So who would be the real world champions?
Last week details leaked out about World Rugby’s latest brainchild, a World League. Details of the proposed new venture are still sketchy, but it’s questionable whether we actually need the bones to be fleshed out, as the concept is so fundamentally flawed as to be laughable.
Let’s start with what works really well at present: the Premiership is in good shape, as is the French Top 14. The Six Nations, despite having one team too many, remains hugely popular, and those three competitions have one thing in common – they all take place in the Northern Hemisphere. Add in the four-yearly Rugby World Cup which is the pinnacle of the game, and things look pretty good.
In England, dumping the Premiership Rugby Cup would ease fixture congestion, and if squad sizes were increased just a bit, so that clubs could give players more rest, the situation would be really good.
However, there are wellunderstood issues in the Southern Hemisphere with not-so-Super Rugby, and with the Rugby Championship. Everyone has sympathy with the problems they have, which stem largely from geography and the ridiculous distances that have to be flown to make any sort of competition work, but you don’t resolve those by messing about with the game in the north.
However, the concept of a ‘merit-based’ world league – whatever that is – is sure to appeal to some. As Nick Cain highlights in his column (P13), the current thinking seems to involve a ‘premier division’ of the 12 top-ranked teams, and a second tier. It is rumoured that there will be promotion and relegation between the two divisions, but I’ll believe that when I see it.
Let’s start with what a league is. In my book it involves every team playing every other, home and away. That means that we get as close as we can to having a level playing field, and I’d stop right there, but then owners want additional revenue, and broadcasters want ‘product’, so you end up with play-offs that sometimes result in the best team at the end of the regular season not actually winning. The Premiership and the Top 14 pass the test and are proper leagues with added play-offs. The PRO14 and Super Rugby are not.
That home and away aspect is one of the reasons I am not the biggest fan of the Six Nations, because the teams that have three home games are always at an advantage over those who have only two. A Five Nations would still be far from perfect, but at least everyone would play two home and two away. The Six Nations model is one of the reasons I’m sceptical about promotion and rele- gation featuring in any World League – whenever the possibility has been raised in the past the six have always thrown their hands in the air in horror! It’s a closed shop, and I’ve a hunch that’s how it will stay – they hate the possibility that the ‘wrong’ team could end up in trouble.
The big controversy last week, when details of the proposed structure leaked out, was the way that the Pacific Island nations would be treated. The suggestion was that they would be left out of a top 12, with Japan and the USA in their place.
That now doesn’t seem to be the case, although whether that’s down to the leaks being inaccurate, or furious back-pedalling, isn’t clear. Such has been the disgraceful treatment of the Islanders in the past that people can be forgiven for fearing the worst.
In World Rugby’s brave new world, it is mooted that there will be semifinals and a final each year, and there will then be a winning team. How will we refer to them – as world champions?
The stature of the RWC couldn’t help but be diminished – will the RWC winners be a better class of world champion than the annual ones?
Every time anyone from World Rugby mentions player welfare I smile, and last week we were told their commitment to it was ‘unwavering’. This is the organisation that has sanctioned the RWC, where teams will be asked to play their four pool games in 23 days, and the best eight will then play up to three more games in the next three weeks. I think that is a barking mad schedule, and it’s driven by the crowded rugby calendar, and the broadcasters’ relentless thirst for more and more games. Where does player welfare fit in?
At the heart of this, of course, is club v country. In the north the club set-up works just fine but I doubt it even registers on World Rugby’s radar. As a committed club fan, that leads me to wonder whether World Rugby have outlived their usefulness? If they disappeared tomorrow, would anyone truly miss them?