Rugby World Cup 2011 Preview

RWC 2011 Preview [email protected] Page 1 of 5

Rugby World Cup 2011 Preview – RWC Should be Better The Rugby World Cup tournament is not as good as it should be. Existing 20 team structure means not enough games between top sides and too many meaningless and non competitive games between top sides and developing nations. In this article Rob Mumford looks at why RWC should be better and how a Super Pools structure could make it so. Like millions of rugby fans around the world I’m looking forward very much to the upcoming World Cup. Of course I’m hoping that my beloved All Blacks can break their 24 year duck but I’m also excited about the prospect of a banquet of thrilling and highly competitive rugby as world rugby’s four year cycle reaches its climax. I’m hoping too that this time round the All Blacks get at least one tough pool match as in 2007 the only potentially competitive match was ruined by Scotland fielding a B team and going down 40-0.

While I’m confident that the All Blacks have a great chance of lifting the cup the chances of seeing a feast of compelling and competitive rugby are not quite so good and France coach Marc Lievremont has already hinted he could put out a ‘B’ team against the All Blacks in their Pool A clash. Even Japan coach John Kirwin admits that the Cherry Blossoms’ match against the All Blacks is not the team’s priority, and then there is the small matter of 170,000 unsold tickets just 4 days out from kickoff. It seems something is not quite right in the RWC kitchen!

Sadly it seems that like in previous cups RWC 2011 will just not be as good as it should be. This wonderful moment and opportunity in the sporting world’s spotlight will be good but will leave a somewhat bitter taste in their mouths of many as a result of too few games between the top sides and too many meaningless and non competitive games between top tier teams and developing nations. Worse still is that many developing nations will have only 3 days rest between games while top sides will get all the rest they need! This hardly seems like the recipe for a highly competitive and sporting Rugby World Cup. Rugby could and should do better.

Not all rugby stakeholders share this view however. The IRB’s press release called the 2007 tournament “The most successful in the tournament’s 20-year history. Attracting record attendances, broadcast coverage and generating a festival atmosphere, the tournament also proved to be incredibly competitive”. I have no doubt that revenue and attendances were higher than in previous cups, I don’t believe though that they were maximised, but to say that the tournament was “incredibly competitive” is at best a great exaggeration, at worst a downright lie! Let’s look at the facts. Not Enough Competitive Matches The IRB in its explanation of the world rankings calculation states “It is significant whether sides win relatively comfortably - with something to spare” A relatively comfortable win according to the IRB is one with a margin of victory of 16 points or more. By extension we can consider a match with a margin of up to 15 points to be a competitive game and one with a margin of 16 or over would be considered non competitive. Of course there will be exceptions to this general rule (Fiji Vs SA 2007). During the pool phase of the 2007 tournament 40 matches were played. Of these 40 matches only 15, or 38%, resulted in full time margins of up to 15 points. From a


statistical point of view it’s hard to classify a return of 38% competitive matches as being “incredibly competitive” Watching fans know very well what they saw!

RWC - Number of Competitive Pool Games (Margin of 15 points or under) 1987 1991 1995 1999 2003 2007 Total

Pool Matches 24 24 24 30 40 40 182 Competitive Games 8 11 8 8 10 15 60 Competitive % 33% 46% 33% 27% 25% 38% 33%

Looking slightly deeper we find that only 36 (20%) of the 182 pool matches played to date have resulted in a “bonus point” winning margin of 7 points or less. (Compared with 43% in Super Rugby 2011, and 37% in NPC 2010)

RWC - Number of Bonus Point Pool Games (Margin of 7 points or under) 1987 1991 1995 1999 2003 2007 Total Pool Matches 24 24 24 30 40 40 182 Bonus Point Games 5 5 6 4 6 10 36 Competitive % 21% 21% 25% 13% 15% 25% 20%

If anyone is still unconvinced about RWC’s uncompetitive nature they should know that the average points difference in pool matches is a whopping 30 points! Twice that of what the IRB considers to be a competitive game!

RWC - Average winning margin for Pool games 1987 1991 1995 1999 2003 2007 Total Pool Matches 24 24 24 30 40 40 182 Average winning margin 27 20 27 33 36 31 30

It’s clear that the RWC cup in its current structure is far from highly competitive and that something must be done to make it a better tournament for all stakeholders. World Rugby’s Great Divide - Top 12 Vs Next Tier The composition of the World’s Top 12 sides as per the IRB rankings has hardly changed since the rankings started in 2003. These Top 12 are Argentina, Australia, England, Fiji, France, Ireland, Italy, New Zealand, South Africa, Samoa, Scotland, and Wales. Samoa, Fiji, and Italy have sometimes slipped to 13th in the rankings, while Next Tier nations Japan and Tonga have on occasion scrapped their way into 12th, but basically the Top 12 is as consolidated as it could be. It is very rare for a team outside the Top 12 to beat one of the “established order” and only once has a Next Tier team made it to the quarter finals of a RWC (Canada in 1991). Despite this clear divide and the high improbability of an “upset” the current RWC format sees a majority of games played between Top 12 and Next Tier teams. The results are predictable. During RWC 2007 24 of 40 pool games were played between Top 12 sides and Next Tier sides. Only one, that between 15th ranked Tonga and 11th ranked Samoa, resulted in a next tier win. Of 100 RWC pool games from 1987 to 2007 just four times has a Next Tier team upset a team in the Top 12! How long will fans continue to turn up and turn on for these mismatches? In RWC 2011 22 of 40 scheduled pool matches will be played between Top 12 sides and Next Tier nations and 170,000 tickets remain unsold!


RWC - Top 12 Vs Next Tier games

1987 1991 1995 1999 2003 2007 Total

Number of games 12 11 11 18 24 24 100 Top 12 wins 12 9 11 17 24 23 96 Next Tier wins 0 2 0 1 0 1 4

Next Tier Wins % 0% 18% 0% 6% 0% 4% 4%

A popular result tipping competition in New Zealand had to be completely revamped from its Super 12 format for the RWC 2007. It was no use asking fans to just predict winners of games as any mildly interested observer knew who would win most of them! Little Rest for Developing Nations In the IRB’s strategic plan of 2004 it states one of the goals of the RWC tournament as being to “Deliver a highly competitive and sporting World Cup”. We have seen already that the 2007 cup, as well as its predecessors, was a long way from being “highly competitive” Lets now look at just how sporting a tournament 2007 was. Rugby is a contact sport and its demands physically are immense, after 80 minutes players are exhausted mentally and physically. In order to perform at peak level it is essential that players get a chance to fully recover between games. At RWC due to scheduling requirements and the need to complete pool games over a fixed period of time this will always be difficult. At RWC 2007 the schedule was organized to ensure that the games biggest eight teams (Home nations, France, and Tri Nations countries) would not be required to play again without at least four full rest days between games. The remaining 12 teams all had to play after only three days rest. In 2011 not only do developing nations have to backup after just 3 or 4 days rest they also have to get through their 4 pool games in a significantly shorter time span than favoured top nations. So the countries generally considered to be better prepared physically are given a further leg up over the developing nations. How sporting is that?

RWC 2011 - Minimum Rest Days between Pool matches(3 or 4 days rest is pretty tough at this level!)

Cana

da

Rom

ania

Scot

land

Geo

rgia

USA

Nam

ibia

Sam

oa

Japa

n

Tong

a

Russ

ia

Ital

y

Sout

h Af

rica

Fran

ce

Engl

and

Aust

ralia

Irel

and

Wal

es

New

Zea

land

Arge

ntin

a

Fiji

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Day

s


RWC 2011 - Days between First and Last Pool match by team(More days = better recovery and training)

USA

Nam

ibia

Sam

oa

Russ

ia Japa

n Cana

da

Rom

ania

Geo

rgia

Sout

h Af

rica

Aust

ralia

Scot

land

Ital

y

Fran

ce

Engl

and

Irel

and

Wal

es Tong

a

Arge

ntin

a

Fiji N

ew Z

eala

nd

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

Day

s

Spare a thought for: Namibia – In 11 RWC games played and lost to date Namibia has an average losing margin of 55 points. In 2011 they play 4 Top 12 teams in just 16 days! Fat chance they have! USA - Play 4 games in only 16 days and 2 games after only 3 days rest. Georgia - 4 games in 18 days, 2 games after only 3 days rest. Samoa – Giant killers a month ago they will soon find out how tough they are when they play 4 games in 16 days in 2011’s toughest pool! Take a breather guys: New Zealand - 23 days to play 4 pool games, minimum of 6 days rest between games Argentina, Fiji – 22 days for 4 pool games, minimum of 6 days between games Tonga, Wales, Ireland, England, France – 5 days minimum rest and 4 games in 21 days.

If developing nations thought getting to the Cup was tough they will be thinking again after seeing the schedule! While it’s certainly good to see teams like Fiji, Tonga, and Argentina getting a better deal this time round its sad to see qualifiers whose losing performances were so highly praised in 2007 continuing to get such a raw deal.

Super Pools the Way Forward

It sounds like a massive project to overhaul the World Cup but actually it may not be all that difficult. I feel that a small change to the World Cup format and the creation of Super Pools would provide a huge boost to the tournament. The Super Pools structure would be achieved by splitting the 20 qualifiers into top 10 and next 10 teams based on a simplified qualifying system and geographical split from existing IRB tournaments. The top 10 are split into 2 Super Pools of 5 teams to play for the World Cup, and the next 10 qualifiers are also split into 2 Super Pools and would play for the RWC Trophy. This would give these exciting Super pools:

World Cup Super Pool 1 New Zealand South Africa France Wales Scotland World Cup Super Pool 2 Australia Argentina England Ireland Samoa

RWC Trophy Super Pool 3 Italy Tonga Russia Canada Namibia RWC Trophy Super Pool 4 Georgia Fiji Romania USA Japan


Each team would play the 4 other teams in its pool with the top 2 in each pool qualifying for semi finals. (Quarter finals would be eliminated) All teams get 4 meaningful games against similar level opposition and finalists would play 6 games. There would be 20 pool games played between the top 10 teams and 20 between next 10. World Cup would run for 6 weeks as it does currently and qualifying would get a boost as established nations want to ensure they make the Top 10. Super Pool structure would enable a level playing field as World Cup games could be played on Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays, while RWC Trophy games would take place on Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays. Minimum rest period between games would be increased to 5 days and a more sporting tournament would be the result. Super Pools would provide: More matches between Top 12 sides More competitive matches. (I estimate around 70% Vs 38% in 2007) Better way to decide World Champion as luck of pool draw is reduced to almost nil. Meaningful goal and competition for Next Tier teams – not just target practice. Reduction in points difference Eliminate uneven and unfair differences in rest periods I’m convinced that the Super Pool concept would make for a very competitive tournament that would be great for players, supporters, and administrators of all participating countries. I’m also certain that this format would stoke the fire of the IRB’s financial engine and provide increased revenues for world-wide game development. Now with just days to go until RWC 2011 kicks off I’m very much looking forward to the action getting underway. I can’t say however that I’m looking forward to seeing the All Blacks again get through their pool matches without a scratch or seeing Namibia losing another 4 matches by 55 points each. Rugby fans around the world know what they saw in 2007 and don’t want any more of that unappetizing fare. They want meaningful competitive games, they want to see the top sides in action against each other. The RWC should be the pinnacle of rugby achievement and organization but right now it’s not nearly as good as it could be. “In seeing clearly begins real responsibility”, Ben Okri (winner of 1991 Booker prize) Rob Mumford is a New Zealand Chartered Accountant, specialist in performance measurement and occasional rugby writer. He has been living in Argentina for the last 10 years and is tired of having to explain to Argentine taxi drivers that the All Blacks are not the World Champions and in fact haven’t won the cup for 24 years!

Documents

Rugby World Cup 2011 Preview