With some of the All Blacks ‘still hurting’ from last year’s loss to Ireland, Ian Foster and his team are already planning how to take down the world’s number-one side. Video / NZ Herald
OPINION
Gregor Paul in Lyon
Now that a pool round which felt interminable and overloaded with one-sided fixtures has all but ended, questions will come about the wisdom of expanding the 2027 Rugby World Cup to 24 teams.
The talent pool doesn’t feel remotely deep enough to be thinking aboutexpansion – not when the All Blacks have scored 240 points in their last three pool games against the teams ranked number 11, 17 and 21 in the world.
Adding more teams feels like it will be creating more mismatches, extending the time between meaningful games and making an already-long tournament even longer.
If anything, it feels like World Rugby should be thinking about going back to the original 16-team format, and so the inevitable announcement when it comes, that the 2027 tournament is to expand to 24 teams, will seem like it is purely commercially-driven.
The conclusion will be reached that the organisers are thinking only about the additional broadcast dollars that will roll in by having more countries involved and more games played.
There’s also a cynical thought that is hard to keep at bay, which is that the plan to add more teams in 2027 is all about ensuring the USA, which is hosting the 2031 tournament, makes it there, having failed to qualify for this one.
Obviously, the Eagles are guaranteed a spot when they host in 2031, but everyone will be sleeping more easily knowing that they are also going to be in Australia in four years, to help build the profile of the game with the future host audience.
Sam Cane of the All Blacks. Photo / Photosport
Probably, too, the same could be said of Canada, who also missed out on qualifying for 2023 and, like the USA, have enough of an established rugby footprint to become a more serious contender in time.
But while there are valid reasons to be sceptical and to see expansion as a cash grab, so too is there an argument that jumping to 24 teams will in fact fix some of the problems that have blighted the current tournament.
Moving to 24 teams will likely see the format change from having four pools of five teams, as is the case now, to six pools with four teams.
This would give teams just three pool games, and by keeping the current format of placing the six top-ranked teams in separate pools, New Zealand, for example, could find themselves in a group with Australia, Samoa and Spain, while England, Wales, Samoa and Canada could be pitted against each other.
The point being that the pool round would have fewer lopsided games and with four third-placed teams also to qualify for the next round, there would be more games with something hanging on them.
The smaller pools would also be able to be played in a reduced period and it would become possible to schedule a better flow of games so there are not weekend gluts and weekday famines as has been the case in France.
And it is in the Round of 16 when the real benefit of expansion would be felt, as it would create more games with real jeopardy.
Italy players during their national anthem. Photo / Photosport
The problem with the current format is that it is incredibly difficult for a mid-ranked team such as Samoa, Tonga or even Japan to make the last eight.
To do that, they typically have to knock over two higher-ranked nations, which is why, since the shift to 20 teams in 1999, only twice – Fiji (2007) and Japan (2019) – have countriesnot in the Six Nations or Rugby Championship made the last eight.
But it is more feasible that Japan, for instance, could beat Australia in a one-off knock-out game, or that Tonga could beat Wales and the make-up of the quarter-finals could start to look different in the next few tournaments.
There is strategic sense behind the move to expand – as well as commercial desire – but to fully justify going up to 24 teams, World Rugby has to present a strong plan to show how it intends to give the emerging nations meaningful competition between tournaments.
Hoping that the likes of Uruguay, Samoa and Romania are going to magically turn up every four years and compete with the best teams in the world, having not played a Tier One nation in the entire World Cup cycle, is not any kind of a plan at all.
If there are going to be a few upsets in 2027, then a team such as Portugal, who have been fantastic to watch in 2023, need to be regularly playing the likes of Italy, Georgia and Tonga, with the odd game thrown in against the likes of Scotland, Wales and France.
Expansion could prove to be a surprisingly smart move for the global game, but only if there is a development plan attached.
