Creating the New International Rugby Cup
Roar Guru By Patstick, 16 Dec 2008 The Crowd is a Roar Guru
- Tagged:
- All Blacks, Europe, International Cup, IRB, Melbourne, Rugby Union, Six Nations, Southern Hemisphere, Springboks, The Springboks, Tri Nations, wallabies
Related coverage
- Rugby Union news
- Wallabies news
- Tri Nations Tournament news
- New Zealand All Blacks news
- South Africa Springboks news
- 2013 Wallabies squad news
While watching the Spring tours of the Southern Hemisphere to the north, and after viewing the ABC documentary on the famous 1984 Grand Slam Wallabies, it occurred to me: why isn’t the Grand Slam a more regular event?
In fact, why not have a new tournament that pits the Six Nations teams against the Tri Nations, Argentina, The Pacific Islanders and the Southern Barbarians (a combined team made up of the best Southern Hemisphere players in Europe) in between World Cups?
Call it The International Cup.
Six weeks of Northern vs Southern Hemisphere rugby, then a final between the two top teams from each hemisphere. That’s 37 games of the highest quality rugby on the earth!
This tournament would be a huge boost for international rugby, not to mention a financial bonanza for the country hosting it. When Southern Hemisphere teams host, the Northern Hemisphere sides would tour that country and when Northern Hemisphere sides host Southern Hemisphere teams tour.
So if Australia hosted, you would have the Wallabies based at the Olympic Stadium, the All Blacks in Melbourne (MCG or Docklands Stadium), the Springboks at Subiaco, Argentina at Suncorp, Pacific Islanders at Canberra Stadium, and the Southern Barbarians at Aussie Stadium, with all the Northern Hemisphere teams touring Australia.
The final would be played at either the Olympic Stadium or MCG.
This would be an amazing tournament for players, spectators and Unions alike. Even the IRB would make a truck full of money.
And it would answer the question of who is the best team in world rugby. Bring it on!
Looking to join The Roar team? We're searching for an experienced Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. Yes, this does mean you get to work with the site all day long! If you're a digital media sales star, we want to hear from you. Apply now.
December 16th 2008 @ 4:18am
pothale said | December 16th 2008 @ 4:18am | Report comment
Eh ok.
If it’s a cup competition then it would have to be on a knockout basis, unless you fix the teams into two strands.
So the 6 Nations would be re-run two months after it had been played? Why bother? Why not make it 6 teams from each hemisphere? FIJI and SAMOA do pretty well and would be better than Pacific Islanders.
Hosting it in one country makes sense. Yep.
The best team in the world would not be the outcome, however. SA or NZ might be better than the winner of NH teams, but only would get a chance to be in final if you keep it in two fixed strands.
If you really want a global grand slam – even though I hate that phrase – Create a 6 nations championship from both spheres, and they all play each other. They all play each other and get bragging rights to have beaten the best of the best in that year.
Only problem to solve now is finding the time for it to happen.
December 16th 2008 @ 7:07am
sambobly said | December 16th 2008 @ 7:07am | Report comment
I think that in this idea all the sides should tour the nation involved. So for example the Wallabies would play games in sydney, brisbane, melbourne etc. I thiink that would probably be better for the fans so everyone gets a chance to see most teams live in action. Under your current structure they would only see just over half the teams, all NH and the one SH one who is based in the city/town.
December 16th 2008 @ 7:22am
sheek said | December 16th 2008 @ 7:22am | Report comment
I love, or used to love, the grand slam tours gee Pothale, here I go again – reminiscing!
However, we have a thing called the world cup, which has overtaken the GS tours in importance. Also, it’s not possible to implement every conceivable competition. The pros can only play so many quality games in a year.
December 16th 2008 @ 7:29am
pothale said | December 16th 2008 @ 7:29am | Report comment
There you go, Sheek – glad you said it. I wanted to write that, but I thought hitting the poor guy first up would be a bit demoralising. 3rd post lets him down gently.
December 16th 2008 @ 7:36am
LeftArmSpinner said | December 16th 2008 @ 7:36am | Report comment
I like the idea but it will need to replace existing games. I’m with Sheek as regards the finite number of games a player can play. So, the IRB needs to make every game played by the elite, the most effective possible. For example, an elite player playing for england and the Newcastle falcons will play in front of 80,000 spectators and a massive global TV audience when playing for England and in front of an average crowd of 5300 spectators and presumably a similarly small TV audience. Sadly in England, the clubs run the show!!! And its not as if NEwcastle hasn’t signed high profile players.
The Spring tour windows can be better utilised to the benefit of all concerned. At the moment, the Euro clubs dont get it.
Despite their protestations, the Billionaires put their money up for the fun of running a rugby club. I will eat my hat if they ever make any money. Just look at the EPL, wealthy owners come, run out of money and/or interest and depart!
December 16th 2008 @ 7:46am
pothale said | December 16th 2008 @ 7:46am | Report comment
And what about the Summer tours?
December 16th 2008 @ 8:12am
sheek said | December 16th 2008 @ 8:12am | Report comment
What I would like to see, which is a compromise combination of the present & the past, is this (based on southern hemisphere teams).
A maximum of 12 tests per year, with the exception of WC years. The 12 tests would be made up as follows:
3 inbound tests (6N – our winter tours). Two against nation A, one against nation B.
6 4N matches per year – home & away against NZ, SA & Arg.
3 outbound tests (6N – our summer tours). One test each against nations C, D & E.
I still think 12 is too many annual tests. So reduce the 4N to just one match against the other 3. Then perhaps add a match against a 2nd tier nation, either home or away, or alternate. Of course, the NH 6N play the extra 2 matches compared to SH 4N.
In world cup years, you would have the inbound tests (3), plus 4N (3), followed by the world cup (replacing outbound tests). The WC would see each country play 4-7 matches depending on how far they progress. Thus, in WC years, you could play between 10-13 tests.
When the Lions tour, their 3 tests would obviously replace the 3 inbound tour tests. For inbound & outbound & as well as Lions tours, it would be great to have several non-test matches. These are great for developing new talent in non-test conditions.
The Northern hemisphere countries have to get onboard, & send out their strongest teams. If this means moving their domestic comp finals back a month, then so be it. We fit in with them, so they should fit in with us.
December 16th 2008 @ 8:39am
sheek said | December 16th 2008 @ 8:39am | Report comment
With respect to limiting test matches to no more than 10 per year if possible (non-WC years), I’m a great believer of the de Beers (diamonds) principle – increase the intrinsic value of a product by creating an artificial scarcity.
In the past, this principle worked a treat. Today, tests have been devalued & diluted by their proliferation. Quantity doesn’t equate to quality.
December 16th 2008 @ 9:04am
pothale said | December 16th 2008 @ 9:04am | Report comment
The De Beers Diamond Principle – like that. V impressive, Sheek.
Easy to say move back domestic finals a month; much more difficult to achieve.
As it is, NH teams and players play more games during their season. They interlace Heineken Cup across the November period, and then again in January. This is just in time to release the internationals for the 6 Nations. As this just finishes, the Henieken knock-out stages commence – albeit for a small number of teams – and the Magners League, Top 14 and Premiership conclude up to May with finals competing across the various stages. Then it’s June – time to head south or West for Churchill, Americas, or Lions or SANZAR tests. Finish those, and grab holidays and back to training to start the whole thing again in August.
I figure if a new comp emerges, then something existing is going to have to be dropped – playing around with the calendar won’t do it.
December 16th 2008 @ 12:30pm
ohtani's jacket said | December 16th 2008 @ 12:30pm | Report comment
There was some talk earlier in the year about having a 10 team world championship every two years, but I don’t see the point. Either you have a World Cup or you have World Championships. Rugby can’t sustain both.
The Munster game was the highest rated game on the All Blacks’ recent Grand Slam tour, IIRC. That was a midweek game on a Wednesday. I’d rather see those kind of matches than have more Tests.