Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Rugby Union
Rugby World Cup 2023
World Cup Format Rethink
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Brigantine" data-source="post: 965740" data-attributes="member: 73940"><p>Good idea making a poll, but including options for people who disagree with you is poll design 101. Otherwise it's "Would you like Crimea to join Russia now or later?"</p><p></p><p>I like the kind of ideas you're talking about, and used to think about this sort of thing a lot. But eventually came around the the mainstream view. Unfortunately, designing a tournament is constrained by reality. The RWC is not an experiment to identify the best team, it's a business, and it's entertainment and spectacle. There is only so much time and resource available, and you need to cater to what normal fans will be interested in. That means you only have about 7 games for each team, you can only have so many teams that don't bring their own market or at least pose a threat to teams with rich fans, and once the big games have happened, any further small games are a waste of time.</p><p></p><p>Your thinking can still work, if it isn't connected to the RWC. The World Rugby Rankings can be their own competition, if you tweak a few more games in test windows to pitch T1 vs T2 and T2 vs similarly ranked T2/3 teams from other continents. Especially if you increase the weightings on these games so points can move around the world more fluidly. Maybe throw in some silverware for the occasional #1 vs #2 challenge match to create more interest.</p><p></p><p>For what it is, the tournament format of a group stage followed by knock out games, rising in intensity all the way through, is very good and there's a reason it's so widely used.</p><p></p><p>Re a plate competition for teams that have been eliminated already - I've said this before, but I'd swap it out for a supercharged repechage qualification tournament before the RWC, with 3 - 7 qualification spots and a plate for winning the tournament. It would work best if you reduced the main RWC tournament to 4 pools of 4. (maybe even 2 pools of 6)</p><p>E.g. 16 team RWC, 5 or 7 of which qualify through a 12 team repechage tournament. (maybe including 2 Six Nations teams and a Rugby Championship team)</p><p>3 pools of 4, then top 4 play off for the Plate, next 4 play off for qualification. (23 or 21 teams involved in either RWC or Plate/qualification comp)</p><p>This would still be difficult to organize. 5 games each the year before the RWC, even if it is replacing a few current qualification and repechage games. Also it wouldn't be so great for Scotland/France/Argentina/whoever if T1 are included.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Brigantine, post: 965740, member: 73940"] Good idea making a poll, but including options for people who disagree with you is poll design 101. Otherwise it's "Would you like Crimea to join Russia now or later?" I like the kind of ideas you're talking about, and used to think about this sort of thing a lot. But eventually came around the the mainstream view. Unfortunately, designing a tournament is constrained by reality. The RWC is not an experiment to identify the best team, it's a business, and it's entertainment and spectacle. There is only so much time and resource available, and you need to cater to what normal fans will be interested in. That means you only have about 7 games for each team, you can only have so many teams that don't bring their own market or at least pose a threat to teams with rich fans, and once the big games have happened, any further small games are a waste of time. Your thinking can still work, if it isn't connected to the RWC. The World Rugby Rankings can be their own competition, if you tweak a few more games in test windows to pitch T1 vs T2 and T2 vs similarly ranked T2/3 teams from other continents. Especially if you increase the weightings on these games so points can move around the world more fluidly. Maybe throw in some silverware for the occasional #1 vs #2 challenge match to create more interest. For what it is, the tournament format of a group stage followed by knock out games, rising in intensity all the way through, is very good and there's a reason it's so widely used. Re a plate competition for teams that have been eliminated already - I've said this before, but I'd swap it out for a supercharged repechage qualification tournament before the RWC, with 3 - 7 qualification spots and a plate for winning the tournament. It would work best if you reduced the main RWC tournament to 4 pools of 4. (maybe even 2 pools of 6) E.g. 16 team RWC, 5 or 7 of which qualify through a 12 team repechage tournament. (maybe including 2 Six Nations teams and a Rugby Championship team) 3 pools of 4, then top 4 play off for the Plate, next 4 play off for qualification. (23 or 21 teams involved in either RWC or Plate/qualification comp) This would still be difficult to organize. 5 games each the year before the RWC, even if it is replacing a few current qualification and repechage games. Also it wouldn't be so great for Scotland/France/Argentina/whoever if T1 are included. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
Rugby World Cup 2023
World Cup Format Rethink
Top