TALKING POINT: Sevens overhaul may backfire and hurt smaller nations

Last week World Rugby announced a massive overhaul of the HSBC World SVNS Series, and the way developing countries can qualify for it. But the big question remains - will all this tinkering make the series better and actually achieve the goals that World Rugby has set for it.

For one, it has caught the teams offside. Chatting to a few team officials from different teams it seems they all have one thing in common - they were all caught offside by the big announcement and some view it in a bad light, claiming they were lied to by World Rugby.

The governing body, which tends to make these unilateral decisions and then try and sort out the fallout afterwards, had, according to some teams, promised them the changes would only come into effect at the end of last season and that they could still qualify as a core team through the two-year-old process of winning the Playoff tournament, which was held in Los Angeles this past weekend.

But a few days before that tournament, World Rugby scrapped those plans and informed teams that a new system - unbelievably complex and one that fans are going to find hard to understand, would replace the system they revamped just two years ago.

CONFUSING NEW MODEL

According to the press release this is to “make it more cost-effective and more competitive”.

The new model now has 13 tournaments in an attempt - via the press release “to boost rugby sevens’ global reach ahead of the LA 2028 Olympics.”

But even that is misleading. Two years ago, World Rugby reduced the tournaments from 10 to eight, and now the elite level - because honestly, this is what it is, will feature eight top teams in six tournaments.

A second division will replace the Challenger Series and have three tournaments where previously there was two. And a third division will be created to give newer sides a chance to qualify for the second division.

But already there is unhappiness. Three World Championship tournaments of 12 teams will end the season, replacing one.

So in essence - the top eight teams will have their own league, a second division of three tournaments will deliver four more for the three World Championship tournaments to end the season.

Confused yet? Well the teams’ are and already there was unhappiness in Los Angeles at the Playoff tournament being played on an outer field and only the “elite 8” teams getting television time and being on the main field during the pool rounds.

The effect of this will still be seen, but it is clear that the changes were made because of the skyrocketing cost of the tournament, of taking 12 mens’ and 12 womens’ teams around the world, not to mention the ever-increasing World Rugby contingent.

SEVENS SERIES OPERATING AT A HUGE LOSS

World Rugby will not admit it, but reports say the Sevens - sorry SVNS Series - has lost $24-million in the past year, mainly on accommodation and travel costs. In addition World Rugby runs all the tournaments, meaning where in the past local organisers marketed it as they knew how, it now is run centrally from Dublin by one team.

Cape Town, for instance, was awarded the title of the best tournament on the circuit three years in a row, and then World Rugby took over the running, delivering a disastrous World Cup which the CT7s is only now recovering from.

It was a massive body blow for all the hard work put in by those at SA Rugby in making it such a success.

There are other concerns that haven’t been addressed - such as Sevens being dropped from the Glasgow Commonwealth Games due to costs and no indication if it will return.

There is no finality if there will ever be another Rugby World Cup either, with World Rugby rather trying to get teams to focus their players’ energies on the new Indian Premier League (yes, like the cricket one, only for Sevens) which launches later this year.

CREATED AN ELITE LEAGUE

What we are left with, for all intense purposes, is a six-tournament tour with eight elite teams. How does that help the smaller teams is anyone’s guess?

Spain were 10th last season and were sensational this last circuit, finishing in third above the Blitzboks. But would another team come through a three-tournament second division, and then within a year do the same in the new system? Most coaches say it is highly unlikely.

Kenya finished ninth but made the final of Singapore. In the new system they have to play in Division two, and have to do exceptionally well in the three World Championship tournaments to become a core circuit team again.

If anything it entrenches the top eight, while offering making the hill for smaller teams to climb a lot tougher.

After all, part of the romance of sevens was watching a smaller side - like Spain over the last two years, defeat the All Blacks. Or Uruguay for that matter.

Tunisia shocked the Blitzboks in the 2009 World Cup opening game and there are countless examples of these sort of shocks that would never happen in the fifteens game.

But now with eight elite teams in one division, playing week in and out against each other, it will be more difficult for smaller teams to compete.

LAW OF UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES

And that, by the law of unintended consequences, may have the opposite effect of what World Rugby wants to achieve.

World Rugby does make the point that they are investing more into the ecosystem, and in team development, with women’s teams being paid the same as men, and they believe the system will streamline the run into the Olympics - which is now the biggest prize in the sport.

But the move to save costs, streamline the process and separate the haves from the have nots may make for a more competitive elite competition, but it is unlikely to develop smaller nations into giant-killers with a hope for core participation.

And that is the real tragedy of an excellent concept of a World Series that has been corporatised into another overthinking marketing exercise.