D-Day for RWC bidders
28 Jul 2009
England and Japan are expected to win the rights to host the 2015 and 2019 Rugby World Cups respectively when the IRB Council meets in Dublin on Tuesday.
Rival candidates South Africa and Italy are set to lose out after the earlier recommendation made by Rugby World Cup Limited (RWCL).
RWCL, who run the tournament, made its decision after consulting with television and sponsorship experts and the IRB Council is expected to ratify it.
Each candidate will need 14 votes from the 24-man IRB Council to secure the rights. However, the process is not a ‘one man, one vote’ procedure, as major unions have two votes.
England’s World Cup bid projects a profit of at least £60 million more than any of the other candidates, which is important to the IRB seeing as the 2011 World Cup will be held in New Zealand.
If England are awarded the 2015 World Cup, it will be their second major sporting event in a few years with London already set to host the 2012 Olympics.
32 Comments
28 Jul 2009, 08:05 am
Well hopefully Japan gets that 1 instead as it should be for rugby reasons and not money
28 Jul 2009, 08:13 am
The bottom line is that 2011 should have gone to Japan. Having it in NZ fails on both the money making and the development goals, so the next two will have to satisfy those targets.
That pretty much makes England and Japan the only viable options.
28 Jul 2009, 08:23 am
England will get it because of the profits the IRB will make.
Japan will get it because it will be a feather in the cap for the IRB in their quest to get rugby into the Olympics, and they do this by ‘taking the game to developing (rugby) countries’…
Add to this the IRB’s dissatisfaction over the recent ticket price shambles of the Lions series and SA wasted R3-BILLION!!!!
The money they invested in this bid.
28 Jul 2009, 08:48 am
#3 PissAnt: It will also be interesting to see the affect this will have on the recruitment policies of the Japanese sides. They will be desparate to recruit some talent to tutor their up-and-coming players so they can field a more competitive side.
It would’t surprise me if they make some citizenship offers for huge cotracts. Mark my words, we are going to see soccer0style contracts developing out of this.
28 Jul 2009, 08:54 am
#4 chappy:
Already happening.
From what I can see is that apart from the Euro or Pound, Japan is the biggest importers of players from the 3 SH countries at the moment.
28 Jul 2009, 08:55 am
#3 PissAnt: I agree 100%.
It is just so freaking sad that we now have this kick-*** infrastructure to host an excellent WC and it got pissed away in the halls of SARU before we ever got into the running. We could have hosted so great games in obscure places that now have the stadiums and the facilities – places such as Nelspruit and Polokwane which will sell out a Samoa v Canada game just to get to see some test rugby.
28 Jul 2009, 09:02 am
England will just ruin yet another RWC. Every time their greedy little fingers get near it and their gutter press, they’ll be messing the whole thing up and using it as a pedestal to teach the World how it really should be done and giving the colonials another lesson in how they should be living their lives. Meanwhile, the non-English speaking peoples keep pouring thru the gates and the rugby fans will arrive to huge local ripoff-costs wondering what all the fuss was about because noone seems to know that the rugby is even on.
Much better to have given it to passionate countries who are desperate to show visitors a good time and spread the word about rugby thru the unique viewpoint of the locals, and everyones a winner.
Italy would have been a great RWC, in Europe, good timezone, great weather and a strengthening rugby audience. Japan has a rugby tradition but is clearly a tournament to fil the IRB coffers so did we really need England in the picture as well ?
28 Jul 2009, 09:08 am
#7 WakaNathan: By your logic South Africa will then be the best host country for any WC? I say give the next five to us!
28 Jul 2009, 09:12 am
Why couldn’t the #1 team in the World have it? We have such amazing stadiums, nearly all events that happen here are a huge success, and that’s mostly due to the gold mines. Please man!
28 Jul 2009, 09:13 am
#7 WakaNathan: Now that South Africa probably wont get it. I would have wanted Italy to get it ahead of England.
Like you say great weather and in the right time zone too.
Still wish South Africa could have got the next world cup. We are rugby crazy here, have brilliant stadiums great, great weather and of course in the right time zone. SA is on the same time as Europe in their summer months (winter here but still brilliant weather its our dry season now) and only one hour behind the UK.
Pity we wont get another world cup here until probably 2023. A long to time to wait.
Will have to go to NZ for the 2011 WC. That will be the last time we will see a WC held in a real rugby country until it gets back to South Africa someday.
28 Jul 2009, 09:19 am
#10 Puma: One hour in front of the UK.
28 Jul 2009, 09:33 am
#8 Kerneels:
Would have given it to SA 10X before giving it to expensive miserable selfish unfriendly old England.
#10 Puma:
too true Puma. And he Poms havent stopped whinging about NZ getting it since they awarded it. Miserable gits.
Make your way to Aotearoa my feline friend, we’ll welcome you with a smile not a frown !
and when SA have another RWC, I’ll be first on the plane fer sure. Just cant wait to go there, waiting for my kids to be old enough first to enjoy it.
28 Jul 2009, 09:33 am
England don’t deserve it! How do they take rugby to the people? They play at one damn stadium?! Plus they’ll make a profit because they’ll rip rugby fans around the world off! Plus it’ll be ****** conditions and therefore boring, kicking rugby! Give it to Japan and then SA (just coz I live here!)otherwise Italy gets my vote!
Who are the major unions with 2 votes? SANZAR countries and the 6N teams?
28 Jul 2009, 10:26 am
Why does Eng, Wales, Scot get to bid seperately for the cup? Surely it is the same country? When Wales got it, the other two and Ireland hosted games, with Twickenham hosting more important games than Cardiff. Even when France hosted, the UK got some games. So basically it is the UK every other WCup.
#3 PissAnt: Surely we did not spend that money? It is only gaurentees. In other words the goverment gaurentees the profit for the event. So even if the event make a loss, SA will never pay the full amount but only the shortfall?
28 Jul 2009, 11:25 am
wow, Big Hit is going to be devastated you guys dont think his homeland is good enough to host a cup, perhaps thats why the continual anti NZ stance.. how on earth could the 7th/8th team in the last world cup get to host it?? payback perhaps for the conspiracy that took place in Cardiff…
and just for the record, I agree with all you guys that Eng isnt a good place to host a world cup.. the exchange rate alone will kill off numerous supporters… and could you imagine the ignorance of the wendyball brigade, they would have as much knowledge and wisdom as Kobus Kitty displays here, which is f@rk all…
28 Jul 2009, 12:03 pm
#7 WakaNathan England will just ruin yet another RWC. Every time their greedy little fingers get near it and their gutter press, they’ll be messing the whole thing up and using it as a pedestal to teach the World how it really should be done and giving the colonials another lesson in how they should be living their lives
Sorry Waka, who’s world cup has England messed up.
#14BEERTJE Why does Eng, Wales, Scot get to bid seperately for the cup? Surely it is the same country? When Wales got it, the other two and Ireland hosted games, with Twickenham hosting more important games than Cardiff. Even when France hosted, the UK got some games. So basically it is the UK every other WCup.
France stuck a deal with Wales,Scotland,and Ireland.Vote for us and you can play you play your games in you own staduim.Ireland finished up not hosting any games at home due to the re development of Landsdown Road.
The same applied in 1991 and 1999. South Africa 95 is the only World cup where games were not played outside of the host nation.
2003 was a joint Austraila/NZ venture which the Aussies the hijkacked for themselves. No mention of greedy Aussies on this thread..
28 Jul 2009, 12:20 pm
#16 PaulLondon: I thought 2003 was more about sponsorship signage at the grounds, with the NZRFU not cowtowing to the IRBs demands ?
28 Jul 2009, 12:22 pm
#15 poppa69:
actually, its less than that !
The papers here in UK today are full of this story, eg Guardians leading Sports story =
‘Boks try to derail England RWC bid’.
Its quite clear the deal is DONE, no amount of lobbying now will change the decision to award Eng 2015 and Japan 2019. The SARU and Italy can kid themselves otherwise and may wish to atleast go thru the process to save face, but theyre better spending their pennies elsewhere. This has been an in-house IRB job done long ago, never you mind.
The most horrendous thing about Englands bid is this. It has at NO stage pretended to be anything other than a ‘revenue gathering’ exercise. It reaches out on the negative angle that ‘NZ 2011 RWC wont make money so therefore its up to England to save rugby/IRB’. No, nothing about “we have a wonderful rugby tradition…..it will be taken to these wonderful England regions….the people will welcome you……look what we can offer”. The focus is solely on money and, in that classic Imperialistic way, simultaneously looking down their nose at annoying colonies like NZ and mocking their inability to hold Global events. Dont be fooled tho, the NZ Govt have guaranteed the IRB Bidding requirement (£80m), just like Eng did – I understand the SA Govt did not – and otherwise it will be England and the RFU taking the bulk of the remainder of all profits. They will blow a bit of smoke in to a few mirrors and kid you otherwise, but thats the truth, Ruth.
One thing you can be sure of at RWC 2011 is that the minute you step off the plane you will KNOW you are at a RUGBY WORLD CUP ! It will be everywhere. The locals will be obsessive about the rugby and want to talk about it all the time. They will be equally desperate for visitors to have a good time and see the country and give them the chance and they will wlecome you in to their homes or to their favourite beach or cafe or farm. Yes, they will know your team down to the laces too but will be as 1-eyed about their own team as you are about yours. But they will still know your team. No country is without its challenges and pitfalls, NZ is no different, but my guess is that when you step off the plane at Heathrow in 2015, it will just be like any other day, the locals will be indifferent to whatever it is that youre jabbering excitedly about, the prices will be horrendous just to breathe and the stadiums will be big and flash but be in football-mad cities and with funny lines on the pitches and the kids will walk passed menacingly. Then the Pom press will gloat about all their wonderful crowd no’s and revenue and make out that this is the measure of ‘success’ for a World Cup. And ‘rugby’ will hardly get a look in.
28 Jul 2009, 12:27 pm
#16 PaulLondon:
I was in Eng for both 1991 and 1999 RWCs. And Ive been to the France ’07 and Aus ’03.
France and Aus were great. The Cups involving Eng have been almost devoid of RWC-atmosphere. They of course divi’ed it out in every direction in buying their way in to it in the 1st place to the extent that the 1999 Wales RWC felt more like it was a London RWC, not Cardiff.
So to answer your question, PaulLondon, its everyones event, not just Englands. Having been heavily involved already with 2 x RWCs, why now a 3rd ?
28 Jul 2009, 12:30 pm
#16 PaulLondon:
ps – no mention of ‘greedy Aussie on this thread’ ?
1. but its Engl, not Aus, we’re talking about
and
2. then you havent been around these here parts very long have ye ?
28 Jul 2009, 12:30 pm
12 Waka
What Pom whinging about New Zealand are you on about? I live here and have read nothing about the English whinging about NZ getting the 2011 RWC. There were some, and I stress the word “some” journalists who opined that Japan would have been a better host for the development of the game, which is a valid point.
However we all know that rugby politics is involved, and the fact that Australia got one over NZ in 2003 meant that sympathy was with NZ for 2011.
England has got some fantastic stadiums, and London will have four world class stadiums of it’s own, in Wembley, Twickenham, Arsenals Emirates stadium and the soon to be completed Olympic stadium.
The investment in the East London infrastucture alone amounts to £24 billion over the next 5 years.
28 Jul 2009, 12:45 pm
# 13 I wanna be coach :
July 28th, 2009 at 9:33 am
England don’t deserve it! How do they take rugby to the people? They play at one damn stadium?! Plus they’ll make a profit because they’ll rip rugby fans around the world off! Plus it’ll be ****** conditions and therefore boring, kicking rugby! Give it to Japan and then SA (just coz I live here!)otherwise Italy gets my vote!
Who are the major unions with 2 votes? SANZAR countries and the 6N teams?
How can you say England rip off rugby fans,when your own SARU are ripping their own people rugby fans to the point where people are refusing to attend game due to inflated ticket pricing for Springbok matches.
Italy would have to go into a joint venture due to the World cup clashing with Seris A.No staduims available.
Back to back world cups in the SH counts out Japan
My choice SA.
If not England
28 Jul 2009, 12:53 pm
#16 PaulLondon: The point is The UK hosted games in 1991, 1999, 2007 i.e. every other WCup and that trend will continue. There is no difference between Scotland or England bidding for a WCup as it is the same government that needs to give the guarentees, the pool games will be played at the same venues and the Finals/semis and 3rd/4th game shall be shared by the same venues. So, it does not matter wich of the four home unions bid for the cup, the other three will always support them because they get the same deal.
As far as i know the Home Unions have three votes each on these matters, so the UK is basically gaurenteed of 12 votes every second WCup.
28 Jul 2009, 12:55 pm
Well well……..recommendation made by Rugby World Cup Limited (RWCL).”
Well well………………..pity those phuckers can’t vote.
RWCL would never have supported NZ, but we still managed to sneak in under the radar.
NZ has two votes……………..and they are going to SA.
SA can vote for itself I assume!
Argentina will go with SA.
That’s five, all you need is another 9.
Hang in there SA.
28 Jul 2009, 13:04 pm
The bottom line is that RWC ltd and the IRB want to develop the game. To do that they need the tournament to generate a huge profit. From reports last year only France and England can make a profit.
When even Austalian journalist Spiro Zavos supports the bid as follows, you know the chances are better than even:
The fact is, for every reason, financial, access to great stadiums, spectator comfort and interest, the need for a geographically compact tournament and in the spirit of rewarding countries that have kept the faith in rugby, England should be awarded the hosting rights to the 2015 Rugby World Cup.
28 Jul 2009, 13:05 pm
#23 Beertjie:
No Bert,
2 Votes.
Scotland.
Wales.
England.
Ireland.
France.
SA
Australia.
NZ.
1 vote.
Argentina.
Japan.
Pacific Block.
American Block.
African Block.
Italy.
Euro block.
Asian block.
(I think.)
28 Jul 2009, 13:19 pm
I see England made it clear some time ago they won’t ‘share’ with their neighbors like was done previously.
Oh well. That’s for the 6N countries to sort out. Pretty sure the rest won’t be very happy.
28 Jul 2009, 13:26 pm
#21 ronstermusic:
Ive lost count of all the anti-NZ RWC bile Ive read in the papers. Not restricted to solely S.Jones of the Times, altho he’s clearly the worst protagonist, but also Telegraph with Moore and Robert Kitson of the Guardian.
Ive lived here 15yrs, not 15mins. The bully boy Big Brother attitude to everyone-but-Engl doesnt win any friends but makes the Good Old Boys at the RFU look big and clever, aye what.
Gee, nice list of stadiums there.
East London, Olympics ? gee, have they found a use for that stadium yet ? no takers from football, or anyone for that matter ? not 1 ?! It has white elephant written all over it.
Wembley, Arsenal, Walkers Stadium, Old Trafford ?
yep, famous rugby stadiums that just send a thrill up the spine for rugby fans. But, gee, think of the numbers of seats and how much we can extract from the fans to fill them ?
The ONLY rugby stadium on the Eng list seems to be Twickenham ! And yet how the bidding RFU and Engl papers have mocked l’il ole NZ with their quaint tiny stadiums and their sh*tty weak dollar squeezing incomes streams. Let me guess, they’ll borrow Cardiffs Millenium Stadium, and the genuine rugby kudos that goes with it, while hiding the backroom deal with Wales that they had to do to achieve it in the first place. And then its an England AND Wales RWC isnt it ? er, just like 1999 (the worst RWC of the 5 of been to, by some considerable distance).
28 Jul 2009, 13:29 pm
#26 cane: OK, but stil from those 24 votes the UK+Ireland automatically get 8 votes, with France usually also benefiting (although they might go with Italy this time) thus 10 votes out of 24. My point is, it should be the UK canvassing and not the induvidual unions because it is basically the same WCup with just a different venue for the final.
28 Jul 2009, 15:47 pm
Hmm… the live stream of the announcement of the 2015 & 2019 World Cup hosts was supposed to start 15 minutes ago.
An update on the IRB website says that the panel is still in discussion. This MIGHT be good news for SA since it might mean that the RWCL recommendation was not just rubber stamped.
28 Jul 2009, 17:18 pm
Well England have got it now, and Waka – I’ve lived here for 24 years, and experienced none of the bile you refer to.
28 Jul 2009, 18:24 pm
#31 ronstermusic:
Then you only read The Sun.
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.