A Rugby League World Cup with more good teams?

Question

As we are never going to see smaller nations rise to be on par with the big 3,
is the best thing to do instead this? to split Australia (who will host it) into its states&territories + split the top 4 (NZ Eng NSW Qld) again by age of players into a Teen, Twens and 30+ Snr team each.

This way, the gap between 1st and 10th would shrink, bringing with it more suspense & excitement and fewer mismatches. Also, more big name Aussie stars could take part. For the shape of it I had the following in mind:
6 qualifying rounds played within an expanded Europe and an expanded Oceania/Pacific group
Rounds 5-6 will be SFs & Fs to determine which of the borderline teams qualifies and which teams start in the upper group (and be in the running to win the title).
Then the World Cup itself is also a 6-round affair, with the top 12 qualifiers (4 from Eur,8 from Pac) in Pool 1 for rounds 1-2, the other 12-18 qualifiers in Pool 2. Then rounds 3-4 are played with the top 6 in Pool A, the next 10 (the bottom 4 from Pool1+the top 6 from Pool2) in Pool B and the rest in C; and the standings at the end of round 4 determine the round 5 fixtures: A1vA2; A3vA4; A5vB1; A6vB2; B3vB4; .... and in the final round: W1vW2; W3vL1; W4vL2; W5vL3; ....

Answer 1

Best Answer - Chosen by Voters

rugby league won't really be able to expand with rugby union around. its a much larger sport and for every player going to league, you have 10 going to union.

even the last rugby league world cup featured very few non-aussies. teams such as ireland were nearly made up entirely of aussies. they only qualified to play for them due to their heritage.

Answer 2

You over think it.
Rugby League is only a 2nd rate sport in terms of popularity which is played in very few countries.
The overly complicated draw you have above proves it.
Unfortunately there is only one "football" sport played in enough countries currently to hold a world cup.
I believe that all the other so called World Cups, ie Rugby, Rugby League (and Cricket also) are pointless marketing and revenue raising exercises designed to help full the coffers of organising bodies.
Next we will be told that the American world series for Baseball is a true international event!

Source(s):

My own opinion.
Guys, there are 193 recognised sovereign states (countries) in the world currently.
My point is that any sport that has 16 countries (usually only there to bulk out the competition) cannot be holding a true world cup.
As for the League world Cup, the best part of that was the final result. You would think that if you were going to give one country so much of an advantage, they could of at least won the thing. Good on the Kiwi team for not believing the result was a foregone conclusion.

Answer 3

Dougal is being a little harsh on pretty much everything but association football. While Rugby League does have a fairly limited base, Union is played by millions of people around the world. There are at least seven nations that have a realistic chance of winning the Rugby Union World Cup. And before all the Sprinbok and All-Black fans start coming down on me, note that I said "realistic" -- which is not the same as saying that they all have an equal chance. Anyway, I wonder if the same could be said of the FIFA World Cup. Brazil, Italy, France, Argentina, Germany -- who else?

And why so down on baseball? It might be dominated by the professional American (and one Canadian) clubs, but first-rate players come from all over the western hemisphere. Teams from Canada, Mexico, Cuba, the Dominican Republic and all of the central American countries can field competitive sides. So can Japan and Taiwan.

Answer 4

I don't mind league but no way will what you are promting work. League is seriously played on the east coast of Oz, northern England, the Auckland area of NZ and that is it. League in France is a joke so when it comes down to it any International competition comesw down to only three sides. Cricket, rugby, football are all played internationally and in their respective world cups more than one or two sides are expected to be the winners.

Answer 5

I think you are on the wrong site. We talk rugby here.

Answer 6

We need to work on developing the game in other nations and your idea is not encouraging that.

Answer 7

I don't think that it is beyond the realms of possibility for a few more nations rise to be compeititive enough to justify a world cup. More and more nations seem to participate everyday (Like a game held about a week ago between the USA Tomahawks and Jamaica). Places like PNG (where rugby league is the national sport), Tonga, Samoa and the surprise packet from the Pacific nations cup held earlier in the year the Cook Islands (They made the final!!!).

I think the better idea is to do sort of what the AFL has done and have a world cup that doesn't include Australia. We could have a "second tier" World cup with nations like Ireland, Scotland, Wales, France, PNG, Tonga, Samoa, Lebanon, Cook Islands. We could even have an emerging nations World Cup with nations in the early stages of develpment such as Georgia, Serbia, USA, Jamaica, Russia, Italy, Germany, Japan etc. These "World Cups" could be held concurrently every 4 years with relegation and promotion the prize (Maybe a cash prize as well :) ). For instance the winner of the "Second tier" competition gets promoted to the 4 nations and gets to play against Australia, England and New Zealand for 4 years and if after those 4 years they are ranked above one of the big 3 they hold their spot and the 4th ranked team gets relegated for the winner of the next second tier. It's all about development of these nations and in the long term we may one day be able to have a competitive world cup.

The other issue that needs to be sorted out is where players are from. Last year we had Hayne playing for Fiji and Jennings playing for Tonga, but this year they were able to abandon these emerging nations to be available for Australia. I'm happy for players to say "even though I was born in Samoa I actually consider myself Australian so that's who I want to play for", but you can't be Samoan when it suits you and then all of a sudden become Australian as soon as you are good enough to make the team this does nothing to foster the development of these countries outside the big 3.

Answer 8

A very simple answer to your question. Who cares? Rugby League has had, in the Eastern States, almost 100 years of monopolistic media coverage to establish the dominance Aussie Rules has everywhere else in Australia and it hasn't by a long shot. Union, Football and Rules all have strong player and supporter bases in NSW, Qld and the ACT whereas League, apart from Melbourne whose team is kept alive by News Corp without whose money it would die, is so minor everywhere else it barely rates a mention in any media. The League World Cup, as it was laughingly called, was a terrible joke played upon sport's loving Australians. The sooner the game dies a natural death the better of all those youngsters who play it will be! A game based on violence, aggression and being 'tougher' than your opposition has no place in today's society.

blackie

Answer 9

Rugby League International is a BIGGGGG JOKE. Your four nation comp was a big joke with no competitive games and dismal crowd attendances. Now you guys are trying this ALL STAR vs. INDIGENOUS STAR with new rules thrown in such as double try added with trying to copy NFL. Keep in mind that World Cup means a country playing against another couttry. Not NSW Under 21 playing against Jamaica.

Answer 10

All Live Streaming Rugby Here
http://rugbyliveonlinetv.blogspot.com

Source(s):

http://rugbyliveonlinetv.blogspot.com