Scandalous opportunism by Wales

or necessary business sense by the RFU?

The Telegraph are reporting,

'Wales fans could now also have a considerable slice of the 2015 World Cup to look forward to. Negotiations started in Auckland last week and are on-going but Cardiff is now likely to host the Wales pool and at least one quarter-final, with the RFU having to guarantee £80 million to the IRB the huge commercial potential of matches in Cardiff has proved irresistible but one important caveat is to be put in place.
“What we are hoping for is that the majority of Wales home games will be held in the Millennium, continues Lewis, “but when Wales play against a tier-one country in the pool that would most definitely be played somewhere else because of the home advantage. we accept that.But it makes business and rugby sense to allow Wales to play their pool games against tier two countries at the Millennium Stadium because we can fill the 74,500 capacity for such game.
“That decision will be this side of Christmas, we met here last week for a particular meeting on that issue. All talks have been sensible and good natured and about what’s best for the tournament, how to make the tournament work. '

Personally I think the WC should be held in one country alone but it may be a case of needs must. The RFU , currently seem to be in such disarray I wouldn't trust them to organise a drink up in a brewery!

However, a balance needs to be struck here - How would a so called tier 2 side like Samoa feel if they had to play a pool game against Wales at the MS. Particularly if they had had 4 days rest like this year?

I think it is a bit of opportunism here but it also makes a lot of financial sense.

Tier 2 teams could rightly feel very had done by though imo if this does go ahead.

did the kiwis have to garantee the irb 80 mill?

that seems the defining reason.
anyway all the same- why not- great stadium, wales have done ok this time around- so fair play, tickets could be sold for alot of dollar!!

I think it’s wrong, I'd make Wales play outside of the principality maybe St James Park in Newcastle.

Good on the WRU I say.

If that can do this deal then why not. They are there to do their best for the Welsh rugby team, I couldn't care less about any other team.

"Personally I think the WC should be held in one country alone but it may
be a case of needs must. The RFU , currently seem to be in such
disarray I wouldn't trust them to organise a drink up in a brewery!"

you really dont get the point do you pal- the RFU can orgainse and organise very well, and that is why they are looking into this decision.

i havent read the full article- but its a financial one only. it does
wind me up that NZ make a hash of the rugby business and demand more all
the time, yet england do very well and seem to get punished.

this is surely not a wesh decison- allthough they are going to be loving
it- its a RFU decsion , because they understand business from the off,
and its obviously because the IRB want to fill there coffers, especially
now because the SH teams were threatening boycotts if they didnt get
some free money!!

I don't have a problem with this if the Tier 2 nations get half the gate Recipts

damage_13 wrote:I don't have a problem with this if the Tier 2 nations get half the gate Recipts

what are you talking about lol- half the game reciepts to the teams playing- so where does the organisers money come from lol- if that happened world cups wouldnt happen

I for one don't agree with this, if the WC is in England then let England host it.

If it was a shared WC then fine but again its all down to money and the RFU/WRU are obviously happy to do a deal.

bedfordwelsh wrote:I for one don't agree with this, if the WC is in England then let England host it.

If it was a shared WC then fine but again its all down to money and the RFU/WRU are obviously happy to do a deal.

what are they supposed to do when the IRB are making such staggering demands!- lets sort out the real culprit here.

Also I think being away from Wales and outside the proverbial goldfish bowl has helped our boys.

bedfrod you would still be in your bowl in england anyway

bedfordwelsh wrote:Also I think being away from Wales and outside the proverbial goldfish bowl has helped our boys.

In that case let the MS host their games, its a win win at least I can get my hands on some free world cup tickets.

Is the playing surface at Millenium Stadium up to World cup standard?

aucklandlaurie wrote: Is the playing surface at Millenium Stadium up to World cup standard?

are you joking or something lol- even if it isnt at presnt- IT WILL BE!!

Well thats good to hear.....

mystiroakey wrote:

damage_13 wrote:I don't have a problem with this if the Tier 2 nations get half the gate Recipts

what are you talking about lol- half the game reciepts to the teams playing- so where does the organisers money come from lol- if that happened world cups wouldnt happen

the organisers get the Back hander from the WRU anyway ...like France got one in 07.

Wales should not be getting ANY games. They are riding on the coat tails of the England bid. You have to feel sorry for the Scots and the Irish, maybe we should've bid under a GB Name and got money from them too.

If the Welsh want a game or two in their Stadia then fine, but they can't play 'at Home' and it should be a Tier 1 v Tier 2 match with half the gate receipts going to the Tier 2 nation Union for grassroots development

They are allowng the RFU to use their stadium so it's only right they should be allowed to play in it. Opportunistic yes but it would be the same the other way around

I don't like it. It's England's WC so let them host it.

But don't blame the WRU, it's the RFU's decision and if they want to use the MS why wouldn't the WRU lay down some conditions?

Of course it's all about money, but it's not a joint WC......it's Englands so let them host it.

I could be wrong but when Wales hosted the world cup in 1999 didn’t they agree to send some games to England, Ireland, Scotland and France only on the condition that if they host the world cup that the ML would have to host some games? Clever move, and it’s still baring fruit 16 years later!

Mickado wrote:I could be wrong but when Wales hosted the world cup in 1999 didn’t they agree to send some games to England, Ireland, Scotland and France only on the condition that if they host the world cup that the ML would have to host some games? Clever move, and it’s still baring fruit 16 years later!

Exactly right. Us having games in the next world cup at the MS is just part of the deal for us giving games to other countries when we hosted it.

It's basically another UK world cup, with the focus on England this time, and the focus was on Wales in 1999

I'd be happy enough if Ireland played Wales in the Millenium Stadium - Ireland have some very happy memories from that stadium - its like playing at home.

I prefer the single host model personally, and England has enough quality stadia to go it alone.

Nothing against the Millenium Stadium of course, one of the great rugby venues.

Does the author of the thread consider England's opportunism in obtaining games for RWC 1999 equally scandalous?

This is Englands world cup, I thought the MS would get one of the quarter finals and thats it.

Its kinda of unfair if Wales are allowed to get their home advantage in a world cup again. When Wales hosted their world cup in 1999 they had to share with England as they lacked the stadia to host it by themselves..

But England have facilities to run it by themselves, one quarter final or even a semi final at the Millenium stadium should be all Wales get.

If NZ can host a WC on it’s own, why do we have to have games outside of England?

chewed_mintie wrote:If NZ can host a WC on it’s own, why do we have to have games outside of England?

Please read my post.

tomhughesnice wrote:their world cup in 1999 they had to share with England

And Scotland. And France. And Ireland.

Mickado wrote:

chewed_mintie wrote:If NZ can host a WC on it’s own, why do we have to have games outside of England?

Please read my post.

I see. Still, it’s bonkers and the IRB should be moving towards a one country policy.

Maybe so, but the IRB have accepted England’s bid, which involves one or more matches in Cardiff. Logistically it’s not a problem as it’s closer to London than say Toulose is to Paris and the RFU are bound by their agreement with the WRU to play a game there.

It’s really clever business by Wales, they needed the help of the other nations in 1999 and in getting it they bought themselves world cup games for years to come.

Not sure I agree with Wales being allowed to play their pool games there though, but that’s a different story. Remember France playing the AB’s there in 2007? That was technically a home game for France I think. It’s a little bizarre but that’s the way things work.

are people not getting the point here.

the irb are choking england on what they want out of theis world cup(80 million pounds) therefore england are trying to find ways to make more money than if there were just asking for a percentage of profits or something(which is the only way it should be)

England dont want to give wales these games in an ideal world(although i doubt we really care that much) they are seemingly being forced into making these type of decisions because the IRB's greed, and that could be due to NZ's greed in the first place

Mikado, by that stage it was a QF and France hadn’t counted on losing to Argentina in the pool. They were banking on a QF v Scotland in Paris, not Cardiff v NZ. The only thing that made it a ‘home’ game was winning the toss of a coin and using their ridiculously un-French navy blue tops

Please explain NZ's greed here?

Oh I totally agree with you, but technically (in terms of iRB ranking points) it was a “home” game for them. As far as I remember, but I’ll look into that.

Well either way it works out, MS does have the best atmosphere of any rugby stadium which can only contribute to what should be a brilliant rugby world cup in England in 2015. I can see Wales getting alot of pool games there too, as you can guarantee sell outs for the smaller fixtures.

But sort yer pitch out! Same for the Wembley too, that turf gets ripped up too easily.

Brilliant, means I can watch a game and still get home the same night.

Can't wait...

Not sure what Wales would get out of it though, apart from being able to host games the RWC2015 organising committee will be ‘hiring’ the stadium and therefore Wales won’t make any money out of it except for the influx of tourists etc. They won’t get a penny in gate revenue.

chewed_mintie wrote:Please explain NZ's greed here?

lol have you been in a time lock or something

chewed_mintie wrote:Not sure what Wales would get out of it though, apart from being able to host games the RWC2015 organising committee will be ‘hiring’ the stadium and therefore Wales won’t make any money out of it except for the influx of tourists etc. They won’t get a penny in gate revenue.

apart from obvioulsy get loads from tourism, they will get loads of love from a home crowd and atmosphere,But they will also directly earn from it from RENT for the stadia. overall its a big touch for wales

Absolutely scandalous, the next thing you know Wales will be selling their 6 Nations rights to Sky

RubyGuby wrote:Absolutely scandalous, the next thing you know Wales will be selling their 6 Nations rights to Sky

They would if Sky wanted to buy them.

SafeAsMilk wrote:

RubyGuby wrote:Absolutely scandalous, the next thing you know Wales will be selling their 6 Nations rights to Sky

They would if Sky wanted to buy them.

lols

mystiroakey wrote:

SafeAsMilk wrote:

RubyGuby wrote:Absolutely scandalous, the next thing you know Wales will be selling their 6 Nations rights to Sky

They would if Sky wanted to buy them.

lols

They wouldn't, the WRU is run by all the clubs in Wales not by the OLD FARTS, it is a working mans game in WALES, they might take the Sky money for the odd game against lesser teams but not against top class opposition. LOL.

so let me get this straight.

Because Wales may have some home games in the 2015 England World Cup, we're all blaming New Zealand right?

I'll take it

Comfort wrote:so let me get this straight.

Because Wales may have some home games in the 2015 England World Cup, we're all blaming New Zealand right?

I'll take it

Something like that…it makes perfect sense.

NZ are to blame for Wales making a deal (as Mickado explained) in bloody 1996 or whatever…..

chewed_mintie wrote:

Comfort wrote:so let me get this straight.

Because Wales may have some home games in the 2015 England World Cup, we're all blaming New Zealand right?

I'll take it

Something like that…it makes perfect sense.

NZ are to blame for Wales making a deal (as Mickado explained) in bloody 1996 or whatever…..

Mintie, I'll ask no more questions, you greedy new zealanders, grrrr, arrghhhhh.

Comfort wrote:

chewed_mintie wrote:

Comfort wrote:so let me get this straight.

Because Wales may have some home games in the 2015 England World Cup, we're all blaming New Zealand right?

I'll take it

Something like that…it makes perfect sense.

NZ are to blame for Wales making a deal (as Mickado explained) in bloody 1996 or whatever…..

Mintie, I'll ask no more questions, you greedy new zealanders, grrrr, arrghhhhh.

lol, it wasn't a go at you Comfort...an earlier post from mystiroakey got me slightly wound up or maybe it was a mixture of that and work!

It just seems whenever explanations are given to situations here, the valid ones are ignored and the stupid ones are suddenly proclaimed as the undeniable truth!

Seriously folks, are there any actual Rugby supporters on this site, I expect drivel from the Telegraph, but I thought somebody on this site would know the true reason for Wales getting some of the games in the 2015 World Cup, was that England were not certain of getting the Tournament but they came to an arrangement with Wales to procure their vote. In the arrangement Wales would get a number of games in said Competition.

Nothing to do with 1996, 2003 or even 2051.

I'd rather give England this one in its entirety personally but seeing as that's unlikely to happen now we'll have no choice but to roll with it. It is opportunism in every sense. Welsh fans made the trip down to NZ in the thousands, driving up the M4 and across a bridge is nearly nothing to ask in comparison.

Mickado, if England, Scotland, France etc hadn't helped lighten the load in 99 we wouldn't have been able to host it simple as. Wales didn't and still doesn't have the infrastructure to host a World Cup by itself. IMO it was plain cheeky of the WRU to add conditions onto the help of the other NH nations, though a lovely gesture of those other nations to accept them. But it was either get help or not host and I don't see why we should insist on "helping" hosts that don't need help as a result.

Im only joking mintie

Wayne - absolutely, the revenue the millenium stadium generates is huge. Wales needed help when they bid to host a previous world cup, they'd more than likely made gentlemanly agreements with the countries that helped them back then that they would have games should any of those unions host a world cup (not that this means anything now).

Of course, the IRB needing a certain return from the RFU in profit for hosting the world cup means that its in the RFU's business to generate as much revenue and profit as humanly possible. The Millenium stadium will play a good part in this.

Its pretty simple, but ayyye, why let sense get in the way of a good debate