Introduce a Plate, Bowl and Shield for the RWC

The idea for minor titles was in 1991 but i think the costs issue (ie get out within 48 hours if you're knocked out) is probably in the pro era.

I wouldnt want to foot the bill for the Tongans to stay at my place for two weeks!!

maybe we should get up a sponsor a rugby minnow program where the players from georgia etc stay at your house for the second two weeks. not saying you're not correctly stating the IRB thinking shahsan but all those arguments are bollocks. if the IRB is thinking that way then we need to find a way to snap them out of it. just thinking maybe money was more of an issue when you raised it in 1991 (amateur days). YES WE CAN!

If only the IRB and RWC thought like that -- sadly, they don't. At the last World Cup, they changed the distribution of the pie such that the bigger guns got EVEN MORE than they did before. They have done and will do nothing to make it easier for the smaller countries to compete. For example, they do not enforce teh rule that clubs have to release contracted players for teh RWC, as Fijia and Tonga found out at the RWC 2007. Face it: even if Samoa were to win the World Cup, how much more revenue would that earn the IRB/RWC from the Samoan TV/stadium markets? However, if they were to lose the interest of countries like, say, Scotland, that can mean a signifcianmt loss of revenue.

Does anybody know how much it would be to house a football team for an extra 2 weeks or so? I can't imagine it would make a huge dent in the IRB's profits, don't they make at least $50m profit or more from each World Cup? They couldn't shell out for a few extra rooms? Sure it would cost a little more, but the goodwill it would create in allowing the "minnows" to compete for a meaningful trophy at a World Cup is surely worth it, as well as growing rugby around the world. Also, if a team has qualified for the World Cup surely they should be afforded a room for the whole tournament, only seems fair.

They could have had help with hosting 3-6 games fewer. They just wanted all the money for themselves. If ever there was a case for a World Cup being farmed out, 2011 was it -- unlike France sharing with Wales in 2007, or Wales sharing with the other home unions in 1999. But yes, Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and even Singapore, Malaysia or Thialand would make good hosts for 1-2 games each.

Shashan, maybe the NZRFU has enough on its plate with the existing tournament. Why don't you write to the island unions/ japan and see if they are interested in hosting the mini-finals? Might be too late for 2011 but 2015 in Europe? 2019 in Asia/Islands?

That won't ever happen! When New Zealand won the right to host RWC 2011, I wrote to the NZRFU to suggest that they could farm out some games to the island nations, who a) could never, ever host a world cup on their own, b) are rugby crazy, c) may not be able to host a whole Pool but could certainly cope with 1-2 matches, the way Adelaide and Tasmania did in 2003, d) could do with the revenue a few thousand rugby fans and some TV money would bring, e) would make fantastic hosts, unlike certain jaded and couldnt-care-less sections of most of teh countries that have hosted RWC. Imagine, for example, Fiji vs Italy in Suva, or Samoa vs Argentina in Apia. What events they would be. Of course, the idea was dismissed completely.

Can I also suggest that we start linking this article to comments in other sites like www.Planet-Rugby.com... see if we can build some popular momentum?

This is a really good idea. Here is a suggestion to address the cost challenge and grow the game. Relocate the shield/bowl plate finals to near by countries and pool the financial resources of those nations to cover costs. This would help grow the rugby infrastructure in the local region too. eg 2011 could play the shield in Japan, the plate in the pacific islands, the bowl in Australia or whatever... 2015 could have the mini finals in other six nations or second tier euro nations. Wouldn't it be great to see packed stadiums in Georgia, Russia, Italy etc and kick-offs scheduled for the benefit of TV audiences. Bring the world cup to the world so to speak.

An alternative idea i thought of, if they insisted on having 20 teams -- which currently creates too many meaningless matches -- is for the top four teams to enter the tournament late. 16 teams could start in 4 pools of four, after which the top two in each pool qualify for the main event (8 teams in all) with the four big guns to form 4 pools of 3. they play a roudn robin and either the top 2 in each go to the quarters or the 4 pool winners go to the semis. This way, the smaller teams will fight like hell to qualify for the final 12 and every game is important (unlike now, where the smallest teams have no chance in all except one match). For teh stronger teams these early games would be a good warmup for tougher battles to come, while for the big four, they dont waste time and risk injuries playing against minnows. The drawbacks would be that the big four would probably play 4-5 matches at most, but they would all be crucial meangful affairs and pratcially do or die. You will see the best of them.

NB: Shield is the lowest level, then Bowl, Plate and Cup. You get all those types of matchups at every 7s tournament and theyre generally as mouth watering as you make them out to be.

I thought of this idea after the 1991 World Cup and wrote to the RWC but got no reply. They probably scoffed that i had watched too many 7s tournaments. A senior RFU offical i spoke to then said it was purely because of money, as Sheek correctly pointed out. As long as teams are kept in the tournament, the bill to host them is horrendously high (which is why they are told to ship out within 48 hours, again as Sheek pointed out), and they dont even have many travelling fans to begin with. Logistically,. if you play, say, a Bowl semifinal between Namibia vs Korea as a curtain raiser for a Cup quarterfinal, how do you get the fans of those teams to leave before the main event starts? Would 50,000 people who bought tickets for SA vs NZ come 2 hours early to watch Namibia vs Korea? And how does this generate more money for teh RWC? I agree it's great idea, even if i say so myself, but it's probably a non-starter.

If I started on the vodkas, I'd need the finals spread over a couple of days! But seriously, imagine the level of interest with a series of finals like those matches.

the gap between tier one and tier two countries is too distant..the same countries that were in the top eight thirty years ago are still there..the usa, china and russia are never going to beat the wallabies, the springboks, all blacks, england, france, ireland, wales, argentina, etc..but sevens rugby- now an olympic sport, and catching on like wildfire around the world - they can.. you people are too close to your 15s rugby to see the big picture..

dunno if starting on the vodka will ensure you make the finish line.

Jason your smack on the money, what a day... 12 pm. Start off with some vodka and wash it down with some john adams 2 pm. Canadian dry and some chianti 5pm. Bordeaux and speckled hen 7.30 Little creature and steinlager What about the boerewors and Castle's?

USA v Russia. Countries that have had quarrels throughout history produce some pretty stirring rugger games. I'd watch that.

I think this is a good idea, it gives the 'minnow' countries such as USA, Canada, Hong Kong something to play for-whether it's a Plate, Bowl or Shield final. In fact, picture how a Rugby World Cup finals day might look like in the future. Let's assume that Australia is the host nation, and this is what the programme should look like: 12:00pm Plate final: USA v Russia 2:00pm Bowl final: Canada v Italy 5:00pm Shield final: France v England 7:30pm Cup final: Australia v NZ

Your idea has the most symmetry but the original idea from this thread is good too. The problem is if they want to stay at 20 teams (and remember that it was actually hard to get 20 teams to next year as NZ wanted to go back to 16) why not top 2 to the cup, next 2 to the plate and bottom team of each pool have themselves a smaller shield knockout