A Celtic RWC ?

by Portnoy Mon Sep 05, 2011 12:46 pm

When will they be gifted the honour?

In my opinion the NZ will be the last to be hosted solely by a 'small' nation and in future should be granted to either a 'big' country exclusively or a collective of smaller nations.

2007 provided a benchmark for the future where neutral games were spectacularly attended whilst (e.g. MS) neutral ones were either in the wrong venue or fell below par for the competition.

So. I want and would welcome a Celtic RWC so long as they can supply and guarantee audiences of a minimum of 30000 for every game.

Equally in the SH where only Oz and the Boks could aspire to attendance and revenue required.

So should future RWC be granted to

'Big' nations (Eng, Fra, SA, Oz) with no 'away' fixtures
and
Collective nations (Celtic (plus Italy), PIs (NZ, PIs and Japan) and the Americas)) with no 'big nations' fixtures

by HERSH Mon Sep 05, 2011 12:49 pm

I haven't a problem with this as long as England get to play their games at Twickers

by **rodders** Mon Sep 05, 2011 12:53 pm

I have no idea what you are on about Portnoy. Wasn't the 1999 WC hosted by Wales?

I think there was talk about Ireland and Scotland putting in a joint bid about 10 years ago or so but nothing came of it because Ireland couldn't supply enough stadiums. That was before Croke park allowed rugby to be played though.

Didn't Japan narrowly lose out to NZ this time. I'd imagine it will be in SA again soon.

by Guest Mon Sep 05, 2011 1:02 pm

roddersm wrote:I have no idea what you are on about Portnoy. Wasn't the 1999 WC hosted by Wales?

It's just another excuse to regurgitate a previous "discussion" by him where he decides to moan about a game in the Millennium Stadium that didn't sellout in 2007.

Come on Portnoy, the rugby season is back now. There must be better topics to try and discuss.

by Portnoy Mon Sep 05, 2011 1:02 pm

roddersm wrote:I have no idea what you are on about Portnoy. Wasn't the 1999 WC hosted by Wales?

I think there was talk about Ireland and Scotland putting in a joint bid about 10 years ago or so but nothing came of it because Ireland couldn't supply enough stadiums. That was before Croke park allowed rugby to be played though.

Didn't Japan narrowly lose out to NZ this time. I'd imagine it will be in SA again soon.

"The 1999 Rugby Union World Cup was the fourth Rugby World Cup, and the first to be held in rugby union's professional era.[1] The principal host nation was Wales, although the majority of matches were played outside the country, shared between England, France, Scotland and Ireland."

The point is to separate the big rugby nations and to create collectives of the other nations to supply financially successful RWCs. (which NZ 2011 won't).

by red_stag Mon Sep 05, 2011 1:05 pm

Japan are hosting 2019. Ireland isn't large enough to host - IMO only Aviva Stadium and Croke Park are really large enough to host WC games.

Italy is a country more than capable of handling a World Cup on their own and I'd love to see them get 2023.

by **Biltong** Mon Sep 05, 2011 1:08 pm

Maybe we should jst host all rugby world cups in south africa, then you guys don't have to fight about it?

by Portnoy Mon Sep 05, 2011 1:10 pm

Risca Rev wrote:
roddersm wrote:I have no idea what you are on about Portnoy. Wasn't the 1999 WC hosted by Wales?

It's just another excuse to regurgitate a previous "discussion" by him where he decides to moan about a game in the Millennium Stadium that didn't sellout in 2007.

Come on Portnoy, the rugby season is back now. There must be better topics to try and discuss.

No it isn't Rev. It's not a moan. I'm sure that if the Celtic nations 'owned' the RWC, then they would be happy and that Canada v Fiji would have been filled to capacity in any number of alternate grounds. As ever half-empty grounds engender less than full crowd interest and that reflects worldwide on TV.

by red_stag Mon Sep 05, 2011 1:11 pm

Portnoy wrote:
Risca Rev wrote:
roddersm wrote:I have no idea what you are on about Portnoy. Wasn't the 1999 WC hosted by Wales?

It's just another excuse to regurgitate a previous "discussion" by him where he decides to moan about a game in the Millennium Stadium that didn't sellout in 2007.

Come on Portnoy, the rugby season is back now. There must be better topics to try and discuss.

No it isn't Rev. It's not a moan. I'm sure that if the Celtic nations 'owned' the RWC, then they would be happy and that Canada v Fiji would have been filled to capacity in any number of alternate grounds. As ever half-empty grounds engender less than full crowd interest and that reflects worldwide on TV.

No it isn't Rev . . . .blah blah blah I'm on my hobby horse about this one match four years ago Rolling Eyes

by Portnoy Mon Sep 05, 2011 1:12 pm

red_stag wrote:Japan are hosting 2019. Ireland isn't large enough to host - IMO only Aviva Stadium and Croke Park are really large enough to host WC games.

Italy is a country more than capable of handling a World Cup on their own and I'd love to see them get 2023.

Which entirely ignores and side-steps my op Stag. A Celtic RWC?

by Portnoy Mon Sep 05, 2011 1:20 pm

red_stag wrote:
Portnoy wrote:
Risca Rev wrote:
roddersm wrote:I have no idea what you are on about Portnoy. Wasn't the 1999 WC hosted by Wales?

It's just another excuse to regurgitate a previous "discussion" by him where he decides to moan about a game in the Millennium Stadium that didn't sellout in 2007.

Come on Portnoy, the rugby season is back now. There must be better topics to try and discuss.

No it isn't Rev. It's not a moan. I'm sure that if the Celtic nations 'owned' the RWC, then they would be happy and that Canada v Fiji would have been filled to capacity in any number of alternate grounds. As ever half-empty grounds engender less than full crowd interest and that reflects worldwide on TV.

No it isn't Rev . . . .blah blah blah I'm on my hobby horse about this one match four years ago

Presumably therefore you are content with the marginalisation of the smaller nations in their own rights.

It seems to me that all the hosts that I propose could arguably host hugely successful tournaments without recall to outsourcing games.

by **Notch** Mon Sep 05, 2011 1:27 pm

I don't think providing 30000 for all games is at all realistic. In France, England, Ireland etc. most games of the local province/club don't get that. You think Namibia vs Canada or Fiji vs Japan is going to pull that in?

A Celtic RWC would be great, but we could only muster 4 or 5 really great stadiums. The midsize stadiums are good though. Somewhere like Parc Y Scarlets or RDS is the right size for all but the high-profile group games.

We'd hardly be less equipped to host than NZ, but NZ is the exception rather than the rule. Unfortunately bigger countries will always have an advantage when it comes to events like this.

by red_stag Mon Sep 05, 2011 1:34 pm

Ok ignoring the usual and obvious jibes I don't think a Celtic RWC should be on the cards.

2015 - England
2019 - Japan

As I said I'd love Italy to get next one in 2023. I think they'd do a smashing job.

I'd imagine its surely back to South Africa (by 2027 it would have been 32 years since they last held it). Argentina or Russia may be capable of hosting one by then. Australia and France both big options too.

Ireland have currently only 2 stadiums really up for hosting RWC matches. That may change due to expansion in the future maybe. Wales has only got 1 and Scotland has only another 1 or 2.

by Portnoy Mon Sep 05, 2011 1:35 pm

Notch wrote:I don't think providing 30000 for all games is at all realistic. In France, England, Ireland etc. most games of the local province/club don't get that. You think Namibia vs Canada or Fiji vs Japan is going to pull that in?

A Celtic RWC would be great, but we could only muster 4 or 5 really great stadiums. The midsize stadiums are good though. Somewhere like Parc Y Scarlets or RDS is the right size for all but the high-profile group games.

We'd hardly be less equipped to host than NZ, but NZ is the exception rather than the rule. Unfortunately bigger countries will always have an advantage when it comes to events like this.

Well I attended the Japan v Fiji game in Toulose in 2007. Along with 34,999 others.

by red_stag Mon Sep 05, 2011 1:49 pm

Yes Portnoy and even MORE people went to see the game you keep rabbitting on about.

by Portnoy Mon Sep 05, 2011 1:56 pm

What's your point Stag? I'm proposing a basically Rabo-hosted RWC.

And I think that I've only mentioned the poor MS attendance in 2007 two (max three) times on v1 and v2 collectively.

And I think twice for the Japan Fiji game in Toulose.

by red_stag Mon Sep 05, 2011 1:59 pm

Fair enough. I've made my point a few posts back I gave quite a long post on why I didn't think a Rabo hosted RWC would be on the cards. Italy is capable of it alone and the other 3 aren't capable even between them.

by TheGreyGhost Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:01 pm

HERSH wrote:I haven't a problem with this as long as England get to play their games at Twickers

Don't England hold the RWC record for most games at their home stadium anyway?

by HERSH Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:03 pm

by TheGreyGhost Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:05 pm

Stats to prove it anyone?

by HERSH Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:10 pm

Must be Wales they're always playing at home!

I'm surprised they're not playing SA at the MS Whistle

by red_stag Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:11 pm

Its certainly England. They played all their 1999 pool stage games there and their quarter final play off there. They also had all their pool games there in 1991 and played the final there too.

So thats 8 Rugby World Cup matches at Twickenham for England.

Don't know about others but thats a lot.

by Portnoy Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:17 pm

TheGreyGhost wrote:
HERSH wrote:I haven't a problem with this as long as England get to play their games at Twickers

Don't England hold the RWC record for most games at their home stadium anyway?

I'd be very surprised if the didn't hold the record at [their] HQ. Can't remember the last time they played a home game outside the Cabbage Patch apart from that game v NZ at Old Trafford when the stadium was being rebuilt. There are probably others though.

by TheGreyGhost Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:18 pm

My thinking is that it's true Stag. I've heard it quoted a lot. However I'm open to being proved wrong of course because frankly I can't be bothered working it out.

by HERSH Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:20 pm

Choke!

Whats does that feel like GreyGhost?

by red_stag Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:20 pm

Ah so the threads going down that route. Right talk to you all later.

by tomhughesnice Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:21 pm

red_stag wrote:Its certainly England. They played all their 1999 pool stage games there and their quarter final play off there. They also had all their pool games there in 1991 and played the final there too.

So thats 8 Rugby World Cup matches at Twickenham for England.

Don't know about others but thats a lot.

Pretty close run between England and Wales I think.

The Millennium stadium had 6 matches in the 1999 world cup and 4 in the 2007 world cup. So I count 10 for Millennium stadium, would have been more if the stadium existed in 1991.

by tomhughesnice Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:29 pm

MS wins 10 games in total.

Twickers has had 7 games in the world cup in total.
1991 3 pool matches and the final.
1999 3 pool matches.

by TheGreyGhost Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:30 pm

It's about the nation team playing home in the their national stadium, rather than just games at the stadium.

by Portnoy Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:33 pm

It is extremely rare for any Home Nation to host a home game outside Twickenham/Lansdowne/MS[or NS]/Murrayfield when they are not being rebuilt.

It would be interesting to hear of any examples that prove the exception to the rule.

by doctor_grey Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:42 pm

I like the idea of discussing possible future hosting ideas for the RWC. Since it is now up to us, we need to decide something first: Is the RWC a tool for growing Rugby in non-core areas? Purely the financial engine which powers the sport? Or a matrix of the two? Remember this is in the context of where we locate the RWC after Japan in 2019.

Italy: I thought Italy was a better choice than Japan for 2019 since Rugby is growing there, they have the stadia, it is close to a lot of Rugby supporters (though no location is convenient to all), the weather would be terrific, would look great on TV, and the wine, women song............

Celtic: Like Italy and England, convenient to a huge number of supporters, have the stadia, would make huge profits. Develops no new areas for Rugby, but would do wonders to further grow Rugby at home. And I think Rugby could use a little boost.

US/Canada (or Canada/US): They have the stadia (could play almost every match in a different stadium and would still have the possibility for 75,000 plus). Would grow Rugby in two fertile countries ripe for it, would be flawlessly marketed and executed, and would make big money. Not terribly convenient to most Rugby supporters.

NZ/Pac Isles: I think we missed the boat on this one as this should have been the plan for 2011. I am not complaining about NZ, but this would have presented the only opportunity for the Pac Isles nations to get RWC matches. Shame.

Argentina/Uruguay: They have the stadia, would grow the sport there, would be marketed very well. Not convenient to most Rugby supporters. But Buenos Aires as a host city would be terrific.

by HERSH Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:43 pm

I see you changed your post GreyGhost, that backfired on you boy, 1 -0 to me Yahoo

Regards

HERSH xx kiss

by TheGreyGhost Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:46 pm

No Hersh, I just realised it was a childish thing to say, so I deleted it.

I don't see it as a points scoring excercise. But you know, congratulations on your 1-0 posting victory, or whatever.

Alternately we could just agree to shelve the petty point scoring while there was real rugby going on, and resume when the world gets boring again.

by HERSH Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:51 pm

"No Hersh, I just realised it was a childish thing to say, so I deleted it."

Whatever boy thumbsup

looks to me like you can dish it out but aren't so keen to receive it.

Some of us are born givers while others only take it. Whistle

by TheGreyGhost Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:52 pm

Whatever. Just, whatever. The threads a good one, let's not Love sacks it up.

by HERSH Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:53 pm

by **Biltong** Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:55 pm

TheGreyGhost wrote:No Hersh, I just realised it was a childish thing to say, so I deleted it.

I don't see it as a points scoring excercise. But you know, congratulations on your 1-0 posting victory, or whatever.

Alternately we could just agree to shelve the petty point scoring while there was real rugby going on, and resume when the world gets boring again.

Because of your maturity in the matter, I have awarded you a gazillion points.

The decision of the match referee is final, and no TMO decisions will be taken into account. Whistle

by Pete C (Kiwireddevil) Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:56 pm

HERSH wrote:"No Hersh, I just realised it was a childish thing to say, so I deleted it."

Whatever boy looks to me like you can dish it out but aren't so keen to receive it.

Some of us are born givers while others only take it.

Just a suggestion (I'd rather not get the red pen/delete button out just yet), there's some interesting comments on this thread, how's about we ditch the petty childish stuff and get back on topic.

EDIT - I typed this before the last 3 posts, well done guys.

by Portnoy Mon Sep 05, 2011 3:13 pm

Why then should there not be a successful Celtic/Rabo RWC?

Look at the Japanese options for 2019

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Rugby_World_Cup venues.

There is equivalence in the stadia available. Is it just the confidence do take the risk for the bid that's missing?

Is the prospect of neutral games too much? I don't think so over 12m home nations countries plus the enticement of Italy.

by Bathman_in_London Mon Sep 05, 2011 5:30 pm

Personally, I think that has there have been games in 'Celtic' countries for 3 of the world cups so far, it would be far better to have the next WC in a single country. I agree with some of the posters above that Italy would be my choice. There are certianly the stadia, plus it would give rugby there a real boost.

Even if it wasnt Italy, I think the best world cups have been in a single country, with more excitement about the smaller games in particular than have been seen in the more disjointed world cups.

by tomhughesnice Mon Sep 05, 2011 5:44 pm

Personally I like the idea of having the world cup in a nation that will make it a financial success and then a developing nation.

So
2007 France
2011 NZ
2015 England
2019 Japan
2023 Italy
2027 Argentina(Will have been in the quad nations for a while by then)
2031 SA
2035 USA / Russia

... Im an old man by this point so probably will care more about trying to make the toilet on time than where the rugby world cup is played.

by **Biltong** Mon Sep 05, 2011 5:45 pm

South Africa will be a great place for the RWC.

Ellispark 60 000 Johannesburg
Soccer city 94 000 Soweto
Loftus 45 000 Pretoria
Royal Bafokeng stadium 40 000 Rustenburg
Free state stadium 40 000 Bloemfontein
Peter mokaba Stadium 40 000 Polokwane
Mbombela Stadium 40 000 Nelspruit
Moses Mabhida Stadium 70 000 Durban
Kings Park Stadium 52 000 Durban
Nelson Mandela Stadium 50 000 Port Elisabeth
Newlands Stadium 40 000 Capetown.
Green Point Stadium 60 000 Capetown

12 very good stadiums to host a RWC.

by tomhughesnice Mon Sep 05, 2011 5:49 pm

Biltong, wouldnt be surprised if you got it after Japan. Got the venues and the local interest. Plus its in a good time zone for all the European TV money.

by **Biltong** Mon Sep 05, 2011 5:52 pm

Well from an economic point of view it will make sense, as you say time zone is great and TV viewership will go through the roof, plus SA is a cheap place to tour.

by nottins Mon Sep 05, 2011 6:48 pm

TheGreyGhost wrote:
HERSH wrote:I haven't a problem with this as long as England get to play their games at Twickers

Don't England hold the RWC record for most games at their home stadium anyway?

No, that would be Wales with 9 matches at their home stadium, England have had 8 of their RWC games at Twickenham.

by Portnoy Mon Sep 05, 2011 6:57 pm

tomhughesnice wrote:Personally I like the idea of having the world cup in a nation that will make it a financial success and then a developing nation.

So
2007 France
2011 NZ
2015 England
2019 Japan
2023 Italy
2027 Argentina(Will have been in the quad nations for a while by then)
2031 SA
2035 USA / Russia

... Im an old man by this point so probably will care more about trying to make the toilet on time than where the rugby world cup is played.

Japan-Italy-Argentina won't happen on economic grounds.
And then to propose SH 27 and SH 31 equally won't happen.

More realistic is
Japan '19
Rabo (or at worst France/Italy) '23
Aus '27

Got to keep the books balanced

by MBTGOG Mon Sep 05, 2011 7:03 pm

I see either Italy/Argentina or South Africa bagging the 2023 event with the other option bagging the next one.

I'd really like to see a tournament go to Argentina as it would be our first venture in the Americas and would give greater credence to the idea that we are a truly global game. Plus the times would work well there as it can be worked that matches can be watching both in the European/South African time zones and also the Oceania and Japanese time zones.

by Portnoy Mon Sep 05, 2011 7:37 pm

MBTGOG wrote:I see either Italy/Argentina or South Africa bagging the 2023 event with the other option bagging the next one.

I'd really like to see a tournament go to Argentina as it would be our first venture in the Americas and would give greater credence to the idea that we are a truly global game. Plus the times would work well there as it can be worked that matches can be watching both in the European/South African time zones and also the Oceania and Japanese time zones.

The IRB has thus far been pragmatic.

Recently they've chosen NZ as a comfortable last hurrah to the leading but unprofitable nation.
So they had to chose England as the alternate profit centre after France (I think that they missed a trick by not excluding home nations venues)
Japan - a development job with big grounds and equally big risks

Why the not ffs a Celtic RWC?
We keep on hearing about how confident and increasingly independent the Celtic axis is. This is an extraordinary opportunity.

Take it. You are no longer dependants.

by MBTGOG Mon Sep 05, 2011 7:45 pm

We wouldn't take the financial burden upon ourselves.

by Shifty Mon Sep 05, 2011 7:55 pm

The rugby world Cup is now officially out of reach of every Union in the World Game, it can only be held with government financial assistance.

Wales and Scotland will never host the tournament again, though Wales has a legally binding agreement that a tournament run by any of the 6 Nations sides, must include games at Cardiff. The WRU got all the other 6 Nation countries to agree to this during the 1999 tournament.

I really don't see why we don't have a European Cup while the Lions are on tour. 4 pools of 4 and a chance for Germany, Italy, Russia etc to host a tournament and increase rugbys exposure.

by Sponsored content