Jump to content

Archived

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

Alexjc

2011 Rugby World Cup

Recommended Posts

Any official 2011 websites yet or links to candidate info?  Seems abit odd that there isnt a big web presence - especially from the Japanese bid...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The NZ website asks for a password and username yet there is nowhere to request or sign up for one... sheesh.  And the Japanese one has no English site yet.  However the SA site looks promising - they promise to upload the bid book once available...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The NZ website asks for a password and username yet there is nowhere to request or sign up for one... sheesh.  And the Japanese one has no English site yet.  However the SA site looks promising - they promise to upload the bid book once available...

I emailed the NZRU asking when the NZ site will be open to the public; they told me when the IRB come out to inspect NZ during the lions tour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hmmm, still no access to the NZ site, and no English page on the Japanese site.  SA are yet to publish any of their bid book, even though they promised it by 'Early June' - and it will not be early June after the next couple of days...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry to keep posting articles but i think this one really does some up what a world in NZ is about.

UK Telegraph

World Cup at home in land of plenty

By Mick Cleary

(Filed: 14/06/2005)

They want you to like them. Or like their country. And their rugby. New Zealanders have no need to get twitchy. They are not as overt in their desire to be loved as their cousins across the Tasman. Australians have long suffered from a cultural cringe, that urge to impress on you that they are not all a bunch of dingo-loving, Vegemite-munching rednecks.

And so they are not. They haven't been for a long time. Two big sporting events, the Sydney Olympic Games and the 2003 Rugby World Cup, soothed so many of those anxieties.

New Zealanders have always been more at ease with their own company. They don't need a reassuring pat on the head. Well, they didn't.

You sense, though, that they could do with a shoulder-hugging boost right now as the vetting process for the 2011 Rugby World Cup approaches the final lap. They want to know where they stand in the pecking order. Damn it, they want to know if they are going to win it ahead of Japan and South Africa.

Japan can offer a sense of the exotic, a sense of difference and shedloads of money. Holding the World Cup there would bring novelty value to a conservative sport and open up new frontiers for the game.

It could also backfire spectacularly with travelling fans being deterred by sky-high prices, the language difficulties and the lack of decent ale. (Mind you, that last complaint holds true for the other two bidders. Oh, for my Harveys Best Bitter of far away.)

South Africa has been this way before. Spectacularly so. The 1995 Rugby World Cup, with its Nelson Mandela resonance, the only man on the planet who could imbue the wearing of a rugby shirt with such significance, was a compelling event from first to last.

And what might little New Zealand offer? Where is their big, Ellis Park cathedral-like backdrop, their Millennium Stadium with closing roof, their soaring Stade de France? They haven't even got a Lansdowne Road. Dilapidated and due for the wrecking-ball, the Dublin ruin still manages to host close to 50,000.

The best New Zealand have in their portfolio is Eden Park in Auckland, a venue that also stages international cricket. Eden Park, first used back in 1921, has undergone renovation in recent years yet can still only summon 45,000 to the ball.

The other Test match venues also cannot pack them in the way they do in Europe. The Jade Stadium in Christchurch, where the first Test will take place in 11 days' time, holds 35,700, while the Westpac in Wellington, the venue for the second Test on July 2, can take only 37,200.

There is no big, show-off stadium in this land of plenty in so many things except people. There's no point building seats for those who might come only once every 12 years.

Should that count against New Zealand when it comes to deciding who should win the right to stage the seventh World Cup? No, it should not. All the evidence of the past fortnight suggests that New Zealand would do an admirable job. It may not have girders and terracing, but it can offer so much else.

The great sporting events, such as the Tour de France or the best of the Olympic Games, are embedded in a community. The worst Olympics in recent memory, Atlanta in 1996, was divorced from any meaningful context except the grubby quest for the dollar.

Rugby in New Zealand is part of their way of life. They are not as daft about it as some people make out: they are too reserved a race for that. But they have embraced the Lions, cherished their presence and provided a vibrant backdrop.

New Zealand may not do gigantism but it does do compact and perfectly formed. All three Lions matches so far have been well staged in the sort of stadiums that barely exist in the United Kingdom. They hold about 30-40,000 and have been full, no mean feat when the population in places such as Rotorua and New Plymouth is not much more than 50,000. Each game has been in touch with its roots. The pre-match entertainment has been tasteful and evocative.

Money is the driver for Rugby World Cups as they look to secure the funds that underpin the game. Fine. But there are times when you need to consider a sport's soul as well as its bank balance. And that is where New Zealand scores heavily. The locals can be partisan. That passion should be encouraged. Tribalism is good. There are thousands of Brits and Irish here trading songs and good-natured insults.

The infrastructure may creak with pressure on hotels, transport and tickets for the big games. But love of rugby surpasses those considerations. This Lions tour is already proving that New Zealand has what it takes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here Here!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OK - I have emailed both the Japanese and SA bidders - the SA site will have the bid book up in about 2 weeks, and the English Japanese site will be active next month.  The NZ Rugby 'Glitterati' are still basking in a tour well-done, so no news on thier site.  Should be interesting...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OK - I have emailed both the Japanese and SA bidders - the SA site will have the bid book up in about 2 weeks, and the English Japanese site will be active next month.  The NZ Rugby 'Glitterati' are still basking in a tour well-done, so no news on thier site.  Should be interesting...

I know it has been mentioned, but when is the 2011 Rugby World Cup host nation decision?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OK - I have emailed both the Japanese and SA bidders - the SA site will have the bid book up in about 2 weeks, and the English Japanese site will be active next month.  The NZ Rugby 'Glitterati' are still basking in a tour well-done, so no news on thier site.  Should be interesting...

I know it has been mentioned, but when is the 2011 Rugby World Cup host nation decision?

not sure.. check out the irb wedsite www.IRB.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New Zealand is a great host but a rugby world cup still is no joke and new zealand need much work... japan for now is nor ready in terms of the lack of rugby culture there its just not best for rugby, what is best IMO is south africa after hosting the soccer world cup, things would be in place, its not as if SA will have one day between the SWC and RWC to prepare, stadia will be in place......

Soccer City 95,000 (wont be neccessary to use)

kings Park (60,000)

Newlands (50,000)

Ellis Park (70,000)

and the new stadiums such as port elizabeth stadium (50,000)

there will also be a second 40,00 stadium in cape town which will be used in 2010, so at this moment although i think 2011 is a bit greedy of south africa my home country, there are no other viable options IMO

StadiuminGamesmode.jpg

100.jpg

100.jpg

100.jpg

100.jpg

100.jpg

100.jpg

even the training venues would be of stellar quality and capacity, cape town would have a 40,00 seater training venue in athlone stadium, an 18,000 training venue in greenpoint stadium and a few others

joburg has soccer city 95,000 which is mainly for soccer, ellis park and the joburg athletics stadium of 25,000, as well as some others....

SO i think 2011 should go to SOUTH africa and 2015 should go to either new zealand if they are ready, or england or a break through nation such as japan.....i just think that will be best for rugby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
New Zealand is a great host but a rugby world cup still is no joke and new zealand need much work... japan for now is nor ready in terms of the lack of rugby culture there its just not best for rugby, what is best IMO is south africa after hosting the soccer world cup, things would be in place, its not as if SA will have one day between the SWC and RWC to prepare, stadia will be in place......

Soccer City 95,000 (wont be neccessary to use)

kings Park (60,000)

Newlands (50,000)

Ellis Park (70,000)

and the new stadiums such as port elizabeth stadium (50,000)

there will also be a second 40,00 stadium in cape town which will be used in 2010, so at this moment although i think 2011 is a bit greedy of south africa my home country, there are no other viable options IMO

100.jpg

100.jpg

100.jpg

100.jpg

100.jpg

100.jpg

100.jpg

even the training venues would be of stellar quality and capacity, cape town would have a 40,00 seater training venue in athlone stadium, an 18,000 training venue in greenpoint stadium and a few others

joburg has soccer city 95,000 which is mainly for soccer, ellis park and the joburg athletics stadium of 25,000, as well as some others....

SO i think 2011 should go to SOUTH africa and 2015 should go to either new zealand if they are ready, or england or a break through nation such as japan.....i just think that will be best for rugby

....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don’t you think this is going to really strain the South African Economy? I mean South Africa isn’t really a rich nation and they are hosting the 2010 World Cup and want the 2011 Rugby World Cup, 2014-2018 Commonwealth Games, 2010 Gay Games and 2020 Olympic Games? Isn’t that a bit unfair on the millions living in poverty in South Africa?

But if NZ doesn’t host 2011 I hope it’s South Africa but 2011 is NZ’s only chance, the NZRU have said that they wont bid for 2015 because they believe it competition will have completely out grown NZ by then and they’re probably right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
south africa is no longer bidding for the 2014 CWG, i would certainly not cry of south africa lost the rugby world cup bid but for now i believe it is the best alternative in this situation...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
south africa is no longer bidding for the 2014 CWG, i would certainly not cry of south africa lost the rugby world cup bid but for now i believe it is the best alternative in this situation...

Best choice in the current situation? No way.

Now that France is hositng, the RWC is truely ready to move out of the "Big" four nations (Australia, New Zealand, England, South Africa)... There are plenty of new possible hosts now and seeing as New Zealand has wated the longest out of the larger four nations, i believe it, and Japan should be easily rewarded the next RWC.

With the Soccer World Cup, Commonwealth Games and Olympics all in South Africas sight, there is no way the country is going to take on a Rugby World Cup... Not evn larger nations such as England are willing to take on all of these (ie; London 2012, Manchester 2002, Rugby World Cup 1999)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But if NZ doesn’t host 2011 I hope it’s South Africa but 2011 is NZ’s only chance, the NZRU have said that they wont bid for 2015 because they believe it competition will have completely out grown NZ by then and they’re probably right.

I don't really see what they're worried about with the notion that the RWC would get bigger. Australia 2005 showed it could be staged with a lot of matches going to small regional centres like Gosford and Townsville. And it really, really doubt they would increase the number of teams _ they're already stretching it about as far as tbhey can go with the number of teams they have so far _ one of the big criticisms of the last tournament was the large number of lopsided matches between Rugby powers and minnows. At more teams, and that distortion would be evenn more pronounced. As such a Rugby-mad nation, I can't see NZ ever outgrowing the desire and the ability to host a RWC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't really see what they're worried about with the notion that the RWC would get bigger. Australia 2005 showed it could be staged with a lot of matches going to small regional centres like Gosford and Townsville. And it really, really doubt they would increase the number of teams _ they're already stretching it about as far as tbhey can go with the number of teams they have so far _ one of the big criticisms of the last tournament was the large number of lopsided matches between Rugby powers and minnows. At more teams, and that distortion would be evenn more pronounced. As such a Rugby-mad nation, I can't see NZ ever outgrowing the desire and the ability to host a RWC.

Well that’s exactly how I feel about it but the NZRU has it in there minds that 2015 will be too big. Even that fact that Scotland (a country not much bigger than NZ) is eyeing up 2015 proves that theory wrong. But we all know New Zealanders have no foresight when it comes to things like this. I wish we could just get some Australians to run the bid, people who know what they are doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well i stand by my previous opinion that its not yet time to branch out to japan, the issues i have with new zealand are simply its organizational capacity and infrastructural capacity to host such an event, but part of me knows that is definitely possible to host teh rugby world cup in new zealand, the new zealand bid if i am correct wanted to co host with japan, i think that did more harm than good in terms of the credibility of a new zealand bid but IMO is not a totally horrible idea,you would get the best of both worlds, reaching new frontiers with japans capability and infrastructure to host with new zealands passion, legacy and history in rugby....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think the world cup is going to Japan, i just have that feeling

i hope not, New Zealand would be a way better host

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An artical in the NZ Herald (04 July) mentioned that Japan is finding corprate sponsorship for their '11 bid hard to come by at the moment.  IMO Japan is not the free to burn monied nation everyone makes it out to be.

It is a country that is still reforming it's economy after years of stag-flatition, and, surprisingly, didn't get a lot of post FIFA WC benifits it was expecting.

The biggest stumbling block for NZ will be the Resource Management Act.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Japan slips in Rugby World Cup race

03 July 2005  

By GREG FORD

New Zealand's odds of landing the 2011 Rugby World Cup have shortened after the surprising news Japan's state-backed bid does not contain a huge financial carrot.

Japan, South Africa and New Zealand are the contenders to host the tournament with the International Rugby Board to make its decision in November.

It has been feared Japan's bid would blow its rivals out of the water with a massive financial guarantee, but this has not happened.

IRB chief executive Mike Miller told the Sunday Star-Times there was very little financially between the three bids.

"In terms of ability to host, commercial programmes and experience for players and fans alike there is not a lot between the three," he said.

"It is going to be a very difficult decision because there are some huge pros to each of the three and some minuses to each of the three.

"At this stage I don't know how we are going to make a decision."

AdvertisementAdvertisementNZRU chairman Jock Hobbs greeted the news with glee, saying its bid has gone from strength to strength in recent weeks.

"We're pleased with the progress we have made since submitting our bid," he said.

"We don't want to get ahead of ourselves but we knew the financial component of the bid would be hugely important and the fact we can guarantee the tournament fee (paid to the IRB) makes us competitive."

IRB cup reviewers have visited Japan to analyse its bid and New Zealand is next on the list at the end of the Lions tour.

Intense lobbying of IRB delegates has already started. Many of the key decision-makers met in Wellington this week. Their wives and partners were wined and dined by the union which flew them by helicopter to the Wairarapa for lunch on Friday.

Hobbs said the Lions tour had given New Zealand an ideal chance to show it could host large rugby events. "Everything has gone smoothly so far and that's a real positive for our bid. We always knew if we could get this right it would help our chances."

Stuff.co.nz]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NZ is starting to feel a lot more confident about our bid but I just hope were not being built up to be knocked down, if we don’t get 2011 we will never host the world cup solo.

Roaring for the 2011 Rugby World Cup

09 July 2005  

The success of the Lions tour to New Zealand is seen as an important gauge of this country's chances of hosting the 2011 Rugby World Cup. Toby Robson investigates.

Hailed across the board as a resounding success, the British and Irish Lions tour has given New Zealand's 2011 Rugby World Cup bid a major boost.

The All Blacks' on-field success - heading into tonight's third and final test in Auckland - has been emphatic, but the rugby-mad nation's off-field performance may yet bring an even bigger victory for the New Zealand Rugby Union.

With the International Rugby Board watching, New Zealand has provided what neither of its bidding rivals, cash-rich Japan or broadcaster-friendly South Africa, can - tangible proof it can absorb all the rugby world has to throw at it, and more.

"There's no doubt that by showcasing to people the country's ability to cope with this number of visitors and how we can present the games will have helped our cause," NZRU chief executive Chris Moller said this week.

"I would say 99 per cent of this tour has gone outstandingly well."

Wellington's Westpac Stadium chief executive David Gray heralds the midweek-weekend double in the capital as "the perfect dry run for the World Cup".

AdvertisementAdvertisementIndeed, there is no doubt the tour has been an off-field success, with fans, media, players and sponsors trumpeting its success.

But amid the plethora of reasons why New Zealand should host its first Rugby World Cup since 1987 there are several nagging doubts.

Japan looms largest with its massive financial clout, population and dogged determination to promote rugby despite dismal international results.

And top of the naysayers' lists is New Zealand's lack of of a national stadium.

In 2003, Sydney's 83,000-seat Telstra Stadium was packed for the semifinals and final. In 2007 Paris will provide the 80,000-seat Stade de France.

Telstra Stadium provided the Australian Rugby Union with the lion's share of the nearly $200 million made through ticket sales and, so the argument goes, Auckland's 60,000-seat Eden Park simply won't generate the cash.

But Moller this week exploded what he says has become a "myth".

"We've been making it clear that we don't think that's the major obstacle. Sure, it's a bit of a discussion, but we have made it clear that with the Government we will pay the hosting fee."

Moller says the size of the finals venue is largely irrelevant to the IRB, which collects commercial revenue generated by the tournament.

"We get the revenue from the ticket prices and out of it we have to pay the hosting fee. Sure, the IRB want to see full stadiums and good facilities, but the size of the stadium is relatively minor.

"The stadium we are talking about is 60,000 at Eden Park, that's 10,000 less than other finals venues, but that counts against the NZRU and the Government, not the IRB."

Moller said the challenge was to make the tournament commercially attractive to broadcasters and major international sponsors.

The NZRU will wait with bated breath on European viewing numbers for the Lions tour, figures Moller says could hold some sway with the IRB.

"Sixty per cent of revenue from any sport comes from broadcasting. The next big one comes from sponsorship and the next one, third in line at least, is ticket prices and attendance.

"It's very misunderstood. I described it as a myth the other day. I can understand it because you look at the people at the game and the amount they have paid to get in, but that's only a small part."

Four million Kiwis will be hoping Moller is right, and that at least 13 of the 24 members of the IRB council agree when they meet in November.

And already there are signs that the people that count have been swayed by New Zealand's passionate play on rugby tradition, enhanced by some well-timed hospitality in Wellington this month.

Rugby columnist Spiro Zavos this month pointed out the IRB's apparent snub of Japan's delegation to Dublin recently.

"What happened when the NZRU presented its bid documents?

"The New Zealanders were greeted at Dublin by a front row of IRB bosses eager to gladhand them.

"And where will many of the IRB bosses be over the next month or so? In New Zealand, on tour with the British and Irish Lions."

The men in charge of New Zealand's biggest stadiums are also convinced they have passed an important test during the tour.

Eden Park Trust Board chief executive John Alexander says the stadium successfully negotiated its two biggest hurdles - traffic and transport - when the Lions played Auckland on Tuesday night.

As a result he's beaming with confidence ahead of tonight's third test.

"We are busing in 20,000 people, 11,000 are coming by train and, when taxis and shuttles are added to the mix, two-thirds of the crowd will have travelled by public transport.

"We will have moved a small town by the end of the night and that is quite incredible."

Alexander said Eden Park had successfully merged its traffic management with the public system for the first time and could now "tweak" its plans for an even bigger event such as the World Cup.

In Wellington, Gray was equally as chuffed with an incident-free event.

"We've proved beyond any doubt that we would not have a problem with a World Cup," he said.

"I think we have such a long lead time and have demonstrated with the Lions tour how much can be done if that time is used well.

"We had no problems at all. You would not have known anything was different to a normal test match."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:) Yes NZ must not get that "Paris" feeling when the final decision is made in November.  Just because of the Lions tour failing to live up to expectations, we must remain humble as we still have a battle hardened Tri-Nations sides to play and the return tour later this year.

IMO Japan is STILL a major threat to NZ hosting what will probibly be it's first and last sole hosting of this event.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dammit - and still the websites have nothing...  NZ's is still unaccessible, Japans is still in gibberish (OK, 'Japanese' if you insist) and Sth Africa's hasnt been updated in months.  They are testing my interest/patience right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...