2023 RWC Host Poll

[rowan]

Interesting to note that one of the areas where South Africa scored highly was crime - frequently cited as the very reason they should not be hosting it. Presumably this criterion was assessed on the basis of the security measures they will be able to put in place for the event. I pointed out a number of times that the fact they held the FIFA World Cup without incident, and also host an annual 7s tourny, indicated that the high crime-rate was not going to undermine their bid. Meanwhile, political instability continues under Zuma, but he'll be long gone one way or the other come 2023. As for Tew's suggestion Ireland should bid for 2027, I think the writing is already on the wall. Small nation Rugby World Cups look to be a thing of the past. France will have waited a reasonable amount of time by then and simply have a far better case. & Argentina will be the frontrunner for 2031 - presuming they bid, and presuming SA does in fact clinch the 2023 tournament, which is far from a done deal just yet.

[rowan]

Reading between the lines I'm beginning to think this World Cup Board may have been set up expressly to discourage the horse-trading which has been going on behind the scenes during host campaigning, and which has quite possibly cost SA at least a couple of votes in the past. So I think the French, in particular, may have felt aggrieved because they'd scratched the rights backs and got themselves into a good position through the voting blocks, only to have that advantage scuppered by the World Rugby board's own assessment. It's still not a fait accompli either, but I don't think the FRU is helping itself by attempting to discredit the report.

[Mellsblue]

Im not sure why you need to read between the lines. That’s exactly why it’s been set-up - to avoid contentious decisions, such as those made by FIFA and the IOC.

Meanwhile, en France:

https://www.sportbusiness.com/sport-new ... p-decision

[Digby]

Sounds like the French think the IRB are as honest and capable as Trump, that might be a touch harsh, but maybe only a little

[rowan]

I think it's the reverse, tbh. What I'm saying is that the WC Board appears to have been set up precisely to provide an honest assessment, and thereby provide guidance along purely ethical lines, in an attempt to allay some of the unethical behavior independent unions tend to indulge in when left to their own devices, such as forming powerful voting 'blocks.'

[rowan]

Zimbabwe players supporting the SA23 bid:

[Digby]

IRB are facing a potential legal challenge from the IRFU for a number of statements/assumptions being made in the2023 evaluation which saw SA top the list as the preferred venue. Whether the legal challenge is real or merely applying pressure isn't clear, though the Irish Unions has contacted the IRB and all other leading unions to raise concerns about

(a) The recent history of games being played in SA to largely empty stadiums, with Ireland stressing part of their proposal was to see full capacity across all WC games

(b) The abrupt withdrawal of the 2022 Commenwealth Games from Durban after SA failed to meet commitments given, and such being ignored when it comes to the 2023 bis by SARU

(c) The lack of consideration for security within the evaluation with France, Ireland and SA all being ranked equally, which Ireland are left to ponder on given the much lower crime rate in Europe

(d) The SA government backed guarantee for the tournament fee given the junk rating of SA government debt

That's as being reported in the Times, and tbh I'd be surprised if they haven't raised other serious concerns with the report too, maybe they will down the line

[rowan]

Sour grapes, predictably enough. All three candidates have spent a lot of time and money promotion their bids and for this report to scupper the plans of one of them, in particular, on the eve of the final vote is obviously not going to go down well. Most of the points raised above have been shot down in the report, which is not surprising as SA does get the best attendances in the world for domestic rugby - despite a couple of lean years due to an excess of fixtures and poor performances by a few of the Super Rugby teams. The security issue has already been discussed to death, but it came out tops in the WC board's assessment. Anyway, it's still up in the air, but I'd say now it's probably going to be either SA or France - and whichever of the two doesn't get it this time will be almost certain to the next. I just think it would be a shame for the latter to get it so soon after after 2007.

[rowan]

Great column by Keo!

Amid all the Irish and French propaganda and attacks on World Rugby’s decision to recommend South Africa as the host nation for the 2023 Rugby World Cup, it needs reinforcing just why South Africa was deemed superior to Ireland and France.
The importance of the weighted bid scorecard, designed by World Rugby and agreed to by the World Rugby General Council, also can’t be stressed enough.

The scorecard also is a bit more than an individual opinion of a bean counter.

For the first time in the tournament’s history each bidding country was given a guideline and a measurement to be considered a competent host.

South Africa, in three previous bids, had lost out because of horse trading, back room deals and rugby politics. The country’s rugby bosses only agreed to bid for 2023 because of the independent nature of the process, with so much importance attached to the independent and technical review report.

South Africa trusted the strength of a bid based on analyses from recognised industry experts.

http://www.sport24.co.za/Rugby/SouthAfr ... 9#cxrecs_s

Not sure that the horse-trading effect has been negated entirely by this report, however. We'll find out very soon, of course...

[Digby]

It's not as such an independent report. Mostly it was compiled by IRB staffers, and then in some part supposedly independently audited. Whereas it seems the expectation from many is the whole report would be supplied from an independent auditor.

[rowan]

I think you misunderstand the term and its application in this context. Regardless, Keo makes some excellent points here. Aside from the horse-trading, there has been a tremendous amount of propaganda involved in keeping the tournament out of Africa over the past couple of decades. & that is basically because the 6 Nations and Australasia still have a complete stranglehold on administrative matters and their media backs them every step of the way, which has obviously been detrimental to the growth of the international game.

[rowan]

The big decision is tomorrow then. Most reports are reading like it's a fait accompli, but I'm not so sure about that. I remember thinking SA had 2011 in the bag, given the fiasco which had resulted in NZ being axed as a co-host 8 years earlier, but there you go. Anyway, good luck, SA. Better late than never...

The fog of war that has afflicted the race to host the 2023 Rugby World Cup will lift on Wednesday and is expected to reveal South Africa as outright victor to stage the quadrennial showpiece.

Two weeks ago the Rugby World Cup board released a report placing South Africa first across a range of criteria on which the candidates were assessed, ranging from stadiums to financial assurances

France, second, and Ireland, third, came out swinging in response to the report and have been as combative as their players on the pitch, slamming the findings that placed South Africa in the driving seat.

Had they been on the field of play — where rugby players distinguish themselves from footballers for their polite acceptance of the referee’s decision — the Irish and French would have earned at least a sin-binning.

World Rugby replied with clarifications but it is now up to the 39 votes on its Council to decide whether they accept the unanimous decision of the Rugby World Cup board to award South Africa the hosting rights for the second time.

https://citizen.co.za/sport/south-afric ... ttle-ends/

[rowan]

Live now:



France

[Digby]

Seems it's allez les blues

[rowan]

Well, better France than Ireland, but only 16 years after last hosting and SA misses out for the umpteenth time in a row. That's sport and now it's just a case of getting on with it. The one consolation from my perspective is that 2007 was perhaps the best World Cup so far, and hopefully 2023 will reach similar heights.

[Digby]

1st Round

France 18
Ireland 8
SA 13

2nd Round

France 24
SA 15

So France won by a distance

[rowan]

I'm a big fan of France hosting it, just feel this is too soon and really unfair on other potential host nations. But, as I said, it's now just a case of getting on with it. I'm also happy it won't be a small nation tournament either. That was my main fear, because I'm a big fan of the game's global development and they need to move onto bigger and better pastures.

[OptimisticJock]

Better than SA

[rowan]

Better than Ireland, that's for sure.

Looks like the 2nd round vote was primarily divided between SANZAAR plus CAR against Europe, North America & Asia. Not sure which way the Oceania vote went, but if it didn't go SA's way, something fishy must have gone on. Regardless, sheer weight of numbers sees it remain in the northern hemisphere for the third time in a row, with tier 2 votes especially crucial. To be fair, if you voted purely from a financial perspective, France would be your choice. But then we'd be staging it in England & France alternately for the rest of eternity...

[Stones of granite]

I'm pleased about this. I would have slightly preferred Ireland, but France is good enough for me. I'm particularly pleased it's not in South Africa as, if I manage to get tickets, there is a much lower chance of being murder fucked.

[Adder]

A great excuse to take my daughter on a "heritage" field trip.

Sent from my SM-J500FN using Tapatalk

[Digby]

Oddly a rare instance when the relative lack of corruption might have gone against SA as France ran around offering cash and games, SA I'm sure will soon move to push their corruption agenda ahead once more in the near term

[rowan]

I think rugby in SA is really going to suffer as a result of this. Not one but 3 shock rejections. Obviously they're out of favour big time - a nation which helped prop this game up throughout the first half century or so of its existence. I think the majority of South Africans are just going to look at this decision and think 'who needs rugby anyway?' But personally I'm not too bothered with it being France. Just so long as they didn't belittle the event by staging another small nation World Cup.

[Digby]

The majority of South Africans already though who needs rugby, or as the alternative never thought about rugby in the first place. As with most nations rugby is going to continue in SA as a strong minority sport.

[rowan]

Yes, & World Rugby missed another chance to remedy that - by reviving the spirit of 95 fully a generation later. I hoped France would get it in 2027, don't get me wrong, and I'm not a fraction as disappointed as I would've been if Ireland had got it, but I think they've snubbed Africa once too often and there are going to be profound long-term consequences to this.

Anyway, the decision is not going to be changed, that's one thing we can be sure of. & France certainly put on one of the best World Cups a decade ago. So it's France 2023 - and sure to be another outstanding tournament.