Given the uneven balance of the draw for this year’s Rugby World Cup, there’s been a fair bit of talk, here and elsewhere, about changing the date of the draw. Obviously there has to be a draw, there needs to be a schedule, teams need to know who they’re playing, where and when with at least some notice. So, how might it change, what challenges will this cause and are there any solutions?
What Happens Now?
Before thinking about how we might change the Rugby World Cup draw, we ought to understand the process.
Currently the top 12 teams in the world are automatically included, in three separate bands of four. So each of Pool A, B, C and D will get one of the top 4, one of 5-8 and one of 9-12 at the time of the draw. These are called, imaginatively, Band 1, Band 2 and Band 3.
The last two places in each pool are also banded, Band 4 is Oceania 1, Americas 1, Europe 1 and Africa 1, while Band 5 gets Oceania 2, Americas 2, Play-off Winner and Repechage Winner. These places are very clearly not fixed, but come from regional competitions which start pretty much straight away after one World Cup finishes, so the remaining teams can qualify for the next one. The play-off winner and repechage winner gives all the teams from the regional contests that didn’t quite make it a chance to play off and the winner and the better of the second and third placed teams in a “second chance” – the repechage – to get a place as well. Quite a few sports have this kind of a system, the idea is that seeding it imprecise so teams that might have been unlucky get a second chance.
Part of the reason the date of the draw is fixed fairly early is nothing to do with logistics etc. it’s to make sure that the Top 12 is fixed and the teams that need to take place in regional competitions are known. Although we’re going to look a bit more closely at all the movement, Japan were in the top 12 for this draw, still buoyed up by their quarterfinal appearance in their home World Cup, but if the draw had been made at the end of 2022, they wouldn’t have been. However, they also would’ve missed all the Oceania qualifying competitions and wouldn’t be in the World Cup at all. This kind of thing is a problem we need to think about, and will look at it below.
The Nature of the Problem
Because of Covid, and the way it unevenly disrupted test matches, the date of the rankings used for the draw for 2023 was set unusually early. But there are mutterings that it should be moved much later for future World Cups. This would better reflect the world rankings at the time of the competition. This seems pretty reasonable.
While there’s a separate debate about the value of the world rankings, World Rugby publishes them, is the overall organiser of the World Cup, it’s going to use them as the basis for the seeding. What would happen to this year’s top three bands if we moved the draw date to the end of 2022? This is about as late as we can reasonable expect and still allow for some organisation. This would give us the following first three bands:
- Ireland, France, New Zealand, South Africa (that’s unchanged to today, but compared to what we’ve actually got France and South Africa in, Wales and England out)
- England, Australia, Scotland, Argentina (the order is different today but that doesn’t matter for a random draw. Fiji in, Australia out of this band. Wales skip this band. The actual draw has France, Ireland, Australia and Japan. Two teams up, one down and one out of the top 12. This band is annihilated by a later draw.)
- Wales, Japan, Samoa, Italy (Wales and Australia have fallen down from higher bands. Georgia is in. Japan and Italy out. The actual band 3 we have is Italy, Scotland, Fiji, Argentina. This would have one team drop out and three teams move up.)
So, overall, the top three bands would look really different. There might still be a Wales v Australia clash, and Fiji would miss out on an automatic place. It’s not perfect, Fiji missing out feels unfair but their improvement has really all come this year. The real change would be up in Band 1, where you’d spread the top four sides across the pools, which is good, and although the order has shifted since the end of 2022, the top four has remained the same. Shifting the order within a band doesn’t really matter, the idea is to distribute the teams one into each pool, nothing more. What would be more problematic would be if the teams in fourth and fifth place had swapped places between the end of 2022 and now. (Actually England have gone and been replaced by Scotland.) Doubly so if the team at five are in the same pool as the team ranked one. But no system is perfect, there are quite a few ifs in there, and it’s still better than what we’ve got now.
If it all works as we hope, and we assume that, as has happened all but once, the winner comes from the top four, this gives each of them the best chance of reaching the semi-final, and thus the final. We know this year that only two of the top four are reaching a semi-final at best, because they’re meeting in the quarterfinals (Scotland might mean that one of the top four is placed by the fifth ranked side).
Problems with a Late Draw
I can foresee at least two significant problems with have such a late draw. One I’ve alluded to above.
The Movement of the Teams
Consider Italy and Japan. Both teams, in the current draw are in Band 3, guaranteed a place in the draw. But if you wait until 2022, they’ve fallen out of the top 12 in the world and are no longer guaranteed a place. Do they miss out? Do we have a wider qualification competition, and teams that qualify by right of their ranking get in, the “winner” of the competition, Europe 1 and Oceania 1 in this case, are the team that placed best but didn’t qualify as of right?
I’m sure there are many solutions, but I’m going to propose one that I suspect makes sense if you’re World Rugby. Let the tier one nations qualify by right. Just to be clear, tier one is actually about voting rights at the World Rugby Council. If you have three votes, you’re a Tier One country. This list is Argentina, Australia, England, France, Ireland, Italy, New Zealand, Scotland, South Africa and Wales. That’s only 10 countries, so working out the other two countries for automatic inclusion is trickier. If a tier two country reaches the quarterfinals or further, they get into the draw by right. The remaining teams that finished in third place in their pools play off for the remaining one or two places.
However, ALL the bands are based on world rankings at the time of the draw.
Let’s consider Japan under this format. They reached the quarterfinals in 2019, so they would automatically qualify as one of the ‘top 12’ teams for 2023, but when it comes to the seeding, rather than being guaranteed a band 3 spot as they were, they would be compared to all the other qualifiers. I think that gets them a band 4 spot. If they’d gone up and were ranked 5th in the world, they’d be in Band 2, if they’d fallen further and were ranked 22nd, they’d be in Band 5. You would then, nicely, keep the current qualifying competitions, with clear information about who is competing in them.
I’m sure there are other solutions but there but the fact that there’s at least one reasonably elegant one suggests it’s not impossible to find a good one. A slightly different one, not so dependent on Tier One status is just to reward the teams that reach the quarterfinals, which gives you eight teams automatically included and extend the qualifying contests. Alternatively you could take the teams that finish in the top three places in one year and give them a place in the contest automatically – but not necessarily in the top three bands.
I don’t have a preference for any of these. I’m not arguing for any of them. I’m pointing out that this is a problem, but that there are solutions. It shouldn’t be beyond the wit of World Rugby to come up with an equitable solution that keep everyone fairly happy.
The Movement of the Players
The other obvious problem is one of logistics. However, with a bit of imagination this too can be solved. Currently each team finds a base, a hotel and training facilities, organises its own travel and so on. Everything is left up to them. But finding accommodation, even in September/October for about 60 people, in the right place, near a training facility, near where you’re playing – you want to book that some time in advance if you can. One instantly obvious solution is to change the process. Each team pays to the host organising committee, and the host committee books hotel rooms for “a Rugby World Cup team, full details to follow” near each venue. Teams are free to book a base separately, or pay for that to be booked if you’re going to have a base and play most of your pool games near there. Then, when the draw is made, the hosts firm up who goes where. There are probably more elegant solutions too, but that one will work. So it is solveable.
I may have missed other problems, I’m sure I have. The way France is organising things teams don’t really have a “base” in the way that previous teams have had. In Japan, and certainly in England, top seeded teams often had a situation where they played all their pool matches in one location. It didn’t help England much to play all their matches at Twickenham, but they did it. In 2019 it looks like everyone is moving around, all over France. So in the “host nations books the hotels” they’d have a lot more room booking to do. But that’s not insurmountable. It’s just more work.
Will It Happen?
I’m not going to pretend we’ll see exactly the system I’ve outlined. That was much more a thought exercise. What happens if we push this to an extreme? Can I see ways to cope with the problems I can think of? And the answer is yes.
Of course, there may be a killer problem I haven’t thought of. In addition, although after the November tests the year before would be nice, it was also good (despite the result) to see fixtures like Wales v Georgia in November 2022. Although Wales is pretty good about playing one tier two nation each November, that exact match would have been unlikely if we hadn’t known they’d both be in Pool C.
The tickets for this year’s World Cup matches went on sale in September 2022. That’s obviously a year ahead (it was actually exactly a year ahead) of the tournament. That seems like a good way to build up the anticipation. That was between rounds four and five of last year’s Rugby Championship. I think that’s probably the best compromise date, the rankings change a bit between early September and December but the bands wouldn’t, except we’d have Fiji instead of Italy in Band 3. Ironically that’s a fairer reflection of where we are today, except Fiji should be in Band 2.
Obviously I have never tried to organise an international rugby team, so I don’t know if a year is enough time to book a hotel, training facilities and the like. I think probably not, because the July and November test matches are booked up ages in advance. I’m not sure you need three years or more, but it’s that kind of timeframe that we see. But there are ways around that, as we’ve discussed. But France played Japan last November and had great attendance figures even though they’re in different pools, so it’s not a requirement to do that.
Concluding Thoughts
I think, although the only mutterings I’ve really heard are among the fans, WR has a bit of egg on its face. Yes, we all understand they made a decision because of Covid. Equally, no one expected all of Australia, England and Wales to tank their rankings. But, as I’ve discussed before since the ranking began, only teams in the top five have ever won. And they’re all in two pools, and in the pools that meet in the quarterfinals. Normally you’d expect the best four sides to meet in the semifinals, this year it looks like two of the best four sides are going home as losing quarterfinalists, two worse sides are going to get through to, potentially lopsided, semifinals. I say “looks like” because there can always be a shock result. In 2007 I don’t know that anyone expected Argentina to reach the semifinals. Same in 2015. However, in those years I don’t think anyone begrudged them their success, it felt like they’d performed better than teams expected to do better. (Supporters of teams they’d beaten in the quarterfinals may still begrudge them those victories.) This year, if they reach the semifinals, it will feel to many as if they’ve had an easier route than their opponent. And that’s not good. So I think something will happen. I’m just not sure what.
What do you think? Will they move the draw for the Rugby World Cup or fudge it and hope it doesn’t go so badly wrong again?
