Nations Championship?
-
@chimoaus said in World League Rugby:
There is also the issue of who gets six home games and who gets five. 11 games doesn't split equally.
Meh, non issue. It'll alternate like every other similar tournament. It's not like the 2/3 split in the 6N had done that any harm, and that's a much higher effect than 5/6
-
@Machpants Yeah no doubt however would be a bummer if you host 5 and then get relegated. I guess the major factor is what percentage of total income is hosting a home game. I can't imagine we make that much hosting a game in Nelson so the broadcasting and sponsorship must be worth way more.
-
@Machpants said in World League Rugby:
@chimoaus said in World League Rugby:
There is also the issue of who gets six home games and who gets five. 11 games doesn't split equally.
Meh, non issue. It'll alternate like every other similar tournament. It's not like the 2/3 split in the 6N had done that any harm, and that's a much higher effect than 5/6
It actually would still take some tinkering, as the world league is biennial. Under the current structure that would mean the same 6N teams playing 3 home games each time.
An easy fix, but the fix will still result in complaints as ti will disrupt a 100 and however many year tradition.
-
First of all, we need to sort out the pie in the sky wheat from the chaff.
There's no way in a million years that all the nations making up the WR voting block are going to voluntarily give up and share their host broadcasting rights for their existing competitions to be diverted into a large pot and then shared.
So, obviously, 6N TV rights, despite now possibly making up part of the world league every second year. The 6N unions are not going to give this away. Fair enough. Trickle down effect - therefore the SANZAAR won't break up their own lesser but still pretty good broadcast rights. Therefore Fiji and Japan (in proposed first iteration) will keep their own broadcasting rights. Which would be a possible financial boon for Fiji if they have 3 6N unions and 2 SANZAAR union visiting them each year.
Or else Japan and Fiji somehow get brought into the SANZAAR rights, which would complicate promotion/relegation.
So. In reality. The only extra revenue, to be shared by god-knows how many unions. Is:
- 2 semi-finals, and 1 final. TV Rights & ticket sales.
- An overall league sponsors. Which may crowd out existing sponsors
So, who is looking to benefit from the possible world league?:
- in the original proposal (pools of 3 in June/November windows) the T2 nations were going to benefit. No longer the case apart from a possible annointed 2 (Fiji and Japan)
- If TV rights get pooled. Then SANZAAR benefit hugely to narrow the gap with the NH. But IMO this not going to be a reality.
- A bit of extra pooled revenue from the 2 extra games under WR management every 2 years. Maybe some SH T1 nations might benefit a little from that. Personally I doubt NZ would make much more money from that than their current strategy of playing revenue sharing tests every 2 years.
I'm not dead set against it. But I don't see a lot of financial change from the status quo for the final version I expect to possibly pass.
-
@Rapido said in World League Rugby:
So, who is looking to benefit from the possible world league?:
- in the original proposal (pools of 3 in June/November windows) the T2 nations were going to benefit. No longer the case apart from a possible annointed 2 (Fiji and Japan)
I'd say the T2 and T3 nations are still the biggest winners here. Instead of a series of ad-hoc games each year, they are a part of something much larger and with a prospect of promotion if they succeed.
I'd also suggest the potential for a big-ticket, big-dollar sponsor is far greater under this proposal than the status quo.
While we do OK for jersey sponsors etc., the market for companies to support the Rugby Championship or the mid-year series is pretty thin as I understand it. But a world league? I could see a company like HSBC stumping up big coin for that.
-
Jersey sponsors is a dying revenue stream, although not as much as naming rights. See the struggles in 6N and Euro Cup up north. Companies realise it is orders of magnitude cheaper to use various forms of social media. However being in the Tier 2 comp, regularly, is going to be better for those than current, I certainly agree with that, incl jersey sponsors.
-
Along with getting 6N to agree with relegation, there's this small road bump..
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/rugby/news/article.cfm?c_id=80&objectid=12210817
-
@Machpants Well if the french had more french players there wouldn't be a problem as they would never make the finals anyway.
As a side note, does this make NZ players even more valuable as they do not play internationals? Well until they qualify this is.
-
@Stargazer said in World League Rugby:
Amended proposal (no more semi-finals):
Perfect - exactly what I was calling for earlier in the thread.
The only tweak I would make is that the tables should be NH conference and SH conference and the top of each conference making the final. It will give conference titles a little bit of meaning, but more importantly you avoid South Africa vs New Zealand first week of December in Paris or something.
-
Heard on the radio that Scotland and Ireland aren't keen - at least in terms of the home nations. Interesting as I would have bet the house on England blocking things. I can get Scotland being a bit worried about the relegation side of things, but would have assumed higher revenue could go some way to help them fund development and high performance stuff. I.e the things you need to do to avoid being relegated!
Haven't caught the latest from the players perspective, will be interesting to see if the latest plans get a different flavour of response.
-
So from our perspective, does this mean the end of multiple games against SA and Australia? Or is that competition the same?
I do like that there is more regular contact with all the NH teams, no silliness of years between playing someone like Scotland, and we will see them more regularly in NZ.
-
@Kirwan said in World League Rugby:
So from our perspective, does this mean the end of multiple games against SA and Australia? Or is that competition the same?
It would be the end of home/away TRC format, yes. From comments when it first came out nations would still have the ability to add tests outside that window - whether it is an official WR window or like the out-of-window tests NZ/Wales etc put on remains to be seen.
-
@rotated said in World League Rugby:
@Kirwan said in World League Rugby:
So from our perspective, does this mean the end of multiple games against SA and Australia? Or is that competition the same?
It would be the end of home/away TRC format, yes. From comments when it first came out nations would still have the ability to add tests outside that window - whether it is an official WR window or like the out-of-window tests NZ/Wales etc put on remains to be seen.
Ok, that’s a big plus for me. Much more variety of opponents, no more friendlies, more regular games with tier 1 teams, and a pathway for teams to be promoted on merit.
Travel seems to be the only major downside, or am I missing something?
-
@Kirwan said in World League Rugby:
@rotated said in World League Rugby:
@Kirwan said in World League Rugby:
So from our perspective, does this mean the end of multiple games against SA and Australia? Or is that competition the same?
It would be the end of home/away TRC format, yes. From comments when it first came out nations would still have the ability to add tests outside that window - whether it is an official WR window or like the out-of-window tests NZ/Wales etc put on remains to be seen.
Ok, that’s a big plus for me. Much more variety of opponents, no more friendlies, more regular games with tier 1 teams, and a pathway for teams to be promoted on merit.
Travel seems to be the only major downside, or am I missing something?
Each NH team will have to play 3 away games in June v SH teams. This sin't actually any different to what was occurring before 3 match series were returned in 2012. Although now they count.
The logical divide would be:
- Argentina
- South Africa
- Australia
- Japan
- Fiji
- NZ
It's only the Arg, Saf, Aus schedule that would be difficult.
- One team would do it in a nice order following the earths turn
- another would do it in reverse
- 1 poor bastard team would have to zigzag. Starting in SAF, going right or left, then zagging halfway back again (or keep on going but skipping NZ)
-
TBH I like it. It also provides a pathway for tier 2 nations and currently Fiji get a massive opportunity to take that next step.
