World Club Cup coming in 2025

Top SH sides v Top NH sides every 4 years.

Personally I would rather they just settled on a sensible Champions Cup schedule. With the South Africans joining there will already be more travel required than seems sensible, but no doubt somebody will be carbon offsetting somewhere to make it all ok. Still it will all come down to money in the end.

More info onbthe 42, seams like first one will be hosted in Europe and future ones will have just one host nation so not much jetting around

There are too many fixtures already. There have been club competitions for over a hundred years, why do we need a another competition now ? The whole thing is a money jamboree, period.

The proposal I saw throws up all the old issues of the European Cup, vastly weighted towards 1 league (in the north), leaving France and England with only 1 representative each. Clearly there are a few in union who want to replicate to a point the jewel in the club (and frankly entire game) game in league with the State of Origin games. There would need to be more tweaks first though to the format.

I'm willing to give this a shot, only because of what the HC has become in recent years. But there is no way in hell SR getting 7 slots will last long, unless SA are still being included in that 7. Also I can see more Japanese clubs getting in as I've no doubt this will be a big deal over there.

No 7&1/2 wrote:The proposal I saw throws up all the old issues of the European Cup, vastly weighted towards 1 league (in the north), leaving France and England with only 1 representative each. Clearly there are a few in union who want to replicate to a point the jewel in the club (and frankly entire game) game in league with the State of Origin games. There would need to be more tweaks first though to the format.

======================
The Club World Cup would consist of eight northern hemisphere clubs who emerge from the Champions Cup pool stage, seven from Super Rugby, plus a Japanese side (the URC’s South African franchises are considered ‘northern hemisphere’ clubs in this model). Those 16 sides would be placed in four pools with each playing two matches against teams from the opposite hemisphere. The winner of each pool would progress to the semi-finals ahead of a final which would crown the best club side in the world.
======================

The only way that would be 1 from France and 1 from England would be if they both had terrible runs in the pool stages.
They talk super rugby but that really ends up as 4 NZ sides plus 3 Oz (though tough on the likes of a Highlanders to miss out on getting in as they'd suffer from losses within NZ for the table standings).

My only interest in this happening would be that maybe it might finally force a global season into place.

[quote="thebandwagonsociety"]

No 7&1/2 wrote:
My only interest in this happening would be that maybe it might finally force a global season into place.

Deep down this is what I think it is striving for.

So it’s just the 8 European/SA quarter finalists from the Champions Cup? That doesn’t sound too bad, but at what point do we expect the Welsh to demand that the best of their also rans also get a place?

Christ, how many more Welsh barbs do we have to have from BamBam on these threads? It’s borderline xenophobic. Please sort it out mods.

Makes no sense to me that there will be eight teams from seven countires from the European Champions Cup and eight from the SH.

How does it make sense that NZ who is dominating the SRP will have a potential five teams in a world club cup?

Old Man wrote:Makes no sense to me that there will be eight teams from seven countires from the European Champions Cup and eight from the SH.

How does it make sense that NZ who is dominating the SRP will have a potential five teams in a world club cup?

Me neither, I also cant figure out why the jaguares were dumped out of super rugby. What a loss they were.

Collapse2005 wrote:

Old Man wrote:Makes no sense to me that there will be eight teams from seven countires from the European Champions Cup and eight from the SH.

How does it make sense that NZ who is dominating the SRP will have a potential five teams in a world club cup?

Me neither, I also cant figure out why the jaguares were dumped out of super rugby. What a loss they were.

Agree, the NZ teams are dominating what is now a small scale local comp. Why are more than one or two teams (to be gracious) involved? As Super Rugby Aus-NZ slowly recedes in relevance this might be one of their last times they can throw their weight around.

Looks like another NZ money grab to me.

Simple, top team from each of the 6ns countries and the top team in SA and Oz forming the 8. Stuff NZ and their constant want for handouts

tigertattie wrote:Looks like another NZ money grab to me.

Simple, top team from each of the 6ns countries and the top team in SA and Oz forming the 8. Stuff NZ and their constant want for handouts

That would be my issue too. Why would we want multiple teams from 1 league, a couple of which will be poor and then just the top team from the other comps?

I don't see why superrugby would get 7 teams would be better to reduce it to 5 and give a spot to each toSúper Liga Americana de Rugby and major league rugby

Interesting that the argument of 6 Unions gets used here, when in order to screw over the Italians, the new and improved European Chumpions Cup was deemed to be a competition that 3 leagues put teams forward to.

Exact same logic would have the European Chumps Cup and Super Rugby be the two outfits putting this together (and both sacrificing their playoff rounds in that season to facilitate the matchdays). 8 teams from each instead of 4 from each is about saturating content for the TV deal. And the quirk of a Japanese team getting a spot probably being commercially motivated for TV revenue too. The structure could (purely theoretically) end up having Fiji/Samoa playing an Italian side (wonder if paddy power has any odds of that fixture happening?)

thebandwagonsociety wrote:Interesting that the argument of 6 Unions gets used here, when in order to screw over the Italians, the new and improved European Chumpions Cup was deemed to be a competition that 3 leagues put teams forward to.

Exact same logic would have the European Chumps Cup and Super Rugby be the two outfits putting this together (and both sacrificing their playoff rounds in that season to facilitate the matchdays). 8 teams from each instead of 4 from each is about saturating content for the TV deal. And the quirk of a Japanese team getting a spot probably being commercially motivated for TV revenue too. The structure could (purely theoretically) end up having Fiji/Samoa playing an Italian side (wonder if paddy power has any odds of that fixture happening?)

Not sure I would agree with that.

If you are looking at "The world Cup Championship of Clubs" then you need to look at an equitable split of how many teams one country gets to represent themselves.

If Super Rugby Pacifica falls flat and NZ and OZ go their seperate ways does that then mean OZ gets three teams and NZ gets four teams to make up the 16?

The truth of the matter is for teams from SA and Europe to qualify ror the Orld Club championship they have to jump through two hoops, first either the French top 14, the Premiership or the URC, and then qualify through the Champions Cup to represent their country at the World Club championship.

If you have another League with ten teams from NZ and Australia with a token team or two from Fiji etc.

By merely participating in the SRP you are almost guaranteed to play in the ultimate club competition.

Compare that to a country from Europe, lets say Wales, they need tofinish top eight in the URC, then top eight in the European Chammpions Cup with all four their teams to get the same representation as NZ or even OZ?

Joke format allowing 7 from Super Rugby.
There are 4 major club tournaments and each should be fairly represented

A far fairer format would be 4 teams from the two major leagues with multiple nations - URC and Super Rugby
3 Teams from the two single nations tournaments - France and England
A maximum of 3 teams from a nation to ensure at least two nations are represented from the multi nation leagues
Add in a Japanese and Argentina team as the two nations in the top 10 of the international rankings not  included in the above.

That gives you (this year)
3 teams - France, England, New Zealand
2 teams - SA, Ireland
1 team - Australia, Japan, Argentina

Far fairer and for those countries who feel they are under represented the answer is simple , win more games in the club competition you are in.

Disgrace that the Jaguares were booted from super rugby, the year after getting to the final too. They now play in a south american league where they just hammer everyone. Not ideal.

Surely the fastest and easiest solution would simply let the HC finalist that year play the Crusaders in a one off. They have been the only team to dominate SH rugby (of the ones that are left given South Africa is now part of the URC).

No doubt a money grab though. Probably turn into the similar farce we currently have going on in Europe.

Collapse2005 wrote:Disgrace that the Jaguares were booted from super rugby, the year after getting to the final too. They now play in a south american league where they just hammer everyone. Not ideal.

They didn't even make the final this year?

Thats not the Jaguares, its the Jaguares XV, basically a youth team, to be the base if Jaguares even get back into top pro competition again. The actual Jaguares don't play or exist

So at a point where rugby has major issues with physical injury in some cases life changing, increased links to early onset dementia and MND and world on the brink of having to introduce major energy saving and pollution reducing legislation, someone thinks its a good idea to fly hundreds of people thousands of miles for this meaningless tripe?

Irish Londoner wrote:So at a point where rugby has major issues with physical injury in some cases life changing, increased links to early onset dementia and MND and world on the brink of having to introduce major energy saving and pollution reducing legislation, someone thinks its a good idea to fly hundreds of people thousands of miles for this meaningless tripe?

Yup. For the almighty Dollar.

In Soccer the World Club WC basically cemented the Champions League as the number one competition and with it the global fan base.

I wonder if the reason for having 8 teams from the Champions Cup and 7 from Super Rugby is about showing how much better Europe/SA is than SR to get the global following.

I think most would agree with the majority of the best Oz players are outside of SR which means only NZ have their top players. I think this means that T14, Prem, URC and SR are all around the same level. By only having the top 3 from the Euro leagues but 7 from SR there is a bigger chance of 1 and 2 being beaten where as the top teams from Europe should get weaker teams (Japan, Tahs, Reds). To make the Top 8 in Europe over half your team needs to be internationals.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

tigertattie wrote:Looks like another NZ money grab to me.

Simple, top team from each of the 6ns countries and the top team in SA and Oz forming the 8. Stuff NZ and their constant want for handouts

That would be my issue too. Why would we want multiple teams from 1 league, a couple of which will be poor and then just the top team from the other comps?

I see it going the same way as Soccer. Right now how many people use to watch super rugby because it was considered better than anything else. Going off how the Crusaders dismantled the Blues and Brumbies pushed them close playing NH style I am fairly sure that most of the SR would not be able to live with the size and cohesiveness of the NH packs.

If only Crusaders are getting top 2 in a group it won't take long for fans from the SH, Japan etc start to follow Europe rugby like they do for soccer.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2024/apr/08/rugby-union-first-club-world-cup-june-2028

The first Club World Cup will happen in June 2028. The Champions Cup will have no winners for the 27/28 season, and will instead be used as a qualification competition.

it just makes a long season even longer, and i agree it looks like the NZ clubs are using it to keep them afloat

carpet baboon wrote:it just makes a long season even longer, and i agree it looks like the NZ clubs are using it to keep them afloat

I can't blame them for doing what they can to gain funding. The problem is this, like everything else, is loaded on the shoulders of our already overworked players. Might be better to let the ABs play Ireland or England in the Rose Bowl in Pasadena, California (you remember The Little Old Lady from Pasadena?). Filled to capacity holds just over 100,000. That would be a yuge money maker. And splits would need to be given to their leagues and clubs.

Little surprised at the format for qualification. 8 from the Champions Cup with 6 from Super Rugby & 2 from Japan.

Given the sheer quality of the sides usually in the last 8 in Europe (and assuming they actually play their best teams), some of those Super Rugby sides and both japan teams will get slaughtered. I'm not sure what will do anything for the profile of the tournament.

Super Rugby does have a couple of good teams at the moment but underneath that a lot of very average sides. Not sure it will be a good thing if some of those super sides are getting spanked by 50 points by the likes of Leinster, La Rochelle, Toulouse, etc.

The tournament will only gain traction if the games are actually competitive. The other thing is playing this globally could be a real problem for generating viewership numbers.

Its great news for Japanese, Australian & New Zealand rugby.....but I don't think this actually benefits anyone in Europe.

I hope I'm wrong and the SH teams are better than my current views on them.