World Cup expands to 14 teams

[winnyason]

Guys why argue about this sh*t, it is exciting that they are expanding no doubt the way lewis spoke that most games will be in the heartland in the north will the final in leeds u would think and a few games in perpignan, toulouse and wrexham.
No doubt that there will be the same 10 teams as last wc plus wales, lebanon and the last 2 is a mystery will they give the atlantic a auto spot with south africa, the usa(maybe pro league) and jamacia and then the last spot a repacharge with the cooks(u would think), south africa and maybe russia(will there be a eastern europe division them, urkraine and serbia).

 

[Bluebags1908]

Assuming that the 10 teams from 2008 + Wales + Cook Islands are automatic qualifiers, and assuming Italy, Lebanon, Russia, and Serbia are in the European qualifiers and Jamaica, Japan, South Africa, and USA are in the 'Atlantic' qualifiers, then...

... from the 2008 World Cup, we had 19 counties participate inclusive of the qualifiers. So if the rumours are correct we will have an increase by 1 and have 20 countries participate in 2013 inclusive of the qualifiers.

Gone from 2008 are: Georgia, Holland.
New for 2013 are: Italy, Jamaica, South Africa

Italy participated in the 2000 World Cup qualifiers but have never made it to the main tournament.

Jamaica will make their World Cup debut.

South Africa participated in the main tournament in 1995 and 2000, but 2013 is their first time in qualifiers.

Since World Cup qualifers started in 1999 for the 2000 World Cup, we have had the following numbers:

2000 - 20 countries (excluding NZ Maoris). 15 in main tournament + 5 that didn't progress past the qualifying stage. One nation qualified - Lebanon.

2008 - 19 countries. 10 in main tournament + 9 that didn't progress past the qualifying stage. 5 nations qualified - Fiji, Ireland, Samoa, Scotland, Tonga.

2014 - 20 countries. 12 automatics + 8 countries to fight it out for the remaining 2 spots.

Since 1954 thru to 2008, a total of 15 countries have participated in the main tournament (excluding NZ Maoris and Great Britain - the home nations are counted instead of Great Britain). Number of tournaments in brackets:

Australia (13)
Cook Islands (1)
England (4 + GB 9)
Fiji (3)
France (13)
Ireland (3)
Lebanon (1)
New Zealand (13)
Papua New Guinea (5)
Samoa (3)
Scotland (3)
South Africa (2)
Russia (1)
Tonga (3)
Wales (3)

A further 8 countires have participated in the 2000 and 2008 qualifiers and never progressed to the main tournament (+ Jamaica in 2013). Number of qualifying tournaments in brackets:

Canada (1)
Georgia (1)
Holland (1)
Italy (1)
Japan (2)
Morocco (1)
Serbia (1)
USA (2)

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

That is the real interesting element, winny.

Personally, I think they should give the spots to the US and Wles and then run two qualifying comps - RLEF (do all Arab nations, i.e. UAE, come under this umbrella?) and Rest of the World.

I would say that this would lead to the Cooks and Lebanon making the cut and these are the teams that I would personally like to see in the 14.

 

[Bluebags1908]

Why are Italy and Japan allowed to participate if they have no domestic comp?

And why have Catalonia (Spain), Northern Ireland, and Ukraine missed out even though they do have domestic comps? (I can sort of understand Northern Ireland as they might come under the all-Ireland banner)

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

Are we seriously going to have the final in Leeds? Surely there is a bigger stadium then Elland Road in Leeds? The WC deserves more then that surely.

 

[winnyason]

Maybe old trafford or manchester stadium, the prob is wembley will not fil unless it is england vs australia.

 

[Springs]

Nothing will fill unless it is England vs Australia. Old Trafford got 44,000 for the 2000 World Cup Final, Elland Road got 27,000 for the 2005 Tri Nations Final. Suncorp probably would not have filled if Australia did not make it, by the looks of it (judging by the way Australian fans poured out of the ground once it was apparent they were going to lose) the Final might have only drew 20,000.

I think Wembley will still get a decent crowd if England do not make it. If the Final is marketed properly, and they sell thousands of tickets in advance, then hopefully the English fans will be good sports and go (they went to the 2008 Final).
If it is in the north, Old Trafford at least. Then hold the England vs Australia pool game at Wembley. If they schedule it at Elland Road there should be protests.

 

[bowes]

Why are Italy and Japan allowed to participate if they have no domestic comp?

And why have Catalonia (Spain), Northern Ireland, and Ukraine missed out even though they do have domestic comps? (I can sort of understand Northern Ireland as they might come under the all-Ireland banner)

I suspect if someone other than Russia or Serbia wins the European Shield this year or next they'll find a spot for them in the qualifiers, or at least I'd hope they would

 

[roughyedspud]

Nothing will fill unless it is England vs Australia. Old Trafford got 44,000 for the 2000 World Cup Final,

it only held 61,000 back in 2000..so given how sh*t the tournament was and that england was'nt in the final...44,000 is pretty damn good imo

Elland Road got 27,000 for the 2005 Tri Nations Final. Suncorp probably would not have filled if Australia did not make it, by the looks of it (judging by the way Australian fans poured out of the ground once it was apparent they were going to lose) the Final might have only drew 20,000.

don't forget all the england fans that where at suncorp for the final ;-)

I think Wembley will still get a decent crowd if England do not make it. If the Final is marketed properly, and they sell thousands of tickets in advance, then hopefully the English fans will be good sports and go (they went to the 2008 Final).
If it is in the north, Old Trafford at least. Then hold the England vs Australia pool game at Wembley. If they schedule it at Elland Road there should be protests.

as for the 2013 world cup...the final,without a doubt will be at old trafford....unless england win one of the next 2 4nations..then wembley might be in with a shout...

thats what it's gonna have to take for the RFL to take us back to wembley for a test match


though i've just read that richard lewis has said the majority of the games will be head in the north

http://www.sportinglife.com/rugbyle...Y_NAME=rleague/10/02/25/RUGBYL_World_Cup.html

which i think is right...we still need to make lots of money

 

[Big Picture]

It's not an eligibility issue, it's actually about helping domestic competitions by expsoing their players to the top level and ensuring there are more legitimate home grown players in each team. If we're going to keep the ridiculous grandparent rule we need something like this to give some of these teams a bit of credibility.

It's really about making sure countries are actually taking on genuine development, not just paying it lip-service, and about making sure there are no made-up teams representing countries where the game isn't actually played and making the whole thing a joke.

 

[VictoryFC]

Are we seriously going to have the final in Leeds? Surely there is a bigger stadium then Elland Road in Leeds? The WC deserves more then that surely.

Why would Leeds need more than 1 big stadium? The only way Leeds gets a bigger stadium in the near future is if England win the rights to host the 2018 FIFA WC and they expand Elland Road. A 40,000 seater stadium is almost surplus to what the city of Leeds needs now.

 

[clarency]

It's really about making sure countries are actually taking on genuine development, not just paying it lip-service, and about making sure there are no made-up teams representing countries where the game isn't actually played and making the whole thing a joke.

I don't see anything wrong with it. The success of a team during the World Cup would spark interest by that nation, generating/improving efforts to develop more players. It's not a joke at all.

Look at the Australian soccer team for example. Before A-League began all of the national players were Australians who played in Europe. After Australia made the World Cup in 2004, it provided the best opportunity to create a proper professional soccer league in Australia.

------------------

I think the much larger problem is getting players out the Australian and New Zealand squad that should be playing else where. eg - Jarryd Hayne playing for Fiji then switching to Australia. That should never happen.

How are any other nations going to have a chance at international events when all the talented players funnel into Australia & New Zealand. It's no wonder they are so far ahead of the rest.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

If domestic players know at least a couple of them are going to play in a WC it'll do more for the sport than watching Australian and NZ pros on TV knowing no local from their comp will ever make it to that level.

 

[clarency]

But it would create demand for a comp that gives players a chance at that level.

And regardless, I believe the public would rather see players go overseas to develop skills to represent their country rather than jump ship and represent a country overseas.

I mean... If Harry Kewell represented England I doubt many Australians would be happy with him.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Why would having a domestic player rule prevent such a demand? It wouldn't. Players already playing in places like Tonga would still be encouraged to go overseas and better themselves having seen their national team play in a WC. This rule would go further. It would encourage players to play the game in the first place. Tonga complained about the rule because domestic players weren't up to it so clearly they have no intention of developing their domestic players because they see no value in them. This rule will change that. Not to mention the fact that it's nonsense because plenty of other countries used domestic players and they were fine. Without this rule we wouldn't have seen the likes of Wayne Kerr, Steve Gibbons and Paddy Coupar in 2008 and we wouldn't have seen the handful of others that played for Lebanon, Ireland and Scotland in the qualifiers and those from Samoa who got to be part of the WC campaign.

 

[bender]

It's really about making sure countries are actually taking on genuine development, not just paying it lip-service, and about making sure there are no made-up teams representing countries where the game isn't actually played and making the whole thing a joke.

While i disagree with the domestic arguments, i can see the purpose and reasoning.

But, i have to say that i think you are totally behind the times with this statement. There is not a single team who is likely to get in the world team that will fit this description, regardless of how many GP players are there.

Samoa and Tonga both have domestic competitions that have improved out of sight, since the start of the last world cup qualifying, Wales are developing brilliantly. Ireland and Scotland are not as well advanced as we would like, but it is certainly not because of lip service! They are trying their best and are slowly expanding. USA has a bona fide improving competition. Russia, who have always obeyed the domestic quota rule are actually going backwards. I wonder how much interest they would have now if they had 13 heritage players from Sydney (like Lebanon) to raise the strength and profile of the Russian game and to help them earn money to give to the local game. I think it would make them much stronger. Anyway back to topic, Lebanon work hard on their local competition. There isnt a single side who will make the world cup and pay only lip service to their domestic competition.

The only concern in this regard is the Italian side, who are at an early period of development. It isnt even confirmed that they will be in the world cup. They probably dont qualify anyway. If they get a competition up and running, even if it is only to qualify for the world cup, then surely that is better than nothing anyway. That is the Way lebanon, samoa etc started and is the first step towards something meaningful. If it works, it is great. If it doesnt work, Does it really matter?

And if a country is going to chuck the game in because they dont make the world cup, then are they really strong enough to play in the world cup, anyway?

 

[Springs]

Richard Lewis on BBC Radio Manchester has said that the qualifiers will be finished by the end of next year, which means a short qualifying campaign to fit in 2011. By the looks of it they plan to have the teams sorted before the schedule is announced, unlike the 2008 World Cup.

 

[Big Picture]

I don't see anything wrong with it. The success of a team during the World Cup would spark interest by that nation, generating/improving efforts to develop more players. It's not a joke at all.

Look at the Australian soccer team for example. Before A-League began all of the national players were Australians who played in Europe. After Australia made the World Cup in 2004, it provided the best opportunity to create a proper professional soccer league in Australia.

I think you missed my point. Where did those Socceroo players start playing that game? I suggest some (maybe most?) learned it in Australia and played their first senior games there.

In contrast, the first Lebanon RL team didn't have a single player who started playing in Lebanon, and the same could probably be said about Fiji, Tonga and Samoa. All four relied exclusively on heritage players at first, with Tonga being notable for dragging their heels when it comes to changing that. A major criticism of the 2000 RL World Cup from outsiders was precisely that it had several made-up national teams, i.e. teams without any players who actually came from the country they were playing for.

We're not talking about developing pro leagues in most of these countries, most of the newer RL nations are too far small and/or too poor to ever have that.

 

[deluded pom?]

In contrast, the first Lebanon RL team didn't have a single player who started playing in Lebanon, and the same could probably be said about Fiji, Tonga and Samoa. All four relied exclusively on heritage players at first, with Tonga being notable for dragging their heels when it comes to changing that. A major criticism of the 2000 RL World Cup from outsiders was precisely that it had several made-up national teams, i.e. teams without any players who actually came from the country they were playing for.

I doubt there weren't any Fijian born players who represented Fiji at the 1995 and 2000 WCs.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Fiji have always had plenty of local players, to their credit. Which just shows how weak it is to suggest these amateur players can't hack it at WC level. If they can do it then the other countries can too.