World 12s Tournament

[Peej]

This just sounds daft. Like an interesting idea that hasn't had those difficult questions with reality yet.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/ ... lating-ipl

[fivepointer]

Actually think 12 a side rugby could be a good thing to watch.
But there are so many practical issues here starting with the basic question of just who would play? Unions and clubs arent just going to release their top players.

[Doorzetbornandbred]

[FKAS]

Actually think 12 a side rugby could be a good thing to watch.
But there are so many practical issues here starting with the basic question of just who would play? Unions and clubs arent just going to release their top players.

The Unions will be well behind it if they are going to make some coin off the back of it. I'm just waiting for them to pressure World Rugby into making it a test window so that the clubs can't refuse to release their players.

Can't say I have any interest. People aren't queuing to watch the local pre season 10s tournaments are they. What they will queue for is the start of the XVs season played in the sunshine on decent pitches for some good running rugby. This shit show will push the start back to the winter and mess up everyone's pre season. I imagine the clubs are fuming at the idea of losing key players for no good reason at the start of next season.

[Puja]

“We are aware of the proposed new World 12s competition,” a World Rugby spokesperson said. “While we welcome innovative thinking with the potential to advance the reach, attractiveness and growth of the sport, comprehensive consultation with the organisers is required to understand the viability of the concept, particularly in the context of ongoing global calendar discussions and the priority area of player welfare.”

The IRB do not sound keen. As a follower of Yank rugby, I have become very aware that a big splashy announcement, media coverage, and endorsement from former players/coaches is very easy to accomplish, regardless of the likelihood of anything actually coming of it.

Puja

[morepork]

What a load of wank.

" Backers for the new concept include New Zealand’s 2015 World Cup-winning coach Steve Hansen, who is a World 12s ambassador alongside former South Africa head coach Jake White, and former New Zealand chief executive Steve Tew, a World 12s non-executive director."

That's how you make money after coaching is it? Smooth business plan guys. All it needs is Warren Gatland to throw his weight behind it.

[Mellsblue]

What a load of wank.

" Backers for the new concept include New Zealand’s 2015 World Cup-winning coach Steve Hansen, who is a World 12s ambassador alongside former South Africa head coach Jake White, and former New Zealand chief executive Steve Tew, a World 12s non-executive director."

That's how you make money after coaching is it? Smooth business plan guys. All it needs is Warren Gatland to throw his weight behind it.

Tbf, Gatland was way ahead of his time with this. He started 12 man rugby upon moving Jamie Roberts to IC and picking Halfpenny at 15.

[Cameo]

This is a bizarre announcement. It might be great fun if lots of top players play, or it might be a complete flop. What it isn't is any coherent way to improve rugby or player welfare.

I'm also bored of all the rugby in crisis as it's too boring talk. It's been going on every year since I was a kid and pops up again everytime there is a dull game or series irrespective of how good the previous month's have been. The shit Lions tour this year followed a great Six Nations and an unbelievable end to the Premiership in England. I'm all for improving the game but anyone starting from the premise that it is completely broken loses me.

If they want to talk about a welfare crisis wih head injuries etc. then that's another matter. I suspect the first and simplest thing they could do to improve the situation would be to reduce the number of games though.

[Danno]

What a load of wank.

" Backers for the new concept include New Zealand’s 2015 World Cup-winning coach Steve Hansen, who is a World 12s ambassador alongside former South Africa head coach Jake White, and former New Zealand chief executive Steve Tew, a World 12s non-executive director."

That's how you make money after coaching is it? Smooth business plan guys. All it needs is Warren Gatland to throw his weight behind it.

Tbf, Gatland was way ahead of his time with this. He started 12 man rugby upon moving Jamie Roberts to IC and picking Halfpenny at 15.

[Which Tyler]

This is a bizarre announcement. It might be great fun if lots of top players play, or it might be a complete flop. What it isn't is any coherent way to improve rugby or player welfare.

I'm also bored of all the rugby in crisis as it's too boring talk. It's been going on every year since I was a kid and pops up again everytime there is a dull game or series irrespective of how good the previous month's have been. The shit Lions tour this year followed a great Six Nations and an unbelievable end to the Premiership in England. I'm all for improving the game but anyone starting from the premise that it is completely broken loses me.

If they want to talk about a welfare crisis wih head injuries etc. then that's another matter. I suspect the first and simplest thing they could do to improve the situation would be to reduce the number of games though.

[Digby]

Seemingly the visionaries in sport all share the same vision of shorter formats and/or less players to try and capture the attention of a world that now thinks a 54 second tiktok video something of a lengthy tome

[Which Tyler]

Seemingly the visionaries in sport all share the same vision of shorter formats and/or less players to try and capture the attention of a world that now thinks a 54 second tiktok video something of a lengthy tome

Even Basketball* had a new, reduced format for the olympics. FFS!~
And don't we already have 7s for rugby fans who want a condensed format?


* Yes, Basketball, which already had just 5 players and play in batches of 30 seconds.

[Croft_No.5]

To be fair on the Basketball thing, 3 on 3 is a massive participation sport in the US and has been for many years.

[Digby]

Seemingly the visionaries in sport all share the same vision of shorter formats and/or less players to try and capture the attention of a world that now thinks a 54 second tiktok video something of a lengthy tome

Even Basketball* had a new, reduced format for the olympics. FFS!~
And don't we already have 7s for rugby fans who want a condensed format?


* Yes, Basketball, which already had just 5 players and play in batches of 30 seconds.

They are very worried about how they capture a new generation of (paying) watchers across the multi media empires of the future. But we are heading to the point it'll be all about the toss, snooker the first to win a frame, cricket matches with an over per side, or maybe just ball per side, and now curtailed versions of rugby are in the offing to go with the curtailed version of basketball (not that I know the more established format for basketball)

On this latest in rugby I do wonder who's giving up their contract to help Ritchie and Hansen. Though it's not a surprise the plan is to screw more out of what there is rather than grow the game

[Mellsblue]

Having read a few bits and pieces, the working theory seems to be that if enough money is chucked at the NH clubs/unions they’ll agree to release their players to help top up covid depleted coffers, that the SH unions will agree as their players will top up their pensions sufficiently to not move to a NH league and that players will be sufficiently tempted by the filthy lucre dangled in front of them for a few weeks ‘work’.

[fivepointer]

I'm going to go against the grain and declare that i find the proposal quite interesting and worthy of serious consideration.

I think 12 a side could work very well, incorporating much of what we like in 15's and in 7's games. 6 forwards and 6 backs balances things better and will still allow for traditional forward elements. 6 fewer players on the pitch will allow greater space.

Further, I think the proposed format might make for a very exciting tournament. 30 minute games are quick but have enough time to get your teeth into. 7 round robin games gives everyone a crack. There is going to be limits on game time but 9 30 minute games over 4 weeks would be the maximum game time.

Would it help the game? I reckon it could. With the right promotion and exposure this could become a popular event. It might be what 7's could have been with greater commitment. Parallels with the 100 are not out of place. Despite misgivings the 100 worked. It may not be "real cricket" but it brought in a new audience and raised crickets profile. 12 a side rugby could do the same.

Now I accept there are questions galore about recruitment, finance, scheduling, player welfare and media exposure. I've said could a lot as there is plainly room for this to fall flat on its face but I wouldnt reject the idea out of hand.

[Puja]

Having read a few bits and pieces, the working theory seems to be that if enough money is chucked at the NH clubs/unions they’ll agree to release their players to help top up covid depleted coffers, that the SH unions will agree as their players will top up their pensions sufficiently to not move to a NH league and that players will be sufficiently tempted by the filthy lucre dangled in front of them for a few weeks ‘work’.

That's all based around this assumption that there is £250 million of unclaimed money across the next 5 years just waiting for someone to go ahead and take it. Just cause a hype man repeats, "Everyone will love it and it'll earn a fuck-tonne of money" over and over, doesn't make it true.

Load of shysters. This'll go the same way as RugbyX or whatever it was called.

Puja

[Digby]

I agree people will be amenable if money is thrown at them. I will not like it should it happen, but I'd also concede I'd play for enough money. The query as noted is where is the money coming from, and then if you have that money why not do something useful with it? Because surely the return on that outlay is going to be miserably bad

[Cameo]

I actually agreed with something Baxter said about this. The whole point of formats like T20 or the Hundred is that they take a long game and cut it down to three hour chunks. Rugby may have issues but it is already in two/three hour chunks. Shorter may be better but, if you want to support a particular team, it's not really worth travelling for a 30 min game. If it's meant to be more of a festival of sport with lots of different games, sevens does a good job.

I'd probs watch as 12 aside is fine. I just don't see it as solving any problems.

[Digby]

The only reason I can see to do this is to start the ball rolling for cutting the number of players aside in XVs, 12 sounds like a big old lurch, but the norm is to propose something more outlandish and then rein it back in after debate. Granted the people involved might just be finding something to do, be getting some payment and their names in the paper

[Puja]

The only reason I can see to do this is to start the ball rolling for cutting the number of players aside in XVs, 12 sounds like a big old lurch, but the norm is to propose something more outlandish and then rein it back in after debate. Granted the people involved might just be finding something to do, be getting some payment and their names in the paper

I never like any suggestion of reducing player numbers, not least because I don't know where you'd cut them from. Copy league and reduce the back row? Not only does that remove some of the best players in the game, but it also screws participation rugby - name me an amateur team that's short on players who want to play flanker! Cut the backs? I suppose you could lose the fullback, but one player's not making a massive difference to the defensive line and cutting a fast skillful player seems to go against the motive for reducing numbers.

Puja

[FKAS]

The only reason I can see to do this is to start the ball rolling for cutting the number of players aside in XVs, 12 sounds like a big old lurch, but the norm is to propose something more outlandish and then rein it back in after debate. Granted the people involved might just be finding something to do, be getting some payment and their names in the paper

I never like any suggestion of reducing player numbers, not least because I don't know where you'd cut them from. Copy league and reduce the back row? Not only does that remove some of the best players in the game, but it also screws participation rugby - name me an amateur team that's short on players who want to play flanker! Cut the backs? I suppose you could lose the fullback, but one player's not making a massive difference to the defensive line and cutting a fast skillful player seems to go against the motive for reducing numbers.

Puja

Hmm reduce the number of players by 3 and speed up the game? The numpties who thought this up are going to cut the front row aren't they.

[Digby]

The only reason I can see to do this is to start the ball rolling for cutting the number of players aside in XVs, 12 sounds like a big old lurch, but the norm is to propose something more outlandish and then rein it back in after debate. Granted the people involved might just be finding something to do, be getting some payment and their names in the paper

I never like any suggestion of reducing player numbers, not least because I don't know where you'd cut them from. Copy league and reduce the back row? Not only does that remove some of the best players in the game, but it also screws participation rugby - name me an amateur team that's short on players who want to play flanker! Cut the backs? I suppose you could lose the fullback, but one player's not making a massive difference to the defensive line and cutting a fast skillful player seems to go against the motive for reducing numbers.

Puja

Hmm reduce the number of players by 3 and speed up the game? The numpties who thought this up are going to cut the front row aren't they.

Flankers and a centre gone in the 12s. Though the scrum is a total farce so the front row should be under threat

[Digby]

The only reason I can see to do this is to start the ball rolling for cutting the number of players aside in XVs, 12 sounds like a big old lurch, but the norm is to propose something more outlandish and then rein it back in after debate. Granted the people involved might just be finding something to do, be getting some payment and their names in the paper

I never like any suggestion of reducing player numbers, not least because I don't know where you'd cut them from. Copy league and reduce the back row? Not only does that remove some of the best players in the game, but it also screws participation rugby - name me an amateur team that's short on players who want to play flanker! Cut the backs? I suppose you could lose the fullback, but one player's not making a massive difference to the defensive line and cutting a fast skillful player seems to go against the motive for reducing numbers.

Puja

Some of those best players could take up roles elsewhere of course.

I don't love the idea, I tend to agree with the idea if you look at a rugby pitch there's a lot of space out there even with 30 players on it, and problems with teams utilising that space might not mean we need to cut the number of players to free up space. But things do change, so I'm willing to listen even if inclined to disagree

[Puja]

The only reason I can see to do this is to start the ball rolling for cutting the number of players aside in XVs, 12 sounds like a big old lurch, but the norm is to propose something more outlandish and then rein it back in after debate. Granted the people involved might just be finding something to do, be getting some payment and their names in the paper

I never like any suggestion of reducing player numbers, not least because I don't know where you'd cut them from. Copy league and reduce the back row? Not only does that remove some of the best players in the game, but it also screws participation rugby - name me an amateur team that's short on players who want to play flanker! Cut the backs? I suppose you could lose the fullback, but one player's not making a massive difference to the defensive line and cutting a fast skillful player seems to go against the motive for reducing numbers.

Puja

Some of those best players could take up roles elsewhere of course.

Thank you Eddie, but I don't need BCurry at 9 or Earl on the wing right now.

Puja