Meanwhile, on planet Earth.........

Only one French team?

lol

And how many teams do the likes of Italy, Scotland, Ireland, Tonga, Samoa, Cook Islands have? Lebanon might not have as many heritage players as those, but at least they have produced their own players. How many of those countries have? If international RL is all about as many heritage players as you can find, then why not have teams like Greece, Malta, Jamaica, Ghana, Serbia etc. in the competition? There's plenty of English and Aussies with the aforementioned heritage lying around.

I'd like to see a 16 team tournament in 2017, but only if it works as a 4x4 with the top two in each group going through, and no super pools like in 08. I'd like to see a real qualification process as well, not giving the same nations a free spot. Only really Aus, NZ and England should get auto-qualification imo.

Irrelevant as they have created teams from SL and NRL heritage players. As pointed out lebanon can draw on two maybe three if they are lucky. Canada none, Jamaica none. So what you are suggesting is putting a group of amateurs picked from a very small pool up against seasoned FT pros. How's that going to work out? You really want to see Lebanon getting 80 points put on them by Samoa or Scotland in the pool stages?

The only argument for your inclusion of yet weaker teams is the USA's performance who with just a handfull of FT pros and a gaggle of 2nd tier comp Australians have performed above all expectations. Maybe lebanon could do the same, but is it worth the risk of pitching two more teams that could damage what has built?

The best thing about this world cup is the competitiveness in general of the pool games. Don;t try and fix what isn't broken. What advantages does putting two weaker nations in create?

Barring serious injury, Robbie Farah will be 33 and in his final year with Wests Tigers in 2017. I would not expect him to be Australia's hooker or even reserve hooker by then. So he will have the option of making his final rugby league appearances with Lebanon in the 2017 World Cup.

Even though he will be past his prime, Farah will still be able to provide leadership and top quality playing skills in a vital position for a Lebanese national team.

Prop Tim Mannah (Parramatta) will be 29 in 2017 and will give muscle and experience to the Lebanese pack

Utility Josh Mansour (Penrith Panthers) who can play full back, wing or centre, or even five eighth, will be 27 in 2017.

Hopefully there will be a few other Lebanese-Australians emerging in the NRL in the meantime to make up a strong core of NRL experienced players who will be supplemented by Lebanese domestic players. If so Lebanon will be a worthy participant in the 2017 World Cup, and as I have pointed out, will be able to draw good crowds from a large support base in Sydney.

If I wanted to watch 17 NRL players play against 17 NRL players, then I'd watch the NRL. Despite what some Australians think, the NRL and Origin are not the be all and end all of rugby league. The World Cup is supposed to a celebration of the game growing around the world and teams who have a spot, should at least have to have some domestic involvement.

Jamaica would not be full of amateurs, they would most likely be full of SL and Champ/Champ 1 players, but then that's no different to Scotland or Ireland. They would also call up some local Jamaicans, which would add a lot to the tournament's credibility and growing the game in the Caribbean.

Why would Samoa and Scotland put 80 points on Lebanon? They never have before.

Exactly and now some of their players (Real Americans) are being looked at by SL and NRL sides. Without the World Cup, this certainly wouldn't have happened.


So making the WC a closed shop to a certain select few because they can pick the most NRL players is the answer? What good would that do to the sport's development worldwide? You could argue that Ireland, Wales and PNG have been 'weak' this year, yet no one's complaining at their inclusion.

That is the challenge, a 16 team format is the ideal number, possibly supplemented by an ' emerging tournament ' running alongside used as curtain raisers, expensive yes, but if International development is to happen, then the will and the cash has to be found

I don't think it would be too much of a problem to have Lebanon and Canada, if for the next tournament we keep them away from the big 3. After all, Lebanon would probably have more NRL players than the USA has this year; and the Canadian national team have been good competition for this USA team (minus NRL and lower grade players) consistently (only they and Scotland have defeated the USA this year

). Until we can handle otherwise, I think a managed expansion through ranked groups is feasible without damage.

For me the RLWC should be the very pinnacle of the RL rep calendar. Not just a throw as many teams in as we can. You should have to earn your place.

If people were taking a hardnosed, business orientated view of the perfect World Cup, the first thing you would do would be to get rid of most of the dirt poor Pacific Island teams and put all the money available into encouraging countries with big economies like Japan, Russia, Canada, Greece, Spain, USA, Italy and South Africa.
The Pacific Island countries contribute close to zero in dollar terms to the game, and only PNG has any chance to in the future.
Historically there are only four countries who put money into the game - Aus, UK, NZ and France - and in the last few years USA and Italy have generated a few dollars to spend on the game. All the other countries take money out of the game.

spot on.
other than the big 3, they should run qualifying for all teams (I'd hope for a % cap on heritage players, but maybe for 2021)

Would a 16-team 2017 World Cup be a bad thing?

If, as suggested by the OP, we tweaked the format in four years time to make it better but still competitive, then surely that's a good thing?

I, originally, was supportive of the current 14-team format. That is despite not foreseeing the possibility of one team going throughout the pool stages unbeaten and still not qualifying despite actually beating another pool stage qualifier.

I also agreed with having all teams play three games during the pool stages. In 2008, four teams played 'ranking games' as their third and final matches. Those that finished second and third in Pools B and C in 2008 played against their counterparts in ranking matches, primarily to decide how to split prize money but didn't really attract the attention of the crowd, media and even the players. They were seen as dead matches and not too many people were interested in them.

This year pools C&D crossed over to make up the third games, but as I said you were looking at the possibility of Scotland going unbeaten and not qualifying to the quarter finals.

So I agree in principle to make 2017 a 16-team competition and agree with the OP to have four groups of four, with pools A&B seeing three teams into the quarter finals with one each from pools C&D. This eliminates the need for crossover games, and sees that the best teams from each individual pool move onto the next stage.

However, because rugby league fans don't like to see one-sided matches despite it having no effect on football, cricket and rugby union world cups, pools A&B would be made up of the top eight sides in the RLIF rankings in 2015. Pools A&B, as mentioned, would see three teams qualify to the quarter finals like this year.

Then pools C&D can be made up of ranked nations from nine downwards and qualifiers, but only one nation from each group can move forwards.

So the move to 16-teams, in my opinion, isn't to increase competitors for the sake of it. It's to create a better tournament in terms of balance, competitiveness and attract public interest.

[iAnd whoever said Lebanon didn't win a match in the 2008 World Cup qualifying stages... They lost out to Ireland on points difference in one of two European qualifying groups having beaten Russia twice and drawing against Ireland twice. Ireland qualified automatically on points difference. However there was a repechage series between USA, Samoa, Lebanon and Wales. It acted as a four team knockout tournament with only the winners qualifying and taking the final World Cup spot in 2008. Lebanon beat Wales in Widnes, but lost to Samoa (who had beaten USA in the first of the two games at Widnes) in Featherstone.[/i

Have to say, whilst this RLWC has been brilliant in a lot of areas, the QF's look like they will expose the lack of depth in the game. Scotland and USA, whilst a breath of fresh air, were not of the calibre that would provide a stern test to the top 3 teams.....
I think it's important that in 2017 they do not "load" the top teams into groups allowing minnows to Qualify for the knock out stages......