• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

RWC 2023 Qualifying & Miscellany

chibimatty

Jimmy Flynn (14)
Ah well, must admit, was hoping for a double announcement of South Africa 2023, then Ireland 2027. Give the Irish ten years to prepare stadia and build the event even further.
 

Omar Comin'

Chilla Wilson (44)
I'd have loved it to be in Ireland but I think NZ in 2011 may be the last time a small country hosts it outright. They just can't compete economically. Ireland may have a better chance in future with a combined Celtic bid.

I think Australia should now bid for 2027. France 2023 means 3 in a row in the Northern Hemisphere so we'd probably have a pretty good chance.
 

waiopehu oldboy

Phil Waugh (73)
^^^^^^ I strongly suspect SA will be the next SH host. 2027 would give them ten years to sort out their issues & leave enough time to develop a bail-out option if they can't (said bail-out option would need to be promised they're the next host should SA deliver).
 

Brumby Runner

Tim Horan (67)
Why should SA be given that sort of preferred treatment? Have any other bidders in the history of RWC had a guaranteed backup if they failed to perform?
 

Strewthcobber

Mark Ella (57)
Here's the first and final round votes courtesy of @bbcmarksimpson
400677d241969b773501c3f466d7c4ea.jpg


Sent from my D5833 using Tapatalk
 
T

TOCC

Guest
^^^^^^ I strongly suspect SA will be the next SH host. 2027 would give them ten years to sort out their issues & leave enough time to develop a bail-out option if they can't (said bail-out option would need to be promised they're the next host should SA deliver).

I don’t see there issues getting any better, the longer they leave it the further they get away from the 2010 FIFA World Cup when all their stadiums were last upgraded.

Realistically they should have bid and hosted it for the 2011 RWC when all the stadium and infrastructure were new and experience was fresh.

Australia can’t sit and wait for South Africa to sort out their shit, Australia must bid for the next RWC IMO.
 

kiap

Andrew Slack (58)
Press speculation on the votes

France bid
3 Scotland
3 Italy
2 Japan
2 South America
2 Europe
2 Africa
1*Asia ?
1*Oceania ?
1 Georgia
1 Romania
----------
18 Total (L'Équipe)

Ireland bid
3 England
2 North America
1 Canada
1 USA
1*Oceania/Asia ?
----------
8 Total (Irish Times)

South Africa bid
3 Australia
3 Argentina
3 New Zealand
3 Wales
1*Oceania/Asia ?
----------
13 Total
 

waiopehu oldboy

Phil Waugh (73)
I don’t see there issues getting any better, the longer they leave it the further they get away from the 2010 FIFA World Cup when all their stadiums were last upgraded.

Realistically they should have bid and hosted it for the 2011 RWC when all the stadium and infrastructure were new and experience was fresh.

Australia can’t sit and wait for South Africa to sort out their shit, Australia must bid for the next RWC IMO.

Absolutely Australia should bid, I hope they do & are successful BUT we're dealing with a decsion-by-members so all other things being equal it'll come down, as it always does, to who is owed the most favours, who do people feel obligated to vote for having not voted for them last time, etc, etc.
 

kiap

Andrew Slack (58)
I don't think Australia can afford to bid.

From The Times:

Ireland and South Africa were both distraught at their fate. However, today was a day when it was the money that spoke. The surplus the French had guaranteed World Rugby was £350 million. Compare that to the £162 million that England handed over after the 2015 World Cup, or the £270 million that Ireland and South Africa were offering for 2023 and the reasons behind this decision become clear.

The surplus is distributed between the nations, 55 per cent of it going to the ten tier-one nations. Ireland were disappointed that Scotland didn’t stick with them in the voting room today, but Scotland were honest: they were following the money. They will be around £4 million better off now that France won the vote.
 
T

TOCC

Guest
^^ true that seems the obvious reason... a path I wish world rugby never went down.. what’s to stop Qatar or Abu Dhabi guaranteeing even more next time. It’s basically buying votes, and not a decision made on merit.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 

Micheal

Nicholas Shehadie (39)
Aren't these figures guaranteed by the government, not the union in question?

In that case, Australia could certainly afford to bid.

It brings 20 teams to Australia, with ~30 players per squad and ~10 staff per squad.

That's 800 people already who need food, services and accommodation before we consider a single fan.

It then attracts hundreds of thousands of fans flocking in from all over the globe who purchase millions of tickets to the games, many of whom will stay in the country before and after the tournament. The sheer amount of global eyeballs provides a massive sponsorship opportunity for Australian brands and it allows the Australian government to show off tourism opportunities within the country.

Essentially, the Government would fucking love for it to happen. They'd definitely be able to table offers to be competitive with any other Tier 1 country.
 
T

TOCC

Guest
Government would love for it to happen, but guaranteeing $600million for niche sport on behalf of a union which has demonstrated itself to be incompetent and controversial in decision making is a big call for any government


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 

Micheal

Nicholas Shehadie (39)
But thats the point - it doesn't matter if Rugby is a niche sport in Australia if we host the pinnacle of the global game.

Imagine the hordes of Kiwis and Brits that would travel to see it.

The England world cup sold 2.47 million tickets, 460,000 fans came from overseas to attend, the final was watched by 120 million + people.

These are figures that the Australian government wouldn't smirk at, even if Rugby Union is currently behind League and AFL for prominence.
 

kiap

Andrew Slack (58)
These are figures that the Australian government wouldn't smirk at, even if Rugby Union is currently behind League and AFL for prominence.

The reason World Rugby are looking for guarantees is that the revenue doesn't always meet the target.

I believe the NZ government had to pay out of pocket in 2011. In the end they were probably happy enough to shell out a few tens of millions to bring back Bill to a rugby-mad country.

But the situation ain't the same here, and the amount required has gone up exponentially since the bidding for 2011.

I wouldn't buy 600 bucks worth of insurance for the ARU, let alone $600 million.
 

Braveheart81

James Horwill (77)
Staff member
If you were looking at an Australian bid in 2027, we would be reasonably well placed with stadia.

NSW
New Stadium Australia - 75k
New SFS - 45k
New Parramatta Stadium - 30k

QLD
Suncorp Stadium - 60k
Proposed new Townsville Stadium - 30k
Robina Stadium (Gold Coast) - 27k

VIC
MCG - 100k
Docklands - 53k
AAMI Park - 30k

WA
New Perth Stadium - 60k
nib Stadium - 20k

ACT Hopefully new Canberra Stadium - 25-30k
SA
Adelaide Oval - 53kk
Hindmarsh - 16k

There are others that could be used but that's a pretty strong list of what will mostly be really new stadia.
 

Strewthcobber

Mark Ella (57)
2 Japan
1*Asia ?
1*Oceania ?
1*Oceania/Asia ?
3 Australia
3 Argentina
3 New Zealand
1*Oceania/Asia ?
----------
15 votes total out of 39 based on SANZAAR and timezone. We'd need to find another couple from somewhere to get over the timezone issue
 
Top