eh?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? Smaller nations missing out on the next world cup?!?!?!?

Discussion in 'Rugby World Cup 2007' started by RoyalBlueStuey, Sep 27, 2007.


    "An investigation for the Sport Wales TV show has learnt of plans to cut the tournament to 16 teams, with a second level tournament for so-called minnows.

    The form of the smaller nations and the support they've recieved has been the best thing about this tournament so far.

    Why would you want to lose that? What is it with the upper echelons of rugby trying to ring fence their own positions. You'd think a game that was amateur until so recently would be in touch with it's grass roots not trying to concrete over them
  2. Forum Ad Advertisement

  3. Will

    Will Guest

    Because the IRB are complete idiots, and instead of helping to develop the game in emerging nations such as Canada and Japan they would rather just keep all the toys for themselves and not let anyone else play.

    It's an absolute farce. Up there with the fact that Japan didn't get the 2011 World Cup and instead it went to New Zealand. A country that on it's own does not have the infrustructure to deal with such a tournament.

    The IRB needs badly replacing. They are doing the game a major disservice.
  4. It's a world cup for God's sake not a tournament for big nations only. Pathetic but fairly typical of modern professional rugby. Me, me, me.

    These people want to remember where they've came from.

  5. lado

    lado Guest

    Rugby Union does not have a chance to become worldwide popular (the way soccer is) if small nations do not get a chance to play in serious tournaments. How the heck are they supposed to improve then :angry: .
    On all forums I have visited so far everybody seems to be opposed to the idea of cutting down number of teams competing in RWC. Maybe there is a way of making our voices heard. What about a petition with a lot of signatures asking for keeping current WC format sent to IRB? Do you think it might work?
  6. O'Rothlain

    O'Rothlain Guest

    Boooooo...I'll just switch over to league!
    I hope the IRB Don't do this.
  7. BokMagic

    BokMagic Guest

    Well, that`s realy nice. The IRB gives financial support to all the teams competing at the RWC, but more is given to those making the last 8, last 4 etc. Ooooh, but it`s okay really, because they`re sending development officers to the smaller unions, in order to develop their coaching and structures. Only to cut them off at the knees by taking away the one single showpiece that many of the smaller nations have.

    I remember one of our Italian posters on here saying that rugby got coverage in the local press ahead of football during the RWC. This is what all rugby fans would love to see- the greatest game on earth being spread to corners of the globe where it still plays second fiddle to other sports.

    Right, now consider the case of teams like Namibia and Portugal, teams made up out of more than 50% amateur players. The only way the game can grow there, is by getting their players more exposure. Greater exposure= greater possibility for sponsorships= potentially more money= better opportunity to get a proper domestic league started= growing the game. But taking away that exposure will kill off any progress having been made during this RWC.
  8. Seriously we need to get out there, e-mail bloggers, canvas opinion on other forums, get peitions going....this is crap. So what if the SANZAR and ERB get X million instead of Y million. They are making the game an elitist, rich-kids only club. It's not what sport is all about. Who's going to pay any attention to a world cup division two. It's hard enough getting the general public interested in the real world cup....and they've finally done it this time. It's been great...but now greed takes over.

    We are the grass roots....we are members of our clubs. We can write to the IRB. Tell them you'd not even consider going to a rugby world cup game if they make it a closed shop for the established nations.
  9. Dmx#1

    Dmx#1 Guest

    That is BS. I seriously won't watch another world cup game if this is happens.
  10. I mean we all know the business end of the world will feature the established nations so what's wrong with everyone playing one extra game?

    I mean that's what it boils down to....for the sake of 4 minor nations getting the chance to perform in front of the world on the same stage as the giants of the game the snobby arsed "big" nations have to play 80 extra minutes of rugby. Can you imagine the boost that gives to the game in places like Georgia & Portugal?

    Granted the 'minnow' games in Cardiff and Edinburgh were badly support but all the others in France have been tremendous occasions.
  11. Prestwick

    Prestwick Guest

    Agreed, this is going to be one of the biggest scandals of modern rugby. The hilarious thing is that IRB head of communications Greg Thomas calls those against this conservative and selfish proposal "traditionalists" when actually this is being pushed by all the old ******** who administrate the game for the top ten Unions. Believe it or not, it isn't just the RFU who have a bunch of rich, upper class twits controlling the game saying "rah rah rah, we're going to smash the oiks" and discuss what race horses they've just bought while drinking champange from the back of their brand new Range Rover y'know.

    If this happens, it'll be a betrayal of all the smaller teams who have put 220% into their performances this world cup. How I would be able to look a Portuguese or a Georgian fan in the eye again and say "the world cup is SUPER!" I have no idea.

    Will Carling was right. We need to murder all the people who run the game the world over.
  12. [​IMG]

    Anyone else here a thumping noise?
  13. On the back of Georgias performances in the World Cup, their president has vowed to increase funding for the game exponentially.
    Link:Meet Georgia`s newest fan

    Georgia were within the four lowest ranked nations (ie those who'd likely be culled) before the tournament began. Would that type of investment have been promised had Georgia not participated in France '07? Of course not.

    Cutting 4 teams is shortsightedness to the nth degree. I posted elsewhere that this World Cup is making record profits. Why not use those profits to boost the tier 2 and 3 nations rather than relegating them to a subpar tournament with only a small chance of qualifying for the main event?

    Syd Miller has done very little to move the game forward. This idea (which he supports) is another example of pandering to the big nations. He needs to be replaced by somebody more forward thinking.
  14. An Tarbh

    An Tarbh Guest

    well he's on his way out after the world cup as far as I know but Lapasset looks to be his likely successor, so he'd be the man to focus any efforts on rather than wasting any efforts with Millar.
  15. jeffb

    jeffb Guest

    Its all part of the WC to have minnow teams. I wish League's WC had a 20 team competition.
  16. hytg

    hytg Guest

    It would be a shame if the smaller nations should disappear from the Rugby WC. Moreover, a team like Tonga has not been ridiculous in the competition
  17. jamesfk

    jamesfk Guest

    The smaller nations have surprised most people this year by playing so well. They need to be kept in the world cup to rise the standard of rugby. In some cases the minnows games have been more exciting than the better teams games.
  18. Fa'atau82

    Fa'atau82 Guest

    The solution to this is simple. Have the 20 teams and have the format the same as now. The top 2 qualify for the Cup quarters, while the 3rd and 4th placed teams have their own quarter-final Plate competition.

    This would include Italy, Fiji, Samoa, Tonga, Canada, Romania, USA and Japan typically.

    The 5th placed teams maybe could have their own Shield semi-final.. which would be Portugal, Namibia, Georgia and whoever.

    This works very well with the IRB Sevens.

    In european basketball, there is a very good system where the top 16 teams are in division 1 and the bottom 16 teams in division 2. They play for promotion and relegation into the divisions.

    Teams like Samoa, Fiji, Tonga and Canada would fight to be with the bigger teams and it'd improve them.

    Samoa get one or two games every 4 years against the likes of SA and England, which is the RWC. Samoa lost both, and are out of the RWC for another 4 years. All momentum for Samoa has been lost. Tonga are the same, they had a great tournament, but they will go home and be ingored for the next 4 years.

    I mean, SA are playing USA today. A complete waste of time. If USA knew they had a hope of winning something in a plate comp, they'd stand a chance against teams of their level, not a giant like SA.

    SA playing USA for training practice doesn't make a world cup match IMO.

    It'd be a disgrace if teams were demoted from the RWC.

    IRB, why not just have an 8 team tournament and stick your fingers up to everyone else?
  19. checco23

    checco23 Guest

    It would be very bad, look at the story of portugal in this WC, they are very "lovely"...
  20. goraph

    goraph Guest

    I will miss Georgia very much if they don't get a place in 16 top teams, but I need to say, 16 teams is enough. Too many games now with 20 teams is just a waste of time. Also it will make nations like USA, Namibia and Japan fight for place in world cup, its sounds much better for me then South Africa-USA matchup or something like this.
  21. polonius

    polonius Guest

    The 'whoever' would be Wales, I guess ...
Enjoyed this thread? Register to post your reply - click here!

Share This Page