World cup "bowl cup"

[barkinghooker]

I rarely post but this is bit of a world cup fantasy of mine.

There could be more meaningful games at the world cup, especially for the teams who finish 3rd and 4th in their groups.

Why not have a "bowl "type secondary competition for the teams who finished 3rd and 4th in their pools.

Fans are not going to go anywhere if their teams still have something to play for and it gives an opportunity to sell rugby to all the countries that are close but so far from even qualifying for a world cup.

The games would of been competitive should such a format been at the last world cup.

Anyone on this ?

 

[bushytop]

I rarely post but this is bit of a world cup fantasy of mine.

There could be more meaningful games at the world cup, especially for the teams who finish 3rd and 4th in their groups.

Why not have a "bowl "type secondary competition for the teams who finished 3rd and 4th in their pools.

Fans are not going to go anywhere if their teams still have something to play for and it gives an opportunity to sell rugby to all the countries that are close but so far from even qualifying for a world cup.

The games would of been competitive should such a format been at the last world cup.

Anyone on this ?

I'm game... they could play them midweek after the group games, as the QF's, Semis and Finals are all on the weekends.

 

[barkinghooker]

I'm game... they could play them midweek after the group games, as the QF's, Semis and Finals are all on the weekends.

That as well! It's a good space filler for the knockout rounds.

Perhaps give the winner of the "bowl cup" an automatic qualifying slot for the next world cup.

It could be a gateway to expanding the world cup to 24 teams.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

This was what I was arguing for in the last RWC . It finished far too soon for 3rd place teams. Hell I would also add a plate competition for 4th/5th placed so they can get more competitive test matches.

 

[barkinghooker]

It could work for bottom placed teams. Two semis and a final and perhaps a 19th/20th place play off.

I wouldn't be surprised if the bottom placed teams aren't already knackered by this stage but I'm sure they'd want to play it still. Double ranking points to play for too at world cups.

 

[bushytop]

It would definitely add to the 'interest' for the populations of the lower ranked teams. As it stands if they are only following their nation, there probably isn't enough games for them to get fully entrenched.

It's a great idea... and I know I'll be jonesing for games during the weekdays after the groups.

 

[barkinghooker]

Possible bowl QF's 2015

England V Samoa
Fiji v Japan
Italy v Tonga
Georgia v Canada

SF
England V Fiji/Japan
Tonga/Italy v Georgia/Canada

Those extra few games for these countries could grow the game and keep us happy during the week.

 

[die_mole]

It's been discussed on the forum before. The tier 2s don't really want it (georgia in particular if I remember correctly) so it won't ever happen.

 

[barkinghooker]

It's been discussed on the forum before. The tier 2s don't really want it (georgia in particular if I remember correctly) so it won't ever happen.

Ahh well that ends that debate then.

Any possibility you can help me find this feed ?

 

[die_mole]

Ahh well that ends that debate then.

Any possibility you can help me find this feed ?

https://www.therugbyforum.com/threads/tier-two-three-world-cup-fantasy.38833/

Forgot I was the one who started it

Edit: I don't think I'd really want a cup but I would like to play a few friendlies after. We rarely get to play tier 2s from Europe, Asia, or Africa so if we could play Namibia and japan afterwards it'd be cool.

World rugby should encourage teams there to schedule friendlies after if they want. I understand teams not wanting to dish out a lot more money to stay in Japan and pay for food, hotel, training grounds, and the such.

 

[bushytop]

It's been discussed on the forum before. The tier 2s don't really want it (georgia in particular if I remember correctly) so it won't ever happen.

God knows why they wouldn't want it, tier twos always complain that they don't get enough test matches... but oh well.

 

[die_mole]

God knows why they wouldn't want it, tier twos always complain that they don't get enough test matches... but oh well.

1. I think georgia doesn't wanna play tier 2s outside of Europe cause they might get beat and it would hurt their mystique.

2. It's expensive. Hosting a test match is cheaper for both unions if you have good working relationships with hotels and places to train. Unions are already stretching themselves for world cups.

3. If these guys aren't full time rugby players they've already been away from their jobs for a month and it's a lot to ask them to play some meaningless games.

 

[barkinghooker]

1. I think georgia doesn't wanna play tier 2s outside of Europe cause they might get beat and it would hurt their mystique.

2. It's expensive. Hosting a test match is cheaper for both unions if you have good working relationships with hotels and places to train. Unions are already stretching themselves for world cups.

3. If these guys aren't full time rugby players they've already been away from their jobs for a month and it's a lot to ask them to play some meaningless games.

I just posted something about this on the older post.

Treat this "bowl cup" as development competition. It will mean world rugby paying their expenses like they do on other development competitions world rugby like to create.

Give the the teams the financial incentive and offer the teams the chance to bring in fresh players to avoid injuries.

 

[bushytop]

1. I think georgia doesn't wanna play tier 2s outside of Europe cause they might get beat and it would hurt their mystique.

2. It's expensive. Hosting a test match is cheaper for both unions if you have good working relationships with hotels and places to train. Unions are already stretching themselves for world cups.

3. If these guys aren't full time rugby players they've already been away from their jobs for a month and it's a lot to ask them to play some meaningless games.

Fair enough I guess but in my mind at least the potential positives outweigh the negatives.

 

[die_mole]

I just posted something about this on the older post.

Treat this "bowl cup" as development competition. It will mean world rugby paying their expenses like they do on other development competitions world rugby like to create.

Give the the teams the financial incentive and offer the teams the chance to bring in fresh players to avoid injuries.

Look I'm all for playing extra games and brining in new players to get them playing time. It is prohibitively expensive for unions without 50+ full time players to do so. You have guys who are playing for almost nothing for their country skipping non rugby work or away from their professional club who pay them a lot more. They are going to want to go back to their jobs after a month.

Unless world rugby starts paying the players all a standard wage this isn't going to happen. Tier 2s just can't magically do things like tier 1s.

I'd love for this to happen but the reality is that tier 2s are unable to right now.

God knows why they wouldn't want it, tier twos always complain that they don't get enough test matches... but oh well.

It's not the number of matches it's that tier 1s aren't very keen to play tier 2s. We have a consistent 9-11 matches a year which is fine, it would just be nice to have 2 or 3 against the big boys each year. A World Cup bow comp wouldn't help us unless we finished 3rd and got to play Italy and whoever was unlucky in group of death.