Actually it's not that hard, especially if you make it similar to 1995. Two 4-team groups based in England, a 3-team group based in Wales and another 3-team group based in France. Two teams advance from each of the 4-team groups (the winners straight to the Semi-Finals) and one each from the 3-team groups.

Split the Super Pool teams from the last World Cup between the two 4-team groups. Examples:

Group 1 - England, Australia, Fiji, Ireland
Group 2 - New Zealand, PNG, Lebanon, Scotland
Group 3 - Wales, Samoa, qualifier 1
Group 4 - France, Tonga, qualifier 2

Quarter-Finals

A Group 1 runner-up vs. Group 3 winner
B Group 2 runner-up vs. Group 4 winner

Semi-Finals

C Group 1 winner vs. winner B
D Group 2 winner vs. winner A

Final winner C vs. winner D

:2vvmqijw
Do they really?

near the comp'?

really happy with the increase in numbers from 10 to 14, thats brilliant

it will be the last 10 teams from our WC, + lebanon and wales.

maybe usa and one of the pacific islands teams who missed out to round it out

giving wales auto entry is v.important to go along with the development of the crusaders

yeah thats how i think they will structure it

you dont want to see mismatches, thats the lesson learnt from our WC.

Russia? USA?

just used them as examples

Either Rhinofox or big picture's are the best ideas by far.
Think I'd rather see a quarter final myself though

They need to get it finalised as soon as possible though.
Tickets should be on sale at club games and in club shops at least a year before the actual world cup.

Russia are good enough to contribute club teams to the Challenge Cup.
USA should (fingers crossed) have a fully professional league by then - in which case it would be madness to not have them in the World Cup.


The 2009 Lebanon national squad (20 players) had a grand total of 4 players from Lebanon, the rest from suburban clubs from NSW. Also, Russia beat Lebanon 80-0 last time they met in 2008.

When was the last time Russian teams played in the Challenge Cup?
IF the US league is up and running then definitely.

no they aint, they pulled the ruskies cos of cost and cos they kept getting thumped by everyone and sundry

so because lebanon did what every other nation does they shouldnt be allowed in the comp?






you conveniently forgot the two results lebanon got over russia in the qualifiers i see

last year.

every one of the USA squad in 2009 was from the domestic competition. cant find the Russian squad anywhere, but they traditionally have always used domestic players.

even Jamaica managed to rustle up more than 4 local players for their 2009 squad.

The last WC was the best tournament I have seen. Every game I watched was a contest and even the so called "minnows" put on good performances. I'm pleased it is going to 14 as I was sad to see Lebanon miss out last time, their inclusion could have been massive in Sydney.

The highlight of the last WC was watching Samoa playing Tonga and watching the fijians and the irish play, build on that and keep the big 3 seperate.

It's the 10 2008 teams to go through automatically with Wales and Cook Islands to get two spots and the other two coming in from two tournaments with 8 nations.

That's what I've heard from [isomeone in the know[/i.

Quote ="saints35 bulls0"The 2009 Lebanon national squad (20 players) had a grand total of 4 players from Lebanon, the rest from suburban clubs from NSW. Also, Russia beat Lebanon 80-0 last time they met in 2008.'" That was only because the team couldn't get visas to travel to Russia, and ended up sending a bunch of juniors. They beat Russia 48-0 the previous year. RL is massive in Lebanon, it's played nationally and they have government recognition. I'd say if they keep up the current rate of development then it has potential to be the national sport there within 10 years. They are one of the strongest and most progressive nations we have, it would be madness to not allow them to play. I wish we had 10 more nations like Lebanon. www.lebrl.com/index.php

Quote ="saints35 bulls0"The 2009 Lebanon national squad (20 players) had a grand total of 4 players from Lebanon, the rest from suburban clubs from NSW. Also, Russia beat Lebanon 80-0 last time they met in 2008.'" That was only because the team couldn't get visas to travel to Russia, and ended up sending a bunch of juniors. They beat Russia 48-0 the previous year. RL is massive in Lebanon, it's played nationally and they have government recognition. I'd say if they keep up the current rate of development then it has potential to be the national sport there within 10 years. They are one of the strongest and most progressive nations we have, it would be madness to not allow them to play. I wish we had 10 more nations like Lebanon. www.lebrl.com/index.php

Quote ="headhunter"That was only because the team couldn't get visas to travel to Russia, and ended up sending a bunch of juniors. They beat Russia 48-0 the previous year. RL is massive in Lebanon, it's played nationally and they have government recognition. I'd say if they keep up the current rate of development then it has potential to be the national sport there within 10 years. They are one of the strongest and most progressive nations we have, it would be madness to not allow them to play. I wish we had 10 more nations like Lebanon. www.lebrl.com/index.php'" whilst not disputing the good work in Lebanon - why is there such a reliance on Australians in the national team? Would it not be better to have 17 Lebanese players, with maybe a couple of older Aussies to give a bit of experience in the squad, rather than the other way round?

Quote ="headhunter"That was only because the team couldn't get visas to travel to Russia, and ended up sending a bunch of juniors. They beat Russia 48-0 the previous year. RL is massive in Lebanon, it's played nationally and they have government recognition. I'd say if they keep up the current rate of development then it has potential to be the national sport there within 10 years. They are one of the strongest and most progressive nations we have, it would be madness to not allow them to play. I wish we had 10 more nations like Lebanon. www.lebrl.com/index.php'" whilst not disputing the good work in Lebanon - why is there such a reliance on Australians in the national team? Would it not be better to have 17 Lebanese players, with maybe a couple of older Aussies to give a bit of experience in the squad, rather than the other way round?

An entire squad of Lebanese domestic boys probably wouldn't be able to compete at the level they are playing, but it is important they don't drop down to maintain interest and government backing. I know what you are saying, but it's also good for the Lebanese domestic players that do come in to play at a higher intensity. Remember they are still relatively new to the game. Also, why shouldn't they field their strongest national team? I don't see too much of a problem with the team fielding ex-pats, so long as there is genuine development work and pathways for the domestic players. It's different to France artificially fielding Australians due to the residency rule, and the Lebanese don't tend to switch nations and also play in smaller tournaments, so they seem pretty committed. I think they consider themselves as Lebanese first and foremost.

There's no point having 14 teams, if half of them are going to be rubbish, and are going to get thumped every game. ALso, we cant have another 'group of death' where almost all the teams in it qualify the knockout stages because it makes the sport look like the joke it is. therefore the obvious thing is to introduce more teams that are able to compete. instead of having USA and russia get beaten 110-0, why not have the likes of an Australian Indigenous team, with the remaining Aussie's split into NSW and Queensland teams, a New Zealand team and a New Zealand Maori's team, PNG with the rest of the islanders put into a pacific islander's team, England split into Yorkshire and Lancashire, France, Celtic Nations (Wales, Scotland, Ireland), 'Australian Euopean Grandparents/passport' team under the name of Europe etc. This way we would have a truly competitive competition, which would undoubtedly get higher viewing figures, better sponsorship etc. What do you think?

Someone ban this troll.

Matt Peterson?

for the set up of the tournament with 14 sides. id like to see one group of 6 and two of 4 with 4 going through from the group of 6 and 2 from the other 2 groups to a 1/4 final i.e

group one

Eng, NZ, Aus, France, PNG, Cook Islands.

Group 2

Samoa, Ireland, USA, Scotland

Group 3

Tonga, Fiji, Wales, Lebanon,

Eng, NZ, Aus, France, finish top four in group 1 and so go on to play Samoa, Ireland, Tonga, and Fiji in the quarters,winners to the semis, and then final.

there is the issue that under that some teams play 5 games and some through, but we can have the bottom team in groups 2 and 3 after 3 rounds drop out, and the bottom teams in groups 2 and 3 after a further two rounds drop out. So in this example after all teams in groups 2 and 3 have played each other Scotland and Lebanon would drop out, and Samoa Ireland and the USA + Tonga Fiji and Wales would play each other again resulting in another 2 games each, after they have played Wales and the USA would drop out and Tonga Fiji, Samoa and Ireland would go through to the 1/4er final

Lets hope they go with an idea ive put on here before which offers the same benefits as the 2008 WC without the downsides (ie/ PNG whipping boys etc. and 3 of the semi finalists all but decided).

For me it should be a super pool of 6, with two pools of 4.

Super Pool A is. ENG / AUS / NZ/ FRANCE / PNG/ and lets say WALES (you would expect them to be in the top 6 in 3 years time with the crusaders)

Then you have two pools......for arguments sake....

POOL B - SAMOA / TONGA / LEBANON / SCOTLAND

POOL C - FIJI / COOKS / IRELAND / RUSSIA or USA etc.

Top 2 in the super group go straight through to the semis..........3,4 from the super group into Semi final qualifiers, with the top team from pools B & C for a place in the semis.

For me that ensures everyone has something to play for.......Ie/ unlike last year...where there was no benefit finishing 2/3 in the super pool for ENG/NZ/AUS this one there is, so in effect ENG/NZ/AUS are playing for the two places straight through in the semis and so have a reason to play in every game, and there are no whipping boys as although FRANCE / PNG / WALES will in the main lose to the big three, they are in reality playing for the 4th place or 3rd if one of the big three have a shocker.

Therefore they all have a realistic chance of progressing unlike PNG did, plus the bottom 8 are playing for 2 spots in the quarters rather than just a play off match for the semis.

On top of that you can run a Plate competition underneath - so 5,6 from the super pool go in regardless with 2nd from groups B & C playing for a place in the plate.

Works all round for me.