Your WC 2013 Format

[Turtle]

Hi everyone, I don't post in the forums often but I have been reading them for several years.

Now that we have found out that there will be 14 participants in the finals in 2013, how would you structure the tournament?

These are my thoughts:

4 Pools - 4,4,3,3 (with 2 'superpools')

Group A
ENG
AUS
IRE
FIJ

Group B
NZL
FRA
PNG
TON

Group C
SCO
lebanese
CIS

Group D
SAM
WAL
USA

Basically everyone except Aus, NZ, Eng, Fra & PNG are interchangeable as they are of a similar level. The teams should be structured to provide the most interesting matchups that will draw a crowd.

From both the super groups the top 3 advance, as well as the winners of groups C & D.

Quarter Finals e.g.
Q1: A1 v D1 AUS v WAL
Q2: B1 v C1 NZL v lebanese
Q3: A2 v B3 ENG v PNG
Q4: B2 v A3 FRA v FIJ

Semi Finals
S1: Q1 v Q4 AUS v FRA
S2: Q2 v Q3 NZL v ENG

Final
S1 v S2 AUS v NZL

This gives a 6 week tournament with 25 games with a minimum of 2 games each, up to 6 games each for the finalists.

Thoughts?

 

[clarency]

Bring back the emerging world cup! Hooray!

 

[bender]

I am pretty confident they will go with the following tournament:

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

Quarter final: France vs PNG
Quarter Final: Wales vs England


Semi Final: Australia vs France
Semi Final: NZ vs England

Final: Australia vs England

I think that represents their best outcome and what they will hope for. I can see Wales and France hosting their group games.

Final

 

[Springs]

Well since I spent most of yesterday creating my own format, I might as well post it.

Firstly, The European Cup and Pacific Cup to decide which teams are in which pools, so first:

Pool A
Australia
England
Pacific 1
Euro 2

Pool B
New Zealand
Euro 1
Pacific 2
Euro 3

Pool C
Pacific 3
Pacific 5
Qualifier 1

Pool D
Euro 4
Pacific 4
Qualifier 2

However, this is unlikely given that Lewis has stated that all the teams, including the qualifiers, will be decided by the end of 2011.

But, my predictions:

Pool A
Australia, England, Wales, Papua New Guinea
Venues- Wembley/Old Trafford, Wrexham, London Olympic, Galpharm, Cardiff City, Elland Road.

Pool B
New Zealand, France, Tonga, Ireland
Venues- Marseille, Ernest-Wallon, Aime Giral, KC, St Helens, City of Salford

Pool C
Fiji, Cook Islands, Lebanon
Venues - Castleford, Doncaster, Leigh

Pool D
Scotland, Samoa, USA
Venues - Halliwell Jones, Widnes, Halifax

Finals
Q1: B-2 vs C-1, Ireland vs Fiji - St. Helens
Q2: A-2 vs D-1, England vs Scotland, Wigan
Q3: B-1 vs A-3, New Zealand vs Wales, Galpharm
Q4: A-1 vs B-3, Australia vs France - Hull

S1: England vs New Zealand, City of Manchester
S2: Australia vs Ireland, Elland Road

Final: Australia vs England, Wembley/Old Trafford

 

[bowes]

Gr A
New Zealand
Fiji
PNG
Scotland

Gr B
Australia
England
Ireland
Tonga

Gr C (in Wales)
Samoa
Wales
European Qualifier

Gr D (in France)
France
Cook Islands
Atlantic Qualifier

Quarterfinals
(1)A1 Vs B3
(2)B2 Vs C1
(3)B1 Vs A3
(4)A2 Vs C4

Semifinals
Winner QF1 Vs Winner QF2
Winner QF3 Vs Winner QF4

Final


The group seedings are based on world cup finishing spots from last time, which would conveniently allow Wales and France to host a lower group each

 

[druzik]

Curious that everyone are putting in the USA and Lebanon in there automatically.

 

[roopy]

the super group is important to make sure as many games as possible are competative, and also because it gives us as many paying games as possible.

I'd have Aus, Eng, NZ and France in the supergroup - and two groups of 5 for the rest, with as many double headers as possible to cut down on costs and build crowds.

Quarter finals would be all four super group sides playing the top two from the other groups - which should match France up v PNG as the top qualifier from the minor groups - Eng v Samoa as the next best - NZ v Fiji - Aus v Tonga.

 

[Big Picture]

the super group is important to make sure as many games as possible are competative, and also because it gives us as many paying games as possible.

The only thing that can be said about double-headers in a tournament billed as a World Cup is M-I-C-K-E-Y M-O-U-S-E. They'd be better off to forget all about having one, it would be a total joke with double headers.

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

Wow 14 is an odd number.

I think it would be good if we treat the 2 groups of 4 as both super pools. So put the best nations in those 2 pools and the next 6 in the other 2. There is the possibility that pools are seeded so that nations like the USA (hopefully with a great TV deal) are in the same pool as other nations with good TV coverage like Aus, England, NZ, France etc etc. The WC might be worth more on TV if its Eng vs USA instead of Eng vs Cook Island.

A
Australia
England
PNG
Wales

B
New Zealand
Fiji
France
Ireland

C
Tonga
Lebanon
Russia

D
Scotland
Samoa
Cook Island

Now, I for one dont think we are ready for Quater finals. The top 2 of the Super Pools should qualify and then the first ranked side from the other 2 pools go through.

Prelim Finals_______________Semi Finals_____________Final
2nd Pool A vs 1st Pool C --> Winner plays 1st Pool B
____________________________________________--> Winners play in Final
2nd Pool B vs 1st Pool D --> Winner plays 1st Pool A

 

[bowes]

Wow 14 is an odd number.

C
Tonga
Lebanon
Russia

You do realise it's impossible for those 2 to both be in?

 

[bowes]

Curious that everyone are putting in the USA and Lebanon in there automatically.

I guess if Italy get enough Australians they could beat Lebanon, but Russia and Serbia would have no chance. USA should win theirs easily, but South Africa are somewhat of an unknown quantity

 

[jim_57]

I guess if Italy get enough Australians they could beat Lebanon, but Russia and Serbia would have no chance. USA should win theirs easily, but South Africa are somewhat of an unknown quantity

I wouldn't be too suprised if Italy do just that. I would still tip Lebanon to make it but if Italy really wanted to they could stack a decent side together.

The Atlantic group USA would be favorites but Jamaica and South Africa will give them a run IMO. South Africa really is hard to tell, they have more domestic teams than USA and by 2012 or whenever the qualifiers are they could have a few players in and arround NRL clubs.

 

[bowes]

Just wondering though if Russia fail to top their group this year in the Shield (i.e. if they lose to Germany or Ukraine), would the team that tops it get invited to the qualifiers in their place? Theoretically I could say the same about Serbia, but they shouldn't have much trouble beating Czech Republic and Latvia

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

You do realise it's impossible for those 2 to both be in?

Was purely going off the top 14 nations according to the RLIF rankings.

 

[bowes]

Was purely going off the top 14 nations according to the RLIF rankings.

The format of qualifying has already been put on here about 5 times and they're both in the same group

 

[adamkungl]

I quite like the first format. 2 Superpools is a great idea and is what i would go with if I was organising this.

 

[PaulyTom]

I think I have worked it all out.


Pool A
England
Australia
Tonga
Fiji

Eng v Aus @ Leeds Elland Rd
Ton v Fij @ Halliwell Jones Warrigton
Eng v Ton @ KC , Hull
Aus v Ton @ Stoop London
Fij v Eng @ New St Helens Stadium
Aus v Fij @ Castleford New Stadium

Pool B
New Zealand
Samoa
Wales
PNG

NZ v Sam Widnes
Wal v Png Wrexham
NZ v Png Millenium Double header
Wal v Sam Millenium Double header
NZ v Wal Wrexham

Pool C

Scotland
Ireland
Lebanon

Sco v Ire Somewhere in Glasgow
Ire v lebanese Barrow , Cumbria
Sco v lebanese Somewhere in Edinburgh


Pool D

Fra v Fij Montpellier
Fral v Usa Stade Gilbert Brutus
Fij v Usa Stade Gilbert Brutus

Finals
Q1: B-2 vs C-1 - DW Stadium Wigan
Q2: A-2 vs D-1 Salfords new stadium
Q3: B-1 vs A-3 Keepmoat Stadium Doncaster
Q4: A-1 vs B-3 Galpharm Huddesfield

S1: Winner Q1 vs Winner Q4 KC Stadium
S2: Winner Q2 vs Winner Q3 Elland Road

Final: Australia vs England, Wembley

 

[Springs]

PaulyTom I think you should check out the 2000 World Cup if you think Millenium Double headers and games in Scotland are good ideas.

 

[JonG]

the super group is important to make sure as many games as possible are competative, and also because it gives us as many paying games as possible.

I'd have Aus, Eng, NZ and France in the supergroup - and two groups of 5 for the rest, with as many double headers as possible to cut down on costs and build crowds.

Quarter finals would be all four super group sides playing the top two from the other groups - which should match France up v PNG as the top qualifier from the minor groups - Eng v Samoa as the next best - NZ v Fiji - Aus v Tonga.

I think this is definitely the way forward, guarantees competitive games throughout the group stages, provides the best of the "tier 2" nations the opportunity to play the top nations, and whilst 3 of the 4 semi finalists could be determined now, there is still the chance of an upset

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

Sure, roops, but then how do we ensure everyone gets equal games?

Each team in your Super Group would only have 3 opponents whereas the two minnow groups have 4 opponents each.

Do teams from the Super Group play another round against each other to even it up? Thus getting one opponent in their group twice?

Do teams from the minnow groups miss playing one opponent in their group to ensure they only play 3 games like the Super Group?

Do we have the SG playing 3 games only but the minnows being forced to play 4 before the finals?

I don't mind your system but just think this is the one sticking point.