Pichot shake-up could harm prestige of World Cup and Lions

AUGUSTIN PICHOT’s blueprint to save international rugby became clearer over the weekend as, in an interview with a French newspaper, World Rugby’s vice chairman outlined his idea of an annual tournament between the top 12 teams on the circuit.

Taking place over five weeks in November, The Nations’ League would see four groups of three fighting it out for a semi-final and final; combining the June and November windows into one and removing the ‘friendly’ element from the Test schedule.

If it sounds familiar, it’s because the former Argentina captain has been inspired by Uefa’s Nations League, which kicked off last month in an attempt to inject life into international soccer windows.

And there is merit to his proposal, which will be discussed at a pivotal gathering of the game’s power-brokers taking place in Sydney this week.

The governing body is locked in a battle with the English and French clubs for control of the game and this offers them a potentially lucrative annual stream of revenue from TV companies vying for the rights to show the tournament over five weekends.

There may be fears about ticket income given Pichot wants the groups to be hosted in one country, but the correct sponsorship model could off-set that.

While rugby’s one-off internationals do not suffer from the same lack of intensity as the round ball equivalents, they lack the stakes to make them truly matter.

“At the moment 56% of the games of international rugby in the world are friendlies and that’s what we are looking at and maybe swinging it back towards more meaningful competitive games and that may even be with interaction between north and south,” World Rugby chief executive Brett Gosper said yesterday.

“There are a number of models out there. I think ultimately it would help add even more meaning to a Six Nations or The Rugby Championships so it would be good news for everyone, I think.”

The proposal that was described as a “potentially divisive joke” by The New Zealand Herald amid fears that, contrary to Gosper’s suggestion that it would improve existing competitions, it could dilute their importance.

While the Six Nations themselves risk diluting their own tournament by holding internationals against each other outside the Test window, the real risk would be to the Lions and the World Cup itself.

They remain the pinnacles of the game, the two events that underpin a four-year cycle and both are threatened by Pichot’s proposal.

The question over the Lions is simply where does it fit in if the June window is closed?

Already, tours are being squeezed by competing demands and, while previous discussions over the future of the schedule have always accommodated the idea of the tour, it looks like it lacks a home in the current concept.

If this proposal signals the death of the traditional tour, then the Lions is even more necessary than ever in preserving the sport’s links with the past and, as last year’s series proved, it remains the most compelling part of the schedule outside of the World Cup.

That four-yearly tournament is the pinnacle of the sport, but would it remain so if the same teams duked it out for a world trophy on an annual basis?

“Some might argue that the more teams getting exposure at World Cup time will address the (disparity) but what tier two nations need and part of our overall position is that not only do they need more guaranteed conditions on pay and welfare, they Proposal: World Rugby vice chairman Agustin Pichot

also need more guaranteed fixtures so they can begin to bridge the gap,” players’ chief Omar Hassanein said.

“Within the four-year cycle we have to try to get better quality matches.”