EFS' Methods Succeed?

Rugby World Cup chief executive Martin Snedden says the schedule for the tournament must change in the future.

The near seven-week-long tournament has been criticised for giving the lower-ranked nations a tougher schedule than the more established nations.

"It's been difficult for some of the teams, there is no doubt about that," Snedden told BBC Sport. "Patently it's not right and needs to be worked on."

He said the problem could be solved if the tournament was longer.

Snedden, who represented the New Zealand cricket team in 25 Tests and 93 one-day internationals between 1980 and 1990, said: "The schedule is one of the most difficult things to do and we thought about it long and hard with the IRB [International Rugby Board].

"You've got a set window for the tournament. The only way you can avoid the situation that has happened is to lengthen the tournament by seven days and that's not a decision for us, that's one for the IRB and their members. If they did that they could get around some of scheduling issues."

He told the BBC's Dan Roan: "It [the scheduling for smaller nations] was looked at seriously before this tournament and the schedule we came up was felt, by the teams, to be a lot better than what they had experienced in France and in Australia before that. But undoubtedly it will be an issue looking forward."

During this World Cup, in general the smaller nations have had less recovery time with matches scheduled midweek, while the bigger nations have largely played on a weekend, giving them longer between games.

Tournament spokesman Mike Jaspers has admitted that TV audiences, wanting to see the top teams play on a weekend, were a significant factor in the scheduling of the tournament.

But this has led a number of representatives from the two-tier nations complaining of what they feel is unjust treatment.

United States captain Todd Clever, who admitted "it hasn't been ideal" that his side had to play Ireland and Russia within five days, and Georgia coach Richie Dixon, who bemoaned the fact his side had to play Scotland and England in the same week.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_union/15176350.stm

I still find it hard to believe that this goes on, why it is necessary at all and which blazerati decided that the weaker teams should bear the brunt. It is blatantly unfair and indicates the IRB do not take seriously the campaigns of certain nations; i would like to have seen a united campaign from those affected unions before RWC . If for the sake of a week the tourney would be far to all involved then the solution seems obvious

What it amounts too is money,the RWC is supposedly more important than any other tournament.
Supposedly to spread the word world wide,another week is`nt going to kill anyone.
It`s a poor club that won`t release a player to represent his country,and for most .It will only be 5 weeks anyway in practice and all teams would be treated the same.

Well yes Samoa were genuine contenders for the last 8.

Who else can say they beat Oz and were in with a 'chance' (for sake of argument) of beating both Wales and South Africa in the last 8 weeks.

Not many within the 3N or 6N can boast that let alone teams from outside it.

Hes wrong in saying a longer tournament is the only option, they could keep it the same length and help the pot 3 and 4 teams by booting out the pot 5 teams who skew the tables by fielding joke sides and suck up resources that could go elsewhere.
Long torunemanets are bad for everyone, including domestic leagues and teh smaller nations who have to find an extra weeks funding for their players with if anything a reduced income from the tournamnet as sponsors walk away from a bloated boring event. Its also even more damaging to domestic leagues and other competitions.
The cups too long already, if thy are serious about helping the likes of Samoa qualify for the knockouts then go back to the 16 teams as pre 2003 ....the sytem that enabled samoa to qualify for the quarters in all 3 that they participated in.
Or continue with the status quo and accept that someones taking a hit to keep the no hopers tier on benefits.

So you are telling me less people would watch Wales midweek? For one game? Come on!

Glas a du wrote:So you are telling me less people would watch Wales midweek? For one game? Come on!

OK thats the third option, make the top two pots play midweek games and have them complain that some of them have short turnarounds between tough games whilst others dont.
As for Watching Wales, how many peoiple wouldve been able to tune in at 8:30 am to watch them on a tuesday? More to the point beyond the borders of Wales ( the majority of teh audience) how many fdo you think would have? Obviously not such a problem in the 2015 cup, but then the chances are they wont qualify from teh group stages then anyway ( yes im just being offensive by saying that )