Advertisement
The Christmas ham has finally been finished, New Year’s Eve hangovers are behind us, and the rugby machine is already whirring, with 2026 set to be a massive year in the sport. We can already mark down the new Nations Championship and New Zealand’s tour to South Africa on our calendars as must-watch spectacles.
The new year brings hope and the possibility of change, even if our gym plans fizzle out by mid-January. Similarly, it’s the perfect time to look ahead and ask what the rugby world should strive for in 2026, even if it’s slightly optimistic.
One of rugby’s biggest challenges remains the widening gap between Tier 1 and Tier 2 nations. Now labelled “Performance Nations,” countries like Tonga, Samoa, and Romania risk sliding further down the rankings unless something is done. Players often choose stronger nations or forgo international competition for rich contracts in France or Japan, leaving emerging nations without their best talent.
In 2026, World Rugby should introduce financial or competitive incentives for players to represent their countries of heritage, starting with contracts that currently discourage playing for Performance Nations during the club season. A good starting point would be to make sides like Moana Pasifika “immediate capture” teams, meaning anyone who signs with Moana is immediately eligible for their nation of heritage (i.e., Tonga, Samoa, or Fiji) and waiving the stand-down period.
World Rugby needs to finally implement an official global calendar detailing international windows, competitions, and player rest periods. The current struggle lies in negotiating with clubs, whose seasons now effectively run 50 out of 52 weeks each year. The Northern Hemisphere predictably tries to bend the rugby world to its will, suggesting the Southern Hemisphere shift their season to summer. If conditions this weekend in Northern England are anything to go by, they might be better off switching to summer rugby themselves.
The rugby landscape is a difficult beast to rein in, with many self-interested stakeholders. World Rugby’s mission should be to create a coherent, sustainable global rugby ecosystem that fans around the world can engage with.
The Women’s Rugby World Cup has shown that women’s rugby has grown exponentially in recent years. It’s no longer a “nice-to-have” but a genuine commercial avenue to expand the game. 2026 should be the year World Rugby cements its commitment, providing more funding for domestic competitions, professional contracts in emerging nations, and a standardized calendar to offer more playing opportunities.
Many nations are growing their programs rapidly, while others, including the Wallaroos who host the next Women’s Rugby World Cup, are still lagging behind in developing full-time programs that can support professionalism.
Rugby’s growth has come under pressure from financial instability across the globe. Teams have been lost from the Premiership, Super Rugby, and Major League Rugby, while traditional powerhouses such as Wales, New Zealand, and Australia are struggling to balance budgets despite sellout tests.
In 2026, rugby needs to radically reconsider its economic model. Clubs have long struggled with wage bills, with many owners highlighting over-inflated player salaries in recent years. At present, only competitions like the Top 14, JRLO, and Super Rugby Americas appear to be thriving financially.
Rugby can sometimes be seen as impenetrable for the casual viewer. Too often, the laws are not black and white, leaving match officials to make difficult rulings that hang them out to dry. The introduction of more short-arm penalties would allow the game to flow while still giving teams the opportunity to play advantage.
An NRL-style judiciary system could review foul play during the week, freeing match officials from having to make real-time decisions on contentious incidents during the game. Additionally, a referee press conference before the weekend’s play would go a long way in providing clarity around confusing laws, controversial rulings and the process for TMO reviews. Too often on television, commentators are left guessing what the referees are seeing and what is influencing their decisions.