In constructing a Proposed Rugby World Cup qualification process, we've made the following assumptions:
- That the next full event will contain 20 sides. This is subject to debate and ratification by the IRB. We believe that there is a strong case to retain the fifth side in each pool, both to give the lower sides experience of competing on the top table, and because there's not a huge gap between the fifth and fourth ranked sides.
- That the first three in each pool this year will automatically qualify. This is almost certain to happen.
- That there will be an intercontinental play-off to determine the remaining places. This is also expected to happen. We propose that it should feature 16 sides competing for 8 places.
- That the eight sides competing in this year's world cup will take automatic places in the play-off. This is an assumption of ours, though would not alter the proposed line-up tremendously - the 16 best sides are the 16 best sides, however they qualify.
- That the rugby world is, de facto, divided into five areas: Americas, Europe, Africa, Asia, Oceania; North and South America qualify as one continent, the Pacific Ocean is a continent in its own right. This is likely to remain the case.
The automatic qualifiers for the main tournament are:
- South Africa
- England
- Argentina
- France
- Australia
- Fiji
- New Zealand
- Scotland
- Ireland
- Italy
- Tonga
- Wales
The eight sides we seed into the qualification round are:
- Canada
- FARCE
- Georgia
- Japan
- Namibia
- Portugal
- Romania
- Samoa
Two Americas, three Europe, one each from Africa, Asia, and Oceania.
We now look at the sides ranked 28th or above in the world, to give the sides we expect to take part in the intercontinental play-off. According to the IRB rankings, these are:
- Russia
- Uruguay
- Spain
- Korea
- Chile
- Germany
- Moldova
- Hong Kong
Four sides from Europe, two each from the Americas and Asia. The next ten in the rankings are:
- Morocco
- Paraguay
- Poland
- Belgium
- Brazil
- Czechia
- Tunisia
- Kazakhstan
- Ukraine
- Uganda
Three from Africa, two Americas, four from Europe, and one from Asia. The next side from Oceania is the Cook Islands, at position 50 - twelve places below this list.
On the strength of these numbers, we propose allocating five direct qualification places: two to Europe, one each to Africa, the Americas, and Asia. We propose mini repechage tournaments to fill the remaining places. In principle, each continent should take two places; Europe's relative strength means it gets three. A bye to the second phase should be the reward for the sides coming closest to qualification; Africa's relative lack of strength means that both its representatives must be drawn in the lower places.
Asia 3 -v- Africa 3, winner to meet Europe 3
Europe 5 -v- Africa 2, winner to meet America 2
Europe 4 -v- America 3, winner to meet Asia 2
In theory, this should mean the eight qualifiers are split: Europe 3, Asia 2, Africa 1, America 1, with the last place decided between Africa and America.
Oceanian sides should be able to compete amongst themselves, and perhaps put two sides (most likely Cook Islands and Papua New Guinea) into the last eight for Asia; this would roughly reflect the balance of power in the combined Pacific-Asia region. We cannot justify seeding sides from Oceania into the nine-team repechage (effectively, positions 26-34 in the world) when they're barely ranked in the top 50.
There is an existing tournament structure beneath the Six Nations for European sides, this could double up as a qualification process for the intercontinental play-off, with one-off matches to decide placings where this is necessary. Similarly, existing structures in Africa and the Americas could be co-opted to meet this qualification, and we do not see the additional games in Asia as a tremendous problem. Alternatively, it is possible to add qualifying games in to the regular schedule.
We would envisage the bulk of the qualifying matches would take place between May 2009 and April 2010, leaving the summer free for the repechage matches, and hold the intercontinental play-off in October 2010.
In the intercontinental play-off, divide the teams into four groups of four. Though some sort of split by continent would be possible, we suggest each group should include a fourth and a fifth from each 2007 World Cup group, and no more than one repechage qualifier. A possible arrangement could be:
Group A Canada Namibia Russia Korea Group B Georgia Japan Spain Chile Group C Romania FARCE Uruguay Morocco Group D Samoa Portugal Hong Kong Germany
Winners of each group progress automatically to the World Cup; it would be possible, but may not be desirable, to have a play-off between the group winners for some silverware. The second-placed side in one group plays off against the side finishing third in another group, with the winner of that match making the World Cup. In the event of a draw, the higher-placed side in their group goes through.
It would be good for this tournament to be staged in one (or more) of the competing nations. Japan offered to stage the 2011 World Cup, and hosting this smaller tournament would be a good demonstration of their ability to stage the big one. The other strong choices are Romania, and a co-hosted Canada-FARCE tournament. This last option, perhaps based around the St. Lawrence basin, would bring rugby to an untapped market.
Other rugby matters: Argentina needs to be included in either the Six Nations or the Tri-Nations. Given the fact that most of Argentina's players are active in Europe, it makes some sense to add them to the Six Nations, perhaps also bringing in Romania for an Eight Nations championship from 2009.
The International Rugby Board now has its war-chest, to keep it afloat if the next World Cup had to be cancelled. It's high time that it paid good money to support the development sides.
