By Spiro Zavos
May 7th 2009 @ 2:10am

View The Roar's top rugby union writers.

Going to the Waratahs v Brumbies blockbuster at ANZ Stadium, Saturday 24 April? If you're keen to meet up with other Roarers, let us know and we'll keep you informed on the place to meet. Register now.

Love new art, fashion, music? Check out Aussie site which unearths all things cool and creative.

Related coverage

England must host the 2015 Rugby World Cup

England's Phil Vickery, center, tries to muscle his way through the Italian defence during the Six Nations rugby union international match at Twickenham stadium in London, Saturday Feb. 7, 2009. AP Photo/PA, David Davies

England must host the 2015 Rugby World Cup. There I’ve said it, and I don’t have my fingers crossed, nor am I trying to be sarcastic.

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.

With Australia pulling out for 2015 and 2019, and probably for decades to come, only Italy, South Africa and Japan are left in the race.

It is doubtful whether Italy has the rugby infrastructure to run a World Cup tournament. Anyway, with France hosting the 2007 World Cup, another tournament on the European continent is just not on.

South Africa hosted a most successful World Cup in 1995.

But with New Zealand hosting the tournament in 2011, it is the turn of a northern hemisphere rugby nation in 2015. South Africa’s next best chance is 2019, when it is the southern hemisphere’s turn or the turn of a nation like Japan, which is not aligned to either the northern or southern hemisphere powers.

South Africa, too, will want to demonstrate with the 2010 Football World Cup, the biggest sports event in the world, that it can handle something of the size (admittedly smaller than the Football World Cup) of the Rugby World Cup tournament.

This brings us to Japan.

Eddie Jones and John Kirwan, both big figures in world rugby who coach in Japan, have pushed the claims of Japan. Kirwan, a former All Black, dismayed New Zealanders by disputing New Zealand’s claim to the 2011 World Cup tournament.

The Japanese authorities, too, secretly hired a PR firm (Dentsu, one of the biggest in the world) to employ a British legal firm to white ant the IRB’s decision to grant New Zealand the tournament.

The legal firm challenged the IRB’s decision, a challenge that was rejected. Information detrimental to the IRB was leaked to the media, a tactic that was not appreciated among the power brokers of world rugby.

Dentsu is behind the Japanese bids, and was behind Japan hosting the Football World Cup.

As with the promotion of the Football World Cup, the promotion of a Rugby World Cup held in Japan would be part of a marketing push by Japan Inc. to push the major Japanese major trading companies.

The language used to promote Japan’s bid is all about how Asia needs a World Cup to push the game forward.

The fact is that, while Asia remains to be embraced or to embrace the rugby game, the best growth prospects for world rugby are in the Americas, the former communist countries like Georgia, Russia and Roumania, and Africa, where Kenya, for instance, has developed a formidable Sevens Rugby team.

Eddie Jones, anyway, suggests that Japan is more interested in 2019 than 2015 to host a Rugby World Cup.

This leaves us with England.

England’s bid ticks all the boxes. They are going to use the great venues of Twickenham, Wembley, Old Tafford (Manchester United’s home ground, where rugby Tests have already been played) and the Millennium Stadium (hopefully something will have been done about solving the problem of the perennially slippery pitch by then).

These magnificent stadiums will be packed and they will provide the IRB and the RFU with a largesse of income that will enable the reserves to be built up and huge sums of money to be spent developing and promoting rugby around the world.

There is also the consideration that England will be user-friendly for the thousands of spectators from around the world who will come to England to watch the event.

The geographical compactness of England will enable a World Cup feeling to permeate the country for the seven weeks of its duration. Journalists, for instance, and spectators who can afford to, will be able to go to many more matches than, say, they were able to in France.

I know that in 1991, England produced a very poor World Cup tournament. There was an arrogance with the officials running the tournament, and a certain incompetence that mitigated against the success of the tournament.

The fact that matches were played in Ireland, as well as England and Wales, also tended to diminish from the sense of a World Cup in England.

The RFU will have the example of England running the Olympic Games in 2012 in London. The expertise gathered from that exercise will be invaluable for the RFU three years later in hosting the Rugby World Cup.

One of the major figures involved in England’s Olympic Games preparation is Sir Clive Woodward. I nominate him as the CEO of the England’s Rugby World Cup committee.

Two other points should be made.

First, the imperative in presenting a World Cup tournament as a spectacle that enthralls viewers around the world might, just might, encourage the RFU to be more amenable to needed reforms in the laws of the game and in its administration.

Second, rugby received a huge boost from the successful World Cup in 2007 in France. Eight years on, with a successful World Cup in England rugby could and should top that boost and entrench itself as a very viable alternative to football.

This would be virtually inevitable if, in the spirit of making rugby as accessible to world audiences as possible, England would lead the way to creating one rugby season around the world, a reform that would create the chances of many more northern and southern hemisphere contests.

So for many reasons, England must host the 2015 Rugby World Cup.

There, I’ve said it again.

Get Australia's best Rugby opinion emailed daily.

Like this content? Buzz it up!

Recently popular

Free Email updates:

Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...

Recent Comments

Forget the drama, Clarke will make a great Test captain (15)
- vas: Hey David, I just wonder how popular guys like Clarke can be. How can you when the Cricket Australia media department turn the press away from ever knowing what these people are like. All they resort to is reporting on things that...
- Amy Price: Every great captain has to have a certain degree of confidence, competitiveness and experience. Clarke managed to play out his very own childhood morality story as the young, flashy cricketer earmarked as the next ‘it...
AFL TV: Fox coverage could be far Fetched (44)
- Mister Football: But all the experts say that they expect FTA to have a very long tail, along the lines of AM radio, which survives to this day despite FM radio having appeared 35 years ago.
Forward pass sinks league’s reputation (84)
- ScottWoodward.me: JF who is Kaless?
- Tifosi: Interestingly, the player surely knew he had received a forward pass and kept going though. Which goes to show that in Any football code, its not cheating unless you get caught !!
- Ryan: Scrums in league are a joke and are only worth having to keep the forwards out of the backs so the backs can have a crack at each other
- josho: Spot on, that’s their way of trying to minimise any backlash for their poor calls. Which is exactly what Finch himself is doing, He addresses one error, from one game – and does so with a counterpoint so he can say...
AFL wants live coverage as part of next TV deal (8)
- Mister Football: It’s up to the networks to decide whether they want the rights or not, and to negotiate the total price and any conditions.
Sydney FC won the title, Melbourne won the true game (73)
- Joe FC: Sitting among the Sydney fans with my son & daughter it was a tremendous night. The noise from the Melbourne fans during the last ten minutes of normal time was unbelievable. As for Melbourne fans not hanging around after the...
Bayliss one of Australia’s great sporting exports (2)
- Marshall: An Aussie legend and one of the most complete motorbike riders ever, that’s who. If you have nothing meaningful to contribute then don’t. Wonder if I had posted the same on a football thread about one of your stars...
- Football Person 2: Who ?
Upside down Roosters in finals contention (2)
- Roosterman: Alan, I agree, Wearea Hargeaves should add some muscle in defence but they had the personnel to do the job yesterday and should be less than pleased with their efforts. In saying that, though, we weren’t the ones...

Boo Cheers

Mark said | May 7th 2009 @ 2:09am | Report comment

Sorry Spiro, I dont agree. Rugby needs to get away from traditional countries if the sport is to survive. Japan / Argentina / USA + Canada need to be look at before the ol dart. The RFU has enough money and support without a WC. I understand the Olympics etc but thats not a good enough excuse. Expansion and inclusion. Even allowing Russia a crack at it.

Viscount Crouchback said | May 7th 2009 @ 2:52am | Report comment

It’s nonsense to say that rugby needs to expand to survive. Why? Part of rugby’s appeal is that it consistently brings together nations who enjoy a shared history going back centuries. Games against nations who don’t share this history – Italy, for instance – are intrinsically less interesting.

Why should any Englishman be remotely interested in regular games against Georgia or Japan or Russia? It holds no appeal whatsoever.

The only reason the IRB talks up expansion is because it wants to grow a bigger pie. In other words, it’s all about money. But they ought to be very careful. We’ve seen in football and cricket that horible things can happen to sports when they slip out of the control of benevolent Anglo-Saxons.

pothale said | May 7th 2009 @ 4:18am | Report comment

Horrible – like other countries become better at the sports than England are. And that would never do.

sheek said | May 7th 2009 @ 6:41am | Report comment

Spiro,

I don’t know…..I’ll swear you wrote this piece with just the hint of a smirk on your face!

Will England make a profit after paying their ransom to the IRB? Will the profit pay for the debt of the Olympics 3 years prior? Is the IRB actually trying to destroy the world cup concept with its exorbitant guarantees? And since when does the IRB use its largesses to develop lesser nations?

MVDave said | May 7th 2009 @ 6:44am | Report comment

Havent England already held the Rugby WC twice already? It seems only a few countries can or are willing to host it, similar to Cricket. It seems the same countries get to hold it in the relatively short time it has been run…no real sense of adventure from the ruling body.

True Tah said | May 7th 2009 @ 8:04am | Report comment

Spiro – Italy would be a fantastic place to host a world cup, the infrastructure is there, and I understand the government is looking at stumping up the fee.

I would have loved Argentina to have put their hands up, with the futbol world cup in 2014, when will South America ever host a large international sporting event? I guess their economy isnt too strong, but they could have staged some pool games in Chile, Uruguay, Paraguay and Brazil.

Also dont understand why Ireland would never try to host the world cup alone – obviously they would need the support of the GAA to do this though (and thats a big if). If they had GAA support, they could host a pool in each of the four provinces.

IMO I would love to see either of these three countries host a WC before either England or Japan. England has had its time in the sun, and Im not convinced the Japanese would really take to the world cup, in terms of a growth area, Spiro correctly points out that these areas are places like the US, South America, Africa, Russia and Georgia.

Yikes said | May 7th 2009 @ 8:24am | Report comment

Sorry Spiro, you’ve got this all wrong.

Italy doesn’t have the infrastructure to support a tournament like this? They have enough soccer stadia to sink a battleship. Sure some of those could be converted without much worry.

Take rugby somewhere slightly different. Italy 2015, Japan 2019. The next RWC must be held in Europe. The Home Nations supporters will travel happily to Italy.

Vincent said | May 7th 2009 @ 8:58am | Report comment

I agree Cookie, Who knows what happens with the English and UK rugby unions and what back room deals they concoct? England is more likely to sell a few games to the home unions up there and end up hosting a UK Rugby World Cup, I say give it to a country like Italy or Japan, we know what disaster a world cup can be in distributed locations outside the supposed ‘host’ country.

Vincent said | May 7th 2009 @ 9:01am | Report comment

addendum: Big question yes Africa might be a rugby growth area, where in Africa apart from South Africa would there be an infrastructure to support a rugby world cup? And at the cost the IRB has put on the World Cup which African country could afford that initial outlay?

pothale said | May 7th 2009 @ 9:01am | Report comment

Cookie, sweetheart. England is one of the few choices left. Australia, Ireland and Scotland all withdrew in the last week. England refused to do a deal involving the 4 Home Nations (thank god). They want to host it themselves and make use of one ‘external’ stadium – the Millennium in Wales.

The tourney in NZ in 2011 is odds on to lose money. It will not leave the IRB flush with money to expend on development of the game. So the IRB and the game needs a banker for the WC in 2015. And not just the IRB, the game needs to have a guarantee in place – a strong one.

As Spiro points out, the alternatives for 2015 to the UK (which is what England is part of anyway when it comes to the Government putting up the stake money), are Italy, SA and Japan. If tradition is followed (though I don’t see why it should be), then SA won’t get it, cos it’s our turn (I swear children are running this thing sometimes). So then it’s either Japan or Italy. No one else has put their hand up for the €80m. Would Japan be a banker in 2015? Possibly. Do they have the stadia infrastructure and the capacity to create the other facilities? Yes they do. Will they get the stadium numbers? I don’t know – it’s not a national sport, and it ain’t a sport at which they excel – so less attractive to the indigenous population – maybe I underestimate that.

Italy have the infrastructure. They may have the money. But they won’t guarantee the crowds as well as England.

As Spiro points out, England ticks all the boxes. It’s easily accessible from an international point of view. Biggest playing population in the world. Big fan base. And they have the guaranteed money and revenues that the game needs.

It’s a no brainer. Let them at it. The UK loves hosting these kind of things. Trust me. They’re gonna do the Olympics in 2012 – all they have to do is throw a few plastic dust covers over the various bits and pieces and take em off again for the WC in 2015. Why waste more money elsewhere?

True Tah -

You ask why doesn’t Ireland host the WC alone. Real simple. We’re a small country – 5m pop – and have bugger all stadia that would be needed for the gig. Croke Park, Lansdowne, and then you’re into much smaller GAA stadia – not enough and not good enough. And if you think the recently demised Celtic Tiger has got 80 euro to rub together never mind €80m, think again.

Wouldn’t want it, never want it. Some things are better left to bigger economies and countries. I think NZ are mad to be running the next one – but maybe they haven’t got anything else to keep them busy.

I say leave it to UK, France, Australia, SA, Italy and let them round robin it every four years. It’s 20 years before they have to do another one. And if there’s an occasional Japan or East European country in there from time to time, it’s nearly quarter of a century before your turn comes around again. Makes sense really.

Jerry said | May 7th 2009 @ 9:08am | Report comment

Pothale – “The tourney in NZ in 2011 is odds on to lose money. It will not leave the IRB flush with money to expend on development of the game. So the IRB and the game needs a banker for the WC in 2015. And not just the IRB, the game needs to have a guarantee in place – a strong one.”

That’s perpetuating a myth. Any loss will be on the part of the NZRU and/or NZ govt (as underwriters), the IRB will make a substantial profit roughly equal to what they made from the 2007 tournament.

pothale said | May 7th 2009 @ 9:08am | Report comment

Vincent – have you ever looked at the size of the UK or Great Britain to be precise? It’s pretty small in world terms. There’s no great geographical difference between hosting it in England as opposed to on the island of Great Britain. That would include Scotland and Wales but so what? It’s one piece of land. I wouldn’t involve Ireland. It’s a separate island. And a separate Government and budget. As I’ve already said above, we couldn’t afford it. For England, read UK – there’s no difference really when it comes to hosting an event like this.

pothale said | May 7th 2009 @ 9:11am | Report comment

Jerry – has the money been given to the IRB already? And how much is it?

sheek said | May 7th 2009 @ 9:17am | Report comment

The other night I watched ‘Paths Of Glory’ which starred Kirk Douglas playing a French Colonel during WW1. After an aborted attack on a German fortification, the commanding General demanded 3 scapegoats from the division be shot as an example against perceived cowardice (initially he demanded more than 3 scapegoats).

This despite the fact the decisions surrounding the attack were scandalously flawed. The Generals, & not the troops, are the ones who should have been on trial. The 3 scapegoats were drawn by lots, or chosen by junior officers. Their trial was a farce, merely designed to give the pretence of justice being served.

I have of course, seen the movie previously. But I wondered how the men of that unfortunate division might have handled this unjust situation differently.

Colonel Dax (played by Douglas), who attempted to defend the scapegoats, at one stage offered to be shot himself. The commanding General would have loved nothing better! Then it occurred to me if the whole division had stood firm & demanded “they all be shot”, that would have put the Generals in an unenviable situation.

It would have “smoked” them out, & highlighted their incompetence & injustice. But of course, we’re talking about a movie set in 1916, when unquestioning respect for authority was different to today.

The point of the story is also relevant to the outrageous & unjust fee guarantee demanded by the IRB to host nations wishing to stage a World Cup. If the leading nations banded together, they could toss this unjust system out the window.

Ultimately, power resides in the people. The never-ending problem is always attempting to find the unified, collective will.

Jerry said | May 7th 2009 @ 9:18am | Report comment

Hasn’t been given to them, but it’s being held in a trust account I believe. Regardless, the NZ govt has underwritten the tournament fee so the IRB will get their money unless the entire country goes bankrupt.

The IRB makes its money off the tourment fee (48 million pounds for 2011) plus sponsorship and tv rights. Despite the time zone difference, it’s not anticipated that tv revenues will be substantially less and sponsorship will be unaffected.

Taylor Bridge said | May 7th 2009 @ 9:20am | Report comment

Japan it should be. Only if you want to build towards a world game, then possibly USA/Canada in 2019. Not England( UK)/Ireland/ France until maybe 2023.

Vincent said | May 7th 2009 @ 9:21am | Report comment

Pothale, thinking of reasons why the Wales 1999 World Cup was such a disaster was exactly the thinking that that sort of location intelligence did not work. I could be wrong but wasn’t PART of the reason the distributed locale of games in poor remote stadia? I personally would not want to travel across borders chasing rugby games. So yes I agree it could be hosted across the UK but is it ideal?

Mark said | May 7th 2009 @ 9:33am | Report comment

God forbid Rugby actually get out of its comfort zone and go somewhere new. UK is like a safety net for the IRB. Its not even worth talking about.

Here in the USA, its a struggle to even get a look in. The stadiums and facilities here are far more superior to anything the UK can cough up. San Fran and LA alone could hold it.

pothale said | May 7th 2009 @ 10:12am | Report comment

Wales 99 World Cup? What borders? There are no borders – not in a national sense – it’s one country. Wales and Scotland are separate named bits in it. If you’re in London, and you wanna go to Edinburgh, you get on the road, train or plane, same as millions of people do every year in the UK. Ditto Cardiff where they’ve held Heineken Cup finals, FA cup finals, etc for people travelling all over the UK, Ireland, France. We’re not talking the USA here. Or South Africa even. It’s 1,273 flying kms between Cape Town and Durban apparently (have been working out my itinerary for Lions tour), That’s more than the width of Ireland and Britain combined, if I have my sums right. As Spiro points out correctly, the country is geographically compact.

Anyway, the point is somewhat moot – since they’ve chosen stadia in England and Wales only. None in Scotland. And Ireland aren’t involved in the bid so you can relax.

Mark – Stadiums and facilities are far more superior in US to anything the UK can cough up. Have you been in the suggested stadia? What makes US ones ‘more superior’ as you put it? Do they have seats or something?

Tifosi said | May 7th 2009 @ 11:21am | Report comment

Can someone explain why the IRB ask for a fee to host the tournament? FIFA dont ask countries for a fee to host the Football World Cup.

But the IRB will chase the most amount of money i guess. But this will mean Australia wont host it ever again.

Jerry said | May 7th 2009 @ 11:40am | Report comment

Tifosi, while both the IRB and FIFA have their respective World Cups as their sole source of revenue, the TV and sponsorship revenues from the FIFA World Cup absolutely dwarf those of the IRB World Cup (even if the tournament hosting fee is included). Essentially FIFA doesn’t ask for a fee cause it doesn’t need to. The IRB may be asking for too big a fee, but it does need to ask for one.

cookie said | May 7th 2009 @ 12:04pm | Report comment

Not sure where everyone is from but I’m pretty sure the Scots, welsh and english do not appreciate being called ‘one’ even though they are happy to live under the UK banner.

Pothole, Darling. Whilst Scotland and Ireland may have withdrawn i can assure you it was not done without baring in mind that as Vincent concurs ‘back room deals’ will prevail and the scots know that they haven’t a hope in hell of going alone so why not put their hand up for it then wait for england to whisper in their ear then withdraw with some pool matches and a semi in the bag?
Just because england or the uk as the pro england bloggers seem to imply has facilities and so called location it is not a just reason to send the cup there.
The IRB is really the guise of the ‘5 nations’ so by putting a ridiculous fee etc they know that few if any will be game enough to host. Just because England held the olympics doesn’t mean they should hold the cup, I’m sure it helped Australia’s campaign but surely it does not ensure the the cup must be held there otherwise the next should be in China?

Money and politics will decide where the cup is held not logic, stadium / logistical capacity nor the interest of expanding the game will not be taken into account.
Russia/Georgia yeah right no hope in hell for at least 20+ years.
Japan or Italy has a chance and both should be given a run within the next 4 cups.
I’d say that Italy would get more support from the irb than Japan from a stadium / logistical / location point of view.

Tongue in cheek, NZ will fill the stadiums with sheep if need be, it’ll get the numbers up but they may still make a loss.( can a kiwi take a joke?)
Given the dollar has gone to the dogs, perhaps more UK fans will make the trip. Nevertheless so long as the tournament organisers don’t charge a pretty penny for tickets; surely the rugby mad kiwis will fill the stadiums?
Even then if the cup makes a profit, NZ will still take a hit by handing a cut of the profits over to the irb.

Hemjay said | May 7th 2009 @ 12:41pm | Report comment

Oh Pothale you come up with some extreme statements and gosh knows where you dig up all the stuff.
As Jerry has already pointed out the IRB will not lose any money the only ones to lose will be the NZRFU. there’s a thing called a contratct and should the tournament make a loss the NZ government will have to stump up with the cash the IRB will get their money so stop scaremongering. The only country who has had to pay to host a tournament to date is France and they made it a success what makes you think that it can’t be a success down in NZ it seems to me you just want NZ to fail to boost your own ego. I see also you have forgotten to mention that even England is struggling to be able to come up with the 80million you also mention in the countries that it should be left to Australia. Well pothale I don’t know if you take much notice of whats going on around you but even Australia cannot afford to host the tournament and with the ever increasing demand from the IRB for more money its highly unlikey they will be in the position to host it within 20 years let alone sooner. The only way to grow this game is to take the game to the Americas and Asia and eventually Georgia and Romania. The fans will travel if not they will watch it on telly as thats where most of the money comes from in Broadcasting rights which oh my gosh the IRB takes all the profit from that too. I’d personally love to see where all the money is actually going. The fee is far too bi and taking the game away from already established small rugby strongholds. The IRB is effectively committing suicide by placing the unreal expectations of huge hosting fees. A true rugby nation like Wales would never be able to host a tournament on its own how is this doing anything for world rugby. After SA and NZ they are by far the next most rugby obsessed nation.
As for South Africa hosting the tournament while its logistically possible is it morally possible a country who has millions and millions of people living below the poverty line and a massive Aids problem do you think they should be spending 80million pound just to secure the tournament then the millions of hosting teams and pretending they don’t have the issues they do so it looks good on telly so the IRB can make more money. The IRB needs to be realistic in its approach the fee is over the top and the need to spread the tournament around. Its the World Cup not Englands cup

Who Needs Melon said | May 7th 2009 @ 12:54pm | Report comment

I don’t have a particular agenda – I don’t care who hosts the 2015 World Cup – but I have to question those who believe that having a developing-rugby-country like Japan host the thing is ACTUALLY good for the games development.

Do you REALLY think hoards of young Japanese kids are going to be more likely to play or keep playing rugby just because their country hosted the World Cup? Or that it will attract fresh long-term spectators?

As I said, I’m NOT saying “therefore Japan shouldn’t get it” or “therefore England should get it”. I’m just saying that lets make sure that the things we are listing in the Pros and Cons columns are ACTUALLY pros and cons.

stuff happens said | May 7th 2009 @ 1:00pm | Report comment

1.Sheek,what happens to all the money the IRB takes ( rorts) as a fee? I’ve criticised O’Neill on other issues ( the inglorious state of rugby in Aust as an eg) but on this one he is spot on. It would be financially irresponsible for Australia to put in a bid for ‘15 let alone ‘19.
‘The never ending problem is always attempting to find the unified collective will.’ A wonderful metaphor for life in a democracy. Well done!! If you’re interested in ‘collective will’ you may enjoy German Romanticism which includes the theories of Kant & Nietzsche & Wagner.Unfortunately, and partly as predicted, it eventually became out of control in early thirties Germany! ( ‘Triumph of the will )
As you may also know ‘Paths of Glory’ is a quote from Grey’s Elegy: ‘The paths of glory lead but to the grave.’ Wonderful poem
Back to rugby:
2 Much as I would love a RWC in Italy for instance, as we’ve discussed before on the roar, it needs to be hosted in a country that is likely to reach the 1/4trs. Home enthusiasm is an enormous asset for the success of any sports tournament.

Ben C said | May 7th 2009 @ 1:25pm | Report comment

It could actually be a good thing for England to host the RWC15. First they are one of the few NH regions who currently have the capacity for it.

Second, if England barely turn a profit or even make a loss, it might convince the RFU to muster the numbers and change the exorbitant fees the IRB is seeking to collect.

I would be happier with the IRB taking a percentage of the profit and working with the local union to host the RWC to make it a success rather than take a huge chunk of cash upfront and nsit back and wait for merchandising royalties to roll in.

Andystath said | May 7th 2009 @ 1:30pm | Report comment

England again?How boring Spiro,the only place to hold the RWC 2015 is Japan.

Working Class Rugger said | May 7th 2009 @ 2:00pm | Report comment

The IRB claims to be invested in the growth of the game internationally. So if this is the case. Then Japan should get 2015 and the US and Canada should get the 2019 RWC’s. In the US given ten years to prepare could provide Rugby impetus for growth that could propel it to the mainstream of the US sporting hierarchy. Its slowly happening now. With Rugby being granted Collegiate status. In regards to Japan. They could share it thoughout throughout the Asian continent. With two pools in Japan ( Tokyo and Osaka), Hong Kong, Shanghai and Dubai. All the finals should be played in Japan. So the first WC in Asia should spread throughout Asia. Afterall its is a key growth market for rugby according to the IRB.

mtngry said | May 7th 2009 @ 2:42pm | Report comment

As long as Japan gets one of them I am happy, Having been there for the Soccer cup a few years back i know they could do it tomorrow in their sleep. But I would love a RWC in Italy as well.
It would be a great vacation.

sheek said | May 7th 2009 @ 4:18pm | Report comment

Stuff Happens,

Thank you for broadening my general knowledge. I am neither a fan of democracy nor socialism, or its extremes, totalitarianism & communism. I still think the best form of government is a benevolent dictator. Saves on all those endless committees & ‘filibuster’ speakers.

The only problem is ensuring each succeeding dictator is benevolent. In the absence of this, I will take (social) democracy with all its faults.

In any case, the IRB must be brought to heel, & this won’t happen unless the major rugby nations force the IRB to see the error of its ways (through collective action). There must surely be a better model for share-arrangements that this draconian system.

I wonder how many of the current members of the IRB were also the same ones banging on about the ethos & values of rugby not being lost, when the game went professional in 1995??????????

How quickly the worm turns!!!

Lazza said | May 7th 2009 @ 4:34pm | Report comment

“As long as Japan gets one of them I am happy”

When the Japanese side gets slaughtered every game what will that do to the interest level in the tournament? Will it encourage a new generation of youngsters to follow in the footsteps of their new sporting heroes?

Football only held the World Cup in Japan when they had a competitive national side. Get that right first.

Working Class Rugger said | May 7th 2009 @ 4:48pm | Report comment

Evidently there a Westerner friendly zones whether they can drink. The Sevens in Dubai being one of them. And women don’t have to wear the hajib. Its not a requirement even for the Muslim population.

Working Class Rugger said | May 7th 2009 @ 5:53pm | Report comment

I wouldn’t think that the stadium in Hong Kong would be suitable for a WC final. That’s why you could only hold pool and maybe a quarterfinal at the stadia.

AndyS said | May 7th 2009 @ 6:14pm | Report comment

To be honest Lazza, I’d have said it wouldn’t have much effect. The Japanese went out in the round of 16, just as the US did in ‘94. Didn’t prevent huge support in both instances, and big strides forward for the sport each time.

pothale said | May 7th 2009 @ 6:30pm | Report comment

Hemjay/Jerry – let’s wait and see what the IRB gets from the WC2011 after all the bills have been paid. I don’t know, but is there a stated amount of how much they’ll be paid and that NZ Govt has underwritten?

I don’t wish NZ any ill-will in running the comp – best of luck to them. I think they’re mad.

Cookie – babes

The facts are that Ireland and Scotland were never going to put in separate bids – that’s the whole point. They wanted to submit a joint 4 Home Nations bid. They got told no by the English RFU – and they have withdrawn. It’s interesting that Wales haven’t ‘formally’ withdrawn any bid, but the Millennium Stadium is being used as part of England’s bid. And it will be called England’s bid. I doubt very much there will be any attempt at backroom deals since that didn’t work out too well the last time for them – Ireland voted for NZ if I recall correctly.

The Scots, Welsh and English (and Northern Ireland) make up the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. They are one. That’s why it’s called the UK Government. And it is the UK government who will be footing the bill for underwriting the tourney. In 2015, it will be 25 years since England hosted the last one, and it’s got a lot bigger since then.

I did actually say that other countries like Japan or other East European country could hold it occasionally, but I see the 4/5 big countries as being the backbone supporters of the tourney. And I’m including Australia. If they’re willing to pitch for the Soccer World Cup, then they’re in with the big hunters as far as I’m concerned.

Jerry said | May 7th 2009 @ 6:55pm | Report comment

Pothale – the tournament fee is 48 million pounds (I did mention it above, but you may have missed it) so when you add the tv rights and sponsorship revenues the IRB won’t have any money problems. Especially considering the increased fee for 2015 regardless of whether it’s in Japan or England.

bob Heron said | May 7th 2009 @ 7:08pm | Report comment

The bigger point is that the IRB is an old-boys club that is run for the benefit of the IRB. visit http://www.puttingrugbyfirst.com and see how the carve up and cock-up merchants work. You think they want to spread the rugby gospel to the world? Well, they have been saying that since the first RWC in ‘87, yet 97% of the TV audience for RWC 2007 was from the big 8 countries. NZ getting 2011 was ridiculous. it’s the back end of beyond for everyone outside of australia and NZ and so will cost a bomb for most fans. Some day we’ll know who got what out of that shady deal.
England hosting isn’t a problem, the stadiums are fine, it’s easy to get to and the average english rugby fan is a decent enough bloke. The problem is that keeping it in the big 8 all the time is a huge missed opportunity. So 2015 in England, back to SA in 2019, 2023 in france?

pothale said | May 7th 2009 @ 9:56pm | Report comment

Thanks Jerry – must have missed it..

Ian Noble said | May 7th 2009 @ 11:05pm | Report comment

Spiro

Yes England would tick all the boxes and would make a very good fist of RWC2015. However, I just wonder whether it is worth all the hassle. The RFU gets in the neck from all and sundry, not least from down under and yet they fall over themselves to play against England as the tests are great revenue generators.

My personal view is that Italy would be great choice for RWC 2015 and give England a break of a couple of Novembers from always playing against the SH. Frankly they are getting a little repetitive and losing their marketing appeal.

Just to clear a couple of points, England have never held a RWC the others have always been in association with Ireland, Scotland or Wales. If they do wish to use the Millenium Stadium, it will hired as any other venue whether it is Old Trafford, St James Park, Wembley etc because it is fit for purpose. The voting history on the IRB is not a home nations stitch up, look at the voting history for other RWC bids and as likely as not the home nation vote is always split unlike the SH.

As some 35,000 supporters are due to support the Lions in SA, it is anticipated that the numbers wishing to go to RWC2011 will be even greater possibly up to 50/60,000. Add in other countries supporters and because of the infrastructure in NZ I can’t see how it will be able to cope. There are not enough camper vans or decent hotels to met demand and the outcome will be a smaller, homely, quiet tournament, OK underwritten by the NZ government but hasn’t the RWC outgrown that perception. Both Japan and Italy have the track record for putting on large successful World tournaments, and as I have always said Japan should have been awarded RWC2011.

Ian Noble said | May 7th 2009 @ 11:07pm | Report comment

Frankly…… should have been tacked onto the end of para 1.

Gladstone said | May 8th 2009 @ 6:25am | Report comment

Anybody into circles within circles?

STUFF HAPPENS alludes to Wagner. Wagner co-wrote the music to Leni Riefenstahl’s Triumph of the Will. And SHEEK mentions Paths of Glory which starred George MacReady as the villainous general. Coriolanus, Shakespeare’s play about another villainous general, was once wittily reviewed by a theatre critic as “A triumph of the Will.”

Okay, now you’re wondering how I’m going to get a rugby reference into this.
Easy.
George MacReady was related to the famous 19th century English actor and manager
William MacReady who played Coriolanus in the above-mentioned production.
And where was William McReady educated?
Rugby.

pothale said | May 8th 2009 @ 7:50am | Report comment

Is there a school actually called Rugby?

Knives Out said | May 8th 2009 @ 8:14am | Report comment

Yes. I also hear that there is a game called Rugby League.

pothale said | May 8th 2009 @ 8:33am | Report comment

Well I never. There’s a coincidence.

pothale said | May 8th 2009 @ 8:56am | Report comment

Talking of oval ball games – here’s a new sport I just encountered. For reasons that will become quickly obvious, I’m an instant fan. Can we open up a thread on this new sport – it’s bound to get some discussion?

Here’s the link for people to make their own judgement: http://www.lingeriebowl.com/seattlemist/index.html

Greg Smith said | May 11th 2009 @ 3:01am | Report comment

Rubbish… you’re just STIRRING.. EVERYONE knows it is 2015 South Africa

Stop this North vs South hemisphere rubbish … who began dividing the world like this ? It’s idiotic !

South Africa 2015 it’s a no brainer – All the major rugby nations have hosted the RWC twice except South Africa.

It’s SOUTH AFRICA… see you there !

Jimmy said | May 11th 2009 @ 4:24am | Report comment

@Greg Smith:: Utter rubbish! 1987 was in NZ, 2011 will be in NZ. That’s the FIRST time the tournament will have been held twice in the same country. 1991, the final was at Twickenham, 1995 in SA, 1999 at the Millennium Stadium, 2003 in Australia, 2007 in France. Get your facts right before accusing others of rubbish.

pothale said | May 11th 2009 @ 4:59am | Report comment

Yeah – right on. And all of the major rugby nations haven’t hosted the RWC once – let alone twice. (some of them wouldn’t want to,)

Greg Smith said | May 11th 2009 @ 5:44am | Report comment

@Jimbo —> Tut, tut… it’s not my job to educate you mate… NEW ZEALAND co-hosted with Australia AND 2007 co-hosts ? The UK ? no ?

ERGO… after 2011……. UK x2 …. NZ x 2 …. France x 2 … Australia x 2 ——-> not so ? South Africa = ONLY 1995

Of the MAJOR rugby superpowers…. South Africa is the ONLY country to have a one off involvment !

Check YOUR facts before you accuse those, who accuse others of rubbish

pothale said | May 11th 2009 @ 6:28am | Report comment

Uou should check your own facts first, Greg. 2007 was France not the UK.

The facts are that the RWC has been hosted by:

1987 – Australia and New Zealand – Joint hosts
1991 – Jointly hosted by Wales, Ireland, England, Scotland and France
1995 – South Africa – sole host
1999 – Wales – sole host – but used stadia in Scotland, England, Ireland and France
2003 – Australia – eventual sole hosts after NZ withdrew from co-hosting
2007 – France sole hosts – they used stadia in Wales and Scotland
2011 – New Zealand – sole hosts

So Australia have co-hosted and been sole hosts
New Zealand have co-hosted and sole hosts
South Africa have been sole hosts
Wales – have co-hosted and been sole host
France have been co-hosts and sole host
England have co-hosted only
Ireland have co-hosted only
Scotland have co-hosted only

Scotland, Ireland or England have never been sole hosts.
Ireland and England have had their stadia used twice.
England have also hosted a final match.
And Scotland and Wales are the only nations to have their stadia used in three world cups.

Of the major rugby nations, Ireland and Scotland have never hosted a RWC final.

Greg Smith said | May 11th 2009 @ 6:39am | Report comment

Typically… you’ll find an Aussie trying to con the world… the blood my grandfather warned us about ?

It’s SOUTH AFRICA 2015 ! The ONLY logical or reasonable choice… but… it’ll probably go to Japan if we apply current rugby union reasoning… while a true rugby union POWER is robbed, suffering a QUARTER century 1995 -2019 vaccuum … nice guys you lot are – I’ll be dead by then !

1987 – 2003 (16 years) Oz & Nz then 2011(8 years) … I’m talking about ‘waiting’ gaps

1991, 1999 (8 years) then 2007(8 years) for the UK…

24 years for the AFRICANS …. fek them hey ! 1995 – 2019 !!!

We should just KILL OFF rugby in Africa – lets just go with the flow and embrace football … rugby unions a mess anyhow.

pothale said | May 11th 2009 @ 6:50am | Report comment

1991, 1999 and 2007 for the UK???

What planet are you living on, Greg? Can you not read facts?

Australia had a gap of 16 years between the two tournaments it was involved in.
New Zealand have had a gap of 24 yeras
South Africa had theirs 14 years ago.
Wales 10 years ago
France 2 years ago

England, Scotland or Ireland haven’t hosted one on their own yet. And I wouldn’t call holding two or three matches hosting a tournament.

Greg Smith said | May 11th 2009 @ 7:19am | Report comment

I don’t want to get into splitting hairs……. but

If you’re a fan….and live in a part of the world like -

OZ & NZ, handy enough, a hop across the ditch… 87 NZ..OZ…. 2003 OZ….2011 NZ (hardly 24 years in reality)

UK – France… *call it England, Ireland, Scotland, Wales… whatever… the whole fekking place is as big as the STATE I live in…
and they’ve had WALL TO WALL rugby in their backyards, basically

Coming back to NZ… the place is on the edge of the planet… the time zones out of whack with civilization… and they have 3 million people… BUT… if those buggers had their way… EVERY RWC would be there !

Now… Africa has 1 BILLION people… lets fek them over… aim for Japan or SE Asia or the Middle East…

Rugby development in Africa is DUE now…….. its OVER DUE now….. forget South America or Japan until Africa is sorted

And 2015 is South Africa….. I tell you….. otherwise…. the IRB can take the game and try flog it elsewhere…

Knives Out said | May 11th 2009 @ 7:27am | Report comment

You don’t want to split hairs? Europe is a rather big place.

pothale said | May 11th 2009 @ 7:46am | Report comment

Now when you’re living in South Africa obviously, KO. The whole centre of the universe must be sitting outside Greg’s house. He has the persecution complex to go with it.

Maybe we should buy him an Atlas for his birthday.

Knives Out said | May 11th 2009 @ 7:48am | Report comment

Makes me look forward to the Lions tour that much more. There’s going to be some great discussions in the SA bars this summer.

pothale said | May 11th 2009 @ 7:49am | Report comment

Actually – I think he might have a point.

I’m going to start a campaign for Wicklow to host the 2023 WC – they haven’t had one there yet. It’s all a big SANZAR/UK/France plot that they’ve tried to cut us out.

Knives Out said | May 11th 2009 @ 7:52am | Report comment

Surely Ghana is a greater IRB priority than Wicklow? Apparently here’s a huge black market demand for Newport Gwent Dragons jerseys in Ghana.

pothale said | May 11th 2009 @ 8:01am | Report comment

Well obviously on the surface, 35 million people versus 100,000 looks like a more attractive market, but you have to look beyond the simple numbers on these things. I mean imagine if the IRB looked at everything in rugby as just simply about money? It’s much more than that, you know.

bob said | May 11th 2009 @ 8:02am | Report comment

It has to be remembered too, that England has a massive ex-pat population from most contries in the world… 250,000 kiwis, more Aussies, enough Saffers to fill a stadium, and London is actually the 5th largest “French” city… that’s how many Frenchies live there… so whoever makes the quarters will have a massive “home” support. With the recession not going away for a few years yet, England is the one contry in the world where everyone who might figure in the last 8 will have a gurantee of big support, even if nobody travels to England who isnt already there.
All the talk of other nations is misplaced… rugby grows because kids play it, kids play it because they are given the chance at school and at clubs, not because it’s on TV… Africa might have 1 billion people, but they wont be watching on TV… soccer is huge in Africa, not because they host a world cup and watrch it on tv, but because they are out playing it. Let the RWC be hosted where it will make the money without compromising its traditions or integrity, let it be hosted where it will be appreciated by real rugby players and supporters, and let the money it makes be spent on making sure evey school in the world that wants one, has at least one ball, and one coaching guide…. and of coursse a gilt framed picture of His Holiness Johnny Wilkinson (may his house be forever blessed).

Greg Smith said | May 11th 2009 @ 8:17am | Report comment

You girls are hilarious… but 2015 is SOUTH AFRICA

Ireland are big fish in a small 2nd division pond called Northern Hemisphere rugby. I first watched Ireland play LIVE in the 1970’s against Border at East London’s BRU… they were rubbish then… and over near half a century… they’re still rubbish. Stick to GAA, Hurling and mucking up the IRB’s administration.

pothale said | May 11th 2009 @ 8:18am | Report comment

“let it be hosted where it will be appreciated by real rugby players and supporters”

Now that’s more like it, Bob. None of these Jonny foreigners getting involved – makes the whole thing very messy.

pothale said | May 11th 2009 @ 8:21am | Report comment

Making sure that “every school has at least one ball and a coaching guide” is a particular favourite sentiment of mine – I know a few boys schools that have none. Not when I played against them anyway.

bob said | May 11th 2009 @ 8:28am | Report comment

pothole, I wasnt implying that only england has real players and supporters, there are otehr nations… but not Dubai or some other such place where the only draw is money… and not an African nation (except SA) where the only reason is political correctness. The 2015 RWC should be in England because it’s a good palce for rugby, has a massive all nation support base and it wants it… as for a ball in every school and a coaching guide, that goes for UK schools as well!

pothale said | May 11th 2009 @ 8:31am | Report comment

Hmmmm Bob I suspect you didn’t notice the tongue firmly in my cheek when I posted the above. I’m all for England hosting the next RWC for reasons outlined earlier.