Rugby in Asia is progressing at a very pleasing rate. With the exceptions of Japan and to a lesser degree Hong Kong, the overall level of the game is pretty even relatively speaking.
However, it’s the likes of Japan and Hong Kong that in my opinion must prompt the need for the rethink.
Japan have yet to be really be pressured in the Asian Five Nations format. Hong Kong is their nearest rivals by a minimum of 30 points and that was on a good day for HK and a bad one for Japan.
More recently they have dispatched Kazakhstan by more than 60 and only yesterday humiliated the newly formed UAE side 111 -0 in Dubai. This disparity cannot continue if rugby in Asia is to ever aspire to a regionally competitive standard. Something must be done.
First of all, I’d like to congratulate Japan in particular as its clear for everyone to see their massive improvement over the last four years and in a perfect world they would move on from the Five Nations in which they have vastly outgrown into a higher more competitive competition for the sake of their developmental.
However, in this imperfect world they are currently confined to the Asian structures in place. So what to do? It would be unreasonable to expect Japan to lower its standards; it should be the exact opposite. The obvious answer is to elevate the rest of Asia at a far faster rate than at current. How? Competitions.
Previously I have advocated club competitions, however, on reflection and at least in the medium term, establishing regional championships within the continent to provide greater opportunities for national teams and unions to compete internationally under the watchful eyes of dedicated development officers assigned solely to the development of each individual region. My suggestions are:
Arab/Central Asian Championship – With the Arabian Gulf disbanding last season the opportunity now exists to create a regional championship to assist in the development of Arab/Central Asian rugby.
Running two pools and including states such as the UAE, Bahrain, Qatar, Iran, Lebanon, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Jordan, Pakistan etc. The IRB could provide each nation with at least five more opportunities to play international rugby.
The winner of each pool would then play off in a home and away format to determine the regional champion. This would tap into regional rivalries and provide them with a structure to build its grassroots works around.
South East Asian Rugby Championship – Once again split into two pools and aiming to provide at least five more international playing opportunities this championship would follower exactly the same format and structure as the Central Asian Championship. It would be reasonable to include Hong Kong, Singapore, Thailand, Malaysia, Philippines, Chinese Taipei, China, Guam, Indonesia, India (at a stretch) and even PNG in such a championship.
These two Championships would provide most of the Asian Nations with at least five Tests matches to add to the two or three they would already compete in with the current format. Keeping it regional would ideally keep cost down as much as possible.
But wait, there are two glaring omissions from my vision. Sri Lanka and South Korea require a different approach, mainly due to in one case geography and in the other pre-existing participation and structure. First with South Korea, as with what John Kirwan has suggested the SKRFU should be looking to gain access to the Japanese professional structures. Initially starting at the bottom and working their way up. By being exposed to higher level of competition the Korean national team would see a considerable rise in standard, something that has fallen for some time now.
Sri Lanka. With the second largest participation in Asia, Sri Lanka are a special case, one that involves direct development of their local structures without heavily relying on international competition. Rugby in very popular at Schoolboy level and is actually a reasonably popular spectator sport. However, they face challenges of maintaining those high participation levels into senior rugby. This will be the IRB’s main objective. To increase the articulation rate and elevate their top line championship (the Caltex Cup) to some sort of professionalism. Do this and Sri Lanka could emerge as a real force of Asian rugby.
A key component in this is as above mentioned is the installation of a corresponding development officer or officers to work exclusively within these regions. There sole focus will be to work with the unions in an information sharing role to raise the standards right across the board. They will also be responsible to ensure the implementation and execution of grassroots youth development initiatives.
John Kirwan has publicly stated that he and Japan are targeting both their Tonga and Canada pool match in the quest to automatically qualify for England thus opening the Asian seed they usually occupy. It’s a goal I believe they are very capable of achieving. This and the fact that Japan will host the 2019 event it is vital that the IRB develops the region well ahead of schedule to ensure whether or not an extra Asian side competes in England or Japan, they are competitive to the sake of the game.
An extra benefit from this would be that if successful it would provide a blueprint in which to apply to the Americas and Africa.
Working Class Rugger
Guest
Not sure about China but their is a local league in South Korea as well as a Universities Championship.
enzopitek
Guest
"One of the main priorities would be the development of the local leagues." +1000 I couldn't find any championship/leagues for China or South Korea.
p.Tah
Guest
Good article in the New York Times where John Kirwan talks about the growth opportunities in Japanese rugby http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/17/sports/rugby/rugby-considers-japan-as-market-for-growth.html
King of the Gorgonites
Roar Guru
A nice article abotu the rise and rise of American rugby........... http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/colleges/121875989.html?cmpid=15585797
enzopitek
Guest
@working class rugger I didn't talk about your article but about the one in the NZ Herald News which cannot understand that the NZRU and ARU objectives are clearly insane from a japanese point of view.
p.Tah
Guest
Interesting article in Philly Sports on rugby in the US http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/121875989.html?page=2&c=y - sorry WCR to put it in a thread about Asia, but thought it was interesting.
simon
Guest
This argument is getting a bit tired. Yes Super Rugby is not ideal in evey sense. Yes there is benefit for AUS in super rugby, but there is also benefit for NZ and SA. In the end all three countries have agreed that Super Rugby is necessary to gain enough revenue to keep players from moving to Europe, and prevent all three countries from becoming feeders for the H Cup and other codes
tc
Guest
K.O.Gs Brilliant idea mate W.C.R Mate It wont be long and all us rugby roarers will be talking about how best to develop the new conferences from the Americas and Asia
Working Class Rugger
Guest
The conference system appears to be the pre cursor to such an expansion. With conferences they ideal situation would be to limit the overall travel time and distances with minimum interconference competition.It would still happen but the long haul travel would be a lot less.
Working Class Rugger
Guest
The Philippines are an interesting case. They are using the heritage angle very effectively and seeing the results. I think they will find 1st division more of a challenge than in previous seasons but I do expect them to be competitive and hopefully stay up. They played a couple of games against Hong Kong and actually ran them closer than HK competitiors outside of Japan have so far this season. They have also have been undertaking some interesating development projects. Good luck to them.
Working Class Rugger
Guest
jus de couchon At most many National teams would play around 8 games a season. That's far from an exhaustive and restrictive number. Especially considering it wwould be established along (as much as possible) regional lines. It wouldn't be some sort of home and away League set up. They'd compete in say two pools of 6, so that's 5 games plus maybe a ranking game to make 6 games as opposed to the current situation where most teams only play twice a season during the A5Ns. They would have more opportunity to develop with more and variable competition (pools would constantly change each season, you may not play the same teams the next year but will again likely in the future). The only teams that would play more than 8 games are those involved in the A5Ns premier division. Even then it will likely only be 12 games. One of the main priorities would be the development of the local leagues.
Working Class Rugger
Guest
Tigranes I agree Japan should be looking to elevate player in every team to full time professional status. This would raise the Top League even further in standard which will once again flow onto the National team. Furthermore, they really need to enhance its image and presence in the Japanese marketplace. From there they will need to address their grassrootsconcerns. All this should be mandated by the IRB prior to their hosting of the RWC. They have years and its very achievable. The 4th Bledisloe was played in Hong Kong last year not Tokyo. As for Super Rugby. It will get bigger there's no doubt about it and there's no stopping it. Asia and the Americas are big target markets for SANZAR and its wouldn't surpirse me to see them start looking to enter those in the near future.
Bruce
Guest
The author speaks about a massive improvement over that last four years so there’s no point in telling me about the events of 1995. We’ll know soon enough regarding your expectations. Regardless given that the rate of development will slow, if it’s a “massive improvement” to lose to NZ by between 50-60 points after losing to Aust by 88 four years ago does this suggest qualitative progress by Japanese rugby over the next four years will be barely discernable?
Tigranes
Guest
Japan would be best served by developing their own Top League, maybe making it fully professional? Last years Bledisloe Cup in Hong Kong didnt even sell out, what makes people think they will support a losing Super Rugby side? Super Rugby is as big as it ever should be. I would personally prefer it is say each of Aust, NZ, SAF has their domestic comp and the best five teams from that comp competed in super rugby.
King of the Gorgonites
Roar Guru
Nice article WCR. i agree with soem of the diea you put forward. On another tangent, with the new super rugby format, i understand their will be 3-4 week hiatus when inbound tours will be played and SR will be halted. This means that all the rugby provinces, excluding the national players, willl be available. Why not have the likes of Japan, USA, Georgia, Spain tour Australia or New Zealand or SA. that would enable the super provinces to continue to get match fitness whilst SR is halted for the NH inbound tours. It will also allow for more revenue or the possbility to spread the game. Think about USA v Waratahs at Gosford in early July. It will give some of the developing nations a few good matches against stong provincial opponenets.
Muzza
Guest
Personal opinion is that S15 should remain as it is. Focus on development of the feeder system (university) and skills and fan base. JK seems to know what he is doing in Japan (Asia leader) but it is an uphill battle. Agree with local comp suggestions and disagree with S15 ideas mostly.
Working Class Rugger
Guest
Enzo My model excludes Japan and Super Rugby for that matter. It's all about regional competition among Unions that at present develop their own professional strucutures. Though if you read my commet on Sri Lanka I do mention I beleive the IRB should be looking to assist in establishing domestic pro structures their. My interests regarding Super Rugby and the USA is that the USARFU are keen on it. Yes, the Utah Warriors and Glendale Raptors have been encouraging (so have noises coming out of the Atlanta Renegades) but a present they still need work to develop the organisations. The USAR are looking at establishing a small Pro League in the nearish future. Accessing Super Rugby and the Magners League are attempts to open professional pathways for young aspiring American Rugby players. By the way, this is an Oceanic point of view. I'm an Australian and this is an Australian site, what else do you expect?
Working Class Rugger
Guest
Sherry Your point is. Nothing who have just posted gives me a solid convincing argument why Guam couldn't develop further. You cite results against Malaysia and Iran. For a Union only formed in 2004 with a small player base those results are actually encouraging as contrary to what you may think, 30 points is a more than an achieveable gap to close and relatively quickly. You also have to remember Guam is currently a 3rd Division Asian 5 Nations team ( and about middle of that division)as opposed to Malaysia who's a 1st and Iran that if not for a couple of silly blunders in try scoring position would be. That's not too bad when you consider Japan has quite comfortable dispatched bot Kazakhstan and the UAE by 60 and 111 points respectively. My model is all about development. Tonga has had a lot longer to develop and you'll find most of its success was during the amateur era. Guam could easily emulate Tonga in a much shorter time frame. That is the whole point of the regional development officers I have suggested. Not only would they be responsbile for the competitive structures that would be established but also to assist in raising the overall standards of the comptition first of all to a fair and even level but then work with all stakeholders in closing the gap with Japan. There final duty would be to activell work with each Union to build its grassroots participation and support. Some Union within my Union particularly in South East Asia are more capable than others which would mean this person or persons time could be focused more intensively on the smaller Unions. You also note expense. Travel and such would be assumed by both the IRB and Asian Rugby Football Union as a cost incurred in their development processes.
tc
Guest
JOHNNO Mate I don't know where your from but i'm a kiwi from Christchurch and I can tell you that the driving force behind Super rugby is New Zealand not Australia, our union is the one that has stifled the comp from growing beyond the borders of the three nations involved, but now it realises that it needs to grow the Super comp into new large financial markets to grow rugby so that the All Blacks have somewhere else to go to make more money . Australia is not the only country that has been given more teams since the start of the Super 12 ,but hey I can't help it if Aussie has one of the best rugby administrators in the world.
Sherry
Guest
WORKING - huge difference between Tonga and Guam re sports. I was stationed on the latter island once for several months and got a good look at recreation. Tonga, as you know, is a rugby-playing nation and Guam is not, the locals much prefer soccer, racing outrigger canoes and baseball. In fact, John Hattig, born and raised in Guam, made the majors. I saw him play shortstop for the Jays several years back. The Tonga RFU was formed in the early twenties, the Guam RFU round about 2004 or so. Tonga can boast an amazing record for such a tiny player base. In the 2007 RWC they lost by a whisker to the mighty Boks. They've notched up wins over touring France, the Maori and the Wallabies, and have beaten Japan seven out of eight games. On the other hand, Guam have been slaughtered by much bigger guys from Kazakhstan and well beaten by Iran. Playing a team their own size, Guam were beaten by Malaysia by 30 points.