Best format for RL World Cup

[Mumby Magic]

8 hours ago, tommyace said:

16 teams 

2 Stronger pools 

2 Normal 

Example 

Pool A Top 3 progress

Australia 

England 

France 

Ireland 

Pool B Top 3 progress 

Samoa 

Tonga 

NZ 

Scotland 

Pool C  Top 1 progress 

Lebanon 

Wales 

Fiji  

Greece 

Pool D top 1 progress

PNG 

Jamaica 

Cook Islands 

Italy 

 

And thrice no. Sick of repeating myself. But here goes number 24. The fact and yes it's fact, we constantly change not just the world cup format but league structure the game can't grow. It can't. There is literally no need to change the 16 team format whatsoever. Countries on the edge of qualifying next time round need to know where they stand. Why have a convoluted world cup with all the best in a group. No need. 16 for now and the foreseeable future and I will defend my view no end. 

In addition the lack of fans at games is back all to do with potential blowouts. It's down to marketing and ticket pricing.

Rugby League the most amazing game on the planet but everyone lacks confidence. Have structure don't change things and let it grow.

[GUBRATS]

50 minutes ago, Mumby Magic said:

And thrice no. Sick of repeating myself. But here goes number 24. The fact and yes it's fact, we constantly change not just the world cup format but league structure the game can't grow. It can't. There is literally no need to change the 16 team format whatsoever. Countries on the edge of qualifying next time round need to know where they stand. Why have a convoluted world cup with all the best in a group. No need. 16 for now and the foreseeable future and I will defend my view no end. 

In addition the lack of fans at games is back all to do with potential blowouts. It's down to marketing and ticket pricing.

Rugby League the most amazing game on the planet but everyone lacks confidence. Have structure don't change things and let it grow.

Ooooh eeer missus  

Agree completely , in fact 16 is the number , can't ever see it growing past that , unlike football and cricket and hockey and netball we can't play more than a game a week , stick with the number and the format , work to help teams improve , Tonga and Samoa with quality halves are a match for anybody , although in another generation they will suffer on heritage rules , PNG should become stronger with the Hunters progression , France need to find a way 

 

[Mumby Magic]

15 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Ooooh eeer missus  

Agree completely , in fact 16 is the number , can't ever see it growing past that , unlike football and cricket and hockey and netball we can't play more than a game a week , stick with the number and the format , work to help teams improve , Tonga and Samoa with quality halves are a match for anybody , although in another generation they will suffer on heritage rules , PNG should become stronger with the Hunters progression , France need to find a way 

 

Lol not on one but everyone wants to change everything. Only France for for mine have underachieved. Imagine changing the boundaries now and possibly Greece and Jamaica, two of the talking points of the tournament have next to no chance of qualifying.

[Anita Bath]

7 hours ago, Spidey said:

Greece played a number of games to qualify for the World Cup. Outside of the top nations plenty of international RL is played. There is a full structure in Europe and full internationals played

Greece even know their fixtures for 2023 - England dont

https://europeanrugbyleague.com/fixtures?filters[fixtures][competition_type]=&filters[fixtures][team]=Greece&filters[fixtures][search]=

5 games sincethe last world cup. 1 against a team with previous world cup ‘experience’ which they lost.

They are not ready to compete at the highest level. So are we interested in having an elite level competition or a festival of rugby?

 

[eal]

People complaining about constantly changing formats are ridiculous. Going to 16 teams was a change in format from the previous two RLWCs, there is no history of any one format so I'm not sure how sixteen teams has suddenly become sacred. If the number of teams in the World Cup decided how much a sport could grow why not just have a 50 team tournament? 

[N2022]

4 minutes ago, eal said:

People complaining about constantly changing formats are ridiculous. Going to 16 teams was a change in format from the previous two RLWCs, there is no history of any one format so I'm not sure how sixteen teams has suddenly become sacred. If the number of teams in the World Cup decided how much a sport could grow why not just have a 50 team tournament? 

Fair point - some people seem to have decided the 16-team format just feels 'normal', but why is it wrong to try something a bit different? And, I get people's right to defend their point of view, but when they refuse to hear what other people may be thinking, e.g. on negative impact of blowouts, it's a less sensible approach. There's a potential audience thinking something and it matters how they perceive the sport if interest is to grow.

[GUBRATS]

33 minutes ago, eal said:

People complaining about constantly changing formats are ridiculous. Going to 16 teams was a change in format from the previous two RLWCs, there is no history of any one format so I'm not sure how sixteen teams has suddenly become sacred. If the number of teams in the World Cup decided how much a sport could grow why not just have a 50 team tournament? 

How long do you think it would last ? 

[GUBRATS]

26 minutes ago, N2022 said:

Fair point - some people seem to have decided the 16-team format just feels 'normal', but why is it wrong to try something a bit different? And, I get people's right to defend their point of view, but when they refuse to hear what other people may be thinking, e.g. on negative impact of blowouts, it's a less sensible approach. There's a potential audience thinking something and it matters how they perceive the sport if interest is to grow.

Is it fair to put a ' sacrificial lamb ' in a group with 3 of the potential semi finalists ? 

The 16 number gives us a five week tournament , we really can't have them lasting longer than that , or you'll have countries deciding not to participate 

[Black Country Wire]

54 minutes ago, N2022 said:

Fair point - some people seem to have decided the 16-team format just feels 'normal', but why is it wrong to try something a bit different? And, I get people's right to defend their point of view, but when they refuse to hear what other people may be thinking, e.g. on negative impact of blowouts, it's a less sensible approach. There's a potential audience thinking something and it matters how they perceive the sport if interest is to grow.

Why are "blowouts" an issue in RL but not in other sports?

Looking at (for example) the last netball world cup. 17 out of 24 group games were won by a margin of 20 goals or more and yet they are sticking with the same format next time out.

And that only has 3 likely winners as well. (Same as ours funnily enough)

 

[jim_57]

7 hours ago, Mumby Magic said:

And thrice no. Sick of repeating myself. But here goes number 24. The fact and yes it's fact, we constantly change not just the world cup format but league structure the game can't grow. It can't. There is literally no need to change the 16 team format whatsoever. Countries on the edge of qualifying next time round need to know where they stand. Why have a convoluted world cup with all the best in a group. No need. 16 for now and the foreseeable future and I will defend my view no end. 

In addition the lack of fans at games is back all to do with potential blowouts. It's down to marketing and ticket pricing.

Rugby League the most amazing game on the planet but everyone lacks confidence. Have structure don't change things and let it grow.

We just changed to this structure from 2 tournaments under the other structure, arguably more successful tournaments. I’d argue there was no need to change format after 2017 except the increase to 16 teams. It’s not like we’re throwing decades of tradition out the window here. I think we should have stuck with the format that was working for us, added teams 15-16 to pools C&D and embraced it as our own.

We aren’t Football or Union, we hardly get to be excited for Internationals before they’re over and it’s back to an off-season and 30+ weeks of club games. Internationals are far rarer in our game so I’d honestly much rather watch England, Australia, NZ, Tonga, Samoa, France, Fiji & PNG play against each other than England put 90 of Greece or Jamaica.
 

We get so few internationals as it is we shouldn’t be ashamed to use a format that sees more quality games. It still gives everyone a chance of getting to the finals if they’re good enough and the same number of teams in the World Cup so Greece and Jamaica don’t miss out on their stories. Convoluted? Hardly. The format could be worked out in 1 minute of looking at it, especially without the crossover games of 2013-2017, 16 teams solves that.

Edited November 8, 2022 by jim_57

[jim_57]

3 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

Is it fair to put a ' sacrificial lamb ' in a group with 3 of the potential semi finalists ? 

The 16 number gives us a five week tournament , we really can't have them lasting longer than that , or you'll have countries deciding not to participate 

Assuming the seedings are done correctly any sacrificial lamb would be outside the top 8 ranked teams. So to earn a finals spot they have to beat one of the top 8 teams, pretty fair I’d say.

[ghost crayfish]

For a world cup to retain and build interest over the group stages, it needs at least one showpiece game each round. This year had England v Samoa as an opener, and then basically nothing until the quarters. We may have too many teams now, but I'm not dead against 16... but I do think a degree of group placement and draw manipulation is needed to make it the strongest event possible. 

[Iceberg Slim]

I think this world cups pools were pretty poorly selected based off of match ups. Here would be my tweaks for France 2025 assuming the same teams qualified 

Pool A
Aus
Tonga
Wales 
Scotland 

2 close games - aus v Tonga wales v Scotland 
4 blowouts lol 

Pool B
NZ
Fiji
Greece 
Jamaica

2 close games - nz v Fiji Greece v Jamaica 
4 blowouts 

Pool C
England
PNG
France
Italy

3 close games - png v France France v Italy png v Italy 
3 blowouts 

Pool D
Samoa 
Lebanon
Cook Islands 
Ireland 

4 close games samoa v Lebanon 
Lebanon v Ireland 
cook v Ireland 
Lebanon v cook

2 blowouts 

Total 🟰 11 close games with 3-4 blockbusters 
13 blowouts 

2021 🟰 3 close games
22 blowouts

[Spidey]

8 hours ago, Anita Bath said:

5 games sincethe last world cup. 1 against a team with previous world cup ‘experience’ which they lost.

They are not ready to compete at the highest level. So are we interested in having an elite level competition or a festival of rugby?

 

There’s plenty of time in between world cups to have your elite competition. The World Cup is about more than that 

[zylya]

11 hours ago, Anita Bath said:

5 games sincethe last world cup. 1 against a team with previous world cup ‘experience’ which they lost.

They are not ready to compete at the highest level. So are we interested in having an elite level competition or a festival of rugby?

 

The sport was literally illegal to play in Greece til last year. Qualifying for the World Cup went a big way towards gaining official govt recognition.

The sport as a whole has done practically nothing to expand the game, and as soon as teams finally get a chance to even play, people want to kick them out for not being good enough. There’s no way to give Greece the 125+ years of playing experience that England have, so why are you expecting them to be competitive so quickly?

The 4 team World Cup of the early years, in this day and age, would be far more detrimental to the sport’s image than blowouts in a bigger competition. Realistically only a handful of teams could win it (some might even say that actually only one team realistically can win it with a couple outside bets) so why not just restrict it to Aus, NZ and Eng +1? Oh yeah, because it would be a terrible tournament, even if there were no blowouts.

You don’t get a meaningful competition day one, you have to build it. The fact that it’s so difficult for RL is a reflection of all the missed opportunities over the years to expand the game internationally.

[Mumby Magic]

13 hours ago, jim_57 said:

We just changed to this structure from 2 tournaments under the other structure, arguably more successful tournaments. I’d argue there was no need to change format after 2017 except the increase to 16 teams. It’s not like we’re throwing decades of tradition out the window here. I think we should have stuck with the format that was working for us, added teams 15-16 to pools C&D and embraced it as our own.

We aren’t Football or Union, we hardly get to be excited for Internationals before they’re over and it’s back to an off-season and 30+ weeks of club games. Internationals are far rarer in our game so I’d honestly much rather watch England, Australia, NZ, Tonga, Samoa, France, Fiji & PNG play against each other than England put 90 of Greece or Jamaica.
 

We get so few internationals as it is we shouldn’t be ashamed to use a format that sees more quality games. It still gives everyone a chance of getting to the finals if they’re good enough and the same number of teams in the World Cup so Greece and Jamaica don’t miss out on their stories. Convoluted? Hardly. The format could be worked out in 1 minute of looking at it, especially without the crossover games of 2013-2017, 16 teams solves that.

Countries qualified for this Tournament by winning two matches. My thoughts on qualification are on this thread and others. I'm not aware of any other sport that build a World Cup in a way so there aren't big scores. It's bizarre to be honest. For me we should have less automatically qualified teams, more qualifying games and a straight forward 16 team World Cup every year. No retraction, no having groups to restrict blow outs. 

Edited November 8, 2022 by Mumby Magic

[MatthewWoody]

Every year?

[Mumby Magic]

8 hours ago, ghost crayfish said:

For a world cup to retain and build interest over the group stages, it needs at least one showpiece game each round. This year had England v Samoa as an opener, and then basically nothing until the quarters. We may have too many teams now, but I'm not dead against 16... but I do think a degree of group placement and draw manipulation is needed to make it the strongest event possible. 

But who's to say that will make it a strong event? 

[N2022]

19 hours ago, Black Country Wire said:

Why are "blowouts" an issue in RL but not in other sports?

Looking at (for example) the last netball world cup. 17 out of 24 group games were won by a margin of 20 goals or more and yet they are sticking with the same format next time out.

And that only has 3 likely winners as well. (Same as ours funnily enough)

 

I think blowouts are an issue if in other sports too, but didn't have the netball stats in mind, as league will be compared with union, football and cricket more than netball. For me netball is a sport with a growing media coverage, but its popularity as a participant sport is still almost exclusively among girls / women. I'd say league has more female supporters and certainly more female players than netball does male, and I think of league as having to deal with expectations informed by people's experience of cricket, union and football in various ways. 

[redjonn]

20 hours ago, Black Country Wire said:

Why are "blowouts" an issue in RL but not in other sports?

Looking at (for example) the last netball world cup. 17 out of 24 group games were won by a margin of 20 goals or more and yet they are sticking with the same format next time out.

And that only has 3 likely winners as well. (Same as ours funnily enough)

 

Yep but even a 20 point difference will normally mean each team scoring often... each quarter could mean only 5 point difference with both teams scoring relatively often... not many games with a 60 or 80 point to 4 score.

That is even the weakest team has lots of cheering opportunities.

[GUBRATS]

3 minutes ago, redjonn said:

Yep but even a 20 point difference will normally mean each team scoring often... each quarter could mean only 5 point difference with both teams scoring relatively often... not many games with a 60 or 80 point to 4 score.

That is even the weakest team has lots of cheering opportunities.

Yes , but unlike RL the scoring team don't get possession after scoring 

[redjonn]

Just now, GUBRATS said:

Yes , but unlike RL the scoring team don't get possession after scoring 

Yep, I watch netball and generally it's a fast game with lots of skill and agility.

I was just giving the observation that the example of netball was maybe not a good example as one sport blowout is different than another. For sure can be helped by which team starts with possession.

[GUBRATS]

2 minutes ago, redjonn said:

Yep, I watch netball and generally it's a fast game with lots of skill and agility.

I was just giving the observation that the example of netball was maybe not a good example as one sport blowout is different than another. For sure can be helped by which team starts with possession.

Imagine netball or basketball if after scoring you got possession again ? 

[redjonn]

Just now, GUBRATS said:

Imagine netball or basketball if after scoring you got possession again ? 

Yep... so go back to how it was for a period that non scoring team starts with possession, assuming that was the only factor, not saying it is or isn't... 

[ghost crayfish]

7 hours ago, Mumby Magic said:

But who's to say that will make it a strong event? 

Well, I guess... I did?