D-Day looms for RWC 2023 bidders
-
I'm shocked. Backroom handshakes and pockets being lined. Congrats to France. Bitter disappointment for Ireland. But looks like Saffers got the shaft.
-
-
@gunner said in D-Day looms for RWC 2023 bidders:
Disappointing.
Lock the future WC rotation in now. France, Australia, England, France, Australia, England.....
It's looking like that isn't it? It would be the death of the RWC if this happens.
I have to say that I found the World Rugby report findings that RSA were the better option somewhat dubious but the whole money thing just stinks.
-
I haven't looked at details of France's bid, but when they hosted in 2007 they made deals with SCO and WAL who hosted matches and that seemed a bit of a farce. Here's hoping all 2023 matches are played exclusively in the host nation.
-
@salacious-crumb nice try. There wasn't a RWC in 07.
-
-
@bovidae said in D-Day looms for RWC 2023 bidders:
Have the details of the final vote been released? NZ voted for SA so didn't follow the money.
I would have seriously thought about going to Ireland or SA for a RWC, but France (again) - nah.
I have no doubts the French will pull together a magnificent tournament -- provided all the matches are played within the confines of their borders (we don't yet know what horse-trading and promises were made written on the back on napkins, so we'll have to wait and see...)
The problem itself is the process. Secret ballots do not and never have been understood as "transparency," despite the bollocks WR is telling us.
-
I understand that all RWCs have to be one-country tournaments now.
I'm sure the info will come out as each country justifies their vote.
-
@pot-hale said in D-Day looms for RWC 2023 bidders:
Jurie Roux, the chief executive of SA Rugby, gave a withering assessment of the last two weeks’ lobbying. He said: “World Rugby ran an exhaustive and transparent process for 15 months to identify the best host nation, only for the process to go entirely opaque for the past two weeks.”
The process was incredibly clear the whole way through. The purposes of the report was to assess the viability of each bid and to recommend the one the review panel felt was the best. The IOC does this also. It doesn't prevent unions from weighing certain criteria differently than what the panel did.
I have no problems with any Union that disregarded a report that suggests SA is a safer venue than Ireland, or has equal transport infrastructure to France. Likewise I don't have any problem with a union who refuses to vote for SA on the basis of the quota system or having no desire to deal with the incompetent embarrassment that is SARU any more than neccessary.
It's a bit of a red herring anyway because had Ireland won, 90% of people complaining would have no problems. The article from the Times posted talks out both sides of it's mouth in that regard - claiming bribery for French votes but bemoaning they didn't have the spine to go with Ireland (which was not the preference).
Money does talk, personally think Ireland would have been the best choice - but I'm not a cash strapped tier 2 union.
If WR voted for a host where the report found large holes in their plan and gave them a failing grade (Qataresque) - then I completely understand the outrage. But these were three competent hosts and the Euros won out in the end. Fair enough.
-
@salacious-crumb said in D-Day looms for RWC 2023 bidders:
The problem itself is the process. Secret ballots do not and never have been understood as "transparency," despite the bollocks WR is telling us.
Most of the votes are publicly known, the Times article lists many of the votes and the supposed rationale behind them. This article lists the likely tally.
-
On some of the points raised above.
The bidding process specified that matches must be played in the bidding union territory. So no sharing out after that fact or horse deals on that one.
The French bid had money for individual unions on offer. Substantial money for Tier One unions who had the 3 votes.
Browne of the IRFU is ‘disappointed with our neighbours’. Like John Pullin before, the English turned up again. But their Celtic cousins and PRO14 partners lost their way.
The SRU followed the money to France and WRU’s Davies said he was honor bound to follow the recommendation because he was on Rugby World Cup board. Those 6 votes changed the picture completely from a likely France 15, Ireland 14 and SA 10 to Ireland being also-rans and out.
The often-quoted myth of home union harmony and voting en bloc in WR is well and truly dead. The IRFU’s other PRO14 partner, Italy, also turned away giving their vote to SA, despite owing the IRFU a good chunk of money from non-payment of their PRO14 participation fees over the last few years.
Should make for a few interesting meetings and pained silences in Celtic Rugby over the next few months.
-
@pot-hale Irish Times article had Italy voting for France.
(... maybe to get the money to Ireland ... ?)
-
-
@booboo said in D-Day looms for RWC 2023 bidders:
Am wondering if anyone is incandescent with rage?
I’d say that Browne is spitting....
-
@taniwharugby I suppose the consolation is, it doesn't matter where it's being hosted as much as which cupboard Bill spends his 4 years in. For all their money, I don't believe they can even beat a shambolic Bok team let alone a home RWC.
-
@pn said in D-Day looms for RWC 2023 bidders:
I guess that this means we wont see another RWC in NZ again.
Why not? Under the current rules - sure, but under the current rules Japan would not win hosting rights either.
Things will change, sub hosting will likely come back on the table, there will be a move on for a RWC in the Americas in the next 20 years. I fully expect a RWC fixture to be played in NZ during my lifetime.
