Surprised that hasn't been posted already... news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 530123.stm

Surprised that hasn't been posted already... news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 530123.stm

So the RFL have taken the successful and lucrative 10 team format used in the ’08 World Cup and scrapped it for a format nearer that of the disastrous 2000 World Cup.

Once again the mentally challenged octogenarians at Red Hall have loaded their Colt 45’s, aimed between ankle and toe and hit a bulls-eye, well done you fools.

At least PNG will be seeded in another group which could lead to more competative finals

Actually its the octogenarians in Singapore, not Red Hall, slight difference.

Although since the major pro for the format in the 2008 WC was the 'super group' system, and that system is apparently to be used again according to that article, then I don't see what the problem is.

Congratulations RLIF, you are a bunch of ing idiots!
the ten team format is perfect, the only change that could be made is that the 3rd and fourth teams in the superpool should play the two winners of the other groups in the quarter finals
I could see an extra team in each minor pool meaning 12 but 14? two many games where people wont attend

I can see where Hopie and Ls16 are coming from but surely we should wait and see who the added teams are 1st before dismissing it as a certain failure.

All it does it take what was effectively the qualifying competition for the 2008 competition and incorporate it within the finals.

Given that no fecker watched the qualifying competition for 2008 anyway maybe moving games into the main competition itself will create some much needed publicity for the game in the likes of Ireland, Scotland and Wales.

Was it the format or the marketing that was wrong in 2000? If it was the latter, and if it can be put right, then an expanded comp can only be for the good.

i think it will be better for the competition to have a few more teams being represented. I think the format didn't help last time, and it was also the most awful period of weather, which wouldnt have helped fill grounds that were mostly terraced.

Now, with a better format, teams that have progressed over the last 10 years, and stadia that are more suitable to host international games it has more going for it.

the 'minor' games will probably be played as double headers,so the value will be in seeing two games ofr the price of 1. while the 'major' teams will play to the normal 4 nations stuff. as opined above, with some good marketing 2013 should be nearer 2008 than 2000.

Ls16_rhino and hopie, why do you and so many other so called rlfans try and slate the RFL or on this occasion the RFIL at any oppertunity? Is it not a good thing that plans are been made for the world cup 3 years in advance?
Expanding the competition makes sense, the 10 teams from the 2008 world cup were all competitive and deserve to be in the next competition. Wales now have a super league and championship1 side and won the euro cup in which lebanon also did well. USA are hopefully getting their own league, if this does happen it would be criminal to leave them out of a world cup. Cook Islands nearly qualifed for the four nations so they also clearly can form a competitive national side.

But you think this makes the RFIL a bunch of loving idiots! I dont think they could possibly win with you. If theyd of kept it at 10 teams or said they are undecided on the number of teams im sure you would have still complained and slagged them off.

Making plans in advance - good
Making bad plans - bad



No it doesnt, the qualification tournament weeds out the poor teams and makes sure the tournament has some level of competitiveness, the format stops the blowouts of 2000



The reason they were competitve was becasue of the ingenious format where the good teams were put in the super pool and the average and worse teams were kept seperate in their own tournament, once fiji entered the elite tournament they were massacred



no elite welsh players though, you should have them for a national team, that is why they failed to qualilfy for 2008


IF they get a team together they can try and qualify, not just be put in because of a whim



enter the qualifiers then...



RLIF make mistakes, they should be picked up on them, I praised them all the way when the 2008 event worked
I am such a big fan of the world cup I went to 10 of the world cup games in 2008, it would have beem more if they hadnt played games in different ciities on the same day (my only criticism and a change I would make to the format) the format worked, the marketing worked, the venues were right and it was a financial success
I want 2013 to be the same but if they get it wrong again they could kill of 13 years of progress, the last world cup almost killed the game off entirely!

I slag off the RFL because I don’t like what they way they closed the league.

I don’t like the stupid 8 team play off system.

I don’t like their inconsistent disciplinary procedures.

The way they introduce a full time ref rota but make no increase in refereeing standards.

The way they killed the excitement of ‘local derbies’ by staging them five or six times a year.

The way they scheduled the fixtures so we played some teams three times a year while others only two.

They way they hold ‘supporter steering groups’ then completely ignore any suggestions that are made.

The 10 team format was ridiculous. A team that loses 2 out of 3 of its group game goes straight to the semi final.

Only in the pantomime of RL.

good point, well made.

An extra 4 teams isnt going to turn the tournament from a success to a failure. Id say the biggest reason the 2000 tournament failed was that too many games were played away from rugby league heartlands not that there were too many teams in the tournament.
The lesser nations were in seperate groups not in a seperate tournament in 2008 as you suggest. Why cant the seeded pool idea be expanded in a 14 team format? Such as.

group 1 aus, eng, tonga, samoa. 3 teams progress
group 2 nz, france, png, fiji. 3 teams progress
group 3 wales, ireland, qualifier. 1 progesses
group 4 scotland, lebanon, qualifier. 1 team progresses

Does anyone think that a 'World Cup Pass' idea could help boost crowds at the games which don't involve AUS, ENG and NZ playing each other. You pay £40/£50 or so and you get entry to all games which do not include the three big teams. I know I'd give it a serious thought and as we all know, stranger ideas have been rubber stamped at Red Hall.

An idea worthy of consideration if to get one you had to have already purchased a ticket to one of the "premier" games.
The ECB did something similar when in order to see an Australian one day game vs England at Headingley you had to get a ticket (at a much lower cost) to see Bangladesh I believe a couple of days earlier.