As if our players were not playing too much rugby, NOW THIS !!!!

Well, how much can they squeeze out of the game ? There are now plans for a 12 a-side tournament where all the best players are drafted, a bit like the cricket 100, please read below:-

World's best rugby players to be auctioned off as shock new 12-aside tournament announced
The new tournament, billed as rugby's answer to cricket's Hundred, is set to take place next year

A new 12-a-side rugby union tournament, which will see the world’s best male and female players compete annually around the world, has been launched.

And it already has the backing of some high-profile names, including former WRU chairman Gareth Davies.

World 12s, a newly formed international company backed by a UK-based financial consortium, claims it can bring £250 million into the global game over the next five years, while attracting a new global fanbase in a vein similar to the IPL and the Hundred in cricket.

They have assembled a board consisting of former RFU CEO Ian Ritchie (Chairman), former NZRU CEO Steve Tew (Non-Executive Director), and former WRU Chairman Davies (Non-Executive Director).

The inaugural World 12s tournament, which could take place in August 2022, is set to see 192 of the world’s best male players from Tier One and Tier Two nations selected via auction to represent eight franchised teams.

The plan is for the maiden tournament to be hosted in England across three concurrent weekends provisionally set for August/September 2022, with each franchise of 24 players, coached by some of the world’s leading coaches, playing in a round-robin format before the knockout stages crown the champions.

With Rugby World Cup 2021 now taking place in New Zealand in 2022, the women’s format of World 12s will launch a year later and will be played in tandem with the men’s tournament.

To help boost the development of the global game, each franchise will be required to select at least two players from Tier Two nations as well as one international Under-20s player.

Speaking at the launch, Ian Ritchie Chairman, World 12s, said: “World 12s is a natural evolution for rugby union. We feel that this is a game for our changing, fast-paced world that can excite a global fan base in the way that we have seen with the IPL or most recently The Hundred in cricket.

" In bringing together the most exciting players under the stewardship of some of the brightest rugby minds with commercial backing, we are looking to propel rugby forward and lay a positive roadmap for how the game is perceived for future generations.

"Early and informal discussions with World Rugby, unions, clubs and player associations have been constructive, and in announcing today we can continue our consultative conversations and collaborations with the relevant stakeholders.”

Former Rugby World Cup-winning All Black coach Steve Hansen, an ambassador for World 12s, said, “The idea of an international 12s tournament involving the world’s best players alongside some of the most exciting developing talent in a short form, fast paced version of the sport is extremely exciting for coaches, players and fans. I believe 12s will complement the existing calendar, attracting a new breed of fans from around the world.”


https://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-news/new-12-side-rugby-tournament-21502548


What in the bloody hell is this all about ? We need our best players playing in our leagues, not in some money making hotch potch of a tournament.

What do you all think ?

Its all about money.

FIFA are currently trying to push having the World Cup and Euro cup every 2 years now instead of 4.

This is people who just look at money and have no care for the health of the players....the ones who actually bring the money in!

Touch Rugby
Rugby X
Rugby 7s
Rugby 10s
Rugby 12s
Rugby Union
Rugby League

Hmm...

At some point in the future the codes will be amalgamated again i think.

Ridiculous

Laughable. Rugby for the TikTok generation who apparently don’t have an attention span.

Presumably the players will have to make themselves available for the new tournament. From that it's likely to impact on their availability for other formats ie the 15 man game. Though the tagline is 'all the best players' I doubt very much you're going to be seeing the likes of Anthony Watson et al lining up for it.

'“In bringing together the most exciting players under the stewardship of some of the brightest rugby minds with commercial backing, we are looking to propel rugby forward and lay a positive roadmap for how the game is perceived for future generations. Early and informal discussions with World Rugby, unions, clubs and player associations have been constructive, and in announcing today we can continue our consultative conversations and collaborations with the relevant stakeholders.”'

Clearly though from that quote the carrot of money is dangling. If it proves massively popular you may see more movement, but again doubt thats the top level (internationals). What it could do is provide another way out for the nations who don't quite have the financial heft of others.

This is mind boggling. This is not going to bring in any more fans. If anything, it will confuse people as to what Rugby really is. If we want to bring more people into our sport we have to sell it for the great game that it is. I doubt any top level players would be allowed to play simply because of the extra matches. As we all agree, our players are playing too much Rugby as it is.

Well, they reckon all the best players will be auctioned off. Whatever that means. Imagine nobody bids for you, what would that do for the players self esteem ?

This is bonkers, absolutely stark craving bonkers. They are planning this for August/September, doesn't the SH rugby championship run then ? What will it do for the pre season ? I bet the players will not be available until the AI's which will suit the money men.

How can this work when there is not a global calendar ?

It won't be the same group of players. Any English player picking up 15k a match for a full international (i think it is) is not going to miss that for this.

A good thing from this though is the guarantee on equal money to the womens team. That is an area that WR need to grow and has huge potential for growth.

I wonder if the French clubs will release their players for this.

What a load of cack this is. How many people watch the local 10s competitions? There's some good standard ones every pre season. Nobody that's who. The sevens circuit is fairly popular but compare it to the 15 a side leagues and it is blown out the water. Put simply rugby fans don't want to watch this Poopie. I'd rather watch some nice running rugby XVs at the start of the season after a proper pre season for the players quite frankly. I'm not going to be emotionally invested in some made up team probably based in London that's nominally representing England.

The last eighteen months have been a wasted opportunity For a brief window, regular rugby schedules everywhere were suspended, and we had the opportunity to get some alignment between the hemispheres, and also between club and country.

The chance was missed. Meanwhile, the sport suffered a major revenue hit, at a time when many parts of the game were already running on fumes. That has left everyone scrambling for cash from wherever they can get it, with no regard for any broader vision of the future.

Just for my benefit...how is a 12 aside team set up? Im assuming no flankers...?

GeordieFalcon wrote:Just for my benefit...how is a 12 aside team set up? Im assuming no flankers...?

I suppose like rugby league with one bloke in the bin

Will bring 250 million. It will bring exactly nothing if nobody watches or the best players decide not to play or both.

Do they really think fans are going to watch this, I couldn't be less interested in that and certainly if it means that players are not going to be able to play for their clubs then fans will tell the clubs exactly what they think which will feed back to the unions.

This has to be a first. All of 606v2 in agreement. At least that's something positive from this pile of diarrhea.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Just for my benefit...how is a 12 aside team set up? Im assuming no flankers...?

More likely no front row. Some bright spark will have decided that the set pieces slow the game down and that if we do away with them then we'll suddenly get this great running rugby form of entertainment. What with both League and Sevens drawing much bigger support bases than XVs and all... Oh wait erm.

The key obstacle will be securing the release of the world’s leading players for a three-week tournament in an already congested calendar. The inaugural men’s competition would take place at the same time as the Rugby Championship, featuring the best southern hemisphere players, and also clash with the preseason period for the Premiership and Top 14 leagues. Unlike the Hundred, which took four years to launch, organisers have no institutional support to get the competition up and running in less than 12 months.

A leading figure within the club game privately dismissed the competition as a “pipe dream” while Premiership Rugby, who would have to sanction the release of England internationals such as Maro Itoje and Anthony Watson, issued a terse statement. "We were made aware of the project to create a new 12-a-side tournament on Monday,” a spokesperson said. “We believe any proposed new competition will require extensive consultation. It can only be considered in the broader context of player welfare and the already congested global calendar.”

The only leverage available to the World 12s is financial to compensate the best players as well as the clubs for their release. Ritchie, who was also the chairman of Premiership Rugby, says that their backers would be able to “provide funds of a realistic nature for what we can put on the table”.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2021/09/07/world-12s-new-12-a-side-global-franchise-competition-launched/

I'm a fan of cricket, but you have to say that full test match cricket is a slow affair and a bit of a marathon to fully watch. So I can see why they needed changes to the format and style of cricket to engage a different or wider audience. I don't feel we need that in rugby. International rugby doesn't need freshening up, in my opinion. OK we can have some turgid games when two teams playing a similar style cancel each other out and you get an arm wrestle (*cough* Lions v SA this year! *cough*), but even then it's only 80 minutes and not 4 or 5 days like with test cricket. We've got a shortened version of the game in 7s, and to be frank even though it's running rugby, tries galore, there's so much if it that it gets boring after a few games when watching a tournament all day. So do we really need this 12s tournament?

Plus the strain on their bodies in cricket, while not insignificant (bowlers get some really nasty overuse injuries and strains, tears, etc.), are nowhere near to those of a pro rugby player. They are worlds apart. So I just don't get the justification for this in a busy calendar and in a sport where we already have so many player welfare concerns.

Rugby........well, it's just not cricket!

You can see people like Ritchie going "I've got an idea, if we take out the front row, move to non-contested scrums, change from rucking and mauling - how about each team gets six goes with the ball and then it hands over to the other side? We can call it a "The League of Rugby"."
On the plus side it might be an opportunity for a few RL players to make a few quid as the clubs/unions are not going to release players. This is the European Cup fiasco all over again.

I assume this 8s like the soccer league that lasted about a week.

No player in France can play in it
No player who is in the RC can play in it
No one taking part in the Summer tests can play in it due to rest.
No Union owned player is going to be allowed play for a private team.
If the PRL punished Saints over North's contracted leave I doubt they would sanction any other league.

Headline should be "former Union people who use to be important pushing to make headlines as they try run a Rugby League game with no stops"

WR isn't going to ok it as it is basically trying to be league.
Unions aren't going to ok it as they get nothing from it.
Fans won't watch it, look at viewship for SR or euro games when your team not in it.
Players won't lose their expense club and international wages for this when they should either be in pre-season or resting.

I would be sceptical that and TV companys of note would take this and lose their international or club coverage.

On the money figures

250m over 5 years is 50m per year
50m for 12 teams (forget costs for stadia refs etc) is 4m (less once you start adding in the extra costs)
4m for the 25 of the top players plus at least 5 coaches and backroom staff).
Add in the cost of each team to rent facilities and accomadation for the entire competition and it runs into financial problems even with their pie in the sky figure.

So who is going to give up all the stuff for 100-200k.

What garbage.

Now the question has to be answered if 100 ball Cricket works why not this.

The big differences are the cricket is over a longer period (allowing for socialising/drinking during the game).
This is 30 mins. Also cricket does have the same team loyalty.

I, and I suspect most supporters, could not give a flying f**k whether Manchester beat London South, Birmingham beat Belfast or Plymouth beat Leeds.
Especially where the players are parachuted in every year, change regularly and have no attachment to the local rugby set up.

A naked money grab that will fall on its arse very quickly

Finally lets look at the Unions
Need money
Oz probably could but will RA let their players go to essential be put in the shop window for the NRL who are already causing problems
NZ has NPC going, will they allow union owned players to skip that for personal gain.
Argentina don't really have any players who wouldn't be at RC or club.
PIs and other T2 don't control their players.

Have Money
SA is playing Currie Cup and preparing for URC. They want to bring players back and Currie Cup players are playing for URC contracts
6N aren't going to let their players play more games when they are already restricting the games their top players play in the leagues
Japan - Sunwolves couldn't get Top League's best players why will this be able to.

geoff999rugby wrote:What garbage.

Now the question has to be answered if 100 ball Cricket works why not this.

The big differences are the cricket is over a longer period (allowing for socialising/drinking during the game).
This is 30 mins. Also cricket does have the same team loyalty.

I, and I suspect most supporters, could not give a flying f**k whether Manchester beat London South, Birmingham beat Belfast or Plymouth beat Leeds.
Especially where the players are parachuted in every year, change regularly and have no attachment to the local rugby set up.

A naked money grab that will fall on its arse very quickly
 

WOL ran an article a few months back about another former WRU suit that was doing some new thing and it was going to be massive.

Due to the source you would wonder how much is facts and how much is person X said A and person Y said B so we know it's going to happen while completely taking both quotes out of context.

I doubt they have the money even discussed to back up the idea.

geoff999rugby wrote:What garbage.

Now the question has to be answered if 100 ball Cricket works why not this.

The big differences are the cricket is over a longer period (allowing for socialising/drinking during the game).
This is 30 mins. Also cricket does have the same team loyalty.

I, and I suspect most supporters, could not give a flying f**k whether Manchester beat London South, Birmingham beat Belfast or Plymouth beat Leeds.
Especially where the players are parachuted in every year, change regularly and have no attachment to the local rugby set up.

A naked money grab that will fall on its arse very quickly
 

I don't think the issue lies with how long a match takes. The issue is with players already contracted for 40+ matches a season. The recovery time for bodies in a contact sport is longer. Injuries more frequent.

Who is going to give a world class players two months off to go play elsewhere when they are paying them hundreds of thousands and risk losing their player due to injury?

If it was a sevens tournament it would sort of make sense, but this is just so obviously a non-starter that it's hard to see how it's even getting any attention.

The real giveaway is probably that they "can bring 250 million into the game", ie don't actually have any money themselves but are sure it'll work out if they somehow convince enough people to go along with it.

Lowlandbrit wrote:If it was a sevens tournament it would sort of make sense, but this is just so obviously a non-starter that it's hard to see how it's even getting any attention.

The real giveaway is probably that they "can bring 250 million into the game", ie don't actually have any money themselves but are sure it'll work out if they somehow convince enough people to go along with it.

WOL runs lots of articles on things that could make money that are pie in the sky to show how rubbish the WRU/Regions are. I'm surprised they didn't mention the WRU and Regions and use this fictitious tournament to take a dig at them. They recently ran an article saying the Scarlets needed their stars more instead of the WRU overlooking the WRU was funding 80% of 14 of their players.

Look at all the issues the Lions faced with player releases and coaching tickets. This fake tournament would make Lions issues look small scale.

Not that I’m one to stand up for WOL, the rag that it is, but most major news outlets are also running the story. So this is not a WOL opinion piece.

If you Google ‘Rugby 12s’ you’ll see the first hits are BBC, WOL, rugby world, Guardian, Telegraph, Rugby Pass, Irish Times, Mirror, etc.

What a bad idea. Yet another tournament? Really? Yet another format? Yet another length of match? For God’s sake can’t they just focus on improving what’s there already? I love rugby but why 30 minutes, 12 players instead of 15, 10 or 7? It’s mad. Yet another tournament? I know I said that already but I had to say it again. This is too much. We are drowning in competitions and formats.

Apart from that, as others have said, it’s really doubtful that any top players would try this/ get released for this. So it’ll have relative unknowns playing. I hope it flops fast.

I’m not sure this initiative is worth a lot of thought. The best players won’t be in it and, as a lot of us have said, there are so many forms of Rugby out there right now it would probably end up getting lost anyway.  It’s good people are being creative but I doubt this gains any traction.

Rob Baxter has responded with a deep sigh, as he forsees a series of coversations where players want to know if they can find some accommodation in their contract. It's a bit of surprise to see how many leading rugby figures have been brought into the project (eg Richie, Tew & Hansen).

It seems like an admission the sevens code has become a separate sport for virtually everyone except a few top Fijian players. If Sevens was working well, there would be no need for another format.

The original hope for the sevens circuit was that it would be a stripped down version of fifteens, giving more athletic and skillful players an opportunity to shine. It now requires specialists with specific conditioning, which means top XVs players play virtually no top level sevens.

This means Olympic Sevens does very little to showcase the sport, though it proved to be a reasonably popular event in Rio and Tokyo. World Rugby envisaged leading players raising their profiles by representing their countries at the Olympics but that doesn't happen.

Ben Ryan believes sevens no longer integrates well with the longer code, so he came up with Rugby X. This was designed to be faster, more spectator-friendly, and something which everyone at any level of the game could play. As games can also be held indoors, Ryan envisaged the format would also be easier to fit with everyone's busy schedules. However, all momentum for this initiative appears to have been killed by COVID-19.

Since World 12s is not an initiative led by the clubs or the unions, it does raise the prospect of creating yet another seat of power, in a sport which has a terrible record of reconciling the interests we already have.

Ben James has put a very articulated article in the national news outlet for Wales, that some refer to as a rag, but I will put it on here for you all to decide for yourselves whether this is worthy of the illustrious members of V2 to grace their eyes with

https://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-news/rugby-needs-stop-panicking-make-21515771

Rugby needs to stop panicking and make the most of what it's got rather than constantly tinkering

New laws, a proposed new 12-aside competition and lots of worry about the future. Does rugby need to stop messing with things?

Remember when rugby was boring last November?

Come on now, you remember.

There were inquests on social media and the knives were out for the sport as the hastily-arranged and admittedly soulless Autumn Nations Cup failed to live up to expectations.

The death knells were being rung and the sport was continuously being told it needed to change to survive.

It seemed a big deal at the time, then better games happened and we all largely forgot about it because that's inherently the cycle of most things - not every rugby game is born equal. Some are good, some are not.

Well, twas ever thus. Rugby has been called boring before and it'll be called boring again.

That wouldn't be such a problem were it not for the fact that the sport itself has a trigger happy, almost paranoid, attitude to tinkering with the laws to eradicate boredom.

In particular, a Lions tour without fans that did little to whet the appetite seems to have resulted in many jumping the shark.

Of course, standing still is the equivalent of going backwards in any competitive walk of life, sport included. But it's hard to say that rugby's constant desire to change is truly heading in any definite direction.

Certainly, when the latest format proposed is a 12-a-side supposed money-spinner that has looked at cricket's recent success with the Hundred and just copied it - despite the fact that rugby isn't really a sport that needs reducing in length like cricket. You can read the full details on the new World 12s competition here.

It's clear that the people behind it are serious, but it's ultimately hard not to view the World 12s format as a money-making gimmick.

You couldn't level that at the law changes, but it's again questionable whether they are needed.

The current law trials - such as the 50:22 and goal-line dropouts ( more on what they actually are here ) - could well work, but it almost feels like the train of thought behind the latest tweaks goes something a little like this.

What's the big issue people seem to have with the game right now? Suffocating defences and a lot of kicking as a result of that.

What's the main influence of those suffocating defences? An influx of rugby league ideologies and influences.

What's the solution? Focus on what separates the two codes - namely the breakdown - and ensure laws around that are enforced more consistently.

Seems a little complicated? Well, just nab some other laws from rugby league then.

Of course, that's simplifying matters just a touch.

But, in the cold light of day, union is effectively just trialling more laws from the other code to try and rectify things. The new 12-a-side idea doesn't exactly help on that front.

But surely, rugby is far better off focusing on implementing the laws it currently has rather than constantly looking for the golden bullet. Defences might not be so dominant if you officiate the breakdown.

Certainly, that was the promise we had last year, when the laws around the breakdown weren't changed, but just enforced more stringently.

That's the balance you get with rugby. It's finely-tuned within its laws.

It needs subtle touches when things become stale, not mass change.

That's what makes the constant discourse over high tackles and player safety so frustrating.

The laws were changed some time ago and, had all parts of the game bought in as they should have, then there'd be no issue now.

As it is, the northern hemisphere referees high tackles and contact to the head totally differently to the southern hemisphere - as demonstrated by Jordie Barrett having his red card overturned.

While that's the case, there will always be debate and happy mediums - such as a 20-minute red card rule - will be sought.

Maybe that's the bigger issue with rugby at the minute - the disparate nature of the sport, with several entities seemingly reaching for different things.

Why else would a 12-a-side competition be announced with little-to-no consultation with the actual governing bodies of the sport and at a time when the calendar is already painfully overcrowded?

The law changes may well prove to have some merit, but if we're being honest, they're not really getting at the root of the problem.

Because rugby will still have its share of boring games after these rules are bedded in.

Rather than appearing to bounce from one identity crisis to the next, rugby would be better placed making the best of what it currently has instead of chasing a quick fix.

Sometimes less is more.


I have to say I agree with him, and he makes a lot of good points. Please feel free to agree/disagree.

If they are that intent on changing rugby, then they should create another code.

Call it the Dirty dozen.

Then they can find their own players.

LordDowlais wrote:Ben James has put a very articulated article in the national news outlet for Wales, that some refer to as a rag, but I will put it on here for you all to decide for yourselves whether this is worthy of the illustrious members of V2 to grace their eyes with

It's like the Daily Star, but without the t1ts!

The Oracle wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:Ben James has put a very articulated article in the national news outlet for Wales, that some refer to as a rag, but I will put it on here for you all to decide for yourselves whether this is worthy of the illustrious members of V2 to grace their eyes with

It's like the Daily Star, but without the t1ts!

It's not that bad.

There are lots of stories in the news section about what is going on in Wales, they have traffic alerts, they have loads of local news, maybe you are only reading the rugby section, but it offers a lot more to a person living in Wales than the daily star FFS. There are updates on all the news in Wales that you need.

Do you watch the Welsh news on BBC or HTV ?

I really cant see where this actually fits in next year. URC rugby is running for 3/4 weekends in June with all previous weeks being Europe, International or League weekends.

Given July then tends to be Internationals where the UK based nations travel south, there is no way any top draw players can be involved as neither national coaches or club coaches will release them.

So essentially it will turn out like the Middlesex 7's Series where baring the odd injury return will largely be filled with players no one's heard of. Not entirely sure how that will then end up driving more people into watching the sport. A pointless undertaking if you ask me.

The thing with it is, that opinion piece is probably pretty good but it’s ruined by the way it’s formatted.

Why

Write

Like

This?

It’s also slightly hidden away on the site, so you could easily miss it without a link. For example, I’d consider it worthy of more attention than deciding a “greatest welsh rugby XV ever” and how “Wales’ RWC squad looks two years out, as just nine players are nailed on”. But WOL don’t, as they are only interested in generating clicks. So it is the same as The Star etc, as it’s all click orientated.

It’s just the way of the world. Whilst Chris Kirwan is still very good, at the South Wales Argus, they’ve even employed people now and I’ve noticed more nonsense articles appearing. I used to think Simon Thomas at WOL was pretty good, but even he admits that clicks are all that matter. Mark Orders used to be pretty good, before he went there too.

As for the plans. It’s a nonsense idea. I’d be surprised if it got off the ground. James is right in that simple law changes may be required. I would vote for better enforcement. But then when you see people like the “World’s Best Ref” admitting he doesn’t really referee to the laws, then there’s not really much hope for officials.

Not interested.

They tried indoor rugby too. Enough of this rubbish.

It's XVs and 7s.

The initial response from most of us to this story was "Why is World Rugby/the Unions/the Premiership Clubs doing this?"

However, it's become clearer that this proposal is from a different group altogether. At first, it looked like it might be akin to Kerry Packer's attempt to take over cricket. Or, for that matter, the coup plot in 1995 which led to Union going professional.

The BBC has an interview with Gareth Davies, where he says the proposal will only work, if there is a buy-in from existing stakeholders. He appears to be saying the proposition to stakeholders is "We can source significant money if this competition takes place. Do you want that money?"

https://www.bbc.com/sport/rugby-union/58522644

Rugby Fan wrote:The initial response from most of us to this story was "Why is World Rugby/the Unions/the Premiership Clubs doing this?"

However, it's become clearer that this proposal is from a different group altogether. At first, it looked like it might be akin to Kerry Packer's attempt to take over cricket. Or, for that matter, the coup plot in 1995 which led to Union going professional.

The BBC has an interview with Gareth Davies, where he says the proposal will only work, if there is a buy-in from existing stakeholders. He appears to be saying the proposition to stakeholders is "We can source significant money if this competition takes place. Do you want that money?"

https://www.bbc.com/sport/rugby-union/58522644

The names for me are the only reason this got any air time. It is a worry that former bosses of the RFU, WRU & NZRU think it's a great idea to play basically rugby league without stops. I know it sounds ridiculous but I wonder if these private backs have no clue about rugby and think they can get Union and league to merge. 12s rugby with a few trial laws as Davises said (maybe remove the scrum) would go long way to making union like league. League adding the ruck and you are more or less there. Never underestate business men to think money overcomes tradition.

If it was a 15 a-side proper Union then maybe but it just seems fishy. What I wouldn't mind is a 3 team competition between 6N Lions, RC Leapords and rest of the world Tigers.

If this 12s did happen you could kiss good bye to the Lions.

Ben Kay:

A little while ago, a very prominent member of rugby’s inner sanctum made a throwaway comment which came back and struck me this week when the World 12s was announced. He said, ‘there is an appetite in certain circles to have one code and merge union and league’.

At a first glance, this new competition looks like an attempt to solve some of the issues rugby is facing. Firstly, there’s the money angle, with £30m of funding secured from an as yet unnamed financial consortium. Then there’s expanding the global reach of the sport and parity for the women’s game. But probably most pressing is a format which means less contact in the game.

You just wonder whether anyone in World Rugby had a hint of this coming because the game is currently facing an existential crisis, along with rugby league. When the dots are joined up from all the research, the conclusion could be, in either code’s current format, rugby is simply not a safe game to play. The one way to change that is to turn it from a contact-heavy sport to one based on evasion and speed.

To be clear, I’m not saying the game needs another format but at some point, an administrator needs to examine what happens if the shutters are pulled down on the sport we know. If World Rugby don’t do anything, and are told, ‘here is the evidence that says the game is unsafe’, what have they got to fall back on? Rugby has to hedge its bets in case that happens.

https://www.thexv.rugby/2021/09/10/world-12s-challenges-the-status-quo/

There's a @World12s Twitter feed. While it started posting on the 7th of September, it was actually registered as long ago as June 2020, which gives some idea of how long this has been brewing.

Pretty clear that we all hate the idea on here, but pretty clear that this is coming whether we like it or not. The only unknown is whether it will take off and gather interest, take over, or indeed replace rugby as we know it.

Not interested in it at all, 15 man rugby is the only sport I really care for, it is my passion, you change it, I will stop supporting rugby

The Oracle wrote:Pretty clear that we all hate the idea on here, but pretty clear that this is coming whether we like it or not.

Not sure that's right. As it's a proposal from a new group, with no previous involvement in rugby, then it can only happen if all the groups currently opposed change their minds. Or, if there's a coup.

If (big if) they have the money AND the will then something will happen, for sure. But for me whether it actually does anything other than be a side show to 15s is the big unknown. Could just be an other rugby x, which was like watching an episode of Gladiators!

A common complaint against this proposal is that it runs counter to concern about player welfare. The argument runs that anyone supporting World 12s, doesn't care about player welfare, because it proposes adding more games to the schedule.

I'm no shill for World 12s but that sounds like a bad argument. It's quite possible to believe top professionals should only play a limited number of games a season, and also want them to be showcased in the best possible way.

I doubt the people behind World 12s want the top players to turn out for their tournament on top of all their current commitments. I suspect they want some trade-off.

As the Ben Kay article above implies, in the current climate of player welfare, concussion concerns, over playing, etc, this might be the attempt to address that and have a contingency plan/proposal in place in case the 15 man game that we know and love is in some way binned for being too dangerous.