Rugby 7s for the first time got a chance to be played at the Olympics in a rugby country and in front of record crowds. The combination has been described by as 7s "coming of age" moment as an Olympic sport. This moment has also brought a lot of myths about 7s back into the light so it is worth giving some basic information about the sport and it's role in rugby's future.
Why has Rugby 7s been so successful at the Olympics?
The Olympics is the world's biggest platform for sports that do not tend to get huge attention from year round fanbases or have any other prize as coveted as an Olympic Gold medal. Things like diving, hockey etc do not typically get large audiences, but once every four years at the Games, there is a general Olympics sports fan who can grasp the high stakes, and at least momentarily be captured by sports they are less familiar with.
Also 7s has an advantage in offering more exhilarating style of action compared to a lot of the other sports (race walking, dressage etc) that has more instinctive appeal to many.
In addition to this early August (outside of RWC warm up years) usually falls in one of the lowest activity weeks of the rugby calendar. So most rugby fans, many of whom will be tuning into the Olympics as general sports fans as well, will also for that one week altogether be focused and commenting on the 7s.
So will 7s outside the Olympics grow big?
There are inherent problems with the 7s format that are difficult to overcome and severely limits its potential of ever being a well followed sport outside the context of the Olympics.
First of all the days on the circuit can be very long, 8 or 9 hours of match after match, and only maybe 28-42 minutes of that involving a home team.
At an Olympics (where men's and women's events combined are spread over 6 days so individual sessions are not actually quite as long) the casual fan can grasp the narrative and importance of going for an Olympic medal. But the same doesn't apply to say, the Perth 7s, and fans have little reason to much care about relatively low stakes games between two neutral teams of players they've mostly never heard of.
The main solution that has been found is to sell 7s as an extraneous background product to a fancy dress beer party. However this comes with other problems attached. Namely giving the sport an unserious aesthetic (the opposite of the Olympics) which does not induce fans to ever start caring about the actual matches, and some issues with grossly drunk behaviour which tends to be a turn off for the mothers and children demographics.
 |
| An ad for the Perth 7s this year where the fancy dress party is the main character rather than the actual sport |
Secondly even if you just want to follow your own team. You can't always reliably know their kickoff times which could be scattered anywhere across the long day. Then to follow them across a season on the circuit is even harder, with them being scattered across the day, and scattered across the time zones of five different continents.
A sizeable year round following usually requires fans adopting a familiar sort of weekend routine. The 7s circuit works in almost exact opposite direction of this principle and thus particularly unsuited to building a large fan community. It for these reasons, despite the success of the sport at the Olympics, the circuit loses money, and World Rugby reportedly are looking "to lessen the financial risk" of its "very costly" 7s programme.
But some people say 7s is rugby's equivalent to T20 cricket?
This has long been lazily repeated, but if you think for a few seconds, it is really a totally bogus comparison, where people confuse a format of merely reduced length of match, to one that also has a reduced number of players as the main feature.
A standard day at the cricket before T20 was around 7 hours long, compared to the 2 hours at a football or rugby match. The point of a shortened T20 cricket match was to make it closer to a standard football or rugby match and a suitable evening out. Whereas a shortened rugby match becomes too short to bother travelling to, so has many matches, and a day ends up closer in length to .... a standard day at the cricket before T20.
Rugby 7s is in fact more comparable to what 5-a-side football variant is to the main sport, or for a better cricket comparison the "Hong Kong cricket Sixes" 6-a-side event. All of these are reduced player (not just length of match) variants that are much like 7s two or three day events with many matches per day.
So no, 7s is not going to be for rugby what T20 was for cricket, and it is high time the actually quite stupid comparison died. It will be what 5-a-side is for football (which by the way, may also be better as an Olympic sport than the current version of football).
Can 7s sell without being marketed as a fancy dress beer party?
The alternative would be of course aim to get people to care more about the actual matches. However when neutral teams are involved, the only way to do this (outside the Olympics) is involving the sport's big stars.
This was most obviously demonstrated in the run up to the Olympics where just one player Antoine Dupont turning up reportedly created "an enormous spike" in interest. It is not exactly hard to understand (just imagine for a football comparison how much sudden interest a futsal tournament would get if a prime Ronaldinho or Messi had turned up).
Arguably 7s peak was the Hong Kong events of the 1990s. These tournaments featured a star name in nearly every team. Most famously Jonah Lomu and Christian Cullen, but also David Campese, George Gregan, Joost van der Westhuizen, Breyton Paulse, Philippe Bernat-Salles, Olivier Magne, Daisuke Ohata, Austin Healey, Brian Lima, Lisandro Arbizu.
If you have a participation lineup showcasing that many highlight reel friendly stars almost any rugby fan anywhere is going to be curious to tune in and your event is going to have some legitimate hype, perceived importance, and in the modern age social media buzz. On old YouTube clips you can see these tournaments were broadcast on BBC with the legendary Bill McLaren on commentary (or later Sky Sports who back then sent their big match duo of Miles Harrison and Stuart Barnes) whereas nowadays 7s struggles to find major broadcasters so is left to be streamed on RugbyPass.tv.
Having this stage also meant more specific 7s stars like Eric Rush and Waisale Serevi both became quite big stars of the sport in their own right despite having lesser 15s careers.
That said, there is a novelty factor to seeing Lomu or Cullen back then, or Dupont now in 7s, which appeals to a curiosity of how they would get on in a different setting. Nobody wanted them to become full time 7s circuit players and watch them play it all year, and without 15s they obviously wouldn't have ever been big names in the first place, so it doesn't really solve the fundamental issues that make the format is simply unsuited to a year round following.
 |
| Jonah Lomu and Waisale Serevi battle at the Hong Kong 7s in the mid 90s |
Why did 15s stars stop coming?
Increasing demands of the calendar and larger schedules made the 7s side quest no longer possible, not just for the 15s stars, but virtually any full time professional with a club career to look after. That also had the knock on effect of a reduction in prestige to 7s, and it became unappealing, with too much effort for too little reward most high profile players bother with.
It was thought Olympics may change this in 2016, and to some extent it did, but the 7s format is typically an arena best suited for the young, fit, and fresh at the peak of their athletic years. Not ageing ones with many miles on the clock or cumulative injury records (it is stating the obvious that it was prime Lomu in 1995 aged 20 who was basically a cheat code in 7s, not the 30 year old version who played for Cardiff in 2005 after just having two years out from worsening illness).
So considering this it was surprising some of the biggest names who tried out included likes of an older version of Bryan Habana winding down his career, or a 31 year old injury riddled Sonny Bill Williams who failed to make an impact. More recently Michael Hooper tried out despite a combination of being at the backend of career and broken down with injuries. Almost the precise opposite of the sort of 15s star to think of drafting into 7s.
These cases were then cherry picked and seized upon as examples by 7s specialists to push a narrative of it being a supposedly monumental challenge for any player to switch from 15s to 7s. This only further discouraged high profile crossovers happening for the next Olympics.
 |
| Michael Hooper, trying out for an Olympics 7s spot at the back end of a tough 125 cap Wallabies career, was one of the big 15s names not to make it |
On the otherhand Fiji of course won Gold at those Olympics in 2016 adding the likes of a prime Leone Nakarawa and Josua Tuisova. Or Great Britain won Silver (in a year none of the Home Unions came higher than 8th on the circuit) supplementing their squad with James Davies and Mark Bennett from 15s (neither who were huge names, but were on good form and in their prime at the time). This all had to be ignored by those pushing their narrative.
So why were the more successful 15s players at 7s ignored?
In 2017 Science of Sport podcast host Ross Tucker (formerly of the South Africa 7s camp) accidentally let slip the real motivation to why there became such strong scepticism and even hostility to the idea of 15s stars going to 7s and doing well.
Tucker said: "when 7s was accepted into the Olympics, there was a fear (me and a few others) that what countries would do is to insert their 15s stars into their teams for the Games only, dominate, smash everyone, and [...] if that were to happen, then it would potentially irreparably damage 7s, because it would reveal the gulf between 7s and 15s".
The 7s specialists (who in Tier 1 nations at least are very often players those who failed to make it in 15s) over the years since 15s players stopped appearing at event had grown to really feel their generally lower status in the rugby world next to the bigger stars in 15s. So they really invested in a narrative emphasising how the demands of 7s are not merely tough coming from 15s (which sounds fair, as mentioned, not best arena to throw in old or injury ridden players) but almost otherworldly and that a seemingly simpler version of the sport had transformed into something so different it requires a long period of specialist focus.
This narrative was pushed in extremely hyped up terms partly out of 7s specialists fear of losing their spots at an Olympics to a 15s player of course, but also in order to boost the self-esteem of the sport, which they felt 15s players taking to with ease would make a mockery of.
In reality most of their fears were misplaced, as even in the days when many more 15s players switched over, there were always still specialists like Rush or Serevi widely acknowledged as the greatest in 7s. So the best 7s team is never going to correlate absolutely perfectly with best in 15s, and having 15s stars turn up for the Olympics, whilst unlucky for a few who will miss out, actually only increases the status and interest in 7s and prestige of winning Olympic Gold.
In Tucker's view it could take as long "a 2 to 3 year transition now" for a 15s player to be good at 7s and "if an opponent did pick someone from 15s, that player was likely to be a weak link". There are plenty examples of others saying similar things, such as former Spain 7s coach Pablo Feijoo once quoted in 2019 saying: "15s players can't play 7s because they wouldn't last more than two or three minutes".
Not quite everyone followed this line however. Most notably Fiji, who had that success in 2016, and this year after failing to reach a final all season on the circuit, added three 15s players to boost their Olympics squad and help them reach the final in impressive fashion.
Selestino Ravutaumada beat more defenders than anyone else in the first international 7s event of his career, and Iosefo Masi who last played a 7s event two years ago came in and played 79 of a possible 84 minutes. Those two played Olympics only a month after the Super Rugby season finished and were among the stand outs of the event. These examples (like Nakarawa and Tuisova before) seem rather inconvenient for the narrative 7s specialists push.
Great Britain's 7s S&C coach James Nolan claimed incoming players required minimum of "at least six months in a sevens programme" to get conditioning up to 7s levels. Maybe some 15s stars are much fitter than 7s people credit them for (Beauden Barrett and Cam Roigard for example have by Nolan's own measure elite 4:12 Bronco test scores), or alternatively top 15s talent can still play 7s to an Olympic standard with a slightly lower CrossFit score than 7s people assume?
 |
| Iosefo Masi and Selestino Ravutaumada success for Fiji at the Olympics this year only a month after starting every match of the Super Rugby season proved somewhat embarrassing for some 7s specialists narratives |
As for transitioning from 15s skill wise, when you think about it, we don't even need big name examples. Because there is no such thing as 7s specialist junior circuit in most countries, almost every 7s specialist begins as one transitioning from being primarily a 15s player. Are they all duds in their first year as Tucker might predict? No, one of the very best like Corey Toole, who scored 43 tries and was Australia 7s player of the year in his one season on the circuit in 2021/22, may find themselves quickly going back to 15s (and Toole returned back to 7s as a 15s player again this year after two years out and did well at the Olympics too).
So if some inexperienced players who haven't yet made it in 15s can quickly transition and make it in 7s, why shouldn't we expect at least some of the best top 15s pros in their prime to be able to do so as well? Carlin Isles famously made his international 7s debut in 2012 only four months after switching to the sport from sprinting, and then kept his place on the circuit for a decade. That this was even contemplated possible suggests 7s actually ought not to be quite such a lengthy and complicated task for an elite 15s player as some suggest.
So will 7s now attract more 15s stars in future?
It's unknown. Dupont, could be a one off at a home games, or may have inspired others as his presence has brought more prestige to a 7s gold medal than there was before (and World Rugby after seeing the increase in viewers he created may even be encouraging this) and it could become a legacy box to try and tick for more elite 15s players from Tier 1 nations who want to say they are a RWC winner and Olympic champion.
Although whether 15s players can do this also depends on whether 7s specialists lock them out by demanding too onerous a commitment (almost nobody is forgoing an entire 6 Nations like Dupont did) or will be okay like the Fijians (or Australians with Toole and Mark Nawaqanitawase) integrating 15s talent on quicker timeframes.
But otherwise outside the context of the Olympics expect big name 15s crossovers to 7s remain very uncommon.
Will 7s grow the sport Tier 2 rugby nations?
One of the big dangers of 7s popularity at the Olympics is that Tier 1 blazers have long patronisingly suggested the extremely damaging idea "7s is the ideal vehicle to grow the game" in non-traditional nations. On the men's side, it is critically important the focus for growth absolutely must fully be on 15s before anything else is considered.
This is format most fans care about, has vastly more potential of growing a year round fanbase and bringing money into the sport, and where there is 25 years of real evidence of doing well at or even just qualifying for a World Cup leaving significant legacies for future progress down the line.
For a Tier 2 nation with lower resources 7s risks being a distraction. To compete seriously in 7s requires a sufficient surplus pool of talent and money that most Tier 2 nations simply don't have (Fiji is a unique exception in having such an abundance surplus of talent). They cannot afford to have two formats essentially competing for same few resources.
Men's 7s glory is a side quest you need to be rich in suitable talent (Tier 1 and Fiji) and money (Tier 1). For Tier 2 nations who do fulfil either those categories, there is little to be gained from 7s, and in worst case scenarios we have seen some nations most notably Canada, trying to both and ending up with the disastrous situation of not achieving 100% potential in either.
This was acknowledged in a damning 2022 independent review of the Rugby Canada organisation which stated: "There is not a shared belief on which of the programs [15s or 7s] is truly the organizational priority and how to align the organization’s activities and resources to the decision [...] athletes see RC’s unwillingness to be clear on the relationships between 15s and 7s as hurting their career potential."
 |
| Canada have become the worst example of a "Tier 2" nation who has split resources and ended up with confused and sub-optimal efforts in both 15s and 7s |
It is vital "Tier 2" Unions and people who want to see the sport grow understand this point as there inevitably will be some coming off the Olympics 7s high giving bad advice. Please don't encourage anybody to follow the model of Canada men's rugby.
And what about women's rugby?
On the women's side there is a totally different set of circumstances and so needs totally different set of solutions. This risks confusion among some, as they might think what is true for the men applies equally to the women, or vice versa, but it does not.
Contrary the men, for women's rugby the Olympics is closer to pinnacle of the sport and in more countries (notable exceptions are Great Britain and Italy) 7s gets the first pick of best athletes and thus more prestige.
For example Portia Woodman-Wickliffe, widely regarded as one of the best female rugby athletes of all time, only played three 15s matches for the Black Ferns in the years between being top try scorer at both the 2017 and 2022 World Cups. In fact the Black Ferns 2022 World Cup success was helped by the 15s side being boosted by 7s players (five Olympic gold medallists started the final) as opposed to the other way round you'd expect for men.
Whilst the women who is surely the greatest female rugby athlete of all time Australia's Maddison Levi has dominated the 7s circuit and doesn't even yet have a 15s cap at all. Neither does her teammate two time women's 7s player of the year Charlotte Caslick. USA's powerful Ilona Maher only has 2 caps, and Naya Tapper only featured in 15s around the 2017 World Cup where she made an impressive impact but then never played it again.
All equivalent talents on the men's side would all most certainly be fully focused on 15s and rarely play 7s if at all. On the women's side more often it is the opposite, the best most talented athletes (Great Britain the exception) are 7s players who play 15s as the side quest.
 |
| Portia Woodman-Wickliffe and Maddison Levi, two of the greatest female athletes to pick up a rugby ball, have had more 7s focused careers |
There is obviously good reason for this, outside of England, there is comparably little domestic semi- professional 15s rugby to speak of, and that is along with an extremely shallow international 15s scene that doesn't generate money (the men's RWC funds a large portion of the entire sport, the women's RWC has only ever operated at a loss), whilst women's 7s meanwhile can access Olympic government funding (in Canada's case this is actually a lot more than the men as they are medal contenders).
Further down the rankings this only makes more sense, as unlike in men's 15s, the World Cup does not carry so much public impact for the teams who can't win it, and it is in the Olympics where this is more the case. Brazil for instance last week had a clip of a try with 1.8m views and 53k likes. It would be a surprise if their participation in the 15s event in 2025 gets much coverage at all.
And of course the USA women got a $4 million donation for their bronze medal at the Olympics, and saw a huge social media star Ilona Maher explode in profile, something their best effort in 15s just could not achieve. Needless to say China's emergence is obviously only relevant in women's 7s as well (they don't even have an active 15s team of either gender).
 |
| USA women's bronze at the Olympics 7s achieved an impact that their best efforts in a 15s World Cup never achieve |
Olympics 7s may not have caused huge change in the men's game (and probably won't in the future either), but may be one of the biggest ever developments in the history of the women's game, which last week gained an audience (both in stadium and on broadcast) of record highs.
So what is the most likely future for Rugby 7s?
The most likely future for 7s is as a popular Olympic sport that is a big deal every four years. On the men's side it will always be a secondary side quest to 15s, and just how big a deal it becomes depends on to what extent 7s specialists want to gate keep against 15s stars entering as guest players ahead of the Olympics. Otherwise unlikely much change from the status quo.
Whilst on the women's side almost every Union that is not flush with Tier 1 cash to fund 15s programs, will look to Olympic government funding to focus on 7s, and there is no reason not to think the success of women's 7s at the Olympics will not continue next time, and if it does continue it is likely to attract a greater number of top female athletes converting to the sport, and grow a wider field of competitive sides.
It won't ever become a mainstream sport by any means with a year round fanbase, but being an increasingly popular big event among Olympic sports is still a pretty cool spot to have.
No comments :
Post a Comment