Tier 2 & 3 Rugby Forum

Future RWC Hosts

Posts: 88
Joined: Thu, 17 Jul 2014, 19:55
National Flag:
AustraliaAustralia

Future RWC Hosts

Postby The Do » Sat, 19 Jul 2014, 23:43

In the past the Home Nations and France have had the opportunity to host the RWC pretty much every 2nd RWC. Sometimes it has been as official host in the case of England in 1991, Wales in1999 and France in 2007, others having the chance to host games in their own country in those mentioned RWC.
This gives these countries an unfair advantage as unofficial host by playing often vital games at home despite not being the official host. Also countries like the Celtic bloc always seems to get games in RWC in return for voting a particular way when it comes to hosting rights.
Should the IRB bring in a rule that states that unless you can host all games than you can not bid to host the RWC. The only exception should be if you share with a minnow nation eg Argentina sharing one of the groups with Uruguay, South Africa with Namibia or Zimbabwe etc or the U.S sharing a RWC with Canada as an equal joint host.
With bids for RWC 2023 still a few years away should the IRB make this mandatory for all bids?

Posts: 2957
Joined: Sat, 05 Jul 2014, 02:44
National Flag:
AustraliaAustralia

Re: RWC Host

Postby thatrugbyguy » Sun, 20 Jul 2014, 00:34

I agree to an extent. I can kinda forgive both '91 and '99 due to the tournament still being in its relative infancy. France '07 made absolutely no sense in terms of taking games to Cardiff and Murryfield, France had more than enough stadia to host the tournament alone. For England 2015 I think it was a case of Cardiff being needed once Old Trafford pulled out of hosting games, I have no doubt that if Old Trafford was a venue Cardiff wouldn't have been used due to both stadiums being of a similar capacity. I think though the focus should be from here on in that there should be a sole host for the tournament. I've got no problem if there's a genuine joint bid, the most obvious one would be a US/Canada bid, but it should be law that countries bidding as sole host cannot include venues from neighbouring nations in their proposal, unless there are extenuating circumstances.

Posts: 45
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 06:05
Location: London
National Flag:
South AfricaSouth Africa

Re: RWC Host

Postby Seaton » Sun, 20 Jul 2014, 01:43

Countries would prefer to host by themselves, but they trade some matches in return for votes from close unions to host.

Such a 'law' wouldn't be implemented, nor should it - it treats a symptom, rather than tackling the problem, which would just manifest itself in another way were such a bidding criteria to be implemented.

Posts: 2575
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: RWC Host

Postby victorsra » Sun, 20 Jul 2014, 01:52

I think a very interesting sequence would be:

2023 - Argentina
2027 - Italy
2031 - USA & Canada
2035 - South Africa

About Argentina 2023, I like this scenario with 12 stadiums:
Buenos Aires (Monumental de Nuñez or La Bombonera): 8
La Plata: 6
Rosario: 6
Cordoba: 6
Mendoza: 5
Mar del Plata: 3
Tucumán: 3
Salta: 3
Montevideo (Uruguay): 2
Santiago (Chile): 2
São Paulo (Brazil): 2
Porto Alegre (Brazil): 2

*Considering a 48-matches world cup
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

Posts: 88
Joined: Thu, 17 Jul 2014, 19:55
National Flag:
AustraliaAustralia

Re: RWC Host

Postby The Do » Sun, 20 Jul 2014, 03:03

victorsra wrote:I think a very interesting sequence would be:

2023 - Argentina
2027 - Italy
2031 - USA & Canada
2035 - South Africa

About Argentina 2023, I like this scenario with 12 stadiums:
Buenos Aires (Monumental de Nuñez or La Bombonera): 8
La Plata: 6
Rosario: 6
Cordoba: 6
Mendoza: 5
Mar del Plata: 3
Tucumán: 3
Salta: 3
Montevideo (Uruguay): 2
Santiago (Chile): 2
São Paulo (Brazil): 2
Porto Alegre (Brazil): 2

*Considering a 48-matches world cup



I like the RWC sequence you have except I would have 2031 in SA or Australia and 2035 in USA/Canada, just to keep that North/South balance.

I'm not too sure about having a Argentinean RWC with games played in that many different countries. I wouldn't mind one extra country depending on who qualified. Eg if Chile qualified, have some of their pool's games in chile. I don't see the point of having RWC games in countries that haven't qualified. Also it would give them an extra incentive to qualifying knowing you could be playing a RWC game in front of your home crowd.

I think a 2023 & 2027 RWC in Argentina and Italy or vice versa will bring a new breath of freshness to the RWC. I think Argentina could struggle for crowd to game between lower ranked team where as Italy's proximity to the rest of the European nation and ex-pat communities will see every game go close to selling out

Posts: 1453
Joined: Wed, 30 Apr 2014, 16:57

Re: RWC Host

Postby 4N » Sun, 20 Jul 2014, 03:03

Seaton wrote:Countries would prefer to host by themselves, but they trade some matches in return for votes from close unions to host.

Such a 'law' wouldn't be implemented, nor should it - it treats a symptom, rather than tackling the problem, which would just manifest itself in another way were such a bidding criteria to be implemented.


Of course they can swiftly fix the problem. The Celts having two votes apiece on who gets to host means that they sell their votes to whomever offers them co-hosting. If Tier 2 nations were also given two votes each, the Celts would no longer wield such disproportionate influence.

Regarding Argentina as hosts, surely their inability to stage a sevens leg counts against them significantly, not to mention their economy tanking again. If the US hosts a successful 2018 RWC 7s and further marquee tests like the upcoming All Blacks fixture, surely they're in the conversation for 2023 or 2027. I don't see 2023 going anywhere very 'exotic' by rugby standards if South Africa and Ireland (with probable Celtic horse-trading) both bid, however.

Posts: 2575
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: RWC Host

Postby victorsra » Sun, 20 Jul 2014, 03:38

I think Argentina could struggle for crowd to game between lower ranked team


I don't fear this. Argentines watch anything at any level. It's a matter of securing not-so-expansive tickets.
Regarding Argentina as hosts, surely their inability to stage a sevens leg counts against them significantly, not to mention their economy tanking again.

Argentina wants 2030 Football World Cup (sharing it with Uruguay). It may be good for a Rugby World Cup as a preparation for Football World Cup. Of course we don't like to see rugby as a "preparation" for football, but it makes sense if we think that it would secure the best organization possible, more private interest in stadium-building and government-support for the rugby competition.
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

Posts: 2957
Joined: Sat, 05 Jul 2014, 02:44
National Flag:
AustraliaAustralia

Re: RWC Host

Postby thatrugbyguy » Sun, 20 Jul 2014, 04:09

2023 is going to be an interesting host whoever gets it's it. I'd love to see Argentina get it but something tells me it will go to South Africa or Ireland. Even though Argentina is a tier one nation with a much stronger rugby following than Japan I struggle to see the IRB choosing back to back new markets for the tournament. A rugby world cup is always going to be a success in the UK, Ireland, France and the Southern superpowers, but the IRB might be too timid to go more than one tournament outside their comfort zone. Italy could be a 'safe' new option in 2023, it's close proximity to the other 6 nations teams and has the stadia in place already, it would at the very least give the illusion of the IRB taking the tournament to new markets whilst preparing for an actual new market in either South or North America in 2027. Ireland could be a good host but coming back to the original topic in the thread it will probably have to farm games over to Cardiff like what England have done. I'm not suggesting nations have to be building stadiums for the IRB like they do for FIFA (and absurd stipulation regardless), but if they don't have sufficient stadia in place already then I don't know if it's a good idea to give that country the hosting gig, which is why I think South Africa would be the most likely candidate.

Posts: 1670
Joined: Sun, 20 Apr 2014, 11:42
National Flag:
New ZealandNew Zealand

Re: RWC Host

Postby YamahaKiwi » Sun, 20 Jul 2014, 05:05

I agree. I think they'll do both 2023 & 2027 at the same time with one a safe and traditional option and one seen as a new option. I'd love to see Argentina in 2023 but I can't see the IRB going as you say for two new options in a row. I agree it'll probably be between Ireland & RSA. Both have pros and issues. The new bet will more likely be 2027, and probably either Argentina or Italy, and depending which hemisphere got 2023. Hemisphere shouldn't matter but the IRB seems to like doing it on a rotational basis. Personally even as SH poster I wouldn't be overly upset by two Euro events in a row eg if it had been 2015ENG & 2019ITA. I guess the fact that ENG got recommended for 2015 though really pushed Japan's bid and dealt a blow to Italy with the IRB's thinking when 2019 was then thought about.

I do wonder for Ireland there might be sympathy for giving it to them like there was for NZ in 2011 since with the tournament growing bigger and bigger there might come a time in the not too distant future where smaller countries stuggle to be able to host the RWC. I have no doubt that was the case for NZ who without 200% population increase to 10m+ at least allowing a bigger market, more infrastructure, more resources etc will never see the RWC again. Of course one major difference for Ireland is that at least in their case they are much closer to other places of population than NZ despite their own being small so maybe it rules out the NZ type argument!

It might also be that the IRB could say right, Ireland you get 2023, but that's the last of UK & Ireland for twenty years while we go to other places in the world. It means the traditional nations have been catered for and taken care of so that others can come into the picture without hindrance. Kind of like NZ going to Samoa, it draws a line under the debate (ie in this case home unions hosting or sub hosting every second RWC) - the IRB could say we acknowledge the important part played by the UK & Ireland from the start of rugby and this has been seen in the hosting and sub-hosting of multiple RWCs since the establishment of the event. Now that the RWC has been hosted in Ireland, the IRB feels fit to move the focus of RWC hosting to outside the home unions area for the next four RWCs to further the reputation and popularity of the event in other parts of the world.

Irish posters on another forum have said that there are enough stadiums of enough size for the Ireland to host alone and that it's expected they will bid as sole hosts. There has been noise that a bid could include a couple of towns outside Dublin having two venues which I'm not sure would be accepted by the IRB. It's normal for the major city host to have two - Sydney, Auckland, Paris, London for 2015 & probably Tokyo for 2019. But none have ever had smaller cities with multiple venues which seeems a waste cost-wise and from a legacy POV not great as the event is confined to a few places in the country. I said on another forum that if they did farm out games, I thought Scotland would be the best choice logistically and as a nation that had little chance of hosting in the future by itself. The Irish posters replied though that Scotland wasn't required, and wanted!

Posts: 2575
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: RWC Host

Postby victorsra » Sun, 20 Jul 2014, 05:21

I think they'll do both 2023 & 2027 at the same time with one a safe and traditional option and one seen as a new option. I'd love to see Argentina in 2023 but I can't see the IRB going as you say for two new options in a row. I agree it'll probably be between Ireland & RSA. Both have pros and issues. The new bet will more likely be 2027, and probably either Argentina or Italy, and depending which hemisphere got 2023. Hemisphere shouldn't matter but the IRB seems to like doing it on a rotational basis.


You are right about IRB's vision, but it would be interesting to see a different concept of rotation, slightly different from SH-NH-SM-NH. Perhaps Japan wc can change this. For me the more logical rotation now would be New Option - RC-countries - 6N-countries - New Option - RC-countries - 6N-countries, from 2019 to 2039 and by New option now I see just Japan and North America as viable.
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

Posts: 4294
Joined: Mon, 26 May 2014, 05:50
National Flag:
TurkeyTurkey

Re: RWC Host

Postby Rowan » Sun, 20 Jul 2014, 06:22

Staging every second World Cup in the home Unions and France makes a mockery of the IRB's global pretensions. No doubt about that. They're just passing the ball around among themselves. What really amazes me is that South Africa has still only hosted it one. 2nd most successful rugby nation in the world and hosted a wonderful tournament in 95. No question about their stadia, and just four years ago they hosted the football World Cup. It's almost as if the IRB has lost confidence in them for some mysterious reason which I have my suspicions about but will refrain from commenting upon here.
If they're good enough to play at World Cups, then why not in between?

Posts: 2957
Joined: Sat, 05 Jul 2014, 02:44
National Flag:
AustraliaAustralia

Re: RWC Host

Postby thatrugbyguy » Sun, 20 Jul 2014, 09:23

YamahaKiwi wrote:I agree. I think they'll do both 2023 & 2027 at the same time with one a safe and traditional option and one seen as a new option. I'd love to see Argentina in 2023 but I can't see the IRB going as you say for two new options in a row. I agree it'll probably be between Ireland & RSA. Both have pros and issues. The new bet will more likely be 2027, and probably either Argentina or Italy, and depending which hemisphere got 2023. Hemisphere shouldn't matter but the IRB seems to like doing it on a rotational basis. Personally even as SH poster I wouldn't be overly upset by two Euro events in a row eg if it had been 2015ENG & 2019ITA. I guess the fact that ENG got recommended for 2015 though really pushed Japan's bid and dealt a blow to Italy with the IRB's thinking when 2019 was then thought about.

I do wonder for Ireland there might be sympathy for giving it to them like there was for NZ in 2011 since with the tournament growing bigger and bigger there might come a time in the not too distant future where smaller countries struggle to be able to host the RWC. I have no doubt that was the case for NZ who without 200% population increase to 10m+ at least allowing a bigger market, more infrastructure, more resources etc will never see the RWC again. Of course one major difference for Ireland is that at least in their case they are much closer to other places of population than NZ despite their own being small so maybe it rules out the NZ type argument!

It might also be that the IRB could say right, Ireland you get 2023, but that's the last of UK & Ireland for twenty years while we go to other places in the world. It means the traditional nations have been catered for and taken care of so that others can come into the picture without hindrance. Kind of like NZ going to Samoa, it draws a line under the debate (ie in this case home unions hosting or sub hosting every second RWC) - the IRB could say we acknowledge the important part played by the UK & Ireland from the start of rugby and this has been seen in the hosting and sub-hosting of multiple RWCs since the establishment of the event. Now that the RWC has been hosted in Ireland, the IRB feels fit to move the focus of RWC hosting to outside the home unions area for the next four RWCs to further the reputation and popularity of the event in other parts of the world.

Irish posters on another forum have said that there are enough stadiums of enough size for the Ireland to host alone and that it's expected they will bid as sole hosts. There has been noise that a bid could include a couple of towns outside Dublin having two venues which I'm not sure would be accepted by the IRB. It's normal for the major city host to have two - Sydney, Auckland, Paris, London for 2015 & probably Tokyo for 2019. But none have ever had smaller cities with multiple venues which seems a waste cost-wise and from a legacy POV not great as the event is confined to a few places in the country. I said on another forum that if they did farm out games, I thought Scotland would be the best choice logistically and as a nation that had little chance of hosting in the future by itself. The Irish posters replied though that Scotland wasn't required, and wanted!


Whilst I agree with most of what you said I'll just make a small correction regarding the two-venues thing. In 2003 both Sydney and Brisbane were scheduled to have two stadiums hosting games, with Brisbane it was Lang Park and Ballymore but ticket demand was so strong Ballymore (the smaller of the two) was dropped and Lang Park ended up hosting all of Brisbane's matches. So there is precedent for more than one city/area to be granted the right to have multiple venues. FIFA are all about spreading their world cup to all areas of whatever country it is, that's why you get these expensive stadiums being built in absurd places like the Amazon. I doubt the IRB are as pedantic about it as FIFA are nor do I think they would want the same reputation. Personally I don't think it's such a big issue if there is more than one city or town with 2 venues, I think it's a preferable option than farming games to Scotland or Wales. I'm not quite sure of the stadium situation with Ireland, I know they have Aviva, Croke Park, Thomond Park, and Ravenhill, I'd assume there would be some other GAA venues there to fill in the gaps but the questions is whether they meet international standards and have the capacities needed. I think from memory the IRB requires at least one venue of at least 60,000, and two venues of at least 40, 000. I agree that if Ireland were to get it in 2023 the UK shouldn't be granted the world cup again until at least 2039. With 2027 I definitely think if the above scenario pans out it will go to a new market, and I definitely think it will be Argentina, it's only a matter of time before they host the tournament.

Posts: 1670
Joined: Sun, 20 Apr 2014, 11:42
National Flag:
New ZealandNew Zealand

Re: RWC Host

Postby YamahaKiwi » Sun, 20 Jul 2014, 10:33

Rowan, they may have hosted a FIFA WC, but it was the poorest one since Italia 90 so rather than being an affirmation of RSA as a great host option it probably did the opposite, and the same can be said with the Lions tour in 2009. Many pool games in 2010 were far from sold out which doesn't inspire confidence. Several nasty security lapses at South African stadiums in international games or Super rugby games like fighting in the stands have also put RSA's case under a black cloud I suspect with the IRB council. (Though as a Kiwi I have to be honest and say maybe I shouldn't criticise that second aspect as NZ hasn't been perfect a couple of times in crowd security letting drunken idiots sans clothes onto the pitch and also intoxicated people into stadiums to abuse other ticket holders).

The only thing with Argentina is the economy's predisposition to tank once a decade or so. And as 4N rightly pointed out they now have a black mark against them for failing to carry out hosting their stop three years in a row for the SWS. If they can't do that, what does that say about their ability to host a RWC? They've also had security concerns with the whole laser thing as well in multiple games.

Posts: 1432
Joined: Sun, 20 Apr 2014, 16:57
Location: Leicester
National Flag:
Great BritainGreat Britain

Re: RWC Host

Postby sk 88 » Sun, 20 Jul 2014, 10:52

There was a good thread on this right at the beginning of the bored.

Ireland would host a great world cup but I want to get away from English speaking nations for a while.

Italy should host the next European world cup for me, big internal market that rugby is beginning to tap, good history and existing links to main competitions at both national and club level. Could be the spring board for a re-emergence of a domestic top tier (c.f. Fifa WC '94 in USA). Very easy to get to for intercontinental fans and very very easy for European fans. Great for UK, SA and French TV times.

Exotic and foreign for the IRB without being new or particularly threatening.

Posts: 2957
Joined: Sat, 05 Jul 2014, 02:44
National Flag:
AustraliaAustralia

Re: RWC Host

Postby thatrugbyguy » Sun, 20 Jul 2014, 12:09

If Argentina isn't quite stable enough then perhaps a joint US/Canada bid for 2027 is an option. There could be an issue with stadia on the US side of things, doing some research the other day only a handful of the major NFL stadia seem to be able to fit a full size rugby pitch on them from what I could find. Canada is not an issue as CFL fields are very similar in size to rugby fields. That said maybe you only need a couple of NFL stadiums, soccer stadiums are being built more and more so there's no shortage of venues.

Posts: 4294
Joined: Mon, 26 May 2014, 05:50
National Flag:
TurkeyTurkey

Re: RWC Host

Postby Rowan » Sun, 20 Jul 2014, 19:10

Yamaha, but they did host the biggest show on earth 4 years ago, five stadiums received major renovations, including Ellis Park, Loftus Versfield and Free State Stadium, which are, of course, major rugby stadiums. In addition to which, new stadiums were built (including one in Mandela's home district) and others were upgraded. I don't think there was ever any question about SA having the necessary stadia to host a rugby World Cup anyway. In fact, they might be the best equipped of all rugby nations in this department, hense my amazement that they have still only hosted the event once. The 1995 Rugby World Cup has often been described as the best ever, with packed stadiums, non-whites taking a major interest, and Nelson Mandela himself on hand to present the trophy. Hell, Clint Eastwood even made a movie about it :mrgreen: So why on earth hasn't it gone back there?

From the IRB website:

South Africa were granted host nation status in 1995 – an inspired move as it turned out, not only for the marvellous spectacle that followed but for the way the Rugby World Cup helped the country’s transition into a new era.


NB: South Africa is the second biggest rugby nation in terms of registered players behind England, and it is the second most successful rugby nation in history behind New Zealand. So, given that the IRB's 'foundation members' have been passing the ball around among themselves, how is it that SA is the only one among them to have only been involved in hosting the World Cup once?
If they're good enough to play at World Cups, then why not in between?

Posts: 101
Joined: Fri, 09 May 2014, 00:26
National Flag:
IrelandIreland

Re: RWC Host

Postby ormond lad » Sun, 20 Jul 2014, 19:43

The Do wrote:In the past the Home Nations and France have had the opportunity to host the RWC pretty much every 2nd RWC. Sometimes it has been as official host in the case of England in 1991, Wales in1999 and France in 2007, others having the chance to host games in their own country in those mentioned RWC.
This gives these countries an unfair advantage as unofficial host by playing often vital games at home despite not being the official host. Also countries like the Celtic bloc always seems to get games in RWC in return for voting a particular way when it comes to hosting rights.
Should the IRB bring in a rule that states that unless you can host all games than you can not bid to host the RWC. The only exception should be if you share with a minnow nation eg Argentina sharing one of the groups with Uruguay, South Africa with Namibia or Zimbabwe etc or the U.S sharing a RWC with Canada as an equal joint host.
With bids for RWC 2023 still a few years away should the IRB make this mandatory for all bids?
They are an official host by hosting games.
I do agree with you a bit on countries getting games in return for votes but that's primarily the Welsh who do so. Welsh have been host every second world cup.
No I disagree on bringing in a rule where unless you can host all games you shouldn't get to host the world cup as that rules out plenty of countries. No It shouldn't be mandatory

There is some plans in process for Ireland to put a bid together for 2023 as a stand alone bid.

Posts: 101
Joined: Fri, 09 May 2014, 00:26
National Flag:
IrelandIreland

Re: RWC Host

Postby ormond lad » Sun, 20 Jul 2014, 20:00

YamahaKiwi wrote:I agree. I think they'll do both 2023 & 2027 at the same time with one a safe and traditional option and one seen as a new option. I'd love to see Argentina in 2023 but I can't see the IRB going as you say for two new options in a row. I agree it'll probably be between Ireland & RSA. Both have pros and issues. The new bet will more likely be 2027, and probably either Argentina or Italy, and depending which hemisphere got 2023. Hemisphere shouldn't matter but the IRB seems to like doing it on a rotational basis. Personally even as SH poster I wouldn't be overly upset by two Euro events in a row eg if it had been 2015ENG & 2019ITA. I guess the fact that ENG got recommended for 2015 though really pushed Japan's bid and dealt a blow to Italy with the IRB's thinking when 2019 was then thought about.

I do wonder for Ireland there might be sympathy for giving it to them like there was for NZ in 2011 since with the tournament growing bigger and bigger there might come a time in the not too distant future where smaller countries stuggle to be able to host the RWC. I have no doubt that was the case for NZ who without 200% population increase to 10m+ at least allowing a bigger market, more infrastructure, more resources etc will never see the RWC again. Of course one major difference for Ireland is that at least in their case they are much closer to other places of population than NZ despite their own being small so maybe it rules out the NZ type argument!

It might also be that the IRB could say right, Ireland you get 2023, but that's the last of UK & Ireland for twenty years while we go to other places in the world. It means the traditional nations have been catered for and taken care of so that others can come into the picture without hindrance. Kind of like NZ going to Samoa, it draws a line under the debate (ie in this case home unions hosting or sub hosting every second RWC) - the IRB could say we acknowledge the important part played by the UK & Ireland from the start of rugby and this has been seen in the hosting and sub-hosting of multiple RWCs since the establishment of the event. Now that the RWC has been hosted in Ireland, the IRB feels fit to move the focus of RWC hosting to outside the home unions area for the next four RWCs to further the reputation and popularity of the event in other parts of the world.

Irish posters on another forum have said that there are enough stadiums of enough size for the Ireland to host alone and that it's expected they will bid as sole hosts. There has been noise that a bid could include a couple of towns outside Dublin having two venues which I'm not sure would be accepted by the IRB. It's normal for the major city host to have two - Sydney, Auckland, Paris, London for 2015 & probably Tokyo for 2019. But none have ever had smaller cities with multiple venues which seeems a waste cost-wise and from a legacy POV not great as the event is confined to a few places in the country. I said on another forum that if they did farm out games, I thought Scotland would be the best choice logistically and as a nation that had little chance of hosting in the future by itself. The Irish posters replied though that Scotland wasn't required, and wanted!
We would if hosting a world cup possibly have 2/3 cities with 2 stadiums. Dublin with Croke Park and Lansdowne Road. Limerick with Gaelic Grounds and Thomond Park.
An Irish bid would have games in 7/8 cities/large towns - Limerick, Cork, Dublin, Belfast, Galway all will be used with Castlebar, Kilkenny, Killarney all other possibilities
If we are to host I don't want us to share with another country. Only times a world cup should be shared bid is if world cup is going to new markets

People talking about shared US/Canada bid wouldn't that not make travelling a big issue. Large distances etc between host cities making things more expensive for fans. Ideally solo bid

Posts: 4294
Joined: Mon, 26 May 2014, 05:50
National Flag:
TurkeyTurkey

Re: RWC Host

Postby Rowan » Sun, 20 Jul 2014, 20:12

Ormond Lad, almost every time one of the Home Unions or France has hosted the RWC they have promised to stage it entirely by themselves, or mostly by themselves, but in the end they shared it around like always. I don't believe for a moment Ireland will actually stage the entire event on its own. & personally I think there could be no bigger insult to the international community at large than a 5th RWC in the Home Unions (and probably France) in nine years' time. That said, it will probably happen, given that the IRB's core committee is dominated by the self-serving Home Unions & France.

In my view it should go to SA in 2023 (see my previous post on this thread), or - if ready - Argentina. Given Japan is regarded as a slight gamble by the IRB, it is highly unlikely they would give the next one to the United States or/and Canada, while Argentina will probably have to wait a little longer too.
If they're good enough to play at World Cups, then why not in between?

Posts: 101
Joined: Fri, 09 May 2014, 00:26
National Flag:
IrelandIreland

Re: RWC Host

Postby ormond lad » Sun, 20 Jul 2014, 20:21

Rowan wrote:Ormond Lad, almost every time one of the Home Unions or France has hosted the RWC they have promised to stage it entirely by themselves, or mostly by themselves, but in the end they shared it around like always. I don't believe for a moment Ireland will actually stage the entire event on its own. & personally I think there could be no bigger insult to the international community at large than a 5th RWC in the Home Unions (and probably France) in nine years' time. That said, it will probably happen, given that the IRB's core committee is dominated by the self-serving Home Unions & France.

In my view it should go to SA in 2023 (see my previous post on this thread), or - if ready - Argentina. Given Japan is regarded as a slight gamble by the IRB, it is highly unlikely they would give the next one to the United States or/and Canada, while Argentina will probably have to wait a little longer too.
I get what your saying and if Ireland do become the hosts we could see games going to a Wales etc. But every mention so far in Ireland from IRFU, in media etc has been for a solo bid and with the Gaelic Athletic Association having given permission for use of their grounds in any bid we have enough stadiums. I know with this forum coming from the tier 2 viewpoint so irish etc are not going to be seen as great but we're not all self serving.
Again I don't see any world cup being shared by US and Canada. Too much travel for sides with such a world cup.

Posts: 282
Joined: Fri, 18 Apr 2014, 13:49
National Flag:
ScotlandScotland

Re: RWC Host

Postby HMFCalltheway » Sun, 20 Jul 2014, 23:04

Rowan, I actually don't think South Africa have been treated terribly in that they haven't been awarded a RWC since 1995.

We've got to remember they would not have been able to host the first two competitions due to apartheid so we really shouldn't consider them when comparing their host opportunities with other countries. When it then became acceptable to have it therer they received host rights at the first opportunity as a welcome back into the fold .Then after the 1995 world cup, as far as I'm aware, they did not reapply to host until 2011.

For this world cup bid and the 2015 bid they lost out to other strong rugby nations that were unlucky not to host the tournament for a number of years either. New Zealand is regarded as rugby's stronghold and had not held any RWC games since 1987 after their fall out with the IRB meant in the lead up to 2003 meant they missed out on being joint hosts. I feel they received that tournament as there was a degree of sympathy in that they had previously missed out and that 2011 could be their last chance to host solely as a small country if the tournament grows as is hoped. 2015 then is the year in which they were likely unlucky but England also had not hosted RWC games since 1999 and had missed out narrowly to France in 2007. So this upcoming tournament was probably awarded to them over SA due to their huge rugby support, larger than SA, and economic pull that will boost the IRB for a perceived risk in 2019. I doubt you would want to deny Japan being the first tier 2 hosts.

So in my view they have not been treated unfairly thus far with it being fitting if they welcome the tournament again in the 2020's.
Last edited by HMFCalltheway on Mon, 21 Jul 2014, 00:55, edited 1 time in total.

Posts: 2957
Joined: Sat, 05 Jul 2014, 02:44
National Flag:
AustraliaAustralia

Re: RWC Host

Postby thatrugbyguy » Sun, 20 Jul 2014, 23:21

ormond lad wrote:People talking about shared US/Canada bid wouldn't that not make travelling a big issue. Large distances etc between host cities making things more expensive for fans. Ideally solo bid


For an area as large as a US/Canada bid you'd probably have to have geographic clusters for the pools to make travel easier. For instance in the west coast you could have Vancouver, Seattle, and Santa Clara as a cluster, Boston, New York and Montreal as an eastern cluster, etc.

Posts: 260
Joined: Thu, 19 Jun 2014, 03:34
National Flag:
AustraliaAustralia

Re: RWC Host

Postby rampage » Sun, 20 Jul 2014, 23:49

thatrugbyguy wrote:I agree to an extent. I can kinda forgive both '91 and '99 due to the tournament still being in its relative infancy.


1999 was a complete and utter shambles, because Wales bought the votes of the other 3 Celtic nations and France, each of the 5 countries got given a pool. So rather than having 4 pools of 5, which neatly falls into a QF-SF-F format, we had 5 pools of 4, meaning playoffs were needed just to get to the QF stage.

I can't see joint hosting of games being a good thing, unless you have a minnow hosting a token home game, like the 2003 Cricket World Cup, where South Africa gave home games to Zimbabwe and Kenya.

Posts: 1453
Joined: Wed, 30 Apr 2014, 16:57

Re: RWC Host

Postby 4N » Mon, 21 Jul 2014, 00:42

thatrugbyguy wrote:
ormond lad wrote:People talking about shared US/Canada bid wouldn't that not make travelling a big issue. Large distances etc between host cities making things more expensive for fans. Ideally solo bid


For an area as large as a US/Canada bid you'd probably have to have geographic clusters for the pools to make travel easier. For instance in the west coast you could have Vancouver, Seattle, and Santa Clara as a cluster, Boston, New York and Montreal as an eastern cluster, etc.


Correct. Just as the 2018 FIFA WC in Russia will be clustered. And let's remember that in 2003 teams like England played their pool matches as far afield as Perth, Melbourne and Brisbane. That's as great a distance covered for a single nation as you'd likely see in a North American RWC.

Posts: 2957
Joined: Sat, 05 Jul 2014, 02:44
National Flag:
AustraliaAustralia

Re: RWC Host

Postby thatrugbyguy » Mon, 21 Jul 2014, 00:57

Australia is roughly the same size as the US but its population centres are much further apart so you are always going to have an issue with long travel. A US/Canada world cup would be far easier to organise.

West - Vancouver, Seattle, Santa Clara
Central - Chicago, Toronto, Kansas City
South - Houston, Orlando, Atlanta
East - Montreal, Foxboro, New York

Next

Return to Rugby Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot] and 7 guests