Leaving Fiji out in the cold a sure-fire way to damage rugby's integrity
With the supposed plans dropping for the new ‘World League’ earlier this week, there’s one nation that will be feeling particularly aggrieved.
World Rugby’s proposal would include 12 of the top international teams regularly playing each other throughout the year in a 12-year deal. Reports suggest that there would be no second-tier competition – once you’re in, you’re in and, more importantly, if you’re out, you’re out.
For the teams already involved in top-level competition (the Six Nations and Rugby Championship participants), there will be little change. More travel for the players has been resolutely criticised, but the quality and regularity of competition for the top teams will remain much the same.
For the new teams which will be brought into the fold – Japan and the USA – rugby will be given a huge boost in their countries and they will have the opportunity for high-quality matches (and, inevitably, regular thrashings) year after year.
When it comes to professional sport, money certainly plays an important part in deciding who to invest in and who to let fall by the wayside. It’s clear to everyone that Japan and the USA are areas of huge commercial opportunity in the rugby world; the sport is somewhat popular in both countries but there’s reason to believe that both nations have the market and growth potential to inject considerable funds and viewership into the game. At present, however, both countries have been courted far more on promise than on what they’re able to achieve in the now.
There are other teams outside the designated 12 that will be especially hard done by if the rumoured plans do turn out to be accurate – and, it should be emphasised, World Rugby haven’t officially revealed what format the World League will follow so we’re operating only on hearsay at present.
If the 12-year deal does limit promotion and relegation, then the Pacific Island teams will certainly be locked out from any future meaningful competition. With the World League teams required to play at least 11 matches every year (not including any potential finals series) and travel demands likely to increase, it’s improbable that we’ll see many matches played outside of the World League for the competing nations.
The belief appears to have always been that the less well-off nations simply can’t be integrated into the standard rugby calendar – it’s simply not feasible. Professional sport, however, can only survive when the competition is strong. The more competitive teams there are battling for glory, the more desirable a product you have to sell to the masses. When it comes to finding competitive teams outside the core ten, you need to look no further than the Pacific Islands.
Even with less money to throw around than other countries around the world, the Pacific nations have remained competitive on a global scale. With a bit of extra investment from the powers that be, the likes of Samoa, Fiji and Tonga could seriously threaten the first tier on a regular basis (which, to be honest, may be one of the reasons why this investment has yet to happen).
All three island nations contribute players to top quality teams around the globe. There are countless island natives plugging gaps in teams in Australasia, the United Kingdom and France and when the players come together to represent their home nations the rugby played is some of the most exciting and enthralling in the world – who wouldn’t love to see Samoa put out a competitive team on a regular basis, instead of only in World Cup years?
Fiji, in particular, have show in recent years that they can foot it with the best. In the last two years, Fiji have toppled Italy, Scotland and France – and came excruciatingly close to knocking over Ireland.
Fiji’s win over Les Bleus at the Stade de France is one of the greatest results in tier two history – not quite on level with Japan knocking over South Africa at the last World Cup, perhaps, but winning against France at home is difficult for even some of the top teams. Scotland and Italy are both yet to taste victory in France since the turn of the century.
Of course, Scotland, Italy and France all have the benefit of playing upwards of ten matches a year against other tier one teams whereas Fiji have been limited to fewer than five games in most seasons.
Fiji have been sharpening their knives against the likes of Namibia, Canada and their fellow Pacific Island teams over the last few years, but they’ve had little opportunity to draw their swords and show the rugby world what they’re capable of. Surely, moving forward, it would be foolish at best and corrupt at worst to omit teams like Fiji from top level competition?
We’re still waiting on the final world on the mooted World League – and some signs point to the competition being dead in the water already due to the player outcry (why the players weren’t already properly consulted is anyone’s guess). For the integrity of the game, however, any major shake ups to the global playfield must include competitive rugby nations such as Fiji, not just countries with financial clout.
Whether or not the much publicised ‘World League’ moniker is used in the future is uncertain, but it would certainly be a joke of the highest order if only 12 teams from around the world are actually allowed to compete over a 12-year period. It’s not quite as bad as America’s World Series Baseball, but offering no outsiders the chance to take part would severely damage the rugby brand on a global scale.
Rugby Explorer with Jim Hamilton:
Comments on RugbyPass
But here in Australia we were told Penney was another gun kiwi coach, for the Tahs…….and yet again it turned out the kiwi coach was completely useless. Another con job on Australian rugby. As was Robbie Deans, as was Dave Rennie. Both coaches dumped from NZ and promoted to Australia as our saviour. And the Tahs lap them up knowing they are second rate and knowing that under pressure when their short comings are exposed in Australia as well, that they will fall in below the largest most powerful province and choose second rate Tah players to save their jobs. As they do and exactly as Joe Schmidt will do. Gauranteed. Schmidt was dumped by NZ too. That’s why he went overseas. That why kiwi coaches take jobs in Australia, to try and prove they are not as bad as NZ thought they were. Then when they get found out they try and ingratiate themselves to NZ again by dragging Australian teams down with ridiculous selections and game plans. NZ rugby’s biggest problem is that it can’t yet transition from MCaw Cheatism. They just don’t know how to try and win on your merits. It is still always a contest to see how much cheating you can get away with. Without a cheating genius like McCaw, they are struggling. This I think is why my wise old mate in NZ thinks Robertson will struggle. The Crusaders are the nursery of McCaw Cheatism. Sean Fitzpatrick was probably the father of it. Robertson doesn’t know anything else but other countries have worked it out.
14 Go to commentsIt could be coincidental or prescient that the All Blacks most dominant period under Steve Hansen was when the Crusaders had their least successful period under Todd Blackadder and then the positions reversed when Razor took over the Crusaders.
14 Go to commentsDefinitely sound read everybodyexpects immediate results these days, I don't think any team would travel well at all having lost three of the most important game changers in the game,compiled with the massive injury list they are now carrying, good to see a different more in depth perspective of a coaches history.
3 Go to commentsSinckler is a really big loss for English rugby.
1 Go to commentsThanks Nick The loss of players to OS, injury and retirement is certainly not helping the Crusaders. Ditto the coach. IMO Penny is there to hold the fort and cop the flak until new players and a new coach come through,…and that's understood and accepted by Penny and the Crusaders hierarchy. I think though that what is happening with the Crusaders is an indicator of what is happening with the other NZ SRP teams…..and the other SRP teams for that matter. Not enough money. The money has come via the SR competition and it’s not there anymore. It's in France, Japan and England. Unless or until something is done to make SR more SELLABLE to the NZ/Australia Rugby market AND the world rugby market the $s to keep both the very best players and the next rung down won't be there. They will play away from NZ more and more. I think though that NZ will continue to produce the players and the coaches of sufficient strength for NZ to have the capacity to stay at the top. Whether they do stay at the top as an international team will depend upon whether the money flowing to SRP is somehow restored, or NZ teams play in the Japan comp, or NZ opts to pick from anywhere. As a follower of many sports I’d have to say that the organisation and promotion of Super Rugby has been for the last 20 years closest to the worst I’ve ever seen. This hasn't necessarily been caused by NZ, but it’s happened. Perhaps it can be fixed, perhaps not. The Crusaders are I think a symptom of this, not the cause
14 Go to commentsNo way. If you are trying to picture New Zealand rugby with an All Blacks mindset, there have been two factors instrumental to the decline of NZ rugby to date. Those are the horror that the Blues have become and, probably more so, the fixture that the Crusaders became. I don’t think it was healthy to have one team so dominant for so long, both for lack of proper representation of players from outside that environment and on the over reliance on players from within it. If you are another international side, like Ireland for example, sure. You can copy paste something succinct from one level to the next and experience a huge increase in standards, but ultimately you will not be maximizing it, which is what you need to perform to the level the ABs do. Added to that is the apathy that develops in the whole game as a result of one sides dominance. NZ, Super, and Championship rugby should all experience a boom as a result of things balancing out. That said, there is a lot of bad news happening in NZ rugby recently, and I’m not sure the game can be handled well enough here to postpone the always-there feeling of inevitable decline of rugby.
14 Go to commentsNo SA supporter miss Super Rugby - a product that is experiencing significant head wind in ANZ - the competition from rival codes are intense, match attendance figures are at a historical low and the negativity of commentators such as Kirwan and Wilson have accelerated the downward spiral in NZ. After the next RWC in 2027 sponsors will follow Qantas and start leaving in droves.
2 Go to commentsLike others, I am not seeing the connection between this edition of the Crusaders and the All Blacks future prospects under Razor. I think the analysis of the Crusaders attack recently is helpful because Razor and his coaching team used to be able to slot new guys in to their systems and see them succeed. Several of Razor’s coaches are still there so it would be surprising if the current attack and set piece has been overhauled to a great extent - but based on that analysis, it may have been. Whether it is too many new guys due to injuries or retirement or a failure of current Crusaders systems is the main question to be answered imo. It doesn’t seem relevant for the ABs.
14 Go to commentsharry potter is set in stone. he creates stability and finishes well. exactly what schmidt likes. he’s the ben smith of australian rugby. i think it could quite easily be potter toole and kellaway for the foreseeable future.
5 Go to commentsThis is short sighted from Clayton if you ask me, smacks of too much preseason planning and no adaptability. What if DMac is out for a must win match, are they still only going to bring their best first five and playmaker on late in the game? Trusting the game to someone who wasn’t even part of planning (they would have had Trask pinned in as Jacomb preseason). Perhaps if the Crusaders were better they would not have done this, but either way imo you take this opportunity to play a guy you might need starting in a final rather than having their 12th game getting comfortable coming off the bench.
1 Go to commentsThanks Brett.. At last a positive article on the potential of Wallaby candidates, great to read. Schmidt’s record as an international rugby coach speaks for itself, I’m somewhat confident he will turn the Wallaby’s fortunes around …. on the field. It will be up to others to steady the ship off the paddock. But is there a flaw in my optimism? We have known all along that Australia has the players to be very competitive with their international rivals. We know that because everyone keeps telling us. So why the poor results? A question that requires a definitive answer before the turn around can occur. Joe Schmidt signed on for 2 years, time to encompass the Lions tour of 2025. By all accounts he puts family first and that’s fair enough, but I would wager that his 2 year contract will be extended if the next 18 months or so shows the statement “Australia has the players” proves to be correct. The new coach does not have a lot of time to meld together an outfit that will be competitive in the Rugby Championship - it will be interesting to see what happens. It will be interesting to see what happens with Giteau law, the new Wallaby coach has already verbalised that he would to prefer to select from those who play their rugby in Australia. His first test in charge is in July just over 3 months away .. not a long time. I for one wish him well .. heaven knows Australia needs some positive vibes.
21 Go to commentsWhat a load of bollocks. The author has forgotten to mention the fact that the Crusaders have a huge injury toll with top world class players out. Not to mention the fact that they are obviously in a transition period. No this will not spark a slow death for NZ rugby, but it does mean there will be a new Super Rugby champion. Anyone who knows anything about NZ rugby knows that there is some serious talent here, it just isn’t all at the Crusaders.
14 Go to commentsI wouldn’t spend the time on Nawaqanitawase! No point in having him filling in a jersey when he’s committed to leave Union. Give the jersey to a young prospect who will be here in the future.
5 Go to commentsIt was a pleasure to watch those guys playing with such confidence. That trio can all be infuriating for different reasons and I can see why Jones might have decided against them. No way to justify leaving Ikitau out though. Jorgensen and him were both scheduled to return at the same time. Only one of them plays for Randwick and has a dad who is great mates with the national coach though.
53 Go to commentsBrayden Iose and Peter Lakai are very exciting Super Rugby players but are too short and too light to ever be a Test 8 vs South Africa, France, Ireland, and England, Lakai could potentially be a Test player at 7 if he is allowed to focus on 7 for Hurricanes.
7 Go to commentsPencils “Thomas du Toit” into possible 2027 Bok squad.
1 Go to commentsDon’t see why Harrison makes the bench. Jones can play at 10 if needed, and there is a good case for starting her there to begin with if testing combinations. That would leave room for Sing on the bench
1 Go to commentsWhat a load of old bull!
1 Go to commentsOf the rugby I’ve born witness to in my lifetime - 1990 to date - I recognize great players throughout those years. But I have no doubt the game and the players are on average better today. So I doubt going back further is going to prove me wrong. The technical components of the game, set pieces, scrums, kicks, kicks at goal. And in general tactics employed are far more efficient, accurate and polished. Professional athletes that have invested countless hours on being accurate. There is one nation though that may be fairly competitive in any era - and that for me is the all blacks. And New Zealand players in general. NZ produces startling athletes who have fantastic ball skills. And then the odd phenomenon like Brooke. Lomu. Mcaw. Carter. Better than comparing players and teams across eras - I’ve often had this thought - that it would be very interesting to have a version of the game that is closer to its original form. What would the game look like today if the rules were rolled back. Not rules that promote safety obviously - but rules like: - a try being worth 1 point and conversion 2 points. Hence the term “try”. Earning a try at goals. Would we see more attacking play? - no lifting in the lineouts. - rucks and break down laws in general. They looked like wrestling matches in bygone eras. I wonder what a game applying 1995 rules would look like with modern players. It may be a daft exercise, but it would make for an interesting spectacle celebrating “purer” forms of the game that roll back the rules dramatically by a few versions. Would we come to learn that some of the rules/combinations of the rules we see today have actually made the game less attractive? I’d love to see an exhibition match like that.
29 Go to commentsIrish Rugby CEO be texting Andy Farrell “Andy, i found our next Kiwi Irishman”
5 Go to comments