Talk:Rugby World Cup

Superbowl comparison

Just to clarify, I think the Superbowl comparison is inaccurate due to fact that "Superbowl" essentially describes one game at the end of an annual national tournament, whereas "Rugby World Cup" is the name for this four-yearly international tournament as a whole. Perhaps a better example would be to compare it to the soccer world cup. Your decision of course, but why is this so important? WilcoxD 19:44, 23 January 2012 (EST)

Ask this guy. ScottDG 19:47, 23 January 2012 (EST)

It is a reasonable comparison perhaps, but I should like to hear a reason for its inclusion contained within the article. We could just as easily compare it to the soccer WC or the cricket WC or the world series etc. I would like to hear why the superbowl in particular is the prefered comparison. (And I don't care at all that NFL is related to rugby in its infancy) --DamianJohn 17:48, 28 January 2012 (EST)

What sort of TV viewship ratings does the World Cup average in comparison to the Superbowl? how much does a 30 second ad spot cost in comparison to the Superbowl? Rob Smith 18:07, 28 January 2012 (EST)

A typical Superbowl gets 93 million viewers apparently, practically all of them in the States. Cumulative TV audience for the 2007 World Cup was 4.2 billion over 42 matches, so an average of 100 million per match with the highest figures being for the final. --GeorgeLi 21:36, 28 January 2012 (EST)

Not sure why that is relevant, but I'd say the total expenditure worldwide for a 30 second ad at halftime in the WC final would be about the same. Of course rugby is a continuous sport so there aren't random ads in the middle of a game. --DamianJohn 21:03, 28 January 2012 (EST)

To go back to my original question, why is it important that there be a comparison? Further to that, on what grounds should the comparison be based? WilcoxD 21:08, 29 January 2012 (EST)

Good question; my guess is there's some comparison between viewership worldwide, however a comparison of the cost of advertising a 30 second spot might be fair to give perspective and relevance, at least for CP's primary American target market. Rob Smith 22:30, 29 January 2012 (EST)

I don't know how that would compute given that the RWC market is all over the world with different broadcasters all with different ads, and some who sell their product on a PPV basis with no ads. Also, the value of an ad at halftime will obviously always be less than an ad that is in the middle of the game. I think you are trying to measure a worldwide sport through the narrow lens of your USA upbringing. --DamianJohn 23:18, 29 January 2012 (EST)

Here's the price list. Now convert euros to dollars and compare with Superbowl rates. Rob Smith 23:44, 29 January 2012 (EST)

New Zealand

New Zealand won the Rugby World Cup twice in the past 25 years? Amazing accomplishment for a (unnecessary insult removed). Perhaps the list in mainspace is a little too Anglo-centric. Rob Smith 18:10, 28 January 2012 (EST)

Anglo-centric? I haven't heard that word outside of a humanities classroom at a university in a long time. RachelW 19:11, 28 January 2012 (EST)

Well, sure. In the 24 years cited, only seven countries are credited as champs -- all English speaking members or former members of the British Empire and Commonwealth of nations. Didn't any non-English speaking members of the British Empire win, or other (unnecessary insult removed) besides New Zealand? Rob Smith 19:15, 28 January 2012 (EST)

Actually if you count again you will see that only 4 countries have ever won it. --DamianJohn 20:59, 28 January 2012 (EST)

"In the 24 years cited, only seven countries are credited as champs" Really? Wow. In a 4-yearly tournament that's been running for 24 years, how many champions would you expect there to be? --GeorgeLi 21:23, 28 January 2012 (EST)

Got it. So the event is held only once every four years. Perhaps that can be clarified. Rob Smith 16:43, 29 January 2012 (EST)

Since the article was created several years ago, the second sentence has made it clear that it is held every 4 years. I'm not sure how much clearer it can get. Also, only 4 nations have won in 7 contests, not 7 nations. AngusT 16:48, 29 January 2012 (EST)

Thank you. The WP article states 22 member nations to the Rugby Union, if that is reliable information. I have no idea. Rob Smith 16:53, 29 January 2012 (EST)

Our article says 20. I'd trust that over Wikipedia any day. Is there an official rugby union website we can double check? AngusT 16:56, 29 January 2012 (EST)

(Ec) Don't know. You could access the link from WP. Rob Smith 17:16, 29 January 2012 (EST)

The International Rugby Board lists 93 member nations, but of course, not all qualify for the tournament. Why would you trust a source that called Newt Gingrich an orphan for a week and which argues that people are born with the perfect amount of teeth even though most of us need to have our wisdom teeth removed? ScottDG Talk Is Gingrich an orphan? Conservapedia says yes. Why does nobody else? 17:13, 29 January 2012 (EST)