Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Alexjc

2011 Rugby World Cup

Recommended Posts

Japan presented its bid to host Rugby World Cup 2011

Now that NZ's bid is on its way to the IRB in Dublin, I'm feeling a lot more confident on our chances. Even though we are up against extremely strong opposition from Japan especially, I believe we have a good chance and i like the way the NZRU and the Government have gone about the bid

South Africa is still to submit it's bit to the IRB but its expected to by the 13th of May

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup, I do feel the same.

While extensive nitty gritty details haven't been revealed yet, I have been encouraged by what I have read so far today.

The NZRU also seems to be taking a reasonably professional approach in the way they have delivered this so far.

And as a small sideline, I also like their brand identity for the bid - launching off the recognisable All Black brand and using *All Rugby 2011* as their logo and I guess echoing the ethos of their bid and vision.

Watching the news tonight, it does appear that the target is to redevelop Eden Park to reach a capacity of around 65K. The capacity is probably hovering around acceptable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NZ has it in the bag.

South Africa is too soon. And Japan doesn't have enough votes behind it. NZ will get the SANZAR and the British Isles votes for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NZ has my vote all the way and I am pretty sure Eruedan is correct when he says that the Brit votes will be behind it 100%. South Africa already has the football World Cup in 2010 so a Rugby World Cup in 2011 would be too much. Who do they think they are...Canada? They seem to bid for everything. I am thinking of hosting a dinner party tonight. Oopps, just noticed that Canada has bid for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NZ has it in the bag.

South Africa is too soon. And Japan doesn't have enough votes behind it. NZ will get the SANZAR and the British Isles votes for sure.

No offence to our Kiwi brethren, but I don't think they can take the votes of the British isles for granted

... the "home unions" are steadily becoming an entirely more commercially minded bunch, and I suspect they will be very attracted to the idea of tapping into the very large Japanese market, with massive stadia, an excitable local audience, very strong commercial sponsorship, and solid organisational experience from the Fifa world cup. It all makes for a strong logical choice to go to Japan ... allied with the attraction of "new horizons" plus the reluctance to give the perenial favourites (the ABs) the added advantage of home turf.

My money would be on Japan getting a hold on the world cup this time round

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I wouldn’t be too sure on the English vote, but i would suspect votes from Scotland, Wales and Ireland as well as Australia. Another thing we over Japan is the north - South Hemispherical swap. 2007 is being held in the north so traditionally 2011 should be held in the South. I would prefer if Japan got 2015, NZ has been waiting too long for the World Cup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have have to agree with Mick about the "loyalty" issue when it comes to votes.  

Japan does have a good sized "Cheque Book" and could easily entice the Pacific Island nations with player incentives to work and play in Japan.  

Even here in NZ, finance anylists say investing in Japan for the '11 RWC is a solid one as they simply have the vast stadia to host the event.

If New Zealand wasn't bidding for 2011, I myself would be supporting Japan, and even if we lose to Japan I wouldn't be crying about it.  There is always 2015!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gotta admit I'm split on this...I'm sure that NZ and the All Blacks would make the RWC 2011 edition great, and there are plenty of reasons why the tournament should go to Aoteoroa. However I think that the IRB must look to the future of the game and the traditional domination of the sport by the Northern hemisphere 6 nations and the southern hemisphere tri-nations has to be challenged. And that's why I would think Japan's bid could be more important (and forget South Africa...how can they do the 2010 World Cup, 2014 Commonwealth Games and a 2011 RWC with the demands expected from such huge events?) for the future of rugby and the RWC. I don't want to rely on the same arguments that were used when Beijing bid for 2000 & 2008, but the IRB must recognise that rugby needs new territories if it wants to grow. FIFA saw this with the 94 and 02 World Cups, and again without disparaging NZ capability for 2011 the IRB has got to think about the game's international future.

Has anyone got details on the voting process re the RWC? I would assume that there are delegates from all unions (e.g. ARU) with full international grading, so do they cast a vote as in the IOC and FIFA. Or does it go to a board decision?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I understand it, it's a board-level decision of the executive council of the International Rugby Board, which comprises the eight foundations Unions each with two seats - Scotland, Ireland, Wales, England, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and France. Argentina, Canada, Italy and Japan each have one seat on the Council as does FIRA-AER (whoever they are, I just took this off the IRB site).

So the decision's pretty similar to how FIFA choose their WC hosts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As far as I understand it, it's a board-level decision of the executive council of the International Rugby Board, which comprises the eight foundations Unions each with two seats - Scotland, Ireland, Wales, England, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and France. Argentina, Canada, Italy and Japan each have one seat on the Council as does FIRA-AER (whoever they are, I just took this off the IRB site).

So the decision's pretty similar to how FIFA choose their WC hosts.

Hmmm...sounds like the vested interests of the traditional powers will be making the decision. Probably more sensible but somehow I would prefer the IRB to open the decision up to more delegates. For example, why not make it that if your country's union team makes the RWC your union has a voting delegate's post on the decision process for the next RWC process. So, you would have the likes of USA, Georgia, Uruguay, Namibia, Fiji, Tonga etc etc getting a voice in how rugby hopefully expands, plus it'd be an organisational incentive for that country's union to be more professional.

In light of the IRB being the ones who'll make the decision I can see NZ getting the RWC for 2011, no matter how much money etc they may pump into the bid or to other unions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
many in NZ believe that with the rate that the Rugby World Cup is growing, 2011 is NZ's last chance of hosting a world cup without being a sub-host to Australia so I fare the 2015 might be too late for us . I know Scotland is eyeing up to host 2015 but if Japan didn’t get 2011 I have no doubt that they will bid for and get the 2015 World Cup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some tough talk from Japan:

by Hidenori Fukuo

TOKYO, May 17 (AFP) - The 2011 Rugby World Cup should be held outside the Commonwealth to help make the sport go truly global, the former prime minister leading the bid of rugby minnows Japan said Tuesday.

``Rugby became popular centering on Britain and related countries. It's now spread over Asia, South and Central America to become a global sport event,'' bid committee president Yoshiro Mori said.

The former Japanese leader, who at age 67 still enjoys the occasional game of rugby, deplored that Europe had a ``tyrannical'' influence in deciding where to hold the World Cup but urged them to head outside the usual suspects.

``It's only recently that countries from around the world, or Asia, have competed in one event, because rugby has turned into a competition between two teams, like England against Wales and England against Ireland,'' he said.

``That is the reason why the International Olympic Committee hasn't included it in the Olympic Games. And rugby is now one of the five candidates to be included in the Olympics.''

``To make it a more global sport, you must expand it over other countries rather than restricting (the World Cup) within the Commonwealth countries.

``It is the biggest reason why it would be better for Japan to host the World Cup in 2011,'' said Mori, who served as premier for a year up to April  2001.

Japan are bidding for the 2011 event despite never reaching the knock-out round in the last five World Cups, winning just one game out of 16.

They are up against rugby union superpowers New Zealand and South Africa.

New Zealand, who hosted the inaugural 1987 World Cup, would prefer to stage the 2011 event on their own but have lined up a secondary option to co-host with Japan despite the huge distance between the two countries.

...

Hong Kong, who have a strong track record of hosting rugby events, also have expressed their interest in staging part of the 2011 World Cup with Japan.

The International Rugby Board (IRB) will decide the host country in November.

England, Ireland, Scotland, Wales, France, Australia, New Zealand and South America have two voting rights each among 24 IRB directors who will decide the host country.

``Europe is tyrannical,'' Mori said.

``Japan, Italy, Argentina, Canada and regions from Europe, Asia, Africa and Oceania have one each. It means, for instance, South Africa have three voting rights,'' said Mori.

``But if the directors have a good reason to expand rugby more into Asia and the world, I believe they will support our bid,'' Mori added.

...

AFP

I don't know if it's a good idea to call the people you must convince to award you the tournament "tyrannical".

I also didn't know that NZ still had a "Plan B" to co-host with Japan if they lost the right to host outright.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Some tough talk from Japan:
by Hidenori Fukuo

TOKYO, May 17 (AFP) - The 2011 Rugby World Cup should be held outside the Commonwealth to help make the sport go truly global, the former prime minister leading the bid of rugby minnows Japan said Tuesday.

``Rugby became popular centering on Britain and related countries. It's now spread over Asia, South and Central America to become a global sport event,'' bid committee president Yoshiro Mori said.

The former Japanese leader, who at age 67 still enjoys the occasional game of rugby, deplored that Europe had a ``tyrannical'' influence in deciding where to hold the World Cup but urged them to head outside the usual suspects.

``It's only recently that countries from around the world, or Asia, have competed in one event, because rugby has turned into a competition between two teams, like England against Wales and England against Ireland,'' he said.

``That is the reason why the International Olympic Committee hasn't included it in the Olympic Games. And rugby is now one of the five candidates to be included in the Olympics.''

``To make it a more global sport, you must expand it over other countries rather than restricting (the World Cup) within the Commonwealth countries.

``It is the biggest reason why it would be better for Japan to host the World Cup in 2011,'' said Mori, who served as premier for a year up to April  2001.

Japan are bidding for the 2011 event despite never reaching the knock-out round in the last five World Cups, winning just one game out of 16.

They are up against rugby union superpowers New Zealand and South Africa.

New Zealand, who hosted the inaugural 1987 World Cup, would prefer to stage the 2011 event on their own but have lined up a secondary option to co-host with Japan despite the huge distance between the two countries.

...

Hong Kong, who have a strong track record of hosting rugby events, also have expressed their interest in staging part of the 2011 World Cup with Japan.

The International Rugby Board (IRB) will decide the host country in November.

England, Ireland, Scotland, Wales, France, Australia, New Zealand and South America have two voting rights each among 24 IRB directors who will decide the host country.

``Europe is tyrannical,'' Mori said.

``Japan, Italy, Argentina, Canada and regions from Europe, Asia, Africa and Oceania have one each. It means, for instance, South Africa have three voting rights,'' said Mori.

``But if the directors have a good reason to expand rugby more into Asia and the world, I believe they will support our bid,'' Mori added.

...

AFP

I don't know if it's a good idea to call the people you must convince to award you the tournament "tyrannical".

I also didn't know that NZ still had a "Plan B" to co-host with Japan if they lost the right to host outright.

Was an earlier plan, but I don't think so now.

Still, Japan does have a point to it's argument...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The guys right, and to win he does need to challenge the status quo of a 4-year tour of the commonwealth (except that 2007 is in France!). But "tyrannical" is a pretty strong word to use .... perhaps something subtle got lost in the translation

For Japan, I think the stronger argument would be in emphasising the positive aspects of a moving the RWC outside the existing powers in terms of extending the global appeal of the sport (aka "commercial ties", "TV rights", etc) and pushing for entry into the olympics (ie "give us the RWC and we'll make sure that the Japanese IOC members vote accordingly")

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was an interesting article in a NZ newspaper today about the 10 thing NZ need to accomplish with the 2005 British and Irish Lions Tour.

Making sure there is no trouble between rival fans.

Probably seems ridiculous to suggest such a notion as rugby has prided itself on its family culture and gloated that it doesn't need to segregate rival fans.

But there is no room for complacency. Emotions will run high during the tour and the beer will be flowing. Those who regularly attend Six Nations matches will tell you how the banter is as good as ever but how a tiny minority have introduced a poisonous undercurrent.

It really doesn't take much for a bit of good-natured horseplay to turn into an ugly scene. The World Cup bid is presenting New Zealand as the spiritual home of rugby and claiming the country provides the ultimate experience for spectators. The IRB may not think so if there is a bit of bother between rival fans.

Getting everyone in and out of Eden Park.

A revamped Eden Park will be New Zealand's showpiece ground if it wins the hosting rights for the 2011 World Cup. But, as the Herald on Sunday revealed in October last year, the Kingsland railway station next to the ground will be closed, leaving 20,000 plus British fans with a bit of a headache as to exactly how they will get to the final two games.

There is barely any parking at the stadium, the roads around Eden Park are notorious bottle necks and, with most Lions fans based in the CBD, it will be too farto walk.

Compare the logistic nightmare of Eden Park with Telstra Stadium in Sydney, where thousands of free trains whisk fans in and out in a flash and the remainder take advantage of the thousands of carparks which surround the stadium.

Access to Japan's major stadiums is even better, as the thousands of fans who went to the 2002 soccer World Cup will testify.

Selling out every game.

With New Zealand selling itself as the spiritual home of rugby it won't look too good if there are empty seats during the biggest sporting event to ever be hosted in this country.

For all the hype, it is a source of amazement there are still thousands of tickets available for provincial games. If locals aren't buying tickets to watch their own team, what chance is there of them paying to watch Namibia play Romania?

Successfully accommodating the 200-plus media following the tour.

Last year when England were here, Observer rugby writer Eddie Butler wrote at length about the inadequacies of Carisbrook. While his column may have been a disservice to Observer readers who probably didn't give two hoots what poor Eddie had to endure in the line of duty, the NZRU can't afford to have negative publicity about antiquated facilities.

If stadiums are so bad that journalists feel compelled to write about that rather than the game, it's hardly a ringing endorsement for New Zealand's bid.

Sending the Barmy Army home happy.

Hosting more than 20,000 British fans will present New Zealand with a number of logistic difficulties. Accommodation in every provincial town and the three test cities will be pushed to the limit. Transport links into New Zealand as well as within New Zealand will also be severely tested.

The majority of fans will also be looking for a more conventional tourist experience which means the whole service economy will be under pressure to deliver.

Present a united front between NZRU, Government and major corporations.

The IRB needs to be convinced the Government and corporate New Zealand is fully supportive of the World Cup bid. Ministers therefore need to be visible during the tour, acknowledge it is happening and make the right noises about its importance to the New Zealand people and economy.

Prove the All Blacks are the people's team.

The All Blacks remain the world's favourite rugby team and arguably the only one with global appeal. Their public image is hugely important and, while the IRB would never interfere, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out the game's governing body wants to see the team have a close relationship not just with New Zealanders but the rest of the rugby world.

Under Graham Henry the All Blacks have improved accessibility and built a closer bond with the paying public. That good work needs to continue as the IRB wants the host side to be the face of the game.

Ensure there is enough beer at every host venue.

This is a serious point as during the 2001 Lions tour in Australia, the fans drank Sydney dry.

That's a hard one for any host to live down and a mistake the Barmy Army have been at pains to avoid this time.

Winning the test series.  

This is out of the NZRU's control but it would do wonders in cementing the All Blacks' position as the number one ranked side. Although World Cup bids will be evaluated on a host of criteria that have little to do with rugby, it won't do any harm to have the All Blacks sit as world leaders while the decision is being made.

He makes a lot of good points, with the IRB coming out to review NZ during the 2005 Lions tour its going to either make for brake our bid.

I was reading another article it made a very good point in favour of the NZ bid. The ICC gave the 2007 Cricket World Cup to the West Indies because it is a world power in the sport and has a long history in cricket. You could liken this to NZ’s bid and hopefully the IRB might feel the same way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something that IS a serious issue is Eden Park.

Even nzolympic will agree that the proposed temporary large stand to take the ground up to 55k is ugly at best.

This is because of an annoying law that I hope no other country ever puts into it's statute books, the Resource Management Act.

Basically it allows the minority to rule over the popular majority.  In this case a long and expensive process of getting everyones approval to allow the old Number One stand and Panasonic stand to be rebuilt would cost the NZRU and, rather ironically the NZ Government,  millions of dollars in legal fees.  If this was allowed then NZ would have a 60k pax facility, albeit a second choice, as even NZ minister for sports, Trevor Mallard said a new National Stadium would cost around 200-300 million $NZ.  They would really have to get it right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i know rugby is important to NZ but rugby needs to expaned, there is only one truly good nation that is not a member of the commonwealth or once controlled by the Brits. That of course being France.

if NZ were to host, they should be back to back new nations hosting ei Japan, Argentina, maybe a combined bid from Canada and the USA especially if it were New England/Maritimes, the tradional areas of rugby in North America.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i know rugby is important to NZ but rugby needs to expaned, there is only one truly good nation that is not a member of the commonwealth or once controlled by the Brits. That of course being France.

if NZ were to host, they should be back to back new nations hosting ei Japan, Argentina, maybe a combined bid from Canada and the USA especially if it were New England/Maritimes, the tradional areas of rugby in North America.

I cant see a Rugby World Cup going to Canada or United States anytime soon. It’s all good to say Rugby should become a more global sport (and it hope it does) but you have to be realistic. Countries where rugby is the premier or popular like NZ, Australia and Britain are going to pull far larger crowds than countries where rugby has a very small following.

Countries I can see hosting in the future:

New Zealand – The World Cup has to eventually come back to NZ whether it be with Australia or on our own, we deserve a Rugby World Cup final. I believe if it doesn’t happen now it has to happen sometime in the future because the NZ public is just going to get more starved of the world cup. Out of all the rugby world powers, NZ is the only one that hasn’t hosted a world cup match in the last 20 years.    

Scotland – Is eyeing up 2015 which does annoy me. Out of the last 5 world cups, Scotland has hosted matches in 3 of them.

Japan – Definitely will host, if not in 2011, then defiantly 2015 or 2019. Has a semi-strong rugby following, has the financing and infrastructure after hosting 2002 FIFA World Cup.

South Africa – Will most likely host sometime in the future but might have to put plans on hold with hosting 2010 FIFA World Cup and plans to bid for 2014 CWG and 2020 Olympic Games.

Argentina – A long shot but could work. I don’t think it would have too much appeal to the IRB but you never know. I think Argentina is campaigning to get pool matches if South Africa.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scotland – Is eyeing up 2015 which does annoy me. Out of the last 5 world cups, Scotland has hosted matches in 3 of them.

I agree with you on this. Well, not so much on Scotland in particular (I've mentioned here before I'd like to see a Celtic World Cup, with Ireland, Scotland, maybe Wales, but definitely NOT England), but it's getting a bit ridiculous that every second tournament goes to the Home Nations, they share it amongst themselves, and only the final is ever moved to somehow make it an "English" or a "Welsh" WC. Even the French tournament in 2007 is doing it (at least they're by-passing England). I would have thought that France 2007, if they weren't going to host it solely on their own, should have been better shared with Italy.

I also agree with you on the non-traditional but mid-range Rugby powers as potential hosts _ Japan and Argentina are the standouts. But I could see Canada doing it eventually, probably in conjunction with the USA.  Canada does, after all, have a seat on the IRB executive board, and money and profile-wise, I'm sure the IRB would love to see the profile of the game lifted in the USA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cant see a Rugby World Cup going to Canada or United States anytime soon. It’s all good to say Rugby should become a more global sport (and it hope it does) but you have to be realistic. Countries where rugby is the premier or popular like NZ, Australia and Britain are going to pull far larger crowds than countries where rugby has a very small following.

Rugby is played at almost every single high school in Ontario and the Maritimes, it is an extremely popular sport at the grass roots level in these areas. Most school boards in these areas send one of the senior teams to Ireland, Wales, Scotland or England almost every year to play and see a six nations game during spring break. (well if they haven't sold there ticket to an eager fan for about 600 pounds i believe)

i could diffinatly see sellouts from any game involving Canada, Scotland, England, Wales, and Ireland, France if played in Quebec, Italy if in Toronto, and a lot of people would line up to see the souths big powers in South Africa, New Zealand and Australia.

I could see a joint bid winning in for 2015 or 2019, but more likely i could see either Canada or the USA hosting in one of 2023, 2027 or 2031. After a few nations get a crack (NZ, SA, Japan)

PS it should be noted that at my school which is quiet low on the school spirit scale, there are about 500 people to football games, non to hockey games, but about 3,000 per rugby match

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:) Canada will host but not untill the 20's if the time line that is predicted by GBers here is anything to go by.  Its a pity that the "RFU" in London dosen't allow a Seven Nations tornament with Canada included.  

So what if Canada gets beaten to a pulp by the top three for the first few years, eventually they will start winning some and that all Canada needs to grow.

As for New Zealand, this, IMO, is the last (and first) time we will ever have a chance to sole host.  If we fail to Japan, then 2015 will be capiable but with Australia as joint host.  It's sad but true.

New Zealand needs to change it's "can't do it" attitude and parocial loyalties to their own provincial grounds and concentrate on building up two very big grounds (Eden and Jade) with at least 60k pax seating and two mid-sizers at around 45k (Waikato and Carisbrooke).  Notice how the two latter grounds are within a respectible driving distance from the major grounds.  This would leave Wellington as the fifth ground and possible indoor stadia with a retractible roof.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This would leave Wellington as the fifth ground and possible indoor stadia with a retractible roof.

why a retractable roof? I doubt wellington is going to get a new stadium in a looooooooooong time with out westpac only being 5 years old.

But yeah, i do agree with you on the fact that we need to shed this "we cant host anything" attitude, especially by the media.

I actually think NZ would be in a better position for the 2015 world cup. With 2007 being held in France and if 2011 goes to Japan, that’s two consecutive world cups the northern hemisphere so the IRB would hopefully be look to 2015 to be in the south.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This would leave Wellington as the fifth ground and possible indoor stadia with a retractible roof.

why a retractable roof? I doubt wellington is going to get a new stadium in a looooooooooong time with out westpac only being 5 years old.

:oops: ...Sorry, I was refering to the Cake Tin when I meant Wellington.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i would love new zealand to win the right to host the 2011 rugby world cup but i personally think that japan will win soely because they havent hosted the games before and the IRB will want to spread the game to make it a more global sport

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...