How to rank this RWC?
-
-
@dogmeat said in How to rank this RWC?:
@MN5 said in How to rank this RWC?:
a terrific time to be living in Sydney
Unpossible
Sorry am I missing something ?
Sydney is terrific
-
So I just started listening to the Rugby Daily podcast ranking the world cups. Worst and second worst were 1987 and 2011. I get 1987, it wasn't a big event or anywhere near fully formed. But the criticism of 2011 included gems like "it needs a country to get behind it" and "the weather was terrible". Is my memory completely failing me? I saw every match and can't remember any terrible weather. I was at the final in perfect weather and massive drama. Compared to say 2007, it was miles ahead. 2007 certainly didn't have one country behind it, the winners didn't play a hard match (will try not to mention why...). 2015 was great for us and I thought the rugby was pretty good, but the hosts going out in the pools surely didn't help.
Then we got Bryan Habana speaking for 10 minutes about 1995. Great for South Africa as a country, yes, but seriously dodgy in how they won it (both the semi and the final).
An interesting fact about world cups is there have often been 2 teams obviously destined to meet in the final in a heavyweight clash but it happens so rarely. 2023, 2015, 1995 being the exceptions. I guess you could argue 1991 given we were always going to meet Australia in the semi-final.
-
One of the best World Cups I think but a little behind 1995 and 2011 in my mind.
Positives: Going into the tournament there were four or five realistically possible winners, holding the tournament in a single country is always best, Portugal defying expectations, great to see a range of playing styles, wonderful Quarter Finals, hopefully a classic final to come, France have been good hosts.
Neagatives: Pool play went on too long, Sides looking to slow the game down have largely got away with it, the hosts going out in the QFs has dampened the atmosphere a bit, Rugby Union no longer seems to captivate my neighbours and acquaintances.
-
@Richie8-7 obviously trolling.
87 and 11 were two of the cups in contention for best ever IMO.
Before @Duluth started this thread was going to start a poll, and was seriously going to leave out 91, 99 and 07.
Those three were absolute rubbish for quality of rugby.
The rest all have a claim to being some sort of awesome.
The reason I didn't post a poll in the end was I couldn't work out how to do a preferential vote, as I reckon each of the other seven have a claim on being the best.
This version though? Down the list somewhat for me.
Maybe it was a timezone thing, but despite close scores in the meaningless matches I found it overall reasonably meh.
Any of 87, 95, 03, 11, 15 and 19 beats 23 for me.
-
Until 2015 - which was great I don't think there had been a really good RWC hosted in Europe.
They were never 'big' events, spread across too many locations and didn't have a buzz.
I was living in London for 87 and it did all seem a bit hokey TBH
95 and 2011 were epic 2003 less so. Japan was quite good despite it being a 'small' event for the host country. Possibly because of a sympathetic time zone.
This one - @sparky pretty much nailed it for me.
-
Quite a few of the hyped pool games failed to live up to expectations from a neutral point of view.
Scotland-Boks, Scotland-Ireland, England-Argentina, Wales-Australia come to mind. Italy weren't even semi competitive vs ABs or France
Of course this isn't unique to this World Cup and other teams performed above expectations going in (Portgual & Japan) but on paper I thought pool play would be even more competitive than it was.
-
@KiwiMurph said in How to rank this RWC?:
Quite a few of the hyped pool games failed to live up to expectations from a neutral point of view.
Scotland-Boks, Scotland-Ireland, England-Argentina, Wales-Australia come to mind. Italy weren't even semi competitive vs ABs or France
Of course this isn't unique to this World Cup and other teams performed above expectations going in (Portgual & Japan) but on paper I thought pool play would be even more competitive than it was.
Failing to live up to expectations in a WC has been a Scots tradition for pretty much as long as I remember. A couple of blow outs but completely shat the bed when it counted.
-
Arise dead thread!
Didn't rank well the FFR! Knocked out in the quarters, and fucked up the finance
‘Major failures’: French oversight costs Rugby World Cup $57m
The French government and FFR were blamed for failures of hosting the 2023 event.
-
-
@sparky said in How to rank this RWC?:
Anyone know which RWCs in the past either broke even or made money?
-
Japan 57 million US
England made record profits that year (can't find RWC only numbers)
NZ made a loss but that was planned for and covered by govt, in effect a profit to nzru
From an article just prior to 2011 "The last four rugby world cups have generated operating surpluses for the host union, but it has become increasingly difficult to achieve this since the tournament fee was introduced in 2003."
In know 1987 did, tooSo the answer is (almost?) all of them have made a profit for the Union, apart from France 2023. Including Ozzie next up
-
@Machpants didn't WR change the hosting model post 2011, that had the same model been in place in 2011 NZR would have made more coin
-
@taniwharugby said in How to rank this RWC?:
@Machpants didn't WR change the hosting model post 2011, that had the same model been in place in 2011 NZR would have made more coin
I don't know. I seem to remember us paying less than France did in 2007
-
@taniwharugby said in How to rank this RWC?:
didn't WR change the hosting model post 2011, that had the same model been in place in 2011 NZR would have made more coin
No. The host fee went up in 2015, and up again in '19 and '23.
The 'step change' was really between 2003 and the RWCs that came after. It is from 2007 onwards that the IRB put in place a hosting fee upfront.
The 'more coin' part probably bubbling away somewhere in the back of TR's memory, would be a comparison to the old model. E.g. NZRU would have made a NZD$78 million dollar profit in 2011 using the 2003 model, rather than the NZD $30 million loss (of which $20mil was covered by govt).
But, then .rolling forward ..... it would beggar belief to apply that same thinking to the profits England, Japan , France could have subsequently made using the same model, at the expense of the central WR/IRB profit,
-
@Machpants said in How to rank this RWC?:
@taniwharugby said in How to rank this RWC?:
@Machpants didn't WR change the hosting model post 2011, that had the same model been in place in 2011 NZR would have made more coin
I don't know. I seem to remember us paying less than France did in 2007
The 2007 and 2011 hosting fees were the same.
But, in 2023 France voluntarily upped that £120 million to £150 million to outbid their rivals (and IIRC that extra £30 million was to buy out the corporate, or travel? parts of the income that WR usually retain?)
Rugby World Cup - Wikipedia
