RugbyRebels

Wow, sensational news! World rugby has released a long term global calendar with developing nations, including Georgia and Romania, getting involved in the AIs & hosting 6 Nations teams

Unprecedented emerging rugby powers integration, commercial certainty for all unions and enhanced player welfare are central principles of a ground-breaking international rugby calendar, approved by World Rugby’s Executive Committee.

A major priority for World Rugby Chairman Bill Beaumont following his election in May 2016, the optimised 2020-32 schedule sets new standards by prioritising rest periods, promoting equity for the sport’s emerging powers and harmonising the relationship between the international and domestic games.

New July window boosts season harmony

The optimised calendar retains three existing annual international windows (northern hemisphere, southern hemisphere and November), but the June window will be replaced by a new July window. This will enable the Super Rugby season to run uninterrupted and to optimise July tests preparation for all unions.

July window to take place in the first three weeks of the month, comprising three tests (with the exception of the year after Rugby World Cup when SANZAAR unions will host two-test series)
July window will enable Super Rugby to be completed before the tests, while promoting optimal preparation time for tests
November window to move forward one week (first three weeks)
Rugby World Cup window cemented within the calendar, kicking off one week earlier in the second week of September
Optimised windows will aid the development of the club game
Increased opportunity for emerging nations and greater schedule equity

With rugby experiencing record global participation, fan-base and commercial growth, the schedule aims to accelerate the competitiveness of international rugby through unprecedented and annual opportunities for the Pacific Islands, USA, Canada, Japan and the European nations, including Georgia and Romania.

http://www.worldrugby.org/photos/232039


Emerging rugby powers will be integrated into the July and November windows, providing annual opportunities against the SANZAAR and Six Nations unions across July and November. In addition, a rotation principle that includes emerging rugby powers will deliver greater schedule equity, promoting more meaningful, compelling fixtures and supporting World Rugby’s objective to increase the competitiveness of the global game:
Record minimum of 110 tier one v tier two matches over the period as emerging rugby nations are integrated into the schedule throughout the period (a 39 per cent increase on the previous schedule)
SANZAAR Unions committed to hosting tier two nations in July window, creating a blend of opposition
France and England to tour the Pacific Islands while USA, Canada and Japan also host tours
Georgia and Romania to host matches against Six Nations unions within the July window
Ability for rankings to determine inclusion of tier two teams in the schedule after Rugby World Cup 2019 and 2023 tournaments to ensure top emerging teams at the time are provided with tier one opportunities based on merit
Six Nations unions to collectively host a guaranteed minimum of six tier two fixtures in each November window
Optimised player welfare

Player welfare is World Rugby’s number one priority and the calendar has been agreed with the full support of the International Rugby Players’ Association (IRPA).

Tours to SANZAAR nations immediately after a Rugby World Cup year will be reduced to two matches, promoting player welfare the year after rugby’s biggest event
IRPA fully consulted to ensure player needs were prioritised within the schedule
The agreement concludes a year of constructive and collaborative dialogue between unions, the game’s major professional leagues and the International




0:000:00
Rugby Players’ Association, driven and facilitated by Beaumont and Vice-Chairman Agustín Pichot. Season pillars were agreed by stakeholders at the San Francisco meeting in January and progressed by a dedicated working group comprising: Philip Browne (IRFU); Steve Tew (NZR); Ian Ritchie (RFU); Serge Simon (FFR) Brett Gosper and Mark Egan (World Rugby).

Beaumont said: “Agreement on an optimised global calendar that provides certainty and sustainability over the decade beyond Rugby World Cup 2019 represents an historic milestone for the global game.

“But more than that, this agreement has player welfare and equity at heart, driving certainty and opportunities for emerging rugby powers and laying the foundations for a more compelling and competitive international game, which is great for unions, players and fans.

“This process has been complex and there was no silver bullet. Compromise has been achieved by all stakeholders in the spirit of collaboration and I would like to thank my union and professional league colleagues for their full contribution and commitment to reaching an agreement that will ultimately benefit the whole game.”

The schedule represents a significant boost for emerging rugby powers such as Georgia, who have automatically qualified for Rugby World Cup 2019, with President Gocha Svanidze adding: “We welcome this agreement, which is great news for Georgia. Like many other unions, we want opportunities to take on the world’s best outside of a Rugby World Cup and this schedule will achieve just that. We have a strong base from which we can progress our ambitions and I would like to thank World Rugby for driving these important opportunities.”

The players have also welcomed a schedule that provides certainty and prioritises player welfare as IRPA CEO Rob Nichol explains: “We welcome the agreement of a calendar and appreciate the genuine consideration given to the player welfare needs of the world’s top players throughout the process by everyone involved. Through collaboration, rugby has delivered a framework that promotes certainty for the international game moving forward. The agreement provides an improved platform for the various professional competitions to structure themselves in a way that will help them succeed while also managing the demands on the players involved appropriately. The players, competitions and the game will be better for it."

With agreement reached on the season framework, discussions will continue among the relevant unions regarding the duration of the Six Nations and the British and Irish Lions, while the major domestic leagues will now be able to start planning start dates and schedules. The full detail of the annual fixtures will be announced in due course by individual unions.

With the optimised calendar now approved, the World Rugby Council will consider at its Annual Meeting in Kyoto, Japan in May the consequential Regulation 9 amendments regarding player release for the revised windows.

Global calendar meeting participants (San Francisco, January 2017): Bill Beaumont (World Rugby Chairman); Agustín Pichot (World Rugby Vice-Chairman); Philip Browne (IRFU); Ian Ritchie (RFU); Serge Simon (FFR); Steve Tew (NZR); Bill Pulver (ARU); Dan Payne (USA Rugby); Bruce Craig (day one) & Mark McCafferty (day two) (PRL); Paul Goze (LNR); Martin Anayi (PRO 12); Rob Nichol (IRPA); Brett Gosper (World Rugby Chief Executive); David Carrigy (World Rugby Head of Development & International Relations); Mark Egan (World Rugby Head of Competitions and Performance) and Martin Raftery (World Rugby Chief Medical Officer).

http://www.worldrugby.org/news/232038?u ... m=referral

Interesting the World Rugby itself continues to use the terms "tier 1" and "tier 2," even though the tier system is supposed to have been replaced by a "band" structure Anyway, here's the highlights in nutshell version:

6 games each November to tier 2 sides, I'm guessing at least one per nation?
A tour to the pacific islands sounds very cool.
Tier 2 more relevant now as a result.

Definitely looking like Georgia and Romania are going to be the major beneficiaries here, followed by the Pacific Islands. Georgia is certain now to begin hosting tier 1 nations on a fairly regular basis, especially 6 Nations teams, which is well-deserved and only fitting, given their form on the field and the level of interest being shown by their fans. Of course, Georgia and Romania were recently added to World Rugby's core committee so it shouldn't be too surprising. Anyway, this is the best news to come out of WR in quite some time

NB: To come into effect as of 2020 (and run for 12 years minimum). Well, better late than never...

Definitely seems like a change for the better, although I have the utmost confidence in the ability of the various bodies working within this frame to fuck it up for everyone.

Most significant development since Argentina was added to SANZA(A)R, and the third biggest this century following Italy's inclusion in the 6 Nations before that. 2020's not so far off either, though I'm a little sad that I'll be in my fifties before this actually takes effect! Pretty sure I won't live to see all my plans for international rugby come to fruition, but this is a step in the right direction. I think Georgia will start to knock over some of the weaker 6 Nations sides on their home patch once they've had a few encounters under their belt and got used to that level of rugby, and by the middle of this century they (or a promotion-relegation fixture) might well have been added to the 6 Nations. As for Romania, they can thank their Eastern European counterparts, because the Oaks certainly haven't done anything in the professional era to warrant such privileged treatment. It's also nice that Pacific Island tours will be back on the agenda (I say back, because they were most certainly on it a decade or two ago, and proved hard yakka for the Celtic nations too, pummeling them on occasions). If it's necessary to play Samoa and/or Tonga in Auckland, then so be it. The diaspora in that city's about as big as the local population anyway. The only thing missing from this statement, I feel, is tier 3 rugby. No mention of how rising starts like Kenya, Germany and Brazil might be further assisted. I mean, if tier 1 teams are going to play their tier 2 teams regularly, how about the tier 2 teams helping their tier 3 counterparts out the same way. Spain gave Tonga a reasonable work-out during last year's AIs, so how about Samoa dropping in on Germany (there is an historical connection there, and a lot of Samoans are part German), & Fiji taking on Russia for instance?

There's a bit more detail on the tiers here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/39293666. Tier 1 is the top 9 in the rankings plus Italy, whereas Tier 2 is the rest of the top 20 apart from Spain and Russia, who are replaced by Canada and Uruguay, presumably to make Tier 2 less Euro-centric.

Seems like a very solid plan to me, although Rowan's got a point about the integration needing to go all the way down. The IRB have done well with that kind of thing recently, so hopefully it will continue.

Puja

Yes, perennial World Cup contenders Namibia & 3-time qualifiers Uruguay are recent additions to the tier 2 brigade, that's for certain. Still very confusing, this whole issue of tiers, bands or whatever.

It will be interesting to see the long-term effect of Georgian and Romanian involvement in top-flight competitions. We have seen how much Argentina's belated acceptance has done in South America, with Uruguay moving up to tier 2 status and Brazil making solid progress. Also, the South American B championships has taken off, with Colombia dominating, and practically every country in Latin America now has an active national rugby team. With Tbilisi and Bucharest set to begin hosting tier 1 teams on a regular basis, will there be a similar spin-off effect for the rest of the region? Russia is Eastern Europe's sleeping giant, and already has a semi-professional club competition underway with foreign players involved, while several other nations have shown promise. They could conceivably get their own 6 Nations competition up and running before too long. & they certainly have the right physical attributes to excel at this sport, in my view. So don't be surprised if Eastern Europe has emerged as one of rugby's major centers of gravity within a few decades or so . . .

TBH the only real lack of cross-over matches is between "tier 1" and "tier 2" isn't it? the rest of the way down, there are plenty of localised tournaments.
For example the Rugby Europe International Championships run all the way from Georgia (ranked 12) down to Finland (ranked 100) and covering 35 nations, some of whom I can't find a WR ranking (Slovakia, Montenegro); S America, Africa and Asia have similar I believe.

That's true. & Brazil is certainly getting plenty of opportunities in the Americas, where Argentina is basically playing the same role as France did in Europe (& North Africa) during the FIRA years. Japan is still light years ahead of HK & Korea, who ought to become involved in the Pacific Challenge Cup or something, but at least the Blossom still play them. Now that Namibia is tier 2 and has played in 5 straight World Cups, perhaps it warrants an annual test with SA, thereby serving as the bridge with African tier 3, which it engages regularly in African Cup competition.

rowan wrote:That's true. & Brazil is certainly getting plenty of opportunities in the Americas, where Argentina is basically playing the same role as France did in Europe (& North Africa) during the FIRA years. Japan is still light years ahead of HK & Korea, who ought to become involved in the Pacific Challenge Cup or something, but at least the Blossom still play them. Now that Namibia is tier 2 and has played in 5 straight World Cups, perhaps it warrants an annual test with SA, thereby serving as the bridge with African tier 3, which it engages regularly in African Cup competition.

Namibia's regular appearance at RWC's is more a reflection of the dire state of African rugby than Namibia's prowess - 5 World Cups, 0 wins, 15 losses (including v Canada, Romania & 2x Georgia). If anything, Namibia has underperformed. It has over 100 years of rugby history thanks to being ruled by South Africa from 1916 to 1990. It played in the Currie Cup and spawned notable Springboks including Percy Montomery. It is a bit mystifying as to why Namibia is so bad but I guess it would be a bit like Buller or the Force declaring independence.

I think they were a bit stronger than that. More like Manawatu or something. Remember they beat Ireland twice shortly after independence, as well as Italy. Incidentally, Bok legend Jan Ellis played for Namibia (South West Africa) first, having grown up there, which is why I think a trophy between the two nations should be named after him.

Meanwhile, Kenya's triumphs over the likes of Spain, Portugal & Brazil in recent years indicate that qualifying out of Africa might not been such a piece of cake as you imply, and Nambia themselves have put the likes of Russia & Germany to the sword on their home patch.

I've suggested NZ & Australia engage the Pacific Islands and perhaps Japan as regular international season warm-up opposition, and perhaps South Africa could do the same against Namibia on an annual basis. My signiature explains why . . .

First day of spring, btw

That's kind of my point. If Namibia could beat Ireland (whether at full strength or full concentration or not) back then, why haven't they maintained that competitiveness?

Player-drain hit pretty hard once SA returned to the international arena, followed by the advent of professionalism, with better prospects at club and provincial level. Those in a position to choose, invariably headed south, naturally.

I'm not sure Namibia is making the most of its population either. Judging by the massive dominance of Afrikans player names, I suspect that even English (or German) speaking whites don't get much of a look in, let alone the 93% non-white population.

http://stats.espnscrum.com/statsguru/ru ... ype=player

Namibia is just a mini-South Africa which has been able to slip under the radar in terms of accountability for the disadvantages created by the Apartheid era due to the fact it wasn't directly responsible, and also that it only has a population of 2 million. So they've actually done remarkably well if you consider the game is dominated there by a community of little over a hundred thousand (ie the population of Dunedin)

Surprisingly good show with some real home truths about international rugby's ongoing elitism...

Another thing that needs to be looked at is news coverage of international rugby. The major web sites in Britain, Australasia and South Africa give practically no space at all to non-tier 1 rugby. Even those who claim to be international web sites - in fact, especially those ones. The British Sites claiming to represent the sport worldwide are really only covering 6 Nations and SANZAAR competitions 99.9% of the time, along with the corresponding club competitions. Some really big news stories about second and third tier rugby over the past few years have slipped completely under the radar, while the vast majority of international results are not mentioned either.

Some people don’t have time to post stuff on the internet that virtually no one is going to read.....

Chicken & the egg, perhaps. Women's rugby gets a little coverage even though playing numbers in even the major women's rugby nations are comparable with those of men's players in tier 3 nations. The articles printed about women's rugby are read mostly by men who are interested in rugby in general. Wouldn't that also apply to tier 3 news? I guess the difference is that they would need to acquire new correspondents and perhaps even translators in some cases, and they're just not bothered because they don't see an opportunity for increased advertising revenue. Also, I have seen a lot of discussion about tier 3 rugby in blogs and forums, suggesting there is definitely a growing interest. So yours is a somewhat pessimistic and myopic perspective, and part of the problem rather than the solution, obviously.

Uruguay's stunning World Cup qualifying win over former quarter-finalists Canada seems to have slipped under the radar as well. None of the so-called global rugby Web Sites seem to have mentioned it...

Grabbed off TRF:

Thanks! It's already on the Global Results thread, btw.

rowan wrote:Surprisingly good show with some real home truths about international rugby's ongoing elitism...

I received a personal response from these guys today thanking me for all my comments and ideas

World Rugby vice chairman Agustin Pichot says the game is 'at a delicate moment'

Agustin Pichot, the vice-chairman of World Rugby, describes it as like playing a game of Tetris. The blocks already in place are rugby's traditional values. Then there are a range of new blocks descending at a great speed, including protecting player welfare and increasing commercial profits.

It is World Rugby's job, Pichot explains in an animated interview with The Sunday Telegraph, to fit these often irreconcilable blocks into place. "Rugby is at a delicate moment," Pichot said. "It is growing, but we have a lot of risks." Being 18 months into his role as Bill Beaumont's deputy, the former Argentina captain has discovered that some blocks cannot be moved. The last time Pichot spoke to The Telegraph, he argued for opening up the Six Nations to Georgia and Rugby Championship to Japan, an opinion for which he says he "nearly got shot". By whom, he declines to say.

He still feels the same way, but recognises that the prospect of Georgia gatecrashing the Six Nations is remote while the present tournament continues to be the grandest of cash cows for the unions involved. "I don't see it at all," Pichot says with a sigh. "It is the point where altruism meets reality. The Six Nations will not change because it is working very well." Similarly, he would love to change the financial model in which unions keep 100 per cent of gate receipts of home Test matches. "We raise it with every country in the south but it won't happen," Pichot said. "We will try? Yes, but we will lose the vote. This is the challenge. There are a lot of people who like the system as it is. I understand that but I want the system to be better for everyone."

An even more eye-opening experience was the vote for France to host the 2023 World Cup, ignoring an independent technical evaluation report that recommended South Africa as the "clear leader". Pichot no longer attempts to project a brave face on the horse-trading that allowed France to steal the necessary votes with promises of an extra 65-80 million. In future, Pichot wants to scrap the secret ballot as well as the two-week gap between the publication of the report and vote that allowed such subterfuge to take place.

"The first thing I thought as an Argentinian is what chance does Argentina have of organising a World Cup? None," Pichot said. "Is that correct? Is that right? Maybe I am an altruist who thinks rugby is about more than making money. The process was independent but then politics comes into it. Maybe we should do a long-range plan of 12 years of three cycles where you can do a forecast so you are assured of the income."

Just as he was as a player, Pichot is a ball of energy, spitting out ideas that may or may not be World Rugby policy. His partnership with Beaumont seems like straight out of a cop buddy movie; Beaumont the vernacular old-timer and Pichot the idealistic rookie. "Bill is a gentleman while I get frustrated and I try to push harder," Pichot said. "I am more anxious. Maybe my shrink would agree that I think time is the most precious thing. I don't like waiting.

"Unless there's a very good reason why you have to wait I would much rather do it and maybe get it wrong. You don't train until you are confident you can beat the All Blacks. You have to play them. The first time you may lose by 50 points, then 30, then 20 and then you beat them."

In their 18 months together, Beaumont and Pichot have already gone about agreeing a new 12-year calendar, extending the international eligibility period from three to five years, relaunching an expanded Americas Rugby Championship that kicked off this weekend and increasing female representation on the board to a third.

Still Pichot is unsatisfied. Mistakes have been made. He wishes more had been done to expand the sevens and women's game. One thing for which he will not apologise is increasing the sanctions around contact with the head. During his playing career, Pichot counts at least four occasions in which he played on with a concussion. On the one occasion when he sought medical help for his symptoms, he was effectively told to man up.

That the culture around concussion has changed for the better is undeniable. The harsher punishments for contact with the head that World Rugby introduced last year are more controversial. The four-week ban handed to England flanker James Haskell for his high hit on Jamie Roberts prompted ex-professionals to claim that the game had "gone soft".

"That's bulls---," Pichot said. "The Haskell tackle was debated all around the world, but the head needs to be protected. Haskell knew he was going up, he knew the risk of going high like that. I get angry when I hear people say the game is going soft. It is still a hard game. We love rugby because it is a contact sport but we don't love it because players get injured. I prefer to go harsh with the punishments and save the player in the long run than allowing them to carry on with the same injuries."

More can and will be done around player welfare. While the exact statistics are being tabulated by scientists at World Rugby, Pichot declares himself "worried" by the weekly accounts of injury crises at different clubs and countries. High on the agenda at the next meeting of World Rugby's executive committee will be the load that players are subjected to in training.

"The load of training that the professional game is bringing is too much," Pichot said. "If you train at the maximum intensity you are fatigued and you are going to get injured. I think we should attack the amount of training in the professional game."

The flip side to being a fierce supporter of player welfare is a recognition that the escalating cost of players' wages is damaging the sport's long-term sustainability. Pichot does not pretend to know all the answers to these various problems, but he knows where to find them. Dialogue between the game's stakeholders, from unions and players to private equity, he says, is essential. World Rugby had never met representatives from French and English clubs until last year when they discussed the long-term calendar.

"You can't solve these problems unless everyone is in the same room together," Pichot said. "What we have not done since 1995 is to get everyone aligned. That is very difficult with money and egos.

"I played with the best 40 guys in our country so egos are the easy thing to handle. The biggest thing for me is that people don't like confrontation. Why are you telling me outside of this room that you want to change the Six Nations and then you get in and don't say anything? This is what disturbs me. People will say I am naive about politics but the game should be bigger than politics.

"I love the challenge. I wouldn't be here otherwise. Everyone tells me it's impossible. It is a personal thing, I wouldn't leave my family on the other side of the world if I didn't think I was doing something right."

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/int ... ate-moment