WC 2013 Format

[Brownie.Kougari]

Same as this year but only 2 SP teams progress.

Semis:
1st Pool A v 1st Pool B
2nd Pool A v 1st Pool C

 

[Misanthrope]

No one went.
We couldn't give away the TV rights to the minor games.
It lost money.
It took 8 years to get over it.

I don't think the format was to blame for that. The English people didn't get out, the weather was terrible, and (like most things RL) - it was horribly advertised. I was at the height of my league love and didn't realise it was on until reading about it in Big League/RLW about two weeks before it kicked off.

 

[Bulldog Force]

4 Groups, 16 teams.

The 10 teams from this world cup, plus:

• Lebanon
• Wales
• USA
• Russia
• Malta
• Serbia/Croatia/Italy

 

[Brownie.Kougari]

Another thing I think needs looking at is the rediculously short turnarounds some teams had this year.

Each team should have at least 5 days to recover.

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

14 teams. Two mini "Super Pools" with 4 teams (2 from Aust, NZ, Eng and PNG into each SP) and two "Minnow Pools" with 3 teams.

eg:
SP1 - Aust, PNG + 2 minnows (USA, Scotland)
SP2 - NZ, Eng + 2 minnows (Lebanon, Fiji)
MP1 - Samoa, Tonga, Wales
MP2 - Russia, Ireland, France

Winner of each SP goes straight through to Semis, 2nd place in each SP play winner of a MP in Quarters. Winners of Quarters go through to meet winners of SP in Semis.

eg.
QF1 - PNG v Tonga
QF2 - England v Ireland

SF1 - Aus v Eng/Ire
SF2 - NZ v PNG/Tonga

Winners play in final.

If we only have 12 teams it means 2 from USA/Russia/Lebanon and Wales miss out and we cannot afford this.

If we go to 16 teams it probably means including teams that are not ready and we do not want to do this.

So 14 is the way to go and this is the best draw for 14.

 

[The Tank]

12 teams max for 2013... Gotta walk before you can run.

 

[westie]

Whats the difference in quality between 12 and 14? As long as you have decent formats to try and encourage "acceptable" attendances at minor games there shouldn't be a problem.

A bigger travesty is missing out on the potential tv earnings in Russia and USA.

 

[screeny]

Why bother talking about anything other than 12 teams as that's what we know it'll turn out being as R Lewis has already said as much.

Agree with roopy - those who slam the SP are nuts. It's been responsible for crowds and therefore cash. And it has enabled the other pools to be exciting and even.

As for the fourth team in 2013 SP I vote for Fiji as the 4th ranked team this time.

The only things up for debate are if they'll go 4 x groups of 3 or 3 x groups of 4 and how they work out the semi finalists, or whether they have quarter finalists.

 

[adamkungl]

I was trying to come up with my own format, keeping the super pool concept. But each had its own problems. Eventaully I came up with something good that exactly matched the 13 team comp mentioned earlier in the thread. Damnit.

 

[Gaba]

I can't stand the super pool format. If as a sport we are too petrified of having the top seeds play the lower seeds than we just shouldn't have a World Cup.

If you want to strengthen lesser nations in the world cup you play them against equal or near same quality opposition there is no point, in playing stronger nations and keep on getting over 100 points score against them in minor rounds. The lesser teams will just give up because they will never be able to compete with the stronger nations and only play to make up the numbers like they do in union


If Australia in one pool , England in the other , nz
No point in having a world cup when the same nations will always end up in the finals


Least the league in trying to mixed it up unlike the other rugby code when its predictable which sides are going ot make it in the finals, because of weaker pool opposition

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

A bigger travesty is missing out on the potential tv earnings in Russia and USA.

This is a ridiculously important point and the reason I'd go for 14 teams. If either of these nations miss out then we blow a massive chance to grow rugby league and make the WC13 even more profitable.

I'd even go so far as to suggest that (if the rumours about Trump are true) we guarantee USA a place and play their pool matches in the US as long as Trump is willing to underwrite it and promote the hell out of it.

 

[Poul]

I've posted this in another thread previously, but here goes, .... again :sarcasm:
Here is the format I believe the RLIF will endorse for the 2013 World Cup:

12 Teams
3 Groups of 4 including a "Super Pool"
Super Pool will include top 4 ranked teams (Australia, England, New Zealand, and probably France)
All teams from all 3 groups get to play 3 preliminary matches
ALL Super Pool teams progress to quarterfinals, according to finshing order in pool.
QF1 - Super Pool winner v Group B runner up
QF2 - Super Pool runner up v Group C runner up
QF3 - Super pool 3rd v Group B winner
QF 4 - Super Pool 4th v Group C winner

SF1 - QF1 winner v QF4 winner
SF2 - QF2 winner v QF3 winner

Final - SF1 winner v SF2 winner

This format is a winner. it retains the best aspects of the Super Pool evidenced in this tournament, yet doesn't disadvantage the Super Pool last place getter, who still get a quarterfinal spot. There is still incentive to be placed high in the Super Pool though, to avoid the more difficult opponent in the quarterfinals and subsequent semifinals. Minimal blowout scorelines, and should keep the viewing public entertained. We have to build on the progress made in the current World Cup. This is the way to go about it You know it makes sense ;-)

 

[bowes]

4 Groups, 16 teams.

The 10 teams from this world cup, plus:

• Lebanon
• Wales
• USA
• Russia
• Malta
• Serbia/Croatia/Italy

FFS include the Cook Islands is we're going to have 16 teams they'd hammer the last 4 named, and have a bigger domestic league than all those bar USA and Wales, Croatia don't even exist

 

[bowes]

Whats the difference in quality between 12 and 14?

Well 12th to 13th isn't that big as Cook Islands are pretty good, but from 13th to 14th is a huge gap as Russia and the USA are rubbish and would get thrashed every game, the latter might be able to get a decent side out of NRL players, at least if they can play on an american football pitch with an American football, but Russia always get demolished when they play the 2nd tier European sides

 

[adamkungl]

I've posted this in another thread previously, but here goes, .... again :sarcasm:
Here is the format I believe the RLIF will endorse for the 2013 World Cup:

12 Teams
3 Groups of 4 including a "Super Pool"
Super Pool will include top 4 ranked teams (Australia, England, New Zealand, and probably France)
All teams from all 3 groups get to play 3 preliminary matches
ALL Super Pool teams progress to quarterfinals, according to finshing order in pool.
QF1 - Super Pool winner v Group B runner up
QF2 - Super Pool runner up v Group C runner up
QF3 - Super pool 3rd v Group B winner
QF 4 - Super Pool 4th v Group C winner

SF1 - QF1 winner v QF4 winner
SF2 - QF2 winner v QF3 winner

Final - SF1 winner v SF2 winner

This format is a winner. it retains the best aspects of the Super Pool evidenced in this tournament, yet doesn't disadvantage the Super Pool last place getter, who still get a quarterfinal spot. There is still incentive to be placed high in the Super Pool though, to avoid the more difficult opponent in the quarterfinals and subsequent semifinals. Minimal blowout scorelines, and should keep the viewing public entertained. We have to build on the progress made in the current World Cup. This is the way to go about it You know it makes sense ;-)

I really don't like the idea that everyone in the super pool goes through regardless. As it stands I like the Super Pool concept. That would cross the line into farcical territory if you ask me.

 

[Noa]

Wont need the so-called super-pool next time if Tonga and Samoa are managed properly. With 12 teams the pools could look like

Australia
Tonga
Ireland

New Zealand
Samoa
PNG

England
Scotland
France

Fiji
Lebanon
Russia

Then have either the top 2 go through to quarters or the group winners go through to semis. Sure we'd get the same semis for a while but how is that any different from the union wc.

 

[Poul]

I really don't like the idea that everyone in the super pool goes through regardless. As it stands I like the Super Pool concept. That would cross the line into farcical territory if you ask me.

Well, realistically we essentially know 3 out of 4 teams that will make the semifinals, so why pretend otherwise. As it is, in this the 2008 World Cup, 3 semifinalists are coming straight from the Super Pool. In my format, which I am quite confident the RLIF will adopt, the 4 Super Pool teams are ONLY going straight to quarterfinals (NOT semifinals). So there will be more games between Super Pool teams and those from other groups than in this World Cup.In this World Cup, 2nd and 3rd (i.e. New Zealand and England) have only played against the other Super Pool teams, and unless Fiji beat Australia in their semifinal, it will remain that way.
My format is the way to go. You know it makes sense ;-)

 

[brendothejet]

Well 12th to 13th isn't that big as Cook Islands are pretty good, but from 13th to 14th is a huge gap as Russia and the USA are rubbish and would get thrashed every game, the latter might be able to get a decent side out of NRL players, at least if they can play on an american football pitch with an American football, but Russia always get demolished when they play the 2nd tier European sides

Mate the Cook Islands are rubbish. I've seen them play and in the WC qualifiers they had 50 put on them by everyone. Now if Samoa at full strength can only get past the USA by around 14, you'd think that the USA would towel them. Russia could pick them apart too.

They have barely any players and are a long long long way behind in the Pacfic.`

 

[pcpp]

Well, realistically we essentially know 3 out of 4 teams that will make the semifinals, so why pretend otherwise. As it is, in this the 2008 World Cup, 3 semifinalists are coming straight from the Super Pool. In my format, which I am quite confident the RLIF will adopt, the 4 Super Pool teams are ONLY going straight to quarterfinals (NOT semifinals). So there will be more games between Super Pool teams and those from other groups than in this World Cup.In this World Cup, 2nd and 3rd (i.e. New Zealand and England) have only played against the other Super Pool teams, and unless Fiji beat Australia in their semifinal, it will remain that way.
My format is the way to go. You know it makes sense ;-)

I actually find it hard to think of a worse format.

If you want to be really extreme, why bother turning up? The advantage of coming first is extremely small. Theres almost nothing to play for.

You could theoretically have a final where one team has won 5 games while the other team has won just 2 games (less than half).

Additionally, we don't have a 4th team that 'deserves' to go to the next stage.

The fourth team in the Super Pool would have realistically nothing to play for in the first three games (except for pride) because they have little hope of winning enough games to get 1st place (for very little reward anyway).

 

[bowes]

Mate the Cook Islands are rubbish. I've seen them play and in the WC qualifiers they had 50 put on them by everyone. Now if Samoa at full strength can only get past the USA by around 14, you'd think that the USA would towel them. Russia could pick them apart too.

They have barely any players and are a long long long way behind in the Pacfic.`

USA are improving so you might be right about them, but Russia? They're appallingly low standard yet you wouldn't know it the way they're talked up. Fiji put less points on the Cook Islands than they did on France