16 matches a year. What happens with the more than 100 other emerging nations? And who gets to choose which ones the top nations play?
Many “minor nations” have taken up and play 7s rugby in the many competitions. This gives them the opportunity to develop (especially as 7s is now an olympic sport) and has created a huge amount of interest in the game. Gradually (it is hoped) this may trickle down to the 15 a side game (as it has with Fiji, Tonga, etc). It is not feasible to add extra games to the current calendar of “major nations”, but the RWC gives everyone a chance to qualify and the players, coaches, etc will learn a massive amount from the experience.
Uruguay, who never play a Tier 1 nation other than at a World Cup, are, in the first half against Wales at least, completely disproving Lapras’ point.
Glad for sporting reasons, although cancelling it was in the rules. The Scots can't argue now whatever the result. To quote P G Wodehouse: ‘It has never been hard to tell the difference between a Scotsman with a grievance and a ray of sunshine.’
Japan win one of the best games of rugby ever. Not necessarily the best skill levels, but the passion and commitment from Japan was first class. As Craig Doyle says, isn’t that what a Tier 1 side looks like?
That was a fantastic, fun, exciting game. Think S Africa will need to be very, very wary next weekend.
Sir Ian McGeechan says World Rugby should give Japan Tier 1 status, and that they should be admitted either to the Rugby Championship or to the 6 Nations. Certainly their performance in this World Cup has vastly exceeded that of either Argentina or Italy. Perhaps there should be regional Tier 2 tournaments, with promotion and relegation?