By important I mean touches the most people, with a global footprint that extends over multiple continents, and is the most sought after and important tournament for that particularly sport.
This, in my opinion, rules out tennis’ Davis Cup, which comes second to the individual players’ careers and Grand Slams.
And I’m not talking about multi-disciplined Olympics either, but strictly national team competitions played with one ultimate prize/title at stake. Plus, as part of the purpose is to find which sport has the second biggest global footprint, let’s ignore the women’s football World Cup – also on the horizon in 2011.
I’m aware there’s a fair bit of personal preference when discussing such matters; obviously there will be an alliance to your preferred sport. But taking bias out of the equation, there must be some way to determine a runner-up. Is there?
Clearly important traits should include: multiple representatives from the six continents (one day, Antarctica), competitive representatives from those continents who do more than just make up the numbers, and a World Cup/championship that is considered the ultimate prize within that sport, i.e. not diminished by other competitions.
There are four contenders: cricket’s World Cup, rugby’s World Cup, hockey’s World Cup and basketball’s world championship. (Rugby league fans, your game doesn’t have the global footprint of rugby union. Don’t shoot the messenger.)
Cricket, in my opinion, is the first World Cup that’s cut from the race, with only five continents represented at the current World Cup (no South American teams); minimal continental European representation (just Holland); the smallest global footprint of the four contenders; and dominated by Commonwealth countries.
Its global reach just doesn’t cut it.
And with the ICC set to cut spots at the World Cup, lowering the amount of minnows represented in the tournament, that footprint will be further diminished.
Also, as the World Cup only represents one of three formats, it’s not exactly indicative of the greatest performing team in the sport as a whole – after all, the World Cup is played with the format that has come under the heaviest criticism and examination in recent time.
Some would even argue the Ashes is more important to England and Australia than the World Cup, diminishing the latter’s status.
That leaves rugby union, basketball and hockey. The latter is the next to be cut. Hockey has a strong global footprint, with powerhouse countries across Europe and Asia, not to mention Australia. But the lack of real representatives from the Americas and Africa hurts hockey’s reach.
No representative from those continents have ever challenged at a hockey World Cup.
And its appeal and popularity is severely lacking compared to rugby and basketball, let alone the eliminated cricket. Even in Australia, where our national team is one of the powerhouse countries and have tasted success, players are relative strangers. A hockey World Cup hardly galvanizes Australia.
So it comes down to basketball and rugby union, and this is where things get interesting…
Basketball’s world championship had a significant head start on the rugby World Cup, and enjoys a much greater presence in Asia, continental Europe, South America (Argentina defeated the USA in the first ever world basketball championship’s in 1950, while Brazil is the fourth most successful) and, obviously, North America.
With the growth of the NBA as a globalised product that has embraced international players, the competitiveness of Spain, Greece, Argentina, Turkey and Lithuania, for example, cannot be questioned as they’ve all medaled at the last three world championships.
While rugby has a strong South American representative in Argentina, continental Europe in France and to a lesser extent Italy, South Africa, New Zealand and Australia, and Japan representing Asia, its reach is still limited compared to rugby’s.
It has the reach over rugby, but does basketball’s world championship resonate like the rugby World Cup? Basketball, despite its increasing global presence, hasn’t totally shaken its “American sport” tag, unlike rugby which has successfully spread and ingrained across a number of continents and countries – think South Africa and New Zealand.
There is still the perception that the USA could wipe the floor with the rest of the world if it fielded its best talent from the NBA, if those egos could be molded into a better cohesive team unit.
Also, with an Olympic presence that includes the pros, some of the shine taken off the world championships, not to mention from the immensely popular NBA, which overshadows the national team basketball scene. At least in rugby the World Cup is the sole and definitive world title, which sits at the top of the sport.
Perhaps there’s an inherent Australian bias at play here that I can’t shake, as basketball remains a fringe sport while the rugby World Cup matters so much more to us Aussies, but it seems the rugby World Cup just edges the basketball world championship for those reasons outlined.
Is the rugby World Cup the most important international team tournament outside of football’s World Cup? It’s debatable.
Follow Adrian on twitter @AdrianMusolino
AlexMilic
Roar Rookie
FIBA World Cup is at no2 most certainly. It is huge in Europe as big as football. In some countries it is the number one sport. Spain, Russia, Greece, Italy are the best leagues but you should add Serbia and Lithuania into that as they produce the most players in the leagues and basketball is the no1 sport in those countries. Serbia produces the most managers also and it is a world powerhouse. More fans go to basketball matches in most countries than football matches. Spainish league matches are always packed and Spain is world champion in football. Barcelona is the best basketball club and at nearly every match you will see the footballers attending the games. Handball is another huge sport. FIBA def no2 on the list!!!!
Lolly
Guest
Are you sure? I reckon an Olympic title is at least on par with and probably above a World Cup for hockey.
Lolly
Guest
I think it's the same with hockey - male and female - in all honesty. Everyone wants the Gold Medal most of all. The World Cup is a big deal but it's not the same as winning the Olympic title. By the way, Argentina is a very high quality hockey nation. South Africa makes the finals of the big tournaments in men's and women's hockey from time to time. I hate it when people claim that a sport isn't played 'here, there' blahdeblah. Hockey seems to follow football pretty much. Where's there is footy, there is hockey. Which makes the Kookas cleaning up of the big trophies recently pretty damn cool. And the South Koreans, like the Chinese, seem to play everything. They'll take up cricket next.
Danny Myers
Guest
and what continent is ireland from? africa? ireland was part of the cricket world cup.. but apart from that i agree with your statement.. rugby would come second after footie..
gwynne
Guest
Have to agree with you there, The ice hockey world champs were played recently and clashed with the NHL finals series, only a few NHL players went across to compete and none played from teams still active in the finals, An Olympic Gold is far more important than a world championship in ice hockey, as they actually stop the NHL season while the winter Olympics are on but continue on playing when the world championships are on
gwynne
Guest
Pretty sure volleyball should be somewhere on this list, may not be big in Australia but is pretty big across Europe, the Americas and is growing in Asia. Also, from what I've read Cricket and Hockey have way more followers (mostly because of the support in the sub-continent) then either of the two rugby codes and basketball.
kovana
Roar Pro
That 2007 is quite an amazing figure... Higher then the 1998 Fifa WC which had avg attd of 43,517 per match.
methysticum
Guest
The rise in popularity of the Rugby World Cup can be seen by comparing the total attendance figures from the first invitational tournament held in New Zealand and Australia in 1987 to the latest one held in France in 2007. 1987 New Zealand/Australia 600,000 1991 UK and France 1,000,000 1995 South Africa 1,100,000 1999 UK and France 1,700,000 2003 Australia 1,900,000 2007 France 2,240,000 The figures for RWC 2007 in France represent an average match attendance of 47,000 across the 48 Tournament matches, in which the host France lost the third-place playoff to Argentina.
It was supposed to read "so many foreign players plying their trade in the NBA". The edit fundtion was not working. It reads like they are being plied with drinks ;)
Brendon - I just read this post and I laughed. When it comes to a global game like basketball then what one country thinks in this instance ,the USA thinks, is not the whole story. For example, England did not bother turning up to Football World Cups until 1950 because they thought they were above it all. In 2006 Greece defeated a U.S team in the semis which consisted of Lebron James, Carmelo Anthony, Dwight Howard etc, etc. This would have been unheard of decades ago. This is a testament to the global reach and development of the game. This is why you see so many now plying their foreign players in the NBA, or haven't you noticed that?? "In the 2010-11 NBA Season, there are 84 international players from 38 countries, most of them European. This is a new record, and 28 of the NBA 's 30 teams feature at least one foreign player." Who know's what, Brendon???
Rusty
Roar Guru
Yawn - classic response from supporter of a game realistically only based in two countries..one of which the working mans sport of choice is 'futball' not rugby in any form
Megaman
Guest
Really? Over a Stanley Cup?
kovana
Guest
"let’s compare who has made the Semi-Finals of the Basketball World Champions over the years and who has made the Rugby Union semi-finals. In otherwords lets compare the competitivness of the tournaments;" You listed Basketball WC with 19 and RWC with 8. You are comparing the All 17 FIBA WC TOURNAMENTS to RWCs currently 6 tournaments held. A better comparison would be to look at the FIRST 6 FIBA WC and count how many S-finalists they have had.. and ALSO how many winners they have had in those first 6 tournaments. FIBA WC S-finals (First 6 tournaments) = 10 nations 5 Different nations won the FIBA WC. RWC S-finals = 8 nations 4 different nations have won the RWC.
kovana
Guest
Bush.. "Only four countries have won (England, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa)." Can you PLEASE add how many RWCs have been played?
kovana
Guest
Also.. On the Baseball World cup held in 2009... Can you tell me who won the 2009 Baseball WC? It was USA. Games played : 106 Attendance 126,799 (1,196 per game) And if no one knew.. The Baseball world cup is also being held this year..with Panama as host.
kovana
Guest
The article is not talking about popularity of the CODE.. But which has a bigger and more important World cup. I think one of the reasons why SOME people view the RWC as a bigger event then the Baskeball WC is because of the huge WC crowd attendance for the RWC, 2nd only to the Fifa WC......, whilst ignoring the fact the Bball is played in smaller stadiums.
kovana
Guest
"Rugby’s only chance of evangelism was strict amateurism. Maybe with live TV it’s different now…but it’ll never be a game the working class can/or even choose to identify with" Sorry Jared.. But im gonna have to call you out on that one.. What about the Coal miners from Wales? The Farmers, shearers in NZ countryside? Dont forget the Samoan, Fijian and Tongan isles where subsistence farming was the only way of life with rugby as the national sport? The generalisation that Rugby is a 'elitist' game holds no truth in much the same why that only uneducated people play Rugby league.. There is no truth to any of these generalisations.
kovana
Guest
"n Rugby, its the fact that only 5 teams have ever made the final, and for all i know the Semi finals. " 8 nations have made the Semifinals in the RWC..The others are Wales, Scotland and Argentina. Its also a fact that there have only been 6 RWC in the history of rugby... 4 different winners in 6 tournaments aint too bad.. Considering that the first 6 Fifa WC also had 4 different winners.
kovana
Guest
Isn’t the all-time leading point scorer for Italy an Argentinian? True. But he is also a Italian Citizen.
kovana
Guest
Just wish to point out some things. Lebanon do play rugby. They are part of the Asian Rugby Union.. But still have not achieved full membership status. They also played a test match against Jordan on 14-May-2010.. They won 27-8. They also have a website/ http://www.rugbylebanon.com/ As for America. Number Of Registered Players : 88151 Number Of Clubs: 2433 However a recent report in February has it grown by 8.7%... The 3rd fastest growing sport in USA. So adding that 8.7% to last years 88151.. You get a total of : 95,820 registered players. http://www.espnscrum.com/other/rugby/story/134246.html "So, if you’re going by popularity and population size",.. So you are ruling out Argentina, South Africa, France, England , Ireland from this counting as well?