Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
NZ NZ

NZ, Australia, South Africa bosses welcome 'exciting' new World League developments

New Zealand Rugby boss Steve Tew. (Photo by Anthony Au-Yeung/Getty Images)

Rugby bosses from New Zealand, Australia and South Africa have emerged from World League talks in Dublin this week with a fresh sense of support about the radical new competition.

ADVERTISEMENT

Officials from around the globe met in the Irish capital on Thursday to discuss the concept of the proposed World Rugby Nations Championship, which was initially met with a barrage of criticism worldwide from players, coaches, fans, administrators and pundits for a variety of reasons including disregard for player welfare and a lack of opportunities for emerging nations.

However, World Rugby have since updated the blueprint for the competition, adding a promotion-relegation mechanism to provide tier two and three nations a pathway to compete with tier one countries, while reducing its initial number of fixtures by removing the semi-final round of the competition in a bid to address player welfare concerns.

World Rugby have also announced that, thanks to a record commercial partnership with leading global sports marketing company Infront, the new format would also inject £5 billion for investment in the sport over an initial 12-year period, and at least £1.5 billion of that figure is guaranteed incremental revenue for the world game.

The proposed business model covers both media and marketing rights but does not include any sale of equity in the competition, meaning full control of the competition and its revenue redistribution model would be retained by the unions, the current major competitions and World Rugby.

These new revelations that have stemmed from the talks held in Ireland over the last 24 hours have eased concerns held by key figures in the southern hemisphere.

New Zealand Rugby boss Steve Tew was impressed with the updated proposal by World Rugby, but stressed the importance of finding a balance between the interests of all involved parties, especially those of the Pacific Island nations.

ADVERTISEMENT

“World Rugby has been working very hard on finding a solution that ensures the future growth of the game in New Zealand and around the world, including the Pacific,” Tew said.

“We now have a strong proposal for a World Rugby Nations Championship that we will need to take back to our stakeholders.

“The creation of a new championship, outside of Rugby World Cup years, has been the focus of discussions with World Rugby for several months and the issues are very complex.

“Our challenge has been to find balance between a model that delivers what fans are demanding, with the welfare of all players, growing the commercial strength of our competition and ensuring we are providing a pathway for other nations.

ADVERTISEMENT

“New Zealand has been a strong advocate for a pathway for Pacific unions and emerging nations.

“The model currently in front of us looks like it could deliver many of the fundamentals we are seeking in a future championship.

“The prospect of new and potentially lucrative opportunities for rugby are exciting and the potential for a single point of purchase for existing and new broadcasters is also interesting.”

Rugby Australia chief executive Raelene Castle echoed Tew’s sentiments.

Rugby Australia CEO Raelene Castle chats to David Pocock. (Photo by Anthony Au-Yeung/Getty Images)

“The proposal put forward by World Rugby for the Nations Championship has the potential to deliver a great product for fans and significant commercial benefit for Australia and the game globally, including opportunities for emerging nations,” she said.

“We commend World Rugby on the work they have done in developing a strong proposal and we remain committed to working towards an outcome that can tick each of those boxes.

“These are exciting but complex discussions which require us to strike a balance between doing what’s best for fans, Australian Rugby as well as the global game, and the players.

“We will now continue the conversation with our member unions and RUPA before reverting back to World Rugby on our position ahead of the next round of discussions.”

South Africa Rugby CEO Jurie Roux said while there is immense potential for the competition to become successful, the format needs to be consulted with by member unions and player representatives before getting South Africa’s seal of approval.

“The model is an interesting one,” he said.

“Creating a meaningful season-long competition out of the current patchwork of events and tournaments has an obvious appeal as well as proving a clear development pathway for emerging nations, which speaks directly to one of the fundamental goals of World Rugby.

“It would also create new and potentially lucrative opportunities for the sport as well as a single point of purchase for existing and new broadcasting players.

“But there are a number of due diligences to be performed and questions to be answered before anything can come to fruition.”

Hansen to the Lions?:

Video Spacer

ADVERTISEMENT

Join free

Singapore SVNS Day 1 - Replay

Fresh Starts | Episode 3 | Cobus Reinach

Aotearoa Rugby Podcast | Episode 11

Chasing The Sun | Series 1 Episode 1

The Breakfast Show | Episode 7

Abbie Ward: A Bump in the Road

Pacific Four Series 2024 | Canada vs USA

Japan Rugby League One | Verblitz v Eagles | Full Match Replay

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
Jon 12 hours ago
The case for keeping the Melbourne Rebels in Super Rugby Pacific

I have heard it asked if RA is essentially one of the part owners and I suppose therefor should be on the other side of these two parties. If they purchased the rebels and guaranteed them, and are responsible enough they incur Rebels penalties, where is this line drawn? Seems rough to have to pay a penalty for something were your involvement sees you on the side of the conned party, the creditors. If the Rebels directors themselves have given the club their money, 6mil worth right, why aren’t they also listed as sitting with RA and the Tax office? And the legal threat was either way, new Rebels or defunct, I can’t see how RA assume the threat was less likely enough to warrant comment about it in this article. Surely RA ignore that and only worry about whether they can defend it or not, which they have reported as being comfortable with. So in effect wouldn’t it be more accurate to say there is no further legal threat (or worry) in denying the deal. Unless the directors have reneged on that. > Returns of a Japanese team or even Argentinean side, the Jaguares, were said to be on the cards, as were the ideas of standing up brand new teams in Hawaii or even Los Angeles – crazy ideas that seemingly forgot the time zone issues often cited as a turn-off for viewers when the competition contained teams from South Africa. Those timezones are great for SR and are what will probably be needed to unlock its future (cant see it remaining without _atleast _help from Aus), day games here are night games on the West Coast of america, were potential viewers triple, win win. With one of the best and easiest ways to unlock that being to play games or a host a team there. Less good the further across Aus you get though. Jaguares wouldn’t be the same Jaguares, but I still would think it’s better having them than keeping the Rebels. The other options aren’t really realistic 25’ options, no. From reading this authors last article I think if the new board can get the investment they seem to be confident in, you keeping them simply for the amount of money they’ll be investing in the game. Then ditch them later if they’re not good enough without such a high budget. Use them to get Jaguares reintergration stronger, with more key players on board, and have success drive success.

28 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING Dan Carter weighs in on who should be Scott Robertson's All Black 10 Dan Carter on who should be Razor's All Black 10
Search