Rugby World Cup Expansion, Not So Fast…?

“The tendency for us is to try and look to expand. It’s about growing the global game – getting interest from fans and commercial interest in new markets.” – World Rugby CEO Brett Gosper

(Published on LinkedIn May 1st, 2020)

November 26th, 2018 (originally published at "The Ruby Corner")

Chris Wyatt

The author departing for Japan for RWC2019 (18 Sep 2019), Chris Wyatt

We are now less than a year out from the first Rugby World Cup (RWC) in Asia with RWC 2019 in Japan (20 Sep to 02 Nov 2019) where teams will compete at twelve venues around the country. While ticket sales remain brisk and excitement builds for 2019, eyes are already turning towards RWC 2023 in France and the following tournament in 2027. The Japan tournament will host 20 rugby union nations. However, World Rugby (the rugby union governing body) is already opening the door to expansion to 24 teams in 2027, or perhaps even as early as France in 2023. This prospect raises many questions about the state of rugby union, the level of competition and expansion itself.

Can World Rugby successfully expand the field from 20 to 24? Since its inception in 1987, RWC has grown twice. During the first three world cups only 16 teams appeared in the competition. In 1999, the International Rugby Board (now World Rugby) added another four countries for the world cup in Wales. Japan 2019 will mark the sixth tournament with 20 participants. By contrast, in its long history the FIFA World Cup has had 21 tournaments. The last six have included 32 countries. Can World Rugby replicate FIFA’s success? Yes, it too can expand further, but with rugby's popularity on the rise globally there are key issues the governing body must address and questions it needs to answer first:

·        Quality or level of competition

·        Player health

·        Financial health of national unions

·        Over-saturation, rugby fatigue

·        The All Blacks

“We’re always looking from an expansive point of view rather than reducing, so it’s just a question of when rather than if. We want to make sure the teams are competitive enough to move to a 24-team tournament. We have assumed 20 for 2023 but we could change that between now and 2023.” – Brett Gosper, CEO of World Rugby

Quality or Level of Competition

The first concern, one Brett Gosper acknowledges, is whether expanding the field will affect competitiveness? Unfortunately, there is a significant gap in the level of competition when we compare traditional top tier rugby nations like England, New Zealand, Ireland, Australia, and South Africa to the “second tier” countries, also known as the “minnows.” Traditionally second tier nations include countries like Georgia, Samoa, Japan, USA, Romania and Canada, for example. Historically, the minnows have seldom done well against the traditional rugby powerhouses. These “smaller” rugby nations (size here is about rugby experience or success, not population or wealth) often struggle mightily in test matches against top tier countries.

Wales vs Samoa in Hamilton, New Zealand, RWC 2011 (17 Sep 2011), Chris Wyatt

Until recently, the significant gap between the top and next level rugby unions was a significant problem. The segregation of the elites largely only playing against other elites was a serious flaw in international competition. About the only time a minnow ever met a top tier rugby nation was in the world cup, hardly a recipe for success. However, more minnows are now getting test matches against the traditional rugby powerhouses. Additionally, efforts at creating regional competitions is raising the level of play among the minnows themselves. The Africa Cup, the Pacific Nations Cup and the 2016 relaunch of the America's Rugby Championship (ARC), for example, all provide additional opportunities for smaller rugby nations to rack up test matches and improve their skills. However, the return of the ARC was not without a cost. The Pacific Nations Cup lost the US and Canada and the 2016 and 2017 tournaments had only three participants.

Lopsided wins are not a good outcome and do not make the competition more exciting or appealing. Who wants to see results like New Zealand 79-15 over Canada, South Africa 87-0 over Namibia and Wales 66-0 over Fiji at RWC 2011, or these one-sided affairs in England for RWC 2015 with England 60-3 over Uruguay and South Africa 64-0 over the United States? Does rugby really need to send more minnows to the slaughter?

USA vs Japan, RWC 2015 in Glouchester (Chris Wyatt)

The good news is that it seems some minnows are getting stronger. Japan’s historic last-minute victory over the Springboks at Brighton in the 2015 RWC and the USA win over 5th ranked Scotland in 2018 indicate that minnows can make waves. And now Fiji have defeated les Bleus (France) for the first time ever with a 21-14 end of season win at the Stade de France in Paris. While Fiji is a top ten ranked team, the win nonetheless is still a minnow victory over a traditional top tier nation. It was Fiji’s first triumph over France in nine attempts. Still the question is, would the quality of competition suffer with expansion? Would the presence of Germany, Kenya, Hong Kong or Spain lead to yet more blowouts or boring games to watch?

Player Health

Player heath is also a concern. Northern and southern hemisphere domestic rugby seasons are not concurrent or harmonized. While this is wonderful for rugby fans as they get to see rugby nearly year-round, it is not always a great thing for players, some of whom compete in northern and southern hemisphere leagues and for national teams. Long seasons, test series and other international competitions like the Six Nations, Super Rugby, the Guinness Pro14 or domestic season competitions like Currie Cup in South Africa, Major League Rugby in North America, Top League in Japan, Premiership Rugby in England or the Mitre 10 in New Zealand can wear on players’ bodies and lead to more chances to accumulate injuries. Top players are always in demand and can easily wind up playing this physical game much of the calendar year when competing with a domestic league at home, with the national team and playing in the opposite hemisphere.

Financial Health of National Unions

There is also the uncomfortable question about the financial health of national unions. Many national rugby unions are not financially sound. While the Zimbabwe Rugby Union’s money woes may not come as much of a surprise, those of Kenya and South Africa ought to open a few eyes. Even the richest country in the world, a place where rugby gains popularity daily, has a rugby union with money troubles. In 2018 USA Rugby had to sell its media company “The Rugby Channel” owing to the streaming service hemorrhaging money and the union’s inability to raise revenue. The South African Rugby Union (SARU) was in the red in its most recent reporting year and many claim that SARU only agreed to a test match against Wales in Washington, D.C. for the guaranteed purse. When a traditional rugby powerhouse must resort to taking on test matches halfway around the world to raise revenue, this is a troubling sign.

Wales - South Africa @ RFK stadium, Washington, DC (02 June 2018), Chris Wyatt

Currie Cup, Super Rugby and even Springbok test matches these days have dwindling crowds. South Africa’s victory over New Zealand in September 2018 may have restored some of South Africa’s box office draw, but there were no signs of it the previous weekend when just under 28,000 fans turned out to watch a Rugby Championship test match against Australia at the Suncorp in Brisbane. That’s a stadium with a 52,500 capacity. Alarmingly, crowds have been falling in The Rugby Championship and Super Rugby. Not to mention that continuous tweaking of the Super Rugby format has left no-one satisfied. While games in Europe continue to sell out venues, a crowd of 10,000 for an Eagles match is a big deal in the US. World Rugby will need to take a close look at the revenue models at work here. Should we consider expanding the world cup when national teams like Zimbabwe’s Cheetahs “sleep rough” (on the street) in Tunisia while trying to qualify?

Over-Saturation, Rugby Fatigue

World Rugby also needs to address the question of supporter fatigue or over-saturation. With the HSBC Sevens, test series, domestic competitions in opposite seasons in each hemisphere, regional competitions and so much more, even the most die heard rugby fan could be pardoned for not getting overly excited for the start or pause in the next Super Rugby, Pro14 or Mitre 10 season. It, quite frankly, is a lot of rugby. I am not complaining. I am one of those fan(atics) who loves all this rugby. But the constant availability of the sport at the professional level can be wearing for many. Would the fan base want an expansion with all this rugby out there? At least on this issue, the answer is yes, for now anyway. However, at some point either World Rugby or national governing bodies will need to “rationalize the length of seasons and better synch calendars between hemispheres, for the good of the sport.

Vegas Sevens Final Samoa - USA (03 Mar 2019) 27-0 (Chris Wyatt)

The All Blacks

Can winning too often damage the game? While that may sound like a silly question, consider New Zealand’s All Blacks have been the top-rated team since November 2009. Until recently, the All Blacks almost never even faced a serious challenge in most of their test matches. Although just a few months ago the Springboks spoiled the All Blacks endless march to glory in defeating the top ranked team for the first time in four years and Ireland has just topped them 16-9 in Dublin, the domination of The Rugby Championship by New Zealand, with South Africa, Australia and Argentina unable to break their stranglehold, remains a serious concern, as does New Zealand’s ability to brush off all opponents. At some juncture, what is the point of the RWC? Is it just for the All Blacks to have a little fun on their way to collecting another Webb Ellis Cup? Expanding the RWC field may just give the All Blacks more “fresh meat” to feast upon as the march to the Webb Ellis.

Is RWC Expansion a Sound Idea?

Like many rugby fans, I too would welcome RWC expansion to at least 24 teams and a chance to see smaller rugby nations in the world cup. But Brett Gosper and World Rugby need to devote attention to the quality of competition, player health, union financial health, "too much" rugby, and the All Blacks domination. Should World Rugby continue to neglect any of these vital issues, the game will suffer, and expansion will simply result in more easy dining for the “old lions” of rugby.