By: gam.wilson@xtra.co.nz
28/12/2008
7:01 am Yahoo! Profile:
gam.wilson@xtra.co.nz Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| There is a depraved person floating around on all the sports threads.. |
|
By: m-family@xtra.co.nz
8/08/2008
9:14 pm Yahoo! Profile:
m-family@xtra.co.nz Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
World Cup should be a 12 team comp
The 3 top teams from the previous tournament automatical qualify.
The 3 next highest ranked teams over the next three years auto qualify
The last six spots are decided on a 24 team straight knockout tournament. Play that tourney in J.apan, Italy, samoa etc
In WC 2 pools of 6, they play each team in their pool once and the top 2 teams go through to the semis.
Not perfect but neither is their current structure |
|
By: nicolte
8/08/2008
9:13 am Yahoo! Profile:
nicolte Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
grrrrrrghh, larksea, you got me started again now (from the Springboks thread). I copped a major hiding for my opinion on the RWC format, it was just "sour grapes"........but it never was, I really do think it needs an overhaul if it is truly to be considered the pinnacle of rugby to win. And like you have just outlined with the way the Tri Nations is developing, 1 off games mean diddly.
I have NP with the group stages 20 teams, 4 groups of 5, top 2 from each group go through.
After that, from Quarters, Semi, and final, are ALL best of 3 games. Then and only then I might give it the respect it is due and stop calling it the "once every 4 year knockout comp" and call it by it proper title because it would actually be deserved of it with this format. |
|
By: a.abel@xtra.co.nz
5/01/2008
10:10 am Yahoo! Profile:
a.abel@xtra.co.nz Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
The only "tweak" I would like to see to the existing format is for the 3rd and 4th from each pool play in a second tier knockout
Re: Why bother playing minnows.
One of the purposes of the World Cup is to promote the game internationally. I recall the boost soccer got in New Zealand when they qualified for the World Cup. They were on a hiding to nothing when they got there , but just getting there was a major achievement. |
|
By: robyndavies18
31/10/2007
9:50 am Yahoo! Profile:
robyndavies18 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
top 4 in 2007 cup are in a pool each
eg Pool A SA Pool B France Pool C Eng Pool D Arg
then draw the next 4 eg NZ,Aus,Scot,Fiji(so we know we gonna get 1 real tough game)
then its free for all for the rest(they get put whever)
then last 8 should play each other: top 4 decided: and then top 2 play for world cup bottom 2 3rd & 4th
it will take a while but its the fairest way to determine whose champions (if we were to play under that system we would of made last 4
i guess im dreamin but the draw should definetly start with top 4 in 2007 tournament |
|
By: larksea
31/10/2007
9:43 am Yahoo! Profile:
larksea Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
SA did not face a single realistic WC contender the whole tournament. Not even in the final
Even the SA's will admit as many did that SA pretty much had it won once NZ were out. It was theirs to lose.
not their fault
The AB's had a string of nothing pointless games against teams who had no chance of winning so their only goal was to put the AB's off their game to lower the scoring rate. Then next up the AB's have a sudden death final?
The world cup format is flawed on many levels. |
|
By: awesome_cruz_lol
31/10/2007
7:39 am Yahoo! Profile:
awesome_cruz_lol Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| i hate to say this coz im aa die hard all blacks fan but alot of this stuff that has been said sounds like excuses for the all blacks losing the best team in the world will step up higher than the level of their opposistion no matter who they have played earlier this year the all blacks beat the south africans in south africa a south african team which had been together for atleast 6 weeks and who were fill of confidence after winning the super 14 the all blacks won that game and they had been playing a 3rd string french team the all blacks just didnt step up on the day and saying it was because they had easy pool games is just stupid the hardest game the south africans played was in the final they had no hard games up till then but they stepped up on the day. the format of the rugby world cup is fine the way it is now maybe they could just make it 16 teams the world cup is not only to find the best team but it is a celebration of rugby thats the reason its only played once every 4 years just leave it the way it is |
|
By: m.graham38
30/10/2007
9:25 am Yahoo! Profile:
m.graham38 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Why change the format?? So the All Blacks get harder games in qualifying rounds. If that be the case, then just get rid of the so called "minnow teams" and let the World Cup be decided amongst the top 8 teams in World Rugby at the start of World Cup year.
This way, teams will know they are about to play in a tournament and train as such.
We will then have a better spectacle of rugby to watch and no team will have an excuse for losing.
The goal over four years should not be to participate at the World Cup, it should be to prove you are worthy of participating at the World Cup. And every team has 4 years to solidify themselves into the top 8 of World Rugby.
If the IRB wants rugby to be strengthened around the World, then this concept will help as it will then make the minnow teams think more seriously about raising the standards of their own rugby to make them more competitive against the much stronger World Unions.
The World Cup isn't about participation, it's about being the best in the World at that chosen sport.
What country actually celebrates their National side being humiliated 100+ - 0??? What country wants the World to see them as a laughing stock in a sport??? |
|
By: nicolte
30/10/2007
9:14 am Yahoo! Profile:
nicolte Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| There are a lot of ideas larksea, and I dont really mind what they come up with, just as long as it makes the test matches in-between RWC games more than "friendlies" and "rebuilding" games, otherwise the positives for having the RWC are outweighed by negatives. |
|
By: larksea
30/10/2007
8:40 am Yahoo! Profile:
larksea Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
lots of ideas.
Many things they can do to make it more interesting and meaningfull.
I also like the idea of 2 pools round robin, winner of each pool play best of 3 to find the winner. 2nd from each group can play for 3-4 playoff.
Something else could be a massive worldwide comp rather than all in one place. so the year to year test matches become the world cup. |
|
By: nicolte
30/10/2007
7:28 am Yahoo! Profile:
nicolte Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Make non RWC test matches count!
In addition to changing the format for the RWC, I would also like to see the introduction of a RWC shield to go with the Webb Ellis trophy.
The RWC winner receives both Cup & Shield. The cup is kept for the duration of the 4 years, the shield would be on offer for ALL "home" games of the season by the holder. If the holder does not lose a home game all season, then the highest ranked country will challenge for the shield as the last test match of the year. If during the year the RWC holder loses the shield then they(RWC Cup holders) will challenge whichever team is the current holder and this will be the last test match of the year. At the end of the 4 years the shield is held on to by the holder. If the holder is also the RWC holder then the highest ranked side will challenge as the last international game of the year, if the team in possession is not the RWC holder, then the team with the cup get to challenge.
What this system does is make sure that ALL teams are trying to attain the highest rank possible so as they get a chance to challenge for the shield at the end of the year. So OK, you got the Webb Ellis for 4 years, lets see if you can defend the shield. |
|
By: rugger.dawg
29/10/2007
7:21 pm Yahoo! Profile:
rugger.dawg Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| I'd like to see an 8-8 split round robin tournament maybe with one extra week where the top 2 teams from each group play in finals for 'Bill' in the top level and a new cup for the lower level. This way we'd get to see 28 (or 29 games with the final) games between teams in the top 8, and 56-58 games in total for only one extra week if the finals were included. Compare that to France where there were 48 games in total - only 11 of which were between teams that were ranked in the top 8 at the start of the WC and 5 of which were in pool play (if my counting is correct). It could even be extended to an 8-8-8 split if venues and organization allowed. |
|
By: larksea
29/10/2007
8:05 am Yahoo! Profile:
larksea Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
I think this will be the 3rd time I have posted this, I think the pools are the problem. Take the AB's for example, all piss easy games then a sudden death final?.... Reality is only a small number of pool games were really worth watching in this last WC and really they were the ones involving the smaller & middle ground teams.
- Split the 20 teams into top 10 and low 10
- Then split again into groups of 5
- Round robin the 4 groups
From here I see two options, the one I like does not have a "final" so I listed another option.
Option 1 - I think this setup will mean a LOT of very good games to watch.
- 2 teams from each of the top groups go through, one from each of the low groups goes through.
- 6 teams round robin, winner holds the WC, no every game will be like a final. I think that would be awesome.
Option 2
3 teams from each top pool and 2 teams from each lower pool make up 8 teams for quater finals -> Semi's -> Final
Either option makes for much more interesting pool games, i like option 1 but i doubt everyone will like the idea of no final. I like the idea that every game is important. And being a kiwi I hate the idea that one team can pull the performace of a lifetime out of their arse with the help of the ref and take a side out in one day with an upset. :p |
|
By: nicolte
28/10/2007
9:43 am Yahoo! Profile:
nicolte Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
just trying to think of a BETTER RWC format.
same as current system "top 2" qualify from 4 pools of 4 or 5 (a,bc,d)
quarters
qf1
aw vs dru 3 match series
qf2
bw vs cru 3 match series
qf3
cw vs bru 3 match series
qf4
dw vs aru 3 match series
semis
qf1w vs qf2w 3 match series
qf3w vs qf4w 3 match series
final
sf1w vs sf2w 3 match series
if a team beats u once, then this might be attributed to a bad day at the office, the officials, the elements of nature, whatever....
if that same team beats u twice, then surely everyone would have to agree, the opposition are better, as kids we are told that the 2 out of 3 contest is the simplest and fairest way to decide a contest), so regardless of which team you do not play(ab's,aus,eng...), if u are not good enough to beat ANY team twice in a 3 match series, then u cant be "world champions".
is it perfect?nope....would it give a clearer indication of who is "the best team" in world rugby? |
|
By: fatmann63
17/10/2007
7:59 pm Yahoo! Profile:
fatmann63 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Is malzki one of your Pitcairn Island mates, cuzz gvtstkwi07 ?... Just a simple yes or no will do.... WHAT ACTUALLY DOES GO DOWN HERE? |
|
By: gvtstkwi07
17/10/2007
7:51 pm Yahoo! Profile:
gvtstkwi07 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| yeah, thats where waarvanden and his pervert saffa mates are from,sniff-dk-Island. |
|
By: malzski
17/10/2007
7:42 pm Yahoo! Profile:
malzski Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| is that the place where all those guys were sexually abusing all the underage females for years? Pitcairn islands? |
|
By: waarvanden
17/10/2007
7:40 pm Yahoo! Profile:
waarvanden Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| three divisions you say...what division would pitcairn island be in? |
|
By: malzski
17/10/2007
7:36 pm Yahoo! Profile:
malzski Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| World cup format? if England win.... they have with great wins against AU Fr and SA? If SA wins they have played easy beats for the last 2 months until the final? For A world cup event which is every four years with only truely 6 - 8 quality teams (unlike football they are all quality teams)why are they using 'pool' format and not a round robin format like the last cricket world cup? what do you think? Maybe have 3 divisions... top 6, middle 6, bottom 6 ?? we waited 4 years to watch the same old Bullshit pool play for weeks and then to the finals? All the top teams didn't get to play against each other?? its a world cup I know but lets get real we watch a lot of nonsence rugby the first 5 weeks. |
|
