Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

EXCLUSIVE: World Rugby respond to allegations that Tier 2 nations 'handicapped' at World Cup

Samoa team perform the Siva Tau before 2015 World Cup match with Japan. (Photo by Laurence Griffiths/Getty Images)

World Rugby chiefs have dismissed claims smaller nations will be “handicapped” at next year’s Rugby World Cup in Japan with less recovery time between matches compared to the game’s leading countries.

ADVERTISEMENT

Pacific Rugby Players chief executive Dan Leo is fronting a campaign to get Tier 2 nations more representation on the World Rugby Council and remains adamant the system is fundamentally unfair despite Samoa being handed a place on the game’s ruling body.

World Rugby is sidestepping direct conflict with Leo, but it is understood they believe significant improvements to the treatment of Tier 2 countries has been instigated, making next year’s World Cup the fairest yet staged.

The counter argument from World Rugby is based on the view that the 2019 tournament has the most balanced playing schedule of any World Cup and they point to the fact that hosts Japan (20) and Tonga and Namibia( both 18) are amongst the teams with the most rest days between Pool matches.

Unlike the 2015 World Cup staged in England, no Tier 2 nation will face a Tier 1 nation after a shorter rest period. In total there will be just two periods of four rest days for Tier 2 nations compared to nine in 2015.

Continue reading below…
You may also like: The Rugby Pod talk transfer rumours

Video Spacer

Leo insists that the Repechage winner that will emerge next month from the play off between Kenya, Germany, Canada and Hong Kong will be an example of an unfair system as they will get less time to prepare for Pool B where they join New Zealand, South Africa, Italy and Namibia. However, World Rugby insist the winner will have the same 18 days to play their four Pool games as double champions South Africa.

ADVERTISEMENT

However, Leo remains steadfast in his view that not enough is being done and said, “While the awarding of Samoa’s council vote would certainly be a step in the right direction and testament to the campaign, it is certainly not mission complete by any stretch of the imagination

“What the world of sport needs to focus on is that even if the Samoa news is confirmed, there could still be six tier two unions competing at the Rugby World Cup next year who have no seat on the main political body, no vote for the chairmanship and even have no representative on the game’s many committee structures.”

“As a result of this lack of political representation, there is no pushback when Rugby World Cup organisers effectively handicap these tier two countries out of the tournament by giving them a much harder schedule than the richer tier one unions who have the permanent voting majority.”

Watch: Dan Leo Life After Sport

Video Spacer

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
JW 5 hours ago
'Let's not sugarcoat it': Former All Black's urgent call to protect eligibility rules

Yep, no one knows what will happen. Thing is I think (this is me arguing a point here not a random debate with this one) they're better off trialing it now in a controlled environment than waiting to open it up in a knee jerk style reaction to a crumbling organtization and team. They can always stop it again.


The principle idea is that why would players leave just because the door is ajar?


BBBR decides to go but is not good enough to retain the jersey after doing it. NZ no longer need to do what I suggest by paying him to get back upto speed. That is solely a concept of a body that needs to do what I call pick and stick wth players. NZR can't hold onto everyone so they have to choose their BBBRs and if that player comes back from a sabbatical under par it's a priority to get him upto speed as fast as possible because half of his competition has been let go overseas because they can't hold onto them all. Changing eligibility removes that dilemma, if a BBBR isn't playing well you can be assured that someone else is (well the idea is that you can be more assured than if you only selected from domestic players).


So if someone decides they want to go overseas, they better do it with an org than is going to help improve them, otherwise theyre still basically as ineligible as if they would have been scorning a NZ Super side that would have given them the best chance to be an All Black.

147 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ What is the future of rugby in 2025? What is the future of rugby in 2025?
Search