Nations Cup/Trophy/Vase

[Wellsy4HullFC]

Could this be the intermittent competition between WCs?

3 tiers of Nations. 5 weeks  8 teams in each (based on rankings), split into 2 groups of 4. Semi and final. Bottom 2 playoff to avoid relegation. 

E.g. (based on who I think will make it to the 1/4 finals!)

 

Nations Cup (hosts: Aus & NZ)

A) Aus, England, PNG, Fiji

B) NZ, Samoa, Tonga, Ireland

 

Nations Trophy (hosts: Wales & France)

A) France, Italy, Greece, Lebanon

B) Wales, Scotland, Cook Is., Jamaica

 

Nations Vase (hosts: USA & Canada)

USA, Canada, Serbia, Spain, Chile, South Africa and anyone else that can afford to join!

 

More evenly matched teams playing in higher quality competition. Less likely to be big blow outs. Performance-related progression means nations need to focus on development and recruitment every competition if they want the big matches. Based in the current rankings, easy to reduce travel by hosting in continent with most nations initially!

 

Pipedream? Good idea? Too structured so you can't piddle about with it every 2 minutes?

[RP London]

24 minutes ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

Could this be the intermittent competition between WCs?

3 tiers of Nations. 5 weeks  8 teams in each (based on rankings), split into 2 groups of 4. Semi and final. Bottom 2 playoff to avoid relegation. 

E.g. (based on who I think will make it to the 1/4 finals!)

 

Nations Cup (hosts: Aus & NZ)

A) Aus, England, PNG, Fiji

B) NZ, Samoa, Tonga, Ireland

 

Nations Trophy (hosts: Wales & France)

A) France, Italy, Greece, Lebanon

B) Wales, Scotland, Cook Is., Jamaica

 

Nations Vase (hosts: USA & Canada)

USA, Canada, Serbia, Spain, Chile, South Africa and anyone else that can afford to join!

 

More evenly matched teams playing in higher quality competition. Less likely to be big blow outs. Performance-related progression means nations need to focus on development and recruitment every competition if they want the big matches. Based in the current rankings, easy to reduce travel by hosting in continent with most nations initially!

 

Pipedream? Good idea? Too structured so you can't piddle about with it every 2 minutes?

Quite like that as an idea.. add that to a mid season 3 way of England, France and say Ireland (maybe in a similar way with Wales, Italy, Lebanon in a group below).. that makes 7 potentiap international matches in a year which would be brilliant!

[The British Lion]

Like this idea! Sure need something more than 'one' mid season international promise by IMG 

[Tommygilf]

We were supposed to replace the 4 Nations with a "Confed Cup" of 8-10 teams evenly spread between World Cups.

Instead we got a return to tours, and an Oceania Cup. The latter of those works rather similar to your nations league idea. Unfortunately it only includes Oceania nations.

For me the ideal 4 year cycle would be:

1. World Cup

2. Oceania/European/Americas Cup (Nations League model)

3. Confed Cup (8 teams)

4. Oceania/European/Americas Cup

The regional tournaments can act as qualifiers for the global events. I also can see an argument for having the tier 1 nations tour in the 4th year, rather than having them in qualifiers.

[Jughead]

A second tournament would be great but I’m not sure how realistic any of it actually is for a few reasons. It’s certainly not realistic when we have two years between the end of this World Cup and the next one.

The two tiered Oceanic Cup in the Southern Hemisphere looked a really good idea. I’m not sure how good a northern hemisphere equivalent would be. I’m not sure it’s that appealing to many when the vast majority of the northern hemisphere nations are made up of part-time players, compared to the full-time Super League players. A World equivalent sounds good but we’ve never had Tonga, PNG, Samoa travel north outside of a World Cup year or France, Wales, Scotland etc going the other way in a non-World Cup year. 

[Wellsy4HullFC]

29 minutes ago, RP London said:

Quite like that as an idea.. add that to a mid season 3 way of England, France and say Ireland (maybe in a similar way with Wales, Italy, Lebanon in a group below).. that makes 7 potentiap international matches in a year which would be brilliant!

Well with more mid-season internationals promised, you'd assume they'd want those to be local. End of season series should include the big nations as much as possible.

Down Under, they seem to have their formula for that (alongside SOO).

We could easily have a EuroNations Cup/Trophy/Vase there, too.

Cup: England, Ireland, France, Wales

Trophy: Scotland, Italy, Greece, Lebanon

Vase: Serbia, Spain, Malta, Netherlands (or whoever applies to play, more flexibility here)

 

I think the international game would benefit massively from a set structure with meaning, rather than just endless "make it up as you go" friendlies.

[RigbyLuger]

There are already European Championships at various levels, just need an actual calendar for the "major" nations to actually stick to.

[Sports Prophet]

I like the idea of one tournament in between WC tournaments.

If the NRL are only open to a five week playing post season, then I would prefer to see a 2 x six nations. Top 6 and then a 2nd tier for the next 6. All based on rankings.

In this format, every team then gets to play min 5 games which is two more than proposed in the OP and you ensure the top 6 nations all play each other.

Edited October 19, 2022 by Sports Prophet

[Wellsy4HullFC]

8 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

I like the idea of one tournament in between WC tournaments.

If the NRL are only open to a five week playing post season, then I would prefer to see a 2 x six nations. Top 6 and then a 2nd tier for the next 6. All based on rankings.

In this format, every team then gets to play min 5 games which is two more than proposed in the OP and you ensure the top 6 nations all play each other.

I was torn between having 6 teams or 8. Both formats would result in 15 games, but like you say it guarantees 5 matches for all rather than 3-5.

Cup: Aus, NZ, England, Tonga, Samoa, PNG.

Shield: Fiji, Ireland, Lebanon, France, Cook Islands, Italy.

Trophy: Scotland, Wales, Greece, Jamaica, USA, Canada

Vase: the rest

[JM2010]

I just hope we have something each year for all nations plus mid season tests. There's got to be a plan for other tournaments outside of WCs

[Gomersall]

1 minute ago, JM2010 said:

There's got to be a plan for other tournaments outside of WCs

Hasn’t there?

[JM2010]

3 minutes ago, Gomersall said:

Hasn’t there? 

I don't know. What is the international plan for the next couple of WC cycles?

[Wellsy4HullFC]

1 minute ago, JM2010 said:

I don't know. What is the international plan for the next couple of WC cycles?

What's the international plan next year?!

[JM2010]

2 minutes ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

What's the international plan next year?!

Exactly. It needs to be set in stone and released for everyone to see 

[Gomersall]

1 hour ago, JM2010 said:

Exactly. It needs to be set in stone and released for everyone to see 

The game has to get away from making plans for the immediate future then five minutes later tearing those plans up. A set rolling five year schedule is needed with annual reviews to create the content for year six, seven etc.

[Madrileño]

This was proposed (well a variation of it for the top 8 countries) by David Collier when he took over at International Rugby League in 2015.

He came from a cricket background, so it was aligned with what the ICC were doing.

It was never implemented and Collier moved on. The Rugby League countries had a chance to do this - they clearly don't want to. 

[gingerjon]

I think it must take great restraint for the people at European Rugby League to not just reply to so many of these idea threads with, "Oh, you mean that thing we announced and are doing".

[Wellsy4HullFC]

2 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

I think it must take great restraint for the people at European Rugby League to not just reply to so many of these idea threads with, "Oh, you mean that thing we announced and are doing".

I'm aware there doing it at European level below England.

I'd love to see it expanded across all international rugby tiers.

[gingerjon]

Just now, Wellsy4HullFC said:

I'm aware there doing it at European level below England.

I'd love to see it expanded across all international rugby tiers.

England are due to be involved next year - albeit does look like being the Knights (which is absolutely not an issue).

If the Pacific Cup returns than we've basically covered it.

[Madrileño]

5 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

I think it must take great restraint for the people at European Rugby League to not just reply to so many of these idea threads with, "Oh, you mean that thing we announced and are doing".

Why would they be bothered about 40 people on a forum?

They are probably too busy getting on with their jobs. 

[GeordieSaint]

Every mid-WC cycle, there should be a 8-team competition between the 8 previous WC quarter finalists. They’ve already qualified for the next WC. The rest of the nations play the final qualifiers that year for the next WC. 

[Sports Prophet]

2 hours ago, JM2010 said:

I just hope we have something each year for all nations plus mid season tests. There's got to be a plan for other tournaments outside of WCs

You see that’s where I differ. I am happy if a tournament like this and the WC are the only international events that take place.

If a country wants to play a series in between, so be it, but I would be comfortable if nations chose only to play in these two events.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

12 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

England are due to be involved next year - albeit does look like being the Knights (which is absolutely not an issue).

If the Pacific Cup returns than we've basically covered it.

I think it's a massive issue that we're trying to grow international rugby league by having first teams playing second teams (and likely losing convincingly).

I hate the Knights being used like this. No one wins at all.

[gingerjon]

Just now, Wellsy4HullFC said:

I think it's a massive issue that we're trying to grow international rugby league by having first teams playing second teams (and likely losing convincingly).

I hate the Knights being used like this. No one wins at all.

I think it's one of those things that we cringe at but, actually, it's not really a big deal.

I was in a debate the other day about how RU really helps bring on its minor nations (it doesn't really). Worth noting in that regard that for *decades* Argentina were playing England A and equivalents rather than the full England team.

[gingerjon]

2 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

And then when Argentina were included in Super Rugby and Rugby Championship the growth actually happened. Visa weren’t coming on board for England A.

And how did Argentina get competitive enough to be included in those competitions?

Was it by playing England when they would have lost by 100 points or by regular games against better opposition that they could be competitive against combined with decades, literal decades, of in-country development?

There are no shortcuts.