New World Cup format confirmed for 2026

[Damien]

22 minutes ago, eal said:

The benefits of a 10-team World Cup far outweigh any perceived disadvantages from having 5 teams per pool.

That is entirely your opinion and not one shared by other major sports who have grown their world cups. Indeed it wasn't shared by Rugby League administrators until the French bid was cancelled and V'Landys and co saw their opportunity to push the agenda they've been trying to push for the last few years.

Edited August 3, 2023 by Damien

[Griff]

10 minutes ago, Keith989 said:

Not anymore, at least here. According to former Irish foreign affairs TD Dermot Ahern: 

"The British Isles is not an officially recognised term in any legal or inter govermental sense. It is without any official status. The government, including the department of foreign affairs, does not use this term". 

Its not recognised over here. 

As the fella said, it's a geographical term, not a legal one.

[Keith989]

If everything on the list happens then there isn't too much to complain about. It needs to start somewhere and building a calendar around the strongest nations in the short to medium term makes sense. 

Once that is consolidated, you can start looking to grow emerging nations and creating other competitions. My main issue though is still the lack of available international windows in the season. The international game still just seems like an inconvenience to the clubs 

[Hopie]

The 2026/2030 cycle won't work so I reckon that will change again in a few years. Also I would be surprised to see a standalone women's world cup as where would the interest/money come from, if the first one happens I expect the next one won't survive. 

We need international windows in the calendar every year, one mid season and one at the end. We need to play first tier internationals in this country every year to build any sort of momentum and until we get that commitment internationals will continue to be an afterthought. 

[LeeF]

34 minutes ago, Hopie said:

I seriously doubt the 10 team tournament will be 2 groups of five, NRL wants a shorter tournament not a longer one, 7 weekends (5 for groups, semis and final) will be too long for them.

The NRL will want it no longer than 7 days in an ideal world. 

[gingerjon]

21 minutes ago, Keith989 said:

you can start looking to grow emerging nations and creating other competitions

This is memory holing the past 25 years.

The competitions are there. The matches have been played. Imperfectly but things have been done.

They are now being forgotten so we can pretend we have to lay new foundations.

[OriginalMrC]

So in the next world cup France, Ireland, Scotland, Wales will potentially be missing. France would be a big blow, the others less so but this feels like a massive backwards step 

[eal]

15 minutes ago, OriginalMrC said:

So in the next world cup France, Ireland, Scotland, Wales will potentially be missing. France would be a big blow, the others less so but this feels like a massive backwards step 

Scotland doesn't really exist as a league playing country so they are no loss. France and Wales would be a bigger loss but a World Cup should have some merit-based aspect to it, not just BE an all-comers festival of Rugby League that some seem to want. Italy have failed to qualify for two consecutive FIFA World Cups, the West Indies recently missed out on the Cricket World Cup, life goes on.

[gingerjon]

6 minutes ago, eal said:

Scotland doesn't really exist as a league playing country so they are no loss. France and Wales would be a bigger loss but a World Cup should have some merit-based aspect to it, not just BE an all-comers festival of Rugby League that some seem to want. Italy have failed to qualify for two consecutive FIFA World Cups, the West Indies recently missed out on the Cricket World Cup, life goes on.

The current RLWC has qualifying. It appears the plan is to remove it from future ones.

Also, the cricket qualifying is hindering the development of countries where the game is growing but they are contracting their top tournaments because India, England and Australia don’t wish to mix with the rabble.

[Damien]

50 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

This is memory holing the past 25 years.

The competitions are there. The matches have been played. Imperfectly but things have been done.

They are now being forgotten so we can pretend we have to lay new foundations.

This is all so true. I am sick to death of big announcements by RL administrators regarding the international game that make out they are improving things or doing something new when instead they just aren't and what they announce is not even as good as what we have had before.

[Anita Bath]

11 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

The current RLWC has qualifying. It appears the plan is to remove it from future ones.

Also, the cricket qualifying is hindering the development of countries where the game is growing but they are contracting their top tournaments because India, England and Australia don’t wish to mix with the rabble.

Or in Englands case, dont wish to lose to the rabble. The only team to beat them at T20 world cup was Ireland. Not for the first time they came unstuck against “the rabble”

[gingerjon]

4 minutes ago, Anita Bath said:

Or in Englands case, dont wish to lose to the rabble. The only team to beat them at T20 world cup was Ireland. Not for the first time they came unstuck against “the rabble”

I promise @John Drake, I won't take it any further but, yes, it's as basic as that. England and India both exiting tournaments early has led to the cricket authorities (the ICC, essentially the BCCI, Cricket Australia and ECB's lackey) not only limiting participant numbers but also constructing bloated tournament structures so those teams cannot be eliminated too early.

Like I say, it is choking development. Scotland, Nepal, Oman and others are missing out on tournament exposure as a result (and Thailand in the women's game).

[Keith989]

1 hour ago, gingerjon said:

This is memory holing the past 25 years.

The competitions are there. The matches have been played. Imperfectly but things have been done.

They are now being forgotten so we can pretend we have to lay new foundations.

Sporadic games played here and there with no end goal. What I'm hoping for (perhaps foolishly) is that this is perhaps the start of announcing fixtures years in advance and getting some sort of a calendar set in stone. Like it or not but new foundations have to be layed.

Unfortunately the international game is still at the very beginning stage of being of a thing, due to incredible mismanagement (and disdain from Aus towards internationals) over the years. This is confirmed by the necessary reduction in the amount of teams in the world cup. 

[Keith989]

1 hour ago, Griff said:

As the fella said, it's a geographical term, not a legal one.

... And geographical terms change, as they have done all throughout history. 

[Damien]

So let's take a look at the July 2018 International board meeting international calendar announcement. Obviously some of this didnt happen, largely because of the NRL and Covid, but at least it showed some consideration for the IRL's remit to grow the international game for all nations. 5 years of the international game doing backwards:

Aside from locking down matches for the top ranking nations over the long term, the Board also ensured that the international calendar offered a platform for the challenger nations to compete against their more mature counterparts while at the same time paying regard to commercial considerations, player welfare and workload, and global balance.

The calendar centres on a suite of global events in four-year cycles, including Rugby League World Cups, 9s World Cups, European and Asia Pacific Confederation tournaments, Lions, Kangaroos and Kiwi Tours, and opportunities for developing nations.

The Board agreed to undertake consultation with stakeholders to finalise the details for the next two cycles to present to its planned World Rugby League Congress in the UK in November.  Key elements of the calendar include:

Rugby League World Cup in 2021 and 2025
Kangaroos Tour to UK in 2020
Kiwi Tour to UK in 2018 and 2022
Lions tour to southern hemisphere in 2019 and 2024
9s World Cup in 2019 and 2023
2019 Championships for the Pacific nations in a mid and end of season format
2018 European Championship (and then at two-year intervals)
2018 Australia v New Zealand Test (annually to 2022)
2020 New Zealand fixture(s) in the southern hemisphere
The Board also agreed that World Cup qualifying competitions will expand organically and begin earlier due to the increase in aspiration from the growing membership.

‘There’s clearly still some detail to be finalised, but this is a fantastic announcement that has been a long time coming.  It should give great heart and confidence to our international community,’ RLIF Chairman John Grant said.

‘It reflects the broad diversity that exists across our RLIF Member nations and we believe it can provide the certainty our fans, players and commercial stakeholders need to make long term commitments to international rugby league,’ he added.

https://nzrl.co.nz/rlif-board-makes-progress-on-international-calendar/

Edited August 3, 2023 by Damien

[Dave T]

One thing I would say with the number of teams in the World Cup thing is that I think we have pretty much ballsed it up as we have gone. There has never really been any real logic as to why we have had the numbers we have. 

When we went from 10 to 16 in 2000 it wasn't because we had more strong teams, it was just because. We even topped them up with the Maoris. It all went wrong, the next version was delayed and cut to 10 (sound familiar?). 

Then in 2013 we increased to 14 for no reason. Again, it wasn't because we had more strong teams, we still relied on mass heritage. 

In 2021 we moved to 16, not because we had developed further in countries but just because. 

If we look at nations from 2000 and then compared them to 2021, how many of them have genuinely developed materially? Scotland, Ireland, Wales, Lebanon, Cooks, etc are no stronger. Are the Pacific teams stronger, or are they just benefiting from strong players in Oz/NZ, because they were also good in 1995?

Im not a fan of moving to 10, I think it's being done for the wrong reasons, but the problems with our WC's have been there each time. The biggest issue is that we don't develop any of the nations at grassroots level, most nations have made no progress since 1995.

None of that is to denigrate work being done at grassroots level, often with no support. 

[Dave T]

9 minutes ago, Keith989 said:

Sporadic games played here and there with no end goal. What I'm hoping for (perhaps foolishly) is that this is perhaps the start of announcing fixtures years in advance and getting some sort of a calendar set in stone. Like it or not but new foundations have to be layed.

Unfortunately the international game is still at the very beginning stage of being of a thing, due to incredible mismanagement (and disdain from Aus towards internationals) over the years. This is confirmed by the necessary reduction in the amount of teams in the world cup. 

See my list earlier in the thread about what was held between 2009 and 2019. 

[gingerjon]

13 minutes ago, Keith989 said:

Sporadic games played here and there with no end goal.

There have been multiple European Championships at different tiers. Granted, Ireland have gone backwards relative to the rest of Europe but still.

That has now been ignored and we have to do a little make believe show that we are just beginning.

And we wonder why people who enjoy rugby end up playing union even though they prefer league.

[Keith989]

7 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

There have been multiple European Championships at different tiers. Granted, Ireland have gone backwards relative to the rest of Europe but still.

That has now been ignored and we have to do a little make believe show that we are just beginning.

And we wonder why people who enjoy rugby end up playing union even though they prefer league.

I'm just trying to be positive, I know we'll be disappointed again and again over the next few years.

Also the scrapping of the 9s is absolutely baffling to me. I honestly thought the last one was relatively successful, guess not. 

[OriginalMrC]

7 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

There have been multiple European Championships at different tiers. Granted, Ireland have gone backwards relative to the rest of Europe but still.

That has now been ignored and we have to do a little make believe show that we are just beginning.

And we wonder why people who enjoy rugby end up playing union even though they prefer league.

Indeed. And countries like Serbia may as well give up the international game altogether. They may have been inspired by the Greece and Jamaica stories but they have no chance of ever qualifying for a major tournament now. 

[gingerjon]

1 minute ago, Keith989 said:

I'm just trying to be positive, I know we'll be disappointed again and again over the next few years.

Also the scrapping of the 9s is absolutely baffling to me. I honestly thought the last one was relatively successful, guess not. 

Understood and fair enough. I'm just too grey of hair to bother with the waiting to be disappointed now.

As for the 9s, it's confirming reality. The World 9s would have been this year if they were still doing it. It never made sense to have the only international 9s be invite only on a four year cycle. It needs to be in your face again and again work. But that takes effort.

[Damien]

12 minutes ago, OriginalMrC said:

Indeed. And countries like Serbia may as well give up the international game altogether. They may have been inspired by the Greece and Jamaica stories but they have no chance of ever qualifying for a major tournament now. 

The irony is that those countries with genuine domestic setups like Serbia, Greece and Jamaica will suffer the most. Those NRL heritage teams with little going on but who have plenty of NRL heritage players will be fine. Not really my definition of elite but plenty of Aussie based players saves on an airfare.

[Harry Stottle]

11 hours ago, Whippet13 said:

I'll be going, always been on my RL bucket list and a nice little 3 week trip. Interesting it's England and not GB, which is sensible as a build up to the WC. 

Why not GB, England will be the only country from these Isles to be represented, what if one of the other nations turns up a bona-fide superstar, no better way to getting them to leave the game for t'other handling sport.

[gingerjon]

4 minutes ago, Damien said:

The irony is that those countries with genuine domestic setups like Serbia, Greece and Jamaica will suffer the most. Those NRL heritage teams with little going on but who have plenty of NRL heritage players will be fine. Not really my definition of elite but plenty of Aussie based players saves on an airfare.

The whole thing is now based around, "How cheaply can you be in Sydney?"

[Damien]

17 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

The whole thing is now based around, "How cheaply can you be in Sydney?"

Absolutely. And people forget this is a World Cup with the emphasis World. That means it should be representative of the World, not just picking the best countries because they have NRL players. Even Football had whipping boys from the world over for many a years instead of a just Europe and South America World Cup and has never had more than half the countries from the same continent. RU similarly. At least 6, and potentially 7, southern hemisphere teams plus Lebanon because they have loads of NRL players out of 10 is not a World Cup.

Edited August 3, 2023 by Damien