That's not a World Cup. That's a Four Nations, European Cup and Pacific Cup with a play-off at the end. That's not what the World Cup is all about. It's about mixing nations and seeing games you wouldn't normally see. That's what annoyed me about the Super Group format slightly in the RLWC08. If it wasn't for PNG and Fiji, it would have been the same old same old.

Plus, how long is this tournament of yours going to last? A group of 5 needs 4 games. Then you want them to play off as well. That's two extra games compared to the Super Group before they've even hit the semis. It's just not logical.

The way I see it going (and the same many others have) is most likely going to be an extended Super Pool format. Instead of one Super Pool of four, they'll have two of equal strength. They'll then have two smaller pools like before, with perhaps a play-off to advance to the next round.

Unlike 2008 though, I really can't see how they can do this without having a quarter final.

Think the groups will be seeded something like this (seeding in brackets, with teams as an example):

Group A: Australia (1), England (1), Fiji (2), Ireland (3)
Group B: New Zealand (1), PNG (1), France (2), Lebanon (3)
Group C: Tonga (2), Scotland (3), Cook Islands (4)
Group D: Wales (2), Samoa (3), USA (4)

Seed one will be the big three + one other (PNG last time, could be France).
Seed two will be the teams that are regularly at the top of their Euro/Pacific comps.
Seed three will be the rest that regularly compete in these comps.
Seed four will be those who didn't automatically qualify.

Top three from Groups A and B go through to QF.
Top two from Groups C and D play-off to go through to QF.
Bottom of Groups C and D play-off for ranking position (basically, wooden spoon!).

All teams have played 3 before the QF then.

It's gonna have to be midweek games too rather than every weekend in that instance

My best attempt - going for simplicity and trying to avoid lots of gross mismatches:

2 super groups of 3.
eg 1. New Zealand, PNG, France. 2. Australia, England, Best Celtic Nation.

then the remaining eight in 2 groups of 4.

Top 2 from each group going into straight knock-out quarter finals, super group winners player normal group runners-up and vice versa.

With an extra round of normal group games, they'd have to open the tournament - but you could make that a celebration of RL as World sport. USA vs Russia would be an eye-catching opener if they both made the cut. Or Samoa vs Tonga would be entertaining.

In the example above, it is a bit rough on the 'Best Celtic Nation', as it was for PNG last time around. Still, they at least get a couple of chances to get a famous result.

Edit - Actually you don't have a extra round of normal group games, its just that there is only 1 game in a super group round, with one team getting the round off.

You've got the potential for a lot of dead rubber final group games with that - teams meeting in the 3 team groups knowing they can't make the Q-finals and in the 4 team groups knowing they are already there.

And only 7 quarter finalists, I think.

No, there's 8 Quarter Finalists. Might not have made it clear enough.

Top two in Groups C and D play off. So 1st in C vs 2nd in D and vice-versa. It's the only way to give them that 3rd fixture and still have two going through. Teams will be playing to get the easier fixture in the next round then (come top, play team in second) so no dead-rubbers.

For the 4-team groups, they again will be playing for the easier fixtures. Top plays teams that come through groups C and D. 2nd plays 3rd in the opposite group.

I see what you mean now!

Yup, but still I suppose it could be condensed. The football world cup takes 7 weeks right? All I can see happening is a shortened 2013 season tbh to accomadate for this, to make the world cup more special. You can't realistically get a competition into a fair 5 week competition with 14 teams. Well I can't think of one anyway that doesn't just have the top teams getting byes and a few also rans who basically play their own competition - not a world cup. To condense mine I'll try...

Super Group 1: England, France, PNG
Super Group 2: Australia, New Zealand, Wales
Minor Group 1: Scotland, Samoa, Cook Islands, USA
Minor Group 2: Fiji, Ireland, Tonga, Lebanon

(Aimed for a bit of a NH/SH split). (Examples later on in brackets)

Week One: (Grand Opener/Wembley Double Header?):
England vs France
Australia vs New Zealand

Scotland vs Samoa, Fiji vs Ireland, USA vs Cook Islands, Tonga vs Lebanon
Wales & PNG Week off.

Week 2:
England vs PNG, Australia vs Wales, Scotland vs USA, Samoa vs Cook Islands, Fiji vs Tonga, Ireland vs Lebanon
France & New Zealand Week Off.

Week 3:
France vs PNG, New Zealand vs Wales, Scotland vs Cook Islands, Samoa vs USA, Fiji vs Lebanon, Ireland vs Tonga
England & Australia Week Off.

Week 4:
Q1: 1st Place Super Group 1 vs 2nd Place Super Group 2 (ENG vs NZ)
Q2: 1st Place Super Group 2 vs 2nd Place Super Group 1 (AUS vs FRA)
Q3: 3rd Place Super Group One vs 3rd Place Minor Group One (PNG vs CKI)
Q4: 3rd Place Super Group Two vs 3rd Place Minor Group Two (WLS vs TNG)
Q5: 1st Place Minor Group One vs 2nd Place Minor Group Two (SCO vs IRE)
Q6: 1st Place Minor Group One vs 2nd Place Minor Group Two (FIJ vs SAM)

13th Final: 4th Place Minor Group One vs 4th Place Minor Group Two (USA vs LEB)

Week 5:
QF1: Winner Q1 vs Winner Q5 (ENG vs SCO)
QF2: Winner Q2 vs Winner Q6 (AUS vs FIJ)
QF3: Loser Q1 vs Winner Q3 (NZ vs PNG)
QF4: Loser Q2 vs Winner Q4 (FRA vs WLS)

LF1: Loser Q3 vs Loser Q5 (CKI vs IRE)
LF2: Loser Q4 vs Loser Q6 (TNG vs SAM)

Week 7:
SF1: Winner QF1 vs Winner QF4 (ENG vs FRA)
SF2: Winner QF2 vs Winner QF3 (AUS vs NZ)

LF3: Loser QF1 vs Loser QF4 (SCO vs WLS)
LF4: Loser QF2 vs Loser QF3 (FIJ vs PNG)

9th Final: Winner LF1 vs Winner LF2 (IRE vs SAM)
11th Final: Loser LF1 vs Loser LF2 (CKI vs TNG)

Week 8:
WCGF: Winner SF1 vs Winner SF2 (ENG vs AUS)
3rd Final: Loser SF1 vs Loser SF2 (NZ vs FRA)

5th Final: Winner LF3 vs Winner LF4 (WLS vs PNG)
7th Final: Loser LF3 vs Loser LF 4 (SCO vs FIJ)

Cut down to 7? It is going to be difficult as I said to hit 5. Six may be possible but I don't think it will be fair and evenly matched throughout.

[url=http://www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague/news/story_get.cgi?STORY_NAME=rleague/10/02/25/RUGBYL_World_Cup.htmlA Northern affair[/url

The final and the opener should both be at Wembley
the rest should be in the fabulous M62 corridor! not france, not wales, not scotland

for all those picking these zany group makeups, why dont you try putting them in groups based on World rankings? and picking the teams that enter the world cup based on a valid qualifying tournament, just like we had at the best world cup ever!

and for the RLIF if you are going to decide the number of teams in the tournament then do so! last year you announced 12 and now you announce 14! oh and the great reasons you used to change your mind, could you let us know because I can't see them

seriously some people have way too much time on their hands with these in depth formats and venues

im sure the people that run the sport will do a great job at it

well you should only have a SL of 6 teams too then.

silly.

the union world cup only has 7/8 proper teams and it apparently is succesful.


you will see more skill in samoa vs tonga in the RLWC than nz vs australia in the RUWC.

for which game? you would have found that for their world cup qualifiers they actually had over 10 australians in their squad, allthough your right re: russia they do use domestic players, thats why they cant get within 40 points of any decent opposition

Mark Minnichello
Ashley Laffranchi
Mark Cantoni
Ryan McGoldrick
David Myles
Dave Marando
Tyrone Copppedge
Mark O'Halloran

2009 Atlantic Cup Squad

Gareth Baxendale (New York Knights)
Louis Tulio (Aston DSC Bulls)
Nate Smith (Connecticut Wildcats)
Derrick Roma (New Haven Warriors)
Gene Giallombardo (Aston DSC Bulls)
Apple Pope (Jacksonville Axemen)
Sean Taylor (New York Knights)
Siose Muliumu (New Haven Warriors)
Curtis Cunz (Connecticut Wildcats)
Kea Misipeka (New Haven Warriors)
Mike Brazill (Aston DSC Bulls)
Bob Knoepfel (Jacksonville Axemen)
John Grace (Aston DSC Bulls)
Ewan Robinson(New Haven Warriors)
Taco Pope (Jacksonville Axemen)
Keikeokalani Misipeka (New Haven Warriors)
Michael Cartwright (New York Knights)

Last time I checked, the 2008 RLWC qualifiers were not held in 2009.

No, the football world cup does not last 7 weeks. It lasts just over 4 weeks (11th June - 11th July). And unlike football, you can't consistently have mid-week games in rugby league.

Every other World Cup in recent times has lasted a similar length of time (about 5 weekends). It won't be any different this time, especially 2 weeks extra. It just isn't financially viable, let alone there aren't enough weeks in the season (if you think they'll change the NRL season or SL season to accommodate then you'll be disappointed).

5 weekends maximum. There isn't enough room for anything else.

Oh well, I only looked at the format (7 rounds) and presumed. I don't watch it anyway it bores me to death





Does the union world cup last 5 weekends? I'd guess (although I again can't be bothered checking) that it was a 6-7 round format so it must have midweek games? Realistically you can run a 7 round competition like the one I put if you only allow around 3/4/5 days between games, but I'm sure the players will be against that.

I expected that the SL season will have been shortened by then anyway, but if they don't they bascially will have to wait a few years before they get a chance to get some proper exposure for a real world cup, but it will be back in Aus anyway so Europe will not care anyway.


Again I'm struggling to think of one that doesn't involve midweek games or basically a sad, sad excuse for a competition.

Didn't the one you post take six rounds anyway? 14 is such an akward number.

I suppose you didn't realize that the successful 1995 World Cup had games in Wales and a 60/40 split between the heartland and other venues.

Seeing as we have been forcing the issue for the past few years maybe Millenium and/or Murryfield could be worth a punt also? Maybe we would trick a few locals into watching a good sport over their own terrible one



After all, who knew RL had internationals.

Just checked the format for the union world cup on Wikipedia. Says 44 days (7th September - 20th October), so 6 weeks (7 weekends). The difference between their World Cup and the football and RL ones is that they run theirs through the domestic season. The Guiness Premiership is still running during their World Cup, something I very much doubt would happen in SL.

And my format did have 6 rounds yes, and it probably would have to have one mid-week game. The last two World Cups both had 1 round that was mid-week, just something I think is a bit inevitable. But one is an absolute maximum.

I still don't get how you've managed to make it last 8 weeks with 14 teams anyway. Surely 2-3 group games, quarters, semis then final makes 6 rounds? Why the unneeded play-off format at the end? Just makes it longer than it needs to be, and longer than we can afford.

The main thing I don't like about this 14 team idea is that it is going to leave is with groups of 3 and the unfair advantages/disadvantages the teams in them groups will face.

Perhaps one option is to have the teams in one group of 3 play the teams in the other group of 3 instead of their own?

e.g. (seedings in brackets)
Group A - England (1), Fiji (2), Lebanon (3)
Group B - Australia (1), Tonga (2), Ireland (3)
Group C - New Zeland (1), Wales (2), Scotland (3), Cook Islands (4)
Group D - Papua New Guinea (1), France (2), Samoa (3), USA (4)

So England won't play Fiji and Lebanon, they'd play Australia, Tonga and Ireland.
And Australia will play England, Fiji and Lebanon.

Group C and D as normal.

This allows us to seperate the big teams then, yet still have that all-important Aus vs England game to start the tournament.
No fangled Super Groups. And one hell of a lot easier to understand for the public.

3 group games, top two from each to quarters.

I think that's the best format possible if keeping it simple is the aim. And certainly the fairest with 14 teams.

why not seed it then draw it from a hat

That would also make it fairer. The teams I've put in are just examples, but the main emphasis was meant on the seeding process.

I don't think they'll draw teams out of a hat though. They'll want to make as attractive fixtures as possible IMO so will most likely group them in a certain way.

Because there was no fair way of getting striaght into quarters that I could think of.

I am all up for giving the better teams an easier run, but not at the expense of the lower teams, who could potentially pull a shocker and wanted to accomadate for that. Unless I suppose you draw randomly into 2 groups of 3 and 4 and the top two of either group goes straight through, there is a massive bias towards the top teams in the ones I have read. In mine I think if the best teams were all from the minor groups (unlikely I know) then the top four would end up coming from these groups, whereas in others only those from the top groups and a couple from the others get a shot.