Rugby World Cup 2027

Just adding the teams, quoting the article.

Which teams have qualified?​

The 12 teams that finished in the top three of their pools at Rugby World Cup 2023 have automatically qualified for Rugby World Cup 2027. Those teams are:
  • France
  • New Zealand
  • Italy
  • Ireland
  • South Africa
  • Scotland
  • Wales
  • Fiji
  • Australia
  • England
  • Argentina
  • Japan
The 12 remaining places were reserved for teams that qualified through various tournaments, including this year's Rugby Europe Championship and Rugby Africa Cup. Eleven of those teams are:
  • Georgia
  • Spain
  • Romania
  • Portugal
  • Tonga
  • Canada
  • United States
  • Uruguay
  • Chile
  • Zimbabwe
  • Hong Kong China (yes, that is how the union is titled)
There is one final qualification tournament taking place in Dubai in November, with four teams facing off for the final spot at Rugby World Cup 2027:
  • Namibia
  • Belgium
  • Samoa
  • and whoever wins a playoff between Brazil and Paraguay which takes place in October.
Click to expand...
 
With the draw on 3 December, most teams will have played the Northern hemisphere outgoing tours. So the seedings should be pretty interesting. We will easily be in band 1. The outlier may be Australia if they end up in p7 and end up in the same pool as a band 1 side.
 
Jeez, so a team finishing 3rd in their group could, in theory, win the 2027 WC?

That's utterly ridiculous nonsense.
 
TheMightyQuin said:
The round of 16 is a kak idea. It didn't work previously. This is just to make more money.

Also: doing the draw this early is ALSO ridiculous.

Now I'm done moaning...and looking forward to 3 in a row!!

Click to expand...

The draw has always been early.

This is how we ended up in the same pool as the All Blacks in 2019. We were ranked 7th during an early draw (2017) and then ended up in the same pool as the ABs. But, at the start of the 2019 WC we were ranked 4th and on the up, so what looked like a balanced pool in 2017 now featured two of the strongest nations.

On the flip side, at the same World Cup the Wallabies were a #1 seed because they were ranked 3rd during the draw (2017), but by the time the WC came around they were ranked 7th and somewhat ''protected'' by the favourable draw, being pitted against Wales and Fiji in easily the weakest pool.
 
thestaggy said:
The draw has always been early.

This is how we ended up in the same pool as the All Blacks in 2019. We were ranked 7th during an early draw (2017) and then ended up in the same pool as the ABs. But, at the start of the 2019 WC we were ranked 4th and on the up, so what looked like a balanced pool in 2017 now featured two of the strongest nations.

On the flip side, at the same World Cup the Wallabies were a #1 seed because they were ranked 3rd during the draw (2017), but by the time the WC came around they were ranked 7th and somewhat ''protected'' by the favourable draw, being pitted against Wales and Fiji in easily the weakest pool.
Click to expand...
Yes, I know. And it has always been ridiculous.
 
Enzo Matrix said:
With the draw on 3 December, most teams will have played the Northern hemisphere outgoing tours. So the seedings should be pretty interesting. We will easily be in band 1. The outlier may be Australia if they end up in p7 and end up in the same pool as a band 1 side.
Click to expand...
I think as the host Aus is automatically in pool 1
 
We are in band 1 and who knows, maybe in pool A with Australia.
 
TheMightyQuin said:
The round of 16 is a kak idea. It didn't work previously. This is just to make more money.
Click to expand...
Isn't this the first time in a RWC that there's a round of 16?

I don't think it's a bad idea at all.

Knock out rugby is inherently more intriguing than say an extra Pool round?

Also, with 24 sides competing, how else would be best to structure it?

There guaranteed to be some blow outs in the round 16 fixtures. 4 sides will qualify on the bases of being best runners up in their respective pool. So you could have Spain v NZ or Chile v SA in a round 16 fixture...
 
sand_man said:
Isn't this the first time in a RWC that there's a round of 16?

I don't think it's a bad idea at all.

Knock out rugby is inherently more intriguing than say an extra Pool round?

Also, with 24 sides competing, how else would be best to structure it?

There guaranteed to be some blow outs in the round 16 fixtures. 4 sides will qualify on the bases of being best runners up in their respective pool. So you could have Spain v NZ or Chile v SA in a round 16 fixture...
Click to expand...
Yes it is. You're 100% correct. I think I read that somewhere and unfortunately did not check. My bad.

But I still think 24 teams are TOO much and will need to extra exhausting and possible injury causing games against minnows.

Just my opinion though. Looking forward to 3 December for the draw.
 
TheMightyQuin said:
Yes it is. You're 100% correct. I think I read that somewhere and unfortunately did not check. My bad.

But I still think 24 teams are TOO much and will need to extra exhausting and possible injury causing games against minnows.

Just my opinion though. Looking forward to 3 December for the draw.
Click to expand...
Definitely too much. There are going to be some cricket scores, without a doubt.

I've always felt there should be 2 world cups running simultaneously, 1 contested between your Top 16 ranked sides and another contested between your 17-32 ranked sides.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X