world. 

A group in NZ, one in PNG, one in USA, one in England. Or two groups in NH and two in Southern, finals in USA etc. 

Finals over three weeks in one country. 

I think this world cup has maybe demonstrated that the new level of world cup will be out of reach for many countries. Attracting £15m government funding to cover a tournament may mean countries just can't take it on. Not unlike what we may see in RU but they benefit from developing in major markets. 

We do see that the Super-Olympics, Commonwealth Games, Euros etc. are changing how they do things. 

[Damien]

28 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Maybe a World Cup should be across the world. 

A group in NZ, one in PNG, one in USA, one in England. Or two groups in NH and two in Southern, finals in USA etc. 

Finals over three weeks in one country. 

I think this world cup has maybe demonstrated that the new level of world cup will be out of reach for many countries. Attracting £15m government funding to cover a tournament may mean countries just can't take it on. Not unlike what we may see in RU but they benefit from developing in major markets. 

We do see that the Super-Olympics, Commonwealth Games, Euros etc. are changing how they do things. 

I hate that idea to be honest Dave and think that it completely dilutes what a World Cup is. I think much of it would just become lost.

[Leonard]

Middlesbrough 

[Dave T]

Just now, Damien said:

I hate that idea to be honest Dave and think that it completely dilutes what a World Cup is. I think much of it would just become lost.

I think we have a real challenge around world cups of this size. We are struggling to get crowds in the heartlands, and NZ and Oz are even tougher. 

If two countries had 12 games each and a third had 7 finals I think it allows us to create that event and festival feel. 

It allows you to be a bit riskier with locations. London, Sydney, Paris could be joint hosts for example. 

[Leonard]

Just now, Dave T said:

I think we have a real challenge around world cups of this size. We are struggling to get crowds in the heartlands, and NZ and Oz are even tougher. 

If two countries had 12 games each and a third had 7 finals I think it allows us to create that event and festival feel. 

It allows you to be a bit riskier with locations. London, Sydney, Paris could be joint hosts for example. 

Maybe a combination of home nations and France. Spread the group games and qfs. Down under doesn't hugely appeal, but I guess they are most likely with the rise of PNG and the islands and supporting their growth is important. That would be helped by the Aussies getting a few hidings so they take things seriously.

[Damien]

4 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I think we have a real challenge around world cups of this size. We are struggling to get crowds in the heartlands, and NZ and Oz are even tougher. 

If two countries had 12 games each and a third had 7 finals I think it allows us to create that event and festival feel. 

It allows you to be a bit riskier with locations. London, Sydney, Paris could be joint hosts for example. 

Across 2 or 3 countries in the same geographic area, like we have seen before, fine. Not different hemispheres and all that carry on. Thats not a World Cup for me and I dont know why it would particularly attract funding like we have seen or funding on the scale that tournaments like RU see. It's getting away from where we want to be in my opinion and is much more of 4 nations type vibe or indeed our old school World Cups.

Our World Cup is heading in the right direction, I see no need for drastic change.

[MattSantos]

18 hours ago, Mumby Magic said:

 

Any other suggestions?

Your Mam's garden

 

 

Sorry

[Dave T]

12 minutes ago, Leonard said:

Maybe a combination of home nations and France. Spread the group games and qfs. Down under doesn't hugely appeal, but I guess they are most likely with the rise of PNG and the islands and supporting their growth is important. That would be helped by the Aussies getting a few hidings so they take things seriously.

Splitting across hemispheres allows you to condense the tournament a lot more if you desired and saturate the TV schedules over weekends. 

 

6 minutes ago, Damien said:

Across 2 or 3 countries in the same geographic area, like we have seen before, fine. Not different hemispheres and all that carry on. Thats not a World Cup for me and I dont know why it would particularly attract funding like we have seen or funding on the scale that tournaments like RU see. It's getting away from where we want to be in my opinion and is much more of 4 nations type vibe or indeed our old school World Cups.

Our World Cup is heading in the right direction, I see no need for drastic change.

I think in reality, a large part of World Cups is that it is a TV product different time zones can help that. 

I also think spreading the risk and rewards can help. I think if the North of England had only 12 games to sell, they could do them better. 

I understand why its not for everyone, but I think the fact that this thread isn't coming up with a great list of potential venues shows the problems we face. 

In my suggestion, we are still talking a three week festival of RL in each territory (and that could be enhanced if Women's and Wheelchair remains part of it). 

I hope I'm wrong, but I worry that the scale of this World Cup in England may break the system. 

Edited October 19, 2022 by Dave T

[MattSantos]

Not sure whether this is the right place for my 'position', but i would have 2 World Cups, the actual World Cup, then an Emerging Nations WC one at the same time / before.

I'm really enjoying the Twenty20 affair at the moment as the minnows all get games against each other, but then a light at the end of the tunnel for the better nations too as they will qualify to be part of the actual WC.

 

[Dave T]

Just now, MattSantos said:

Not sure whether this is the right place for my 'position', but i would have 2 World Cups, the actual World Cup, then an Emerging Nations WC one at the same time / before.

I'm really enjoying the Twenty20 affair at the moment as the minnows all get games against each other, but then a light at the end of the tunnel for the better nations too as they will qualify to be part of the actual WC.

 

I think this moves us back to the structure from a few years back, where we had the top teams in two group and weaker ones in two other groups. 

I've enjoyed the group so far and the mis-matches haven't been an issue yet, but there are some to come. I think we'll be able to judge better in a couple of weeks whether it has been successful. 

[MattSantos]

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

I think this moves us back to the structure from a few years back, where we had the top teams in two group and weaker ones in two other groups. 

I've enjoyed the group so far and the mis-matches haven't been an issue yet, but there are some to come. I think we'll be able to judge better in a couple of weeks whether it has been successful. 

Two groups of 4/5 allows for absolute brilliant games every time and easier games to sell.

I'm enjoying the games too, but Aus v Scotland & NZ v Jamaica scare me and shouldn't be a thing.

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, MattSantos said:

Two groups of 4/5 allows for absolute brilliant games every time and easier games to sell.

I'm enjoying the games too, but Aus v Scotland & NZ v Jamaica scare me and shouldn't be a thing.

There is a real possibility of a couple of 100pts victories. Now, I'm not overly stressed about that, other sports see hammering and just crack on, but we also should be open to doing things differently.

[Spidey]

5 minutes ago, MattSantos said:

Two groups of 4/5 allows for absolute brilliant games every time and easier games to sell.

I'm enjoying the games too, but Aus v Scotland & NZ v Jamaica scare me and shouldn't be a thing.

England v Samoa was meant to be a close game, things don’t always happen as planned

[MattSantos]

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

There is a real possibility of a couple of 100pts victories. Now, I'm not overly stressed about that, other sports see hammering and just crack on, but we also should be open to doing things differently.

A hammering in Rugby League is different to a hammering in soccer et al.

2 things. It's bordering on unsafe and from an entertainment perspective, it's awful to watch.

Copy and pasted from my really important work file - the below gives me a semi.

Group 1	Group 2
England	France
Australia	NZ
Samoa	Tonga
PNG	Fiji
Semi
England	NZ
Tonga	Australia
Final
England	Australia

 

 

Group 1	Group 2
Greece	Italy
Scotland	Ireland
Lebanon	Cook Is
Jamaica	Wales
Semi
Lebanon	Cook Is
Ireland	Italy
Final
Lebanon	Ireland

[MattSantos]

2 minutes ago, Spidey said:

England v Samoa was meant to be a close game, things don’t always happen as planned

40odd thousand people turned up to see a bookies underdog win comfortably.

Your point has no merit 

[Damien]

17 minutes ago, MattSantos said:

Not sure whether this is the right place for my 'position', but i would have 2 World Cups, the actual World Cup, then an Emerging Nations WC one at the same time / before.

Thats what we had in 1995. I dont mind what we have now, hammerings happen in all sports. If we aren't having 16 as now then it's a case of going back down to 8 for me, I hated all the stronger groups/weaker group setups we have had before.

If we have an emerging World Cup like 1995 then the costs are all essentially the same. I'm not sure what we now gain from going back to be honest and it takes away a huge carrot from smaller nations, whatever way you dress it up an emerging nations tournament isnt the same.

The game is getting stronger in places like Africa and with African representation the 16 team World Cup will hopefully grow and become stronger too. I simply dont see the point from going back.

Edited October 19, 2022 by Damien

[Spidey]

We've had that many formats of world cups that it'd give SL a run for its money - decide on one and let's try and stick to it for at least 2 concurrent tournaments. 

We have proper qualification games also, this is where maybe we should firm it up and give out less automatic places??  

[MattSantos]

1 minute ago, Damien said:

Thats what we had in 1995. I dont mind what we have now, hammerings happen in all sports. If we aren't having 16 as now then it's a case of going back down to 8 for me, I hated all the stronger groups/weaker group setups we have had before. If we have an emerging World Cup like 1995 then the costs are all essentially the same. I'm not sure what we now gain from going back to be honest and it takes away a huge carrot from smaller nations, whatever way you dress it up an emerging nations tournament isnt the same.

The game is getting stronger in places like Africa and with African representation the 16 team World Cup will hopefully grow and become stronger too. I simply dont see the point from going back.

I have a different view and that it would be rewarding the smaller nations by giving them more meaningful games and something to aim for. The carrot is a semi-final and final and subsequently, those teams are ranked better for competitions in-between the WCs.

The carrot for the fan and broadcaster is more attractive games.

Scotland & Wales are turning up to lose 3 games. Heavily. I personally don't want to watch that, but then i will contradict myself with the Scotland v NZ game from years back...

I agree that the game is getting stronger, i would like to see those emerging nations then promoted into the Emerging Nations WC, with previous Emerging Nations WC winners etc being promoted to the WC. An approach similar to IMG in a way...

 

 

[MattSantos]

4 minutes ago, Spidey said:

We've had that many formats of world cups that it'd give SL a run for its money - decide on one and let's try and stick to it for at least 2 concurrent tournaments. 

We have proper qualification games also, this is where maybe we should firm it up and give out less automatic places??  

I really like the idea of the Nations League in football and think it could work in RL. Position yourself in the 3 years between an ENWC to dictate your seeding. The top teams should never leave the WC with the goal to expand that only through teams winning Nations Leagues / Emerging Nations WCs etc.

IMG styleee.