Picture this wedding scenario. Glasses are clinked and a multi-tiered wedding cake is brought out.
The bride and groom pick up a knife and make the first cut into the top tier. The groom cuts a slice and feeds it to his grateful wife. The onlookers start salivating over the elaborate icing and the moist filling inside.
More slices are cut and passed to guests at the two tables closest to the newlyweds.
The other tables soon realise the top tier has gone. As they watch the privileged tables tuck in heartily to their slices, they turn their attention to the second tier. It has no icing and the cake looks a lot drier.
The tables that receive those slices grumble to one another.
The tables at the back realise that the third tier is all that is left of the cake. What is more, there does not appear to be much of it. Certainly not enough to go around all the remaining tables.
The bride and groom then proceed to tear off chunks of the third tier with their bare hands and start throwing them at the rear tables. Those guests look on in both horror and shame as crumbs start raining down upon them.
When you look at the international rugby scene, it seems that there are a select few who seem to have more than their fair share of the good cake and get to eat it too.
If you belong to one of the premier tournaments, life appears very good in comparison to the rest. Not only are those who participate in either the Six Nations and Rugby Championship assured of gate revenue in those respective tournaments, they also get access to hosting or going on tours to the other side of the world.
Moreover, if those teams have domestic leagues and have access to regional provincial tournaments, they generate even more revenue through broadcasting rights and gate revenue.
The next tier below has it much worse. They have access to less prestigious tournaments but are invariably at the mercy of foreign clubs who have signed up their players and are reluctant to release those players for international duty. They rarely get games with top-tiered teams and are most likely to encounter them once every four years where they have no chance of competing evenly.
The third tier are fed the equivalent of the American Dream – the William Webb Ellis Dream. Any team, they are told, can rise to the top. Not all the teams have the same level of resources or access to the same opportunities so they are incredibly unlikely to do so, but that does not get in the way of a good tale.
The Rugby World Cup is a worthwhile event but it has the effect of marginalising certain teams and downplaying the rugby that occurs outside that four-year cycle, especially if you do not belong to a premier rugby tournament.
When I look at what Rugby Sevens has done to increase the profile and skill level of teams from all over the world, I see how far behind its bigger brother is.
With its Plate and Bowl Final format at every destination in the sevens circuit, teams quickly get exposed to playing teams from different tiers.
This autumn, Ireland plays Georgia at home and Scotland has toured the Pacific Islands. The fact that these types of matches occur so infrequently is a disgrace.
The fact that certain sides are forced to play games without their best players at their disposal because they have been retained by clubs is equally unacceptable.
Although I can see the appeal of club rugby, I feel that it is increasingly biting into the international calendar and that little is being done to stop its encroachment.
I enjoy watching Super rugby but supporting my native province is not like it was in the past. The Crusaders are filled with players who come from outside the borders of Canterbury. The players may be predominantly home grown but their connection to Canterbury has been so diluted, they are not really my team anymore.
When I see club rugby in France, Japan or the UK, I feel that disconnection even more. I am fine that many people do not care that their teams are full of foreigners. They are happy to see the best players turn out in their team colours. I can respect that.
But are they happy to see that collection of players turn out for their respective countries as well to ensure that they too have their best available players?
This growing incompatibility between club and country is exacerbated by the perception that a lot of international rugby serves no purpose.
When I try to explain to people in Madrid what the upcoming November internationals mean, they ask me what tournament it is. When I say that individual trophies may be at stake and all games go towards world rankings that are used for the following World Cup, they usually respond ‘ahh, it’s a friendly’.
To me a friendly in rugby is like saying a tackle is a hug.
Yet somehow I think they have a point. People can get behind the concept of the Six Nations or the Rugby Championship but outside these tournaments and the Rugby World Cup, how do you explain the rest of the international matches? What are they working towards?
I think it is time to do away with the June and November internationals as we know them. They seem to serve only a select number of teams and all the tiers below are excluded.
When you look around the world, there are rugby tournaments that are happening alongside the Rugby Championship and the Six Nations but completely independently of those tournaments. The European Nations Cup has no relegation or promotion between the Six Nations and neither does the Pacific Cup, the Africa Cup, the Americas Rugby Championship and the Asian Rugby Championship with the Rugby Championship.
The way I see it, you could reinstate certain fixtures that once existed to create regional tournaments that would culminate in a regional tournament every four years in between a World Cup cycle.
England, for example, used to be part of the now defunct Churchill Cup. The Baby Blacks and Australia A used to compete in the Pacific Cup.
Make three conferences: Europe combines with North America, Africa with the rest of the Americas and Oceania with Asia. Teams within that conference play a set of qualifying matches. Games like the third Bledisloe could also be nominated as a qualifying match to add some extra spice to the match.
The June and November internationals as we know them now become games where the teams play one another in the conference and the top-tier teams can use their representative sides like the Irish Wolfhounds, the New Zealand Maori, Australia A or the Baby Boks to play the lower-ranked teams.
None of these games must clash with club rugby games. All players must be released in time to prepare for these matches.
From these matches, depending on the rankings after those matches, the top teams get to play the top-ranked teams from other conferences until a regional conference championship is determined.
In conjunction with those games, you have a Plate and Bowl tournament that also determine ranking points.
This Conference Champions Cup, on all three levels, would occur every four years between the World Cup and the seedings for the following World Cup would be determined by the rankings after that event.
The tournament would be rotated around the different conferences and a share of the revenue generated by this event would be distributed among the teams much like what occurs in the Champions Trophy in football, i.e. the winners get the biggest share.
Feel free to pick further holes in my Swiss-cheese idea but the problem with the current international set-up is that there are teams who are artificially propped up in the top tier and lower-ranked teams do not get enough meaningful competition or opportunities to progress up the rankings.
I also do not like how we see too many games with the same opposition. Nations might appear to lose revenue from not visiting their cash cows but that can be compensated by revenue generated from the regional tournaments in terms of ticket sales and broadcasting rights.
We would also do away with this building for the World Cup mentality and dismissing all rugby that occurs outside that tournament. Rankings mean a chance to play in lucrative regional tournaments which, in turn, give seedings to the Rugby World Cup.
Top-tier teams would have to manage their resources but get the benefit of developing a larger pool of players. Lower ranked teams would get real opportunities to secure all-important ranking points and get exposure to more meaningful competition on a regular basis.
Call me an idealist or much worse, but something needs to be done to stop the encroachment of club rugby in the international calendar and having matches that go towards more than world rankings for a global tournament that currently only serves a select few countries.
We need to make a bigger cake and make sure everyone gets to enjoy some icing.
Higgik
Guest
I liked the idea the books had a couple of years ago, when they had a 3 way tour with Scotland and Samoa. The idea of a mini tournament would enable tier 2 nations to play more regular matches, while keeping the more popular tests still going. England could host the renewed Churchill Cup, with a tier 1 team and either USA or Canada.
kevin dustby
Guest
you cant claim Samoa produce that many players with such a small population and then claim those born in NZ as well. Where would Australia be without immigration - should we all be in debt to Europe because thats the birthplace of many of the socceroos parents?
Kia Kaha
Roar Guru
Rankings are not a good way to determine tiers. Japan broke into the top ten last year and Argentina slipped to 12. I would define tiers as the competitions you are in. The 6N and the RC are the top tier even though there are teams there who would struggle against teams like Samoa. Then tier two are the next sub tournaments like the Pacific Cup. The problem for me is that there is no meaningful link between these tiers. Every so often there will be isolated games but not geared towards anything. Regular games between the tiers that could see upward mobility for tier two teams or teams being relegated from top tier tournaments would be a good start.
Kia Kaha
Roar Guru
OB if you look at France, you certainly can say with confidence that their club structures are having a negative impact on their national team. The money being thrown around is unsustainable and yet Toulon's success in Europe encourages them to maintain the status quo. When you look at crowd attendances at French matches, it is very hard to justify any change in position. This is where the IRB need to lay down clear markers as to where international windows are but the way the European club calendar is set up, where are those gaps? They have been allowed to spread across the year and they won't want to regress to a situation before of less club rugby knowing how profitable it is to maintain the existing one.
Navigator islands
Guest
Please explain how Tier 1 and tier 2 teams are decided. If its based on world rankings then Samoa who are consistently in the top 10 ranked nations and who are currently ranked 7th, should be a Tier 1 nation.In their last outing since and including the world cup 2011, they have defeated Tier 1 teams like the Wallabies,Wales,Scotland,Italy and Argentina. Not to mention a very close loss to South Africa at the world cup with an unlucky loss to France last year. They have consistently beaten their Oceanic rivals Japan,Tonga and Fiji. On top of this they struggle annualy to put their top team together as all their players ply their trade in different parts of the globe. They receive very little financial assistance and yet with a population of less than the town of Wollongong NSW, they continue to maintain a higher ranking than many so called tier 1 nations. Where would the mighty All Blacks be without the historical input of Samoan players born in NZ and in Samoa (Umaga,Savea,Mealamu,Kaino,Nonu,Brown, So'oialo,Tialata,Afoa,Stanley,Bunce,Tuigamala,Ieremia,Luatua,Collins,Masoe,Faumuina, Schuster and SBW to name a few. Samoa like other Island nations need to be supported more financially and layers given special compensation for availability by the IRB, to enable them to grow and develop their home grown players,therefore also growing the game in their homeland. Maybe the rich IRB wont want their precious game being dominated by players from the tiny islands of the south pacific.
single malt
Guest
Very Interesting Kia Kaha. If there cannot be agreement about a global season, perhaps another way to generate interest between World Cups would be for the IRB to activate and properly promote the Raeburn Shield. Call it something meaningful like The Global Challenge and run it like NZ's Ranfurly Shield. The first holder could be the winner of the next RWC, and take it from there. All home games become challenges. This wouldn't add to the international calendar. Perhaps after 2019 (when I think the existing schedule ends) the IRB could nominate a 'special' challenge at the start of the season whereby a deserving improving country gets a shot. Just a thought.
Old Bugger
Guest
Kia Could this deflating appetite be a direct reflection of the status of NH international sides on the global ranking system?? If I look at Scotland, Wales, Ireland, Italy and France - neither of these sides have challenged for the top 3 rankings of global rugger since....well, you know what I mean. England seem the only country that is having-a-go and finally made it. It is human nature to retract supporting a sports side that is not doing so well and push the agenda of other options particularly, if any of those options offer a successful team that you can and therefore will, support. My guess is, if the boot was on the other foot, then the perception of international rugby could conceivably gain support....possibly, but it will require a truck-load of goodwill between the clubs and unions to try and achieve some common ground otherwise IMO, the writing is proverbially "on the wall" for international rugby specifically and rugby in general. Without international rugby, the clubs in their efforts to pursue top international players, will effectively have no reference to select such players so where does rugby in general turn to, after that?? Your guess is as good as mine.....
kevin dustby
Guest
why is everyone on the roar obsessed with Pacific islands Rugby and their treatment? tonga has the GDP of one street in Bellevue Hill, thats just the way it is, not playing tests there regularly is somehow disgraceful. the heads of rugby union are businessman and the spread of international rugby is secondary to their bottom lines. tonga has less population than the small city of Toulon
Rugby Fan
Roar Guru
It's so difficult to engineer any change because everyone seems so wedded to their current revenue streams. Unless you increase the number of international matches a year, then any game against less traditional opposition will bring in, at least initially, less money than the one it replaces. Increase the length of the international windows and the clubs start to suffer. In many cases, we have to go one step back to go two steps forward, but there is little appetite for doing that when so many parties feel their current position remains precarious.
chis
Guest
Rugby Union season should be only 9 months max as it's a full contact sport so start NH/SH at the start of March the club competitions i.e. Top 14, English Premiership, HEC, Super Rugby or what ever they can agree and let them go all the way to finals in September with a world club final between winners of the HEC/Super Rugby then have October and November for the 6 Nations, Rugby Championship with again a final game between winner of both comps....season gets changed a bit for RWC and Lions.
Dr Dan Frogan
Guest
a great article (for those of the above without blinkers on)
Kia Kaha
Roar Guru
Indeed Rugby Fan. I am unashamedly pro-international rugby but my exposure to club football through Atletico has been an eye opener for me as to the attractions of club rugby. However, it is impossible to expect players to play so much club rugby followed by international rugby. The problem is both parties would need to make compromises with the current set up and I see that increasingly unlikely. I just don't want to see rugby follow the path of football where the relevance of internationals is limited to very specific tournaments that occur all too infrequently for my liking.
Kia Kaha
Roar Guru
Thanks for the post. The issue I have is that there is no interlinking between the regional tournaments. I'd even settle for the winners and runners up of the sub tournaments playing the bottom two of the 6n and RC for relegation and promotion. At least then the tier two countries would be exposed to games at a higher level but the timing of the event would have to ensure that access to the best pool of players were possible. I'd doubt the idea would get much support from the nations at threat of being relegated. The vote that nations get in the IRB is another great bone of contention for me. Change is hard to bring about because voting blocks are all too easy to stop change the way things are set up.
Rugby Fan
Roar Guru
Nothing muddled about your post, Kia Kaha. Well worth raising the topic. Always difficult to get people to engage because most of us just see a small part of the picture.
ethan
Guest
Not saying I necessarily agree with the specifics of what you've come up with, but I definitely agree with a global international calendar. For Australia: -Perhaps a tournament in the beginning of the year with Pacific only teams. Asia, Islands, possibly US. This for $$$ and growth in the region. Play each team once. Because NZ and AUS will finish on top, play this game last, for the trophy, and make it also the first Bledisloe. -Host a 3 match series v a northern hemisphere team. -Rugby Championship (incl. final 2 Bledisloe games) -Northern Tour Schedule it in a way that the international players can be available for the back end of Super Rugby season and the Finals. But do not have any international break during Super Rugby. This will mean our international players are only ever playing high intensity tests, but will give them more weeks recovery in between tournaments. Members of the squad who are not playing can drop back to Super Rugby, or if players don't want a break in the weeks off, they are free to play Super Rugby. Some might bemoan the drop in quality at Super Rugby level, but at the most important time of year - the finals - this would not be the case. Obviously trying to organize an international caldera would mean much re-scheduling of current club tournaments, but I think it for the best.
Kia Kaha
Roar Guru
I fear you're right about little appetite for international rugby.
Kia Kaha
Roar Guru
I see OB. The problem is the club scene isn't one coherent competition up north and Super rugby seems to be getting longer. The key to a global season would be having gaps in between the club commitments rather than having them added on at the end. Have the north tour the south after the 6n. The problem is it's too far gone to make any changes now. And of course there are many people who don't have a problem with club rugby and probably feel there's too much international rugby!
Kia Kaha
Roar Guru
You certainly could do no worse than my muddled nonsense! ;)
Old Bugger
Guest
Kia But that's my whole point - when NH and SH tour tests are played, it seems NH teams are at the end of their season and vice versa, SH teams are at the end of their season. The objective is to get both hemispheres coordinated into a single season rather than 2 different seasons. Once that can be resolved, then look at the calendar effects upon domestic and international rugby....but first off, get some mutual resolution on the timeframe. Tell you what, it will certainly provide an opportunity for other inter-hemisphere matches outside of the international arena where the calendar would allow....food for thought on SH champs v NH champs!!
Rugby Fan
Roar Guru
I would advise a separate post. That would make it easier to discuss, since replying to replies can get messy.