Eruedan Posted January 8, 2006 Report Share Posted January 8, 2006 Seems that unless the IRB scrap the recent result awarding NZ the 2011 World Cup, the ARU (Asian Rugby Union) organisation representing Japan will take the IRB to court. Specific allegation of bribery have been made. THE Asian Rugby Union (ARU) has threatened the sport's governing body with legal action unless it annuls the vote that awarded the 2011 World Cup to New Zealand.The ARU wants a new ballot by the International Rugby Board (IRB) council on the grounds that the previous one in November lacked transparency because the IRB decided during the voting process not to reveal the count. This was an accusation both the NZRU chief executive Chris Moller and his ARU counterpart Gary Flowers vehemently denied yesterday. The decision to give the tournament to New Zealand instead of Japan or South Africa caused widespread dismay. Now, under threat of legal action, the IRB is being urged to conduct a new vote under independent auspices. If the first vote is declared void and the tournament is taken away from New Zealand, it would be unprecedented. Alongside the alleged lack of transparency of the voting procedure, there are serious specific allegations, notably of horse-trading between Ireland, whose two votes were vital to New Zealand's cause, and the NZRU. "We are aware ... two Irish members were encouraged to vote for New Zealand by being promised the appearance of the All Blacks at the opening ceremony of the redeveloped Lansdowne Road ground," the letter said. It also alleges South Africa and New Zealand made a secret pact that if either was eliminated after round one of voting, then their own votes would revert to each other. Source: Call for new World Cup host Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faster Posted January 8, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 8, 2006 nothing there is out of the ordinary lots of countries swap votes for different things Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie Posted January 8, 2006 Report Share Posted January 8, 2006 Mori is just bitter from losing, he is adamant to try and ruin this for New Zealand. He has just strutted into the IRB and want everything his own way, this guy wants Japan to be apart of the the super 14 and the tri-nations when South africa leaves? i dont think so, give me Argentina or Pacific Islands please. I’m so sick of the JRU’s arrogance and i don't want them anywhere near SANZA. It's interesting that you don't hear South Africa whinging about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Rols Posted January 8, 2006 Report Share Posted January 8, 2006 Well, I've been pretty vocal about my view that the 2011 decision was a lost opportunity, but taking it to court really is a stupid move and sour grapes. Just let the result stand _ even if it did get overturned, NZ would appeal the decision anyway and it would all drag on through the courts for years, leaving the whole tournament preparations in limbo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faster Posted January 8, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 8, 2006 i think now that NZ's won it first off, even with a new vote it still would be NZ why is SA leaving the trinations? Japan is not the greatest rugby nation, i am not sure how right the IRB rankings are, but they put Japan at 18 behind such countries and areas like Samoa and Fiji, not to mention Canada and the USA, even Portugal is ranked higher Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexjc Posted January 9, 2006 Report Share Posted January 9, 2006 The Nips are just being a bunch of Aaaahsoooos :laugh: This may be bad Karama returning to haunt New Zealand... I knew something like this would happen eventually and the myth of the London 2012 vote where Greece's IOC rep accidentally pushed the wrong button voting London instead of Madrid, may have been a cataylist for Japan. Anyway the thought of an appeal and the years that may be involved will work against Japan. They will be shut out next time by angry IRB member nations. The irony is that New Zealand has pulled a stunt like this before, and got away with it. America's Cup 1987...After loosing the 1987 Loui Vitton Cup in Perth against Dennis Conner's Stars and Stripes, the Kiwis were so insenced by the nastiness of the event, they wanted revenge. A spectacular loophole in the rules was exploited and the infamous 1988 challenge took place. A J-type monohull (NZ) verses the twin hull sailing speed machine, no contest on the water so off to Court. NZ temporarly won it in 1989 but lost it again in the US court of appeal. This delayed the true event set down for 1990 and it was not untill 1992 the 28th America's Cup got underway...This time NZ was bowled out again in the LV Cup Finals, due punishment. This time NZ waited patiently for 1995... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guardian Posted January 9, 2006 Report Share Posted January 9, 2006 The BBC has disputed that and now confirms that Japan WILL NOT appeal the vote and accepts New Zealand the host nation of the 2011 Rugby World Cup: Japan Accepts World Cup Decision Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arwebb Posted January 9, 2006 Report Share Posted January 9, 2006 I'm with you on this one, Roltel. As much as I still believe the IRB got it badly wrong, this would be going too far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eruedan Posted January 9, 2006 Report Share Posted January 9, 2006 Alex, you might want to reconsider some of your language, some people may find it racist and offensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suit U Sir !!! Posted January 9, 2006 Report Share Posted January 9, 2006 It's interesting that you don't hear South Africa whinging about it. That's because S.Africa has already hosted the event, and fairly recently as well- 1995, in contrast Japan has never hosted, so it was a bigger blow for them. I think the danger here is that the IRB and JRU are fast becoming enemies, and this may mean that Japan won't be interested in bidding for 2015, and could lose interest in bidding for/ hosting a rugby world cup altogether. I predict all energies will now probably go into a Japan 2016 summer olympic bid. Japan has a better relationship with the IOC and is highly respected with Rogge commenting on Japan and South Korea's great performance at Athens 2004 and something along the lines of "the re-emergence of Asia." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted January 9, 2006 Report Share Posted January 9, 2006 The Nips are just being a bunch of Aaaahsoooos :laugh: This may be bad Karama returning to haunt New Zealand... I knew something like this would happen eventually and the myth of the London 2012 vote where Greece's IOC rep accidentally pushed the wrong button voting London instead of Madrid, may have been a cataylist for Japan. Anyway the thought of an appeal and the years that may be involved will work against Japan. They will be shut out next time by angry IRB member nations. The irony is that New Zealand has pulled a stunt like this before, and got away with it. America's Cup 1987...After loosing the 1987 Loui Vitton Cup in Perth against Dennis Conner's Stars and Stripes, the Kiwis were so insenced by the nastiness of the event, they wanted revenge. A spectacular loophole in the rules was exploited and the infamous 1988 challenge took place. A J-type monohull (NZ) verses the twin hull sailing speed machine, no contest on the water so off to Court. NZ temporarly won it in 1989 but lost it again in the US court of appeal. This delayed the true event set down for 1990 and it was not untill 1992 the 28th America's Cup got underway...This time NZ was bowled out again in the LV Cup Finals, due punishment. This time NZ waited patiently for 1995... I agree (minus the "Nips" slip -- but hey, there's a caramel candy called Nips). Plus, it's probably also the case of the NZ FIFA member who abstained in the 1998 or 1999 vote, and thereby threw the election to Germany, and had South Africa wait another 4 years. THese things do come back to haunt these pompous sports nabos. RACIST CANDY!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arwebb Posted January 10, 2006 Report Share Posted January 10, 2006 I think the danger here is that the IRB and JRU are fast becoming enemies, and this may mean that Japan won't be interested in bidding for 2015, and could lose interest in bidding for/ hosting a rugby world cup altogether.I predict all energies will now probably go into a Japan 2016 summer olympic bid. I think interest in the Rugby World Cup will re-emerge, but we probably won't go to Japan now for at least another 20 years and I think that's a real shame. As for a 2016 Olympic bid, though it is a long time since Japan have hosted the Summer Games, it would probably be too soon after Beijing 2008. Perhaps they'd be better off going for the 2020/2024 global carve-up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suit U Sir !!! Posted January 10, 2006 Report Share Posted January 10, 2006 I think the danger here is that the IRB and JRU are fast becoming enemies, and this may mean that Japan won't be interested in bidding for 2015, and could lose interest in bidding for/ hosting a rugby world cup altogether.I predict all energies will now probably go into a Japan 2016 summer olympic bid. I think interest in the Rugby World Cup will re-emerge, but we probably won't go to Japan now for at least another 20 years and I think that's a real shame. As for a 2016 Olympic bid, though it is a long time since Japan have hosted the Summer Games, it would probably be too soon after Beijing 2008. Perhaps they'd be better off going for the 2020/2024 global carve-up. But a 2016 bid could be a good warm up for a victory in 2020/24. Japan is better off concentrating on a Tokyo 2016 olympic bid. The IRB clearly has no value/ regard for non-established nations like Japan, so with the gradually worsening relationship between the IRB and JRU, Japan would probably be wasting time on a 2015/19 RWC bid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arwebb Posted January 10, 2006 Report Share Posted January 10, 2006 Perhaps, but Tokyo is a world-renowned city. I'm sure the IOC knows what Tokyo can offer without the need for them to make a warm-up bid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Rols Posted January 11, 2006 Report Share Posted January 11, 2006 The issue just won't lay down. Now the Argentinians claim they were offered extra test matches in return for their support: More claims over world cup voting 11 January 2006 More controversy surfaced today regarding the way New Zealand won the hosting rights for the 2011 Rugby World Cup, with allegations that the New Zealand Rugby Union (NZRU) promised more tests against Argentina. Several websites have reported the claims following a link on the Argentina rugby union (UAR) website reporting the general committee minutes on its participation on the World Cup vote. The minutes detail a call made by the Argentina union's president-elect Alejandro Risler after the first round of voting, when Argentina had voted for the eliminated South Africa and then had to transfer its vote to either New Zealand or Japan. "Before the voting process Alejandro Risler phoned the president (chairman) of the NZRU Jock Hobbs to tell him that Argentina would vote for New Zealand and not Japan and that the UAR needed to meet with them to discuss the possibility of having regular international competition in the southern hemisphere in the nearest future, having already obtained South African approval for Argentina's inclusion," the website says. New Zealand Rugby Union chief executive Chris Moller said the claims were "absolutely incorrect". "We have been accused of promising a match to Ireland to the opening of Lansdowne Road. I have refuted that as being absolutely incorrect and furthermore said that it doesn't apply to any country because we at no stage discussed additional games in respect to Rugby World Cup 2001," Moller told NZPA. "In respect to Argentina specifically, we are scheduled to play Argentina in Argentina in the June window. That match has been in the IRB (International Rugby Board) tour schedule for about five years." AdvertisementAdvertisementThe timing of the match in June when the All Blacks would normally play at home was mutually agreed upon, Moller said. "From what they've said it appears they voted for us and we're very appreciative of that. "And it is true that Alejandro Risler and Jock Hobbs did have a telephone discussion and it is true that we agreed, as we're going to, (to) have a meeting at around the (Wellington) sevens (February 3-4). At no stage however has there been any promise by New Zealand, and indeed New Zealand can't make such promises because Sanzar matters are matters for all three countries (NZ, Australia and South Africa)." Early this week the Asian Rugby Union denied that it had written to the IRB seeking a recount of the votes. The website linked to UAR said New Zealand won the World Cup votes 11-10 Stuff.co.nz Personally, I think this latest is just a big hoohah over nothing. So what if the Kiwis promised extra matches? They were just playing hard and using all their advantages. And of course extra tests against the All Blacks are going to be more of a lure than a promise of extra matches again st the Cherry Blossoms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arwebb Posted January 13, 2006 Report Share Posted January 13, 2006 Especially if the All Blacks go to Buenos Aires. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stryker Posted January 22, 2006 Report Share Posted January 22, 2006 The IRB really blew it on this one. Yes New Zealand has a long and successful history in rugby but look at the existing infrastructure. The IRB is going from having the finals from Stade de France to Eden Park! If the IRB wants to see the sport grow they need to send the World Cup to some new frontiers. Japan would've been a great choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie Posted January 22, 2006 Report Share Posted January 22, 2006 *groan* I can’t be bothered getting into this. Y’all might “disapprove” of NZ getting the world cup but myself, I can’t wait till be sitting in Eden Park at the final with 60,000 other screaming rugby nutters and enjoying all the infrastructure upgrades we are going to get from this. Thought I’d just post this article. Japan bid for Rugby World Cup couldn't deliver 15.01.06 By Paul Lewis Japan's bid for the 2011 Rugby World Cup offered less profit to the International Rugby Board (IRB) than New Zealand's and was judged to be a long last behind New Zealand and South Africa, according to international rugby sources. Japan's bid - founded on an emotional appeal to spread the game of rugby to the potentially huge Asian market - also hinged on the vast sums that Japanese companies would offer as sponsors. However, it now appears the Japanese bid fell short on financial as well as other grounds, according to sources close to the IRB, undermining the runaway victory many in the UK media had supported and predicted. The IRB's technical evaluation of the three bids apparently ranked the Japanese bid third out of three although, when voting commenced, it was South Africa which was edged out of contention in the first round, leaving the contest to be decided between Japan and New Zealand. One of the main planks for a Japanese victory was supposed to be the battery of multi-national, multi-billion dollar corporate sponsors lined up to bankroll the Japanese bid. But, when push came to shove, sources said the Japanese bid actually promised less money for the IRB than the New Zealand bid. It was also poorly organised and poorly presented and relied heavily on shaping public opinion through an international PR campaign. NZRU chief executive Chris Moller would not comment on Japan's bid but did say that the voting margin recently outlined by Argentina - 11 votes to 10 - was wrong and that the margin was wider. He would not reveal the actual margin. The NZRU has been vehemently denying recent allegations which continue to point the finger at supposed irregularities surrounding the voting - including implications that the NZRU did "deals" with some IRB member countries to ensure the World Cup came to New Zealand in 1987. The latest implications, sparked by an Argentinian rugby website, were that the NZRU used the promise of entry to the Tri Nations tournament to secure Argentina's vote and tip the contest in New Zealand's favour. Moller expressed frustration at the aftermath of New Zealand's successful bid. "What I can say is that the New Zealand bid was always a strong contender. We knew we were always viewed very favourably but the media and public saw only that we were a rank outsider." However, because many of the media swallowed Japan's line, they were under pressure to explain getting it wrong and were looking for opportunities to do so - and were all too eager to imply wrongdoing on New Zealand's part. Moller said: " Even if the voting had been done in a more transparent way, we would still have been subject to these allegations because there was so much expectation and a whole lot of media statements out there predicting a different result." The allegations stemming from Argentina suggested that the ARU President, Alejandro Risler, had spoken to NZRU chairman Jock Hobbs around the voting. Some reports implied that the telephone call took place between the first round of voting and the second round and linked it to a meeting early next month between the NZRU and the ARU, represented by former Puma great Hugo Porta - formerly Argentina's Minister of Sport and now president of the ARU's international relations committee, a body charged with arranging more international matches for the Pumas. Moller said that Risler had telephoned Hobbs but before the voting. No "deal" was done - proven by the fact that the Argentinians voted for South Africa in the first round and then switched their vote to New Zealand only in the second round. No telephone calls were possible between voting rounds as they occurred immediately and the voting overseers, KPMG, ensured that no delegate left the room and no telephone calls were permitted. "In any case, such a promise would have been ludicrous," said Moller. "We could not have delivered. For Argentina to get into the Tri-Nations, all three parties [NZ, Australia and South Africa] have to agree and any one of them can veto it. So how could we promise that?" In addition, as previously reported by the Herald on Sunday, Argentinian players are contracted to their clubs in the UK, France and Italy and will not be freed to play in the Tri-Nations international 'window'. This is an ongoing problem affecting the Pumas, seen most recently when Australia pulled their Australia A team out of the Pacific Six Nations tournament to begin this year (also involving the NZ Juniors, Japan, Tonga, Samoa and Fiji). Argentina was approached to fill the gap left by Australia but could not do so because of player unavailability. "We don't know at this stage what Argentina wants to discuss next month's meeting. All I know is that there'll not be an easy answer to the issue of getting more international rugby for Argentina - but we will listen and try to help," said Moller. "I also know that, even if we had been tempted to link playing against the All Blacks to the World Cup bid, we would not have won the hosting rights," he said. "It would have blown up in our faces. We faced a sizeable challenge and determined that we'd face it in a way so that we could look people in the eye and state our case honestly and openly. "If we'd played the sort of game we are being accused of playing, we would have lost our credibility instantly. That's how you can tell these accusations are false." - HERALD ON SUNDAY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arwebb Posted January 23, 2006 Report Share Posted January 23, 2006 So instead of passing the ball amongst themselves, the IRB went to New Zealand for money then? And who are these sources "close to" the IRB? Presumably, the same nameless individuals in any story of this ilk who think they know a lot, but probably don't. It doesn't matter how this gets dressed up. The IRB got it wrong last November. Unfortunately, there's naff all that can be done about it now, except to make sure they don't make the same mistake again. And another thing - why can't they, or won't they, tell us the voting numbers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Rols Posted February 10, 2006 Report Share Posted February 10, 2006 John Kirwan's not going to be popular back home: Kirwan says Japan should have won! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arwebb Posted February 11, 2006 Report Share Posted February 11, 2006 Whoops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie Posted February 11, 2006 Report Share Posted February 11, 2006 John Kirwan's not going to be popular back home: Kirwan says Japan should have won! everybody knows kirwan wanted Japan to win…but they didn’t so that’s that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexjc Posted February 12, 2006 Report Share Posted February 12, 2006 John Kirwan's not going to be popular back home: Kirwan says Japan should have won! everybody knows kirwan wanted Japan to win…but they didn’t so that’s that. No issue on that one...Got to remember the NZRU had that "we'll give it our best shot" attitude instead of a "we're gonna win this thing." Even the media had dumbed the bid down right up untill "Nuuu Zeelund!" was read out as the next host. Even Steve-o didn't stay up for the ceremony, we least expected it and were ready to say well done Japan. We would've been pissed if South Africa got 2011. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Rols Posted February 12, 2006 Report Share Posted February 12, 2006 We would've been pissed if South Africa got 2011. I would've been with you on that one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arwebb Posted February 12, 2006 Report Share Posted February 12, 2006 At the risk of sounding boring, I would have been with you aswell, for the simple reason that it would have been too soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.