European Professional Club Rugby’s (EPCR) announcement that the first Rugby World Club Cup will be held in 2028 has been roundly criticised by many in the rugby fraternity by claiming that the sport is chasing profits by turning its back on existing successful competitions.
In a move that is clearly aping the new FIFA Club World Cup being held this summer in the USA, EPCR’s competition will be staged every four years and have 16 teams taking part.
The teams will qualify through the Investec Champions Cup, with the remainder coming from Super Rugby and Japan. The ambition is to ‘elevate’ the existing competitions every four years, with the quarter finalists in the Champions Cup being joined by seven teams from Super Rugby Pacific and one other from Japan.
Ironically the plans, which have been spoken about for a few years, were finalised in Cardiff just before the Champions Cup final. The final, played between Northampton Saints and Bordeaux Begles, was the perfect advertisement for rugby with a close, hard-fought match eventually being won by Bordeaux 28-20. Most importantly it was enjoyed by a crowd in excess of 70,000 people and lived up to its billing as the greatest club competition in the world.
So why tinker with a format that is undoubtedly not broken? Not surprisingly in a sport that continues to be comprehensively outshone by its roundball rival, the single motivation appears to be financial. Being able to crown a world club champion every four years brings with it increased broadcasting rights and much needed revenue into a sport that is somewhat floundering at the moment.
But the reality is that this new format could backfire, and many critics have raised serious concerns about the format. For starters, it will diminish the allure of the existing, successful, competition. The introduction of eight new teams into the quarter finals every four years is the equivalent of the FIFA Champions League competition bringing in 8 teams from South American clubs into the quarter finals – one can only imagine the kickback from the likes of Real Madrid, Barcelona, Liverpool and Bayern. Which is exactly why football has introduced a new, separate World Club tournament rather than meddle with an already existing format.
A further concern is the exclusion of Argentinian teams from the competition, which immediately raises the legitimate question of whether it can be deemed a ‘world’ club championship. In addition, with only 8 teams representing the Home Nations, France, South Africa and Italy, and the recent dominance of teams from the French Top 14 and Irish provinces in the Champions Cup, it is quite possible that English clubs will only have one participant (if any) in the new format, let alone Scottish, Italian and Welsh teams.
With the suggestion that the competition’s final could be played in Bilbao, there is little prospect that, for instance an Auckland Blues versus the Sharks (based in Durban) final will attract loyal fans attending due to the distance and cost. As any sports fan knows, an international match that doesn’t fill a ground’s capacity takes much of the glamour away.
While broadcasting revenues will doubtless more than make up for reduced ticket revenue, there is a chance that the competition will be soulless, especially in comparison to the spectacle served up in Cardiff recently. With the current commercial success of the Champions Cup, based in large part on the prestige and heritage that it has gained over the past three decades, it certainly seems like a risk to reduce its appeal with a new competition that has a dubious format. Time will tell if it is a success, but in sport true innovation usually encompasses more than tinkering with existing formats.
David Little is a Partner at Bishop & Sewell in our expert Sports Law and Corporate & Commercial teams.
If you would like to contact him, please call on either 07968 027343 or 020 7631 4141 or email: company@bishopandsewell.co.uk.
The above is accurate as at 03 June 2025.
The information above may be subject to change. The content of this note should not be considered legal advice, and each matter should be considered on a case-by-case basis.
