KEY POINTS:
Cutting the 2011 World Cup to 16 teams could see radical changes to the tournament's structure.
New Zealand Rugby Union boss Chris Moller says some innovative ideas have already been discussed regarding the format of the 2011 event should the number of participating teams be reduced from 20 to 16.
Although Moller will not discuss options, one alternative could be to group the seeded nations on one side of the draw and play them against each other more. Unseeded nations would play off for places in the knockout round.
The IRB, through its subsidiary Rugby World Cup Limited, is trying to determine if the global event would benefit from being more compact.
Since 1999 the World Cup has featured 20 teams - there were 16 in the 1987, 1991 and 1995 World Cups - which has led to bigger financial returns but more mis-matches and essentially dull games.
On a recent visit to Auckland, IRB chairman Syd Millar aired a belief the World Cup suffered from having amateur teams such as Georgia and Portugal competing against well-paid professionals, a strong hint the ruling body is in favour of the 2011 event being reduced.
While that would lead to a more competitive tournament it would also have a dramatic impact on revenue raised through ticket sales.
The NZRU would almost certainly cop a bigger loss than the predicted $30 million.
In winning the hosting rights, the NZRU agreed to pay the IRB a flat fee of £48 million ($131 million) on completion of the tournament.
With the IRB controlling and owning the sale of broadcast and sponsorship rights as well as other commercial elements, the NZRU's only source of revenue is ticket sales.
Even with 20 teams, the NZRU predict they will lose $30 million from hosting the 2011 competition. If only 16 teams participate, the total number of games will drop from 48 to 32 leaving the NZRU with 16 fewer games to raise the £48 million.
But Moller says increased financial losses could be avoided if the tournament ditches the current pool format and adopts a new structure that leads to more tests being played between the leading nations.
"It depends how you format it," said Moller. "If there are 16 teams is it necessary, or even appropriate, to stick with the current pool structure?
"There are some ideas that I have discussed with Martin Snedden [RWC 2011 chief executive] but it would be premature to go into any specific detail," said Moller.
"We haven't come to any definitive view on 16 teams or 20 teams and have an open mind.
"I think it is hard to have the debate [about a new format] around 20 teams but the opportunity is there to have a discussion about ways to enhance the tournament if there are 16 teams."
RWC Limited are not expected to make any decision about team numbers for the 2011 event until they have had a chance to assess the 2007 tournament.
Moller says that the ultimate decision lies with RWC Ltd but he would expect it to be done in consultation with Rugby World Cup 2011, the joint venture company set up between the NZRU and government earlier this year.
A reduction in the number of teams and a potential change in format could also have an impact on where games are played and possibly the number of venues.
The French will use 11 venues at this year's World Cup, with St Denis in Paris - the showpiece stadium used for football's 1998 World Cup final - hosting 11 games.
There was an expectation the NZRU would use a similar number of venues to ensure every part of the country was involved.
But if they have to raise the £48m from 16 fewer games, RWC 2011 might have to reduce the total number of venues and play more games at Eden Park, Jade Stadium and Westpac Stadium to maximise returns.
