2023 RWC Host Poll

[OptimisticJock]

I can't really see them refuse though... It would be a political nightmare for whoever is leading, if they did...

I think you're over estimating the support for it in the Republic.

Maybe. I'm not Irish after all.
My point is that I can understand them not wanting it( as in, not requesting it), but can't see them refusing it.

You really can't see them refusing the divisive and economical nightmare that is the north when most of the Republic don't want them?

[Adder]

RWC2007 had 12 Venues. (including Millenium/Principality and Murrayfield)
RWC2011 had 12 venues
RWC2015 had 13 venues(including Millenium/Principality)
RWC2019 will have 12 venues

What would the 12 venues be in Ireland? What would the 3-4 bigger Stadiums be? I know the GAA has a few big stadiums(Croke Park).
This is an innocent post. I just want to get an Idea of what locations will be involved

[Adder]

I think you're over estimating the support for it in the Republic.

Maybe. I'm not Irish after all.
My point is that I can understand them not wanting it( as in, not requesting it), but can't see them refusing it.

You really can't see them refusing the divisive and economical nightmare that is the north when most of the Republic don't want them?

Shortly put: no. They might slow down the process though and not do a Germany 1989.

[Sandydragon]

RWC2007 had 12 Venues. (including Milleniun/Principality and Murrayfield)
RWC2011 had 12 venues
RWC2015 had 13 venues(including Milleniun/Principality)
RWC2019 will have 12 venues

What would the 12 venues be in Ireland? What would the 3-4 bigger Stadiums be? I know the GAA has a few big stadiums(Croke Park).
This is an innocent post. I just want to get an Idea of what locations will be involved

I'd prefer Ireland. I think an event there would be well supported and would be an income generator for the RWC. The only issue would be the availability of suitable stadia. Given the figures provided by Adder, can Ireland host all the matches or will there be another agreement initiated with Scotland, Wales or England?

[Eugene Wrayburn]

No it isn't. Highly doubtful that the Republic have any interest taking the north on board though.

I can't really see them refuse though... It would be a political nightmare for whoever is leading, if they did...

I think you're over estimating the support for it in the Republic.

Feckers will have to take us whether they like it or not.

[Eugene Wrayburn]

RWC2007 had 12 Venues. (including Milleniun/Principality and Murrayfield)
RWC2011 had 12 venues
RWC2015 had 13 venues(including Milleniun/Principality)
RWC2019 will have 12 venues

What would the 12 venues be in Ireland? What would the 3-4 bigger Stadiums be? I know the GAA has a few big stadiums(Croke Park).
This is an innocent post. I just want to get an Idea of what locations will be involved

I was hoping to get a neat list of what is ACTUALLy going to be used but it's not to be:

http://www.irishrugby.ie/ireland2023/venues/

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of ... y_capacity

[rowan]

I'd rather see it rotating around different countries, like the FIFA World Cup. So if it's a choice between SA for the 2nd time and Ireland for the 3rd or France for the 4th - and a strong possibility that either of the latter could involve Wales for the 5th time - I'm definitely for the African bid. But that's far from the only reason, of course.

There are reasons to support a South African bid but that's just nonsense. How many RWC games has RSA hosted? How many Ireland?

Ireland is a fraction the size of South Africa - which is about as big as the UK and France combined - and neither is it remotely as successful in this game, so that's a bit like comparing Ireland to Brazil in football. In fact, I supported the South African bid ahead of Italy's as well, because I think geographical rotation isn't just about countries but also continents, and while Europe has already staged four, Africa has only held one.

[OptimisticJock]

What has the size of ireland got to do with it? Or their success? You can only host it if you've won it? In that case NZ should be holding it again seeing as they're SH and have just won it. It should have fuck all to do with continents, Europe has at least 4 unions that can host it independently, Africa has 1.

[Sandydragon]

I'd rather see it rotating around different countries, like the FIFA World Cup. So if it's a choice between SA for the 2nd time and Ireland for the 3rd or France for the 4th - and a strong possibility that either of the latter could involve Wales for the 5th time - I'm definitely for the African bid. But that's far from the only reason, of course.

There are reasons to support a South African bid but that's just nonsense. How many RWC games has RSA hosted? How many Ireland?

Ireland is a fraction the size of South Africa - which is about as big as the UK and France combined - and neither is it remotely as successful in this game, so that's a bit like comparing Ireland to Brazil in football. In fact, I supported the South African bid ahead of Italy's as well, because I think geographical rotation isn't just about countries but also continents, and while Europe has already staged four, Africa has only held one.

Europe has 6 top flight international teams, Africa only has one. Im all for spreading the game, but a re-run to South Africa when its possible the South African government might throw a spanner in the works is unlikely. Ireland are a top flight team who have never hosted the RWC. They are also very commutable for European fans. Provided there are sufficient stadia to make it practical, Ireland would be my first choice.

[Eugene Wrayburn]

I'd rather see it rotating around different countries, like the FIFA World Cup. So if it's a choice between SA for the 2nd time and Ireland for the 3rd or France for the 4th - and a strong possibility that either of the latter could involve Wales for the 5th time - I'm definitely for the African bid. But that's far from the only reason, of course.

There are reasons to support a South African bid but that's just nonsense. How many RWC games has RSA hosted? How many Ireland?

Ireland is a fraction the size of South Africa - which is about as big as the UK and France combined - and neither is it remotely as successful in this game, so that's a bit like comparing Ireland to Brazil in football. In fact, I supported the South African bid ahead of Italy's as well, because I think geographical rotation isn't just about countries but also continents, and while Europe has already staged four, Africa has only held one.

Quite what geographical size has got to do with your earlier point of rotation you only know. Ditto success. Since you declined to answer my question, SA has hosted 32 games in the RWC. Ireland 12. Rotation away from Ireland is not a reason for SA to host.

[rowan]

There are reasons to support a South African bid but that's just nonsense. How many RWC games has RSA hosted? How many Ireland?

Ireland is a fraction the size of South Africa - which is about as big as the UK and France combined - and neither is it remotely as successful in this game, so that's a bit like comparing Ireland to Brazil in football. In fact, I supported the South African bid ahead of Italy's as well, because I think geographical rotation isn't just about countries but also continents, and while Europe has already staged four, Africa has only held one.

Quite what geographical size has got to do with your earlier point of rotation you only know. Ditto success. Since you declined to answer my question, SA has hosted 32 games in the RWC. Ireland 12. Rotation away from Ireland is not a reason for SA to host.

Both geographical rotation and size are factors that will be considered when World Rugby makes its decision. Ireland has co-hosted two World Cups. South Africa has hosted one. Europe has hosted four World Cups. Africa has hosted one.

Europe has 6 top flight international teams

& South Africa has won twice as many World Cups as all of them combined

I mean, does anyone seriously think a RWC in Ireland would be better than one in South Africa? Seriously

[OptimisticJock]

Why is size a factor, other than for stadia? What has success got to do with it? Should Japan not have been awarded their tournament because they've never qualified from their group?

And yes I do think a WC in Ireland would be better.

[Eugene Wrayburn]

Why is size a factor, other than for stadia? What has success got to do with it? Should Japan not have been awarded their tournament because they've never qualified from their group?

And yes I do think a WC in Ireland would be better.

Really? I mean surely you want your RWC to be set against a background of crime, corruption and one of the most unequal societies the world has to offer, set along the lines of race.

[Lizard]

So World Rugby has confirmed the three bidders, despite SA not appearing to meet the requirement of home government support. Presumably there have been some informal assurances in this respect.

Meanwhile, Argentina has thrown its hat in the ring for 2027. Argentina must be the most successful team at RWC's to have never hosted a single match. In fact no country in South or North America has hosted a RWC match.

If SA missed out on 2023 and rebid for 2027, on almost any criteria, Arg should be preferred.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rowan]

Why is size a factor, other than for stadia? What has success got to do with it? Should Japan not have been awarded their tournament because they've never qualified from their group?

And yes I do think a WC in Ireland would be better.

Really? I mean surely you want your RWC to be set against a background of crime, corruption and one of the most unequal societies the world has to offer, set along the lines of race.

Was it any different in 95? Yet that tournament was a resounding success.& we just had the Olympics in Brazil. The FIFA World Cup has also been held recently in both SA and Brazil.

Japan has 130 million people. Combined Ireland has 6 million. All of the factors discussed will be duly taken into consideration. That is not to suggest any one of them will be the defining factor.


I mean, we're comparing this & this. Now, seriously, gentlemen, which do you prefer?

[rowan]

So World Rugby has confirmed the three bidders, despite SA not appearing to meet the requirement of home government support. Presumably there have been some informal assurances in this respect.

Meanwhile, Argentina has thrown its hat in the ring for 2027. Argentina must be the most successful team at RWC's to have never hosted a single match. In fact no country in South or North America has hosted a RWC match.

If SA missed out on 2023 and rebid for 2027, on almost any criteria, Arg should be preferred.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If South Africa are awarded 2023, then I think it will return to Europe in 2027, with either France or Italy the most likely (possibly combined). So Argentina would be more likely to get 2031, and I think they almost be certainties, even if Australia, for example, decided to bid again at that time. There might also be North American competition, but Argentina is surely first in line as far as the Western Hemisphere goes.

If, on the other hand, either of the European bids is successful for 2023, then South Africa would be almost certain to bid for a 5th time in succession in 2027. I'm not sure how long World Rugby would be able to keep knocking them back before things started to turn nasty, and upsetting one of the traditional powerhouses of the game could have dire consequences for the sport, especially given the delicate nature of rugby's place in the modern South Africa. So, I would most certainly expect SA to receive 2027 if they fail to get 2023 and then bid yet again. In this case, the event would almost certainly return to Europe in 2031 and Argentina would have to aim for 2035.

[OptimisticJock]

Why is size a factor, other than for stadia? What has success got to do with it? Should Japan not have been awarded their tournament because they've never qualified from their group?

And yes I do think a WC in Ireland would be better.

Really? I mean surely you want your RWC to be set against a background of crime, corruption and one of the most unequal societies the world has to offer, set along the lines of race.

I said I was on favour of ireland



Rowan you've still not answered why size matters to you (make yer ane jokes). You've also completely disregarded japan's lack of success or even of lack of wins.

[rowan]

My answer to that was that all of these factors will be taken into consideration but no single one of them will be the defining factor. World Rugby obviously deemed Japan's advantages in terms of financial status, large population, substantial player numbers and ready-do-go infrastructure far outweighted the Blossoms' historically modest achievements on the field.

As far as size goes, Ireland only has one major metropolitan center - Dublin - and you're going to have 20 (possibly 24) teams and their fans hanging around there for more than a month, mostly likely in rotten weather, and thus with little more to do in their free time than sit around in the pubs.

South Africa, on the other hand, is about the ideal size for a major sporting tournament in the modern era. It's nicely spread out, but most of its dozen or so major metropolitan centers are within a day's drive of one another. It's actually easier to get around than NZ is, due to its major expressways - and the lack of a Cook Strait dividing the country in half. Fans will be able to go on safari, explore nature, go up Table Mountain and visit any of the dozens of world class beaches. In addition to which there is the wide diversity of local culture indigenous to the African continent.

[Lizard]

Why is size a factor, other than for stadia? What has success got to do with it? Should Japan not have been awarded their tournament because they've never qualified from their group?

And yes I do think a WC in Ireland would be better.

Really? I mean surely you want your RWC to be set against a background of crime, corruption and one of the most unequal societies the world has to offer, set along the lines of race.

Was it any different in 95? Yet that tournament was a resounding success.& we just had the Olympics in Brazil. The FIFA World Cup has also been held recently in both SA and Brazil.

Japan has 130 million people. Combined Ireland has 6 million. All of the factors discussed will be duly taken into consideration. That is not to suggest any one of them will be the defining factor.


I mean, we're comparing this & this. Now, seriously, gentlemen, which do you prefer?

Indeed...

[Lizard]

And, seriously, gentlemen, which do you prefer?

[OptimisticJock]

My answer to that was that all of these factors will be taken into consideration but no single one of them will be the defining factor. World Rugby obviously deemed Japan's advantages in terms of financial status, large population, substantial player numbers and ready-do-go infrastructure far outweighted the Blossoms' historically modest achievements on the field.

As far as size goes, Ireland only has one major metropolitan center - Dublin - and you're going to have 20 (possibly 24) teams and their fans hanging around there for more than a month, mostly likely in rotten weather, and thus with little more to do in their free time than sit around in the pubs.

South Africa, on the other hand, is about the ideal size for a major sporting tournament in the modern era. It's nicely spread out, but most of its dozen or so major metropolitan centers are within a day's drive of one another. It's actually easier to get around than NZ is, due to its major expressways - and the lack of a Cook Strait dividing the country in half. Fans will be able to go on safari, explore nature, go up Table Mountain and visit any of the dozens of world class beaches. In addition to which there is the wide diversity of local culture indigenous to the African continent.

Is this a serious post?

[Lizard]

Is this a serious post?

Of course it is. Everyone knows that Ireland is bereft of scenery and is a cultural desert. It's pubs are particularly shithouse which is why practically every large town and city in the world doesn't have at least one "Irish Pub."



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Adder]

Size is an issue because all the infrastructures are meant for a smaller population (with a relatively big tourist market) and will take a hit. Dublin and Belfast are big enough towns but the rest are pretty small.
I wouldn't host in Scotland. Ireland Tourism industry is miles ahead of Scotland but its still very congested. Especially at the moment with it's "safe destination" image and all these multinationals not paying taxes over there.

In order for it to work well, you would need to spread and schedule the games accurately as to get visitors to rotate.

I don't really know SA, but they have recently hosted the FIFA world cup so accommodation must be up to a certain standard. Security will be a massive issue though. And it doesn't appear very safe politically.

I won't even mention, France, so depressing...

[rowan]

How small is Ireland?

It is smaller than Cuba
It is smaller than Iceland
It is smaller than New Zealand's North Island and barely half the size of the South Island
It is less than half the size of Orange Free State and less than a third the size of Transvaal
It is less than a tenth the size of Namibia
Texas is nine times bigger than Ireland
You could fit 202 Irelands in Russia.

[Adder]

How small is Ireland?

It is smaller than Cuba
It is smaller than Iceland
It is smaller than New Zealand's North Island and barely half the size of the South Island
It is less than half the size of Orange Free State and less than a third the size of Transvaal
It is less than a tenth the size of Namibia
Texas is nine times bigger than Ireland
You could fit 202 Irelands in Russia.

Comparing Ireland's 4.5 M population to Iceland's 300 000?