South Africa firm as favourites to host Rugby World Cup

That makes sense. If anywhere in Ireland is accused as being similar to England it is usually Blackrock in Dublin or parts of South Dublin. There is a whole beautiful country outside of those areas. That said I live near there myself and still fell that while there are similarities and cultural similarities and economic ties there are a whole host of differences too. You most certainly wouldn't get the same experience at an England RWC as you would at an Ireland one.

Never say never. At the time NZ managed to host one of the most lucrative WCs ever. It shouldn't be all about money anyway. Id like to see it go back to NZ when it is their turn.

Fionn is from Blackrock the Dublin version not the Cork variety. No way you could say that in Thomond Park

I am half Irish half Australian too and have lived in both countries too. Dual nationality. I have also lived in the UK. I think you are talking through your hat. Not sure how long you have lived in Ireland but you don't seem have a great sense of the cultural differences between Ireland and England nor the relative similarities between Australia and England compared to Ireland and the UK. The majority of the population of Australia comes from British heritage. A minority of people in Ireland come from a British heritage. I never said Ireland had anything in common with Iceland other than being genetically much more similar to their population that English people. That is a fact. It is about as relevant as your flora and fauna comment.

Public transport in Ireland has improved vastly since then too. To be fair to the Irish press Ireland had a fairly weak team back then and hadn't had much luck v Australia in a while. I met Bob Dwyer after the game and he gave me his RWC 1991 Aussie badge from his lapel. He is a good dude.

Not sure I ever said that. I said it was too culturally similar as well as being similar geographically. Let's not get into the genetic stuff, mate. Given that I'm Irish/Australian, half of my genes are Irish and I've lived in Ireland even if I now live in Aus I think I feel qualified to say that Ireland has a lot more in common with England than Iceland. The idea that there are more ties between Australia and England is nonsensical. Perhaps at an institutional level, but not at a cultural level. I think you know that also. How many people outside of a few pockets in the West speak Gaelic fluently or as a first language?My dad speaks completely fluently but what are the overall rates, about 15% or something? While there are proud Gaelic speakers Ireland is now overwhelmingly an English speaking country. Politically you are not very different given the Monarch in Britain is just a figurehead. Both of Australia's and Ireland's legal and political systems are largely based on the British. Ireland's currency is irrelevant—first of all Ireland doesn't even have its own currency, second of all Northern Ireland uses the pound.

Ireland shouldn't host a world cup because the flora and fauna is the same as in England? Lol. There are of course similarities between Ireland and England but there are also lots of differences. Culturally there as many similarities between Ireland and England as there are between England and Australia. There may even be closer ties between England and Australia as they are both in the Commonwealth, share a monarch both have a huge population of people from uniquely English descent. Ireland does not to the same extent. Aussies and English both love cricket and pies and have a similar legal system (as does Ireland). Genetically Irish people are more closely linked to people from Iceland than England. We use a different currency, different accents and language, politically very different, Ireland being a republic and England being a monarchy.

I'll agree Australia and New Zealand are very similar culturally (although I would argue not as similar as England and Ireland), but the fact is that Australia and New Zealand are very different countries in terms of geography, climate, flora and fauna. Aside from the culture which is very, very similar as you say, they feel like different experiences in terms of both the cities and especially the nature and things to do there. England and Ireland are both characterised by appalling weather and similar geography, as well as very similar cultures. And I wouldn't have wanted Australia to get it in 2019 for the very same reason that I don't think the timing is right for Ireland in 2023—it would have been too recent since NZ had it (8 years).

No problem with rotating the tournament. Splitting between the NH and SH makes zero sense though. As already mentioned Tokyo is closer to Australia and New Zealand than any other NH rugby jurisdiction. Where is your logic in rotating between the north and south coming from? I don't think a RWC in Ireland would be similar to a RWC in England at all. It is about as similar as New Zealand is to Australia and not such a big difference in proximity in terms of flight time. NZ and Australia have hosted the tournament 1.5 times where as Ireland has hosted a meagre 11 games.

Because England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales all offer extremely similar experience, whereas the S/H countries are all more different from each other. Because Japan is in the Northern Hemisphere. Okay, if you think dividing between north and south is nonsense then how about the fact that you simply shouldn't have too many in the home nations too close together. They're too similar.

What is the logic behind rotating between the north and south when the majority are in the north? Where is the logic in shoehorning Japan in the same category as the other NH sides when in reality they are as close or closer to some of the SH countries as they are to the NH sides? Diving between the north and south is nonsense.

Sorry Id rather host the tournament every 28 years than be offered a patronising pat on the head and the consolidation of a flight to London. You logic is very warped. Irish fans will turn out in huge numbers no matter where the tournament is held. Travel distances aren't the issue. The issue is it is Ireland's turn having never hosted before. Not South Africa's. Baffled how you find that so hard to understand.

Hope SA sorts out it's visa requirements before then, as if they host the RWC they should get quite a few Kiwi visitors, but at present if you hold a NZ passport you need a visa to visit, which can only be obtained in Wellington or Canberra here. So if you're a Kiwi in Perth you need to jet over to Canberra to get a 30 day visa - I can see huge problems issuing all those visas. Hopefully the crime situation gets a little better by then - it would be a huge boost to SA, it's a great country to visit.

Mate, I think the real Honibal would feel rather different.... I think you're missing the point here though, here's the logic: UK/France area has hosted 4 Australia/NZ area has hosted 3 SA - 1 Dublin was closer to every game played in England in 2015 than Cape Town is to Joburg, or even Townsville is to Brisbane (and they're both in QLD), and just as cheap and easy to travel to and from. Dublin to Paris is super easy too! I loved in London for 4 years and have been to Ireland so I do know the area and culture etc very well. Many friends/ family went over to Paris from London for the final in 2007, it was easy. Btw I wasn't there in 2015. Yes Ireland is a different country (well not if you include the North but hey...) I understand about local economy boost. But the point is every game has been easily accessible for Irish rugby fans for 4 different World Cup tournaments. Actually more easily accessible than many Aussie or South African rugby fans when their own country has hosted it! "The consolation of being able to pop over to the UK or France to watch a game every 12 years doesn’t really cut it." How about 28 years to pop over to Joburg for the finals, if you live in Cape Town or Durban chap? I'm confused as to how you cannot understand the logic here?

With the massive increase in fees that Work Rugby are demanding, there is no way NZ will host another. We can't afford the fee with our tiny pop and stadiums, 2011 was our last fling

Fraser Neil said on the Ruggamatrix videocast a few weeks back (well worth looking at on YT) and said with the RWC it often focuses on one huge profitable tournament then the following tournament they are happy to take a reduction. Japan is a high risk for the IRB but high reward. I don't buy in to thoughts that revenue will be high as expected. The tickets haven't been launched which will give us a better indication. Hopefully as it will be soon as the draw will be announced in a few hours time.

Its not a matter of convincing anyone PH. What your argument demonstrates is unfortunately, only a handful of countries have the ability atm, to host this competition and I agree, that is in essence, the history of it all. But, if hosting rights are restricted by these consequences then at this time, I commend WR for ensuring that such restrictions don't limit, their ability to take the competition to either side of the equator, every 4 yrs. And, if that is normal service than, that is a consequence of the rugby strength of those countries, granted the hosting rights, so far. We've seen it with the Olympics - the majority of the early games, were held north of the equator. If my memory is correct, the first time the games came south of the equator, was 1956 or 60 years, after the inaugural event albeit, the same period was also affected by a couple of very significant, world-wide events. Nevertheless, I'm glad that WR/IRB didn't wait 60 years, before sending the RWC, south of the equator. I'm sure, when those countries you nominated show a similar strength in the game then, I too would like to see them become successful RWC hosts.....but until then, we must wait for those occasions, to eventuate.

I attended the 1991 RWC in GB and Ireland.. There were 3 Aussie busloads and what seemed to be 20 or more Kiwi busloads of supporters there, but transport to and from the games (Aust. v. Ire and Aust v NZ) was not a problem. We Aussies were made very welcome by the Irish everywhere we went - Clubs, towns etc, and touring for sight-seeing between the 2 matches was not a problem.. Well do I remember the Irish press pouring heaps on praise on the the Irish team after our get-out-of-jail win over them. They hardly mentioned the Wallabies ---- except for their final comment:- "Go well against NZ next Saturday, Wallabies ! ALL of Ireland will be backing you !!!"

You haven’t convinced me OB. History of hemisphere location means nothing and it’s not relevant to decide on hosting a tournament. Rugby needs to move away from SH/NH - it’s outdated. Moreover, if people talk about NH rugby, they generally mean Engkand and France with the Celtic unions and Italy occasionally thrown in. Japan is no more part of “NH Rugby” than Argentina is. SH rugby generally means SANZAR, not including Argentina. History shows it’s the Big 5 unions who continue to dominate ownership of the RWC - the finals have been held in Eden Park (twice), Twickenham (twice), Ellis Park (about to be twice), Telstra in Sydney, Stade de France. And a tidbit once in Cardiff when most of the games got farmed out in 1999. Luckily we’ll get Tokyo on the map. But then it’s back to Ellis Park. Normal service will resume. Rinse and repeat. The Big 5 continue to hoover up everything. I hope that Argentina, USA, Italy, China are the next destinations to wrest it from their grasp but I won’t be holding my breath.

PH As dumb as SH/NH alternation may sound, history does show that the tournament was varied between both hemispheres, on each 4-yearly occasion. The only change to this approach was Japan's entry back in 2005 when they bid for the 2011 cup but lost against NZ, which then offered an alternative for WR to consider, in an effort to expand the game globally. Japan was encouraged to bid again and their efforts were rewarded, with the 2019 rights. The fact that Japan is in the NH, simply offers WR further encouragement now, to demonstrate that global rugby involves playing nations located in two hemispheres, not one. I would suggest, the recommendation to head south in 2023, is merely an effort by WR to show this global connection and of course, to appease the membership and avoid any politicking backlash. Any financial benefits that may arise from this decision, were merely "the icings on the cake", for all involved considering France's attempts, to try and buy the tournament.