2023 (expanded) Rugby World Cup for South Africa

First topic message reminder :



The Rugby World Cup should return to South Africa in 2023, and the tournament should be expanded to 24 teams.

The other three candidates are Ireland, France and Italy. Were any of these successful, that would mean a third straight World Cup in the Northern Hemisphere, even though it is the Southern Hemisphere which overwhelmingly dominates.

It would also entail a return to the Six Nations for the fifth time in just ten tournaments, which is a little ridiculous for a sport with over one hundred affiliated member nations and self-professed global pretentions.

Should it go to Ireland, that would also mean, technically-speaking, that the United Kingdom were involved to some degree in hosting the event for the fifth time, given at least a few of the games would be staged north of the border.

France, meanwhile, hosted the World Cup as recently as eight years ago, and was also a co-host in 1991 and 1999.

That leaves Italy, to my mind the most attractive of the European bids, as it is a newcomer to the heavyweight ranks with a large number of registered players. However, World Rugby might want to go with a more established rugby playing nation for its 10th World Cup. Japan is already facing problems as it prepares to stage the 2019 event, with its new Olympic Stadium having now been removed from the venue list.

As for South Africa, it has the biggest and best rugby-purpose stadia in the world - with the possible exception of England, which has just hosted the event for the second time. It has the second largest number of registered players (also behind England), and it is the second most successful rugby playing nation after New Zealand.

By the time 2023 rolls around, an entire generation will have grown up since the last time the tournament was held in South Africa. This, even though the 1995 installment was one of the most successful and spectacular World Cups to date.

So if New Zealand, Austrlalia and England can all host it twice, and France can be involved as either host or co-host on three occasions, why on earth shouldn't it return to South Africa in 2023? Why does World Rugby appear to have lost faith in the republic, having overlooked it for both 2011 and 2019?

It's time to break the cycle. The World Cup can not continue to return to Western Europe on every second occasion. That is a myopic approach and anathema to the globalization cause.

But it does need to return to the Southern Hemisphere in 2023 for what will be the first time in 12 years. Moreover, it needs to return to the African continent, one of the hotbeds of international rugby development in recent decades.

This leads me to my final point in South Africa's favour. World Rugby officials have raised the possibility of an expanded tournament, and this is undoubtedly overdue. Again, with its vast array of rugby-purpose stadia, South Africa's credentials are unsurpassed as a potential host nation for a 24-team World Cup.

The last - and only - increase in teams was from 16 to 20 in 1999. This appears to have been successful, judging by the improved performances of the fringe teams in New Zealand and England.

In fact, no centuries have been recorded since 2003, while Japan's stunning victory over the Springboks this year suggests the days of foregone conclusions is World Cup rugby may be drawing to a close.

That said, a lot of work needs to be done in the interim if the additional teams are going to be genuinely competitive. One of the biggest obstacles to the game's global development is the stratification of its international competitions.

Not only are the elite championships closed-shop, but there is little interaction between the top teams and the emerging nations in between World Cups. How on earth are the up-and-comers supposed to be competitive in the big exam if they have been denied the lessons to prepare in between?

New Zealand and Australia should be playing annual tests with the Pacific Islands and Japan, as should the Six Nations with their Eastern European neighbours. South Africa ought to engage Namibia in a 'Bledisloe Cup'-style annual trophy match, and Hong Kong and Korea should be playing in the Pacific Challenge tournament, alongside the Pacific Islands B teams and Argentina's 'Pampas,' with a possible view to future inclusion in the Pacific Nations Championship.

In addition to this, would it not be a fairly straightforward exercise for Six Nations teams to stop in for tests against Namibia and Uruguay enroute to South Africa and Argentina, respectively - as well as the Pacific Islands while touring New Zealand or Australia?

By the same token, how about the Southern Hemisphere teams playing Georgia, Romania or Russia on their Autumn tours to Europe? Argentina might even take on Spain or Portugal.

If rugby is to more forward, it needs to expand its World Cup, and this can only be successful with a more integrated international rugby calendar.

Rowanbi wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Who's your favourite player for Russia and why?

Don't have one. I just support the national team in the ENC, but I haven't seen them play in a good long while. I'm not much into favorite players either, not even for the big teams.

World Rugby announces expansion to ruling Council amid governance reform process:

So this has been described on another thread as likely "cowpat." Wouldn't surprise me either. The founding members of the board are unlikely to relinquish their strangehold on the decision-making process so easily, don't you think?

Sine e Described it as "cowpat".

Rowanbi wrote:

Cyril wrote:So what nationality are you?

Hong Kong born, raised mostly in NZ, been abroad since last century. Yourself?

Hold the phone cowboy. I was born in Hong Kong and I don't remember seeing anyone with your name there.

Well, that was a long time ago, Doc

Rowanbi wrote:Well, that was a long time ago, Doc

Not really, Quentin.

I've only just discovered that the 2022 Commonwealth Games will be staged in Durban - just a year before the 10th Rugby World Cup. Thouands of athletes from 50 nations will be taking part - including 7s rugby. So much for the crime factor. Seems like Northern Hemisphere rugby fans are the only ones quaking in their boots about that . . .

Must say Im very surprised about this, as Durban has the highest Murder rate of any South african city (35 homocides per 100,000 pop).
But if you go might I suggest the following:
1. Dont have sex with the locals (any race) kwa Zulu Natal had up to recently the highest HIV infection rate in the World.
2. Dont give beggars money, just dont.
3. At all times when driving keep your doors locked. and when stopped even for a red light and someone taps (sometimes with a Glock) on your window take off.
4. When walking dont wander into back streets.
5. Be concious at all times not to create temptation, and that includes how you dress, and especially jewellry.
6. Beware of the kids, they are armed and out of it on Whoonga.

I'm sure all the rhythmic gymnasts, badminton players, lawn bowlers & netballers will be mindful of your advice, Aucklandlaurie, but they don't seem to be one fraction as concerned about it as the rugby fraternity is, judging by this thread.

& to be honest I'd have recommended much the same to anyone visiting Papakura or Otahuhu - not to mention some of the rough back streets of Dublin, Belfast, London, Paris, Napoli & Sydney, for example.

Perhaps the fact that Durban is only one fraction of South Africa has something to do with that.

Otahuhu is  tame compared to Durban.

My brother's done a lot of surfing in Durban. Never mentioned it. I imagine that, like many large cities, it has its dangerous quarter that no tourist would ever go to on purpose.

"I have just travelled to Durban from Australia with my wife and 2 young daughters. In a nutshell, don't go.
My wife is from Durban and lived there for 19 years so she is street wise and knows to look for dangerous situations.
This didn't help when she had a gun held at her head and had 4 black males trying to kidnap her. She gave them her bag phon car keys and this still wasn't enough. They wanted her aswel. She managed to fight them off and get away. This was extremely traumatic for her and myself.
I will never be returning to south africa. It is extremely dangerous.
The police were excellent. In the 20 minutes they were taking a report from my wife there was another 3 hijackings in the area. All violent.
People can say be aware. Be streetwise. It doesn't make difference. These pigs will get what they want by any means possible.
Don't go. It is a beautiful country. But you can not enjoy it if your dead.
Not worth the risk."

An Australian tourist gives his view.

Pot Hale wrote:"I have just travelled to Durban from Australia with my wife and 2 young daughters. In a nutshell, don't go.
My wife is from Durban and lived there for 19 years so she is street wise and knows to look for dangerous situations.
This didn't help when she had a gun held at her head and had 4 black males trying to kidnap her. She gave them her bag phon car keys and this still wasn't enough. They wanted her aswel. She managed to fight them off and get away. This was extremely traumatic for her and myself.
I will never be returning to south africa. It is extremely dangerous.
The police were excellent. In the 20 minutes they were taking a report from my wife there was another 3 hijackings in the area. All violent.
People can say be aware. Be streetwise. It doesn't make difference. These pigs will get what they want by any means possible.
Don't go. It is a beautiful country. But you can not enjoy it if your dead.
Not worth the risk."

An Australian tourist gives his view.

Sounds like my last trip to South Auckland. You know Jonah Lomu's uncle was beheaded there, right?

'Uncle was decapitated ...I was stabbed twice': Jonah Lomu details life on South Auckland's mean streets'
https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/sport/rugby/uncle-was-decapitated-i-stabbed-twice-jonah-lomu-details-life-on-south-aucklands-mean-streets.html

The point was that concerns about SA crime - real or perceived - extends beyond rugby fans living in the NH as you attempted to state and belittle it.

Since you appear to have no direct experience of living in any of the places being discussed in context of 2023 RWC, your assertions are somewhat discredited - as proven by actual statistics and real testimonies from people who've been to or actually live in the various countries.

Must be wonderful to sit in your Turkish ivory tower pronouncing on all and sundry and dispensing your largesse to the multitudes.

Pot Hale wrote:The point was that concerns about SA crime - real or perceived - extends beyond rugby fans living in the NH as you attempted to state and belittle it.

Since you appear to have no direct experience of living in any of the places being discussed in context of 2023 RWC, your assertions are somewhat discredited - as proven by actual statistics and real testimonies from people who've been to or actually live in the various countries.  

Must be wonderful to sit in your Turkish ivory tower pronouncing on all and sundry and dispensing your largesse to the multitudes.

I think you have missed the entire point of the forum concept, Pot Hale. Forums are designed for people to discuss issues and exchange opinions. But you seem to have a problem with that. In fact, you seem to have a problem with freedom of speech altogether. Unable to win an argument on merit, due to the weakness of your case, you would attempt to stifle opinions with juvenile spite and pretentious waffle.

Sooo, back to the topic, shall we? The fact the Commonwealth Games is going to be held in South Africa just a year before the 2023 Rugby World Cup makes a complete mockery of fears expressed on this thread about crime. If the rhythmic gymnasts, badminton players, lawn bowlers and netballers are going to South Africa in 2022, I'm not sure why anyone thinks it is too dangerous for the rugby fraternity to risk going there . . .

Rowanbi wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:The point was that concerns about SA crime - real or perceived - extends beyond rugby fans living in the NH as you attempted to state and belittle it.

Since you appear to have no direct experience of living in any of the places being discussed in context of 2023 RWC, your assertions are somewhat discredited - as proven by actual statistics and real testimonies from people who've been to or actually live in the various countries.  

Must be wonderful to sit in your Turkish ivory tower pronouncing on all and sundry and dispensing your largesse to the multitudes.

I think you have missed the entire point of the forum concept, Pot Hale. Forums are designed for people to discuss issues and exchange opinions. But you seem to have a problem with that. In fact, you seem to have a problem with freedom of speech altogether. Unable to win an argument on merit, due to the weakness of your case, you would attempt to stifle opinions with juvenile spite and pretentious waffle.

Sooo, back to the topic, shall we? The fact the Commonwealth Games is going to be held in South Africa just a year before the 2023 Rugby World Cup makes a complete mockery of fears expressed on this thread about crime. If the rhythmic gymnasts, badminton players, lawn bowlers and netballers are going to South Africa in 2022, I'm not sure why anyone thinks it is too dangerous for the rugby fraternity to risk going there . . .

On the contrary, many of your various assertions about the countries involved have been debunked by myself and others. You're mistakenly focused again on 'winning' an argument.
There are no winners or losers as I've stated previously. There's your opinions and there's everybody else's.

Them's the essential terms and conditions of these fora. No other.

Keep ploughing.

So the shoot-the-messenger approach now enters the reverse the accusation phase. You can't even think up your own denunciations; just repeat those that have already been made about yourself. The very reason you keep trying to derail this discussion is because your own arguments have been shot down in flames - repeatedly.

Sooo, let's try once again to get the discussion back on track, shall we. The fact the Commonwealth Games is going to be held in South Africa just a year before the 2023 Rugby World Cup makes a complete mockery of fears expressed on this thread about crime. If the rhythmic gymnasts, badminton players, lawn bowlers and netballers are going to South Africa in 2022, I'm not sure why anyone thinks the rugby fraternity should be expected to stay at home quaking in its boots...

Rowanbi wrote:So the shoot-the-messenger approach now enters the reverse the accusation phase. You can't even think up your own denunciations; just repeat those that have already been made about yourself. The very reason you keep trying to derail this discussion is because your own arguments have been shot down in flames - repeatedly.

Sooo, let's try once again to get the discussion back on track, shall we. The fact the Commonwealth Games is going to be held in South Africa just a year before the 2023 Rugby World Cup makes a complete mockery of fears expressed on this thread about crime. If the rhythmic gymnasts, badminton players, lawn bowlers and netballers are going to South Africa in 2022, I'm not sure why anyone thinks the rugby fraternity should be expected to stay at home quaking in its boots...

You can resort to name-calling as much as you wish. The reality is that your argument has been met with real facts and experience - something your argument appears to be in short supply of.

You fail to recognise in your Quixotic tilting style of argument that repeatedly stating your opinions (ill-founded or otherwise) on the suitability of the various countries bidding for the 2023 tournament does not convince anyone of the merits of your case. You seemed to have learned nothing from your experiences on other fora that dismissed you as to why your approach to the topic didn't work.

Crime levels and the safety and security of a substantial number of travelling fans will be a factor of consideration for any bidding nation. As will stadia infrastructure, travel, logistics, access, ticketing, attendances, revenues, TV markets, and a host of other issues that will keep the various bid organisations busy.

You think South Africa should win the bid. Hopefully, you might recognise that at this stage everyone who is interested has got your point.

Crime levels and the safety and security of a substantial number of travelling fans will be a factor of consideration for any bidding nation. As will stadia infrastructure, travel, logistics, access, ticketing, attendances, revenues, TV markets, and a host of other issues that will keep the various bid organisations busy.

Finally a relevant comment. Yes, all of these things will be considered. & World Rugby will no doubt be aware of the fact that no major event staged in South Africa has been effected by its admittedly abysmal crime problem. They will also have noted that the Commonwealth Games has not shied away from the republic because of this issue. Stadia is an comparison South Africa will always win hands down and is surely one of the main points in its favor. Ditto ticketing, infrastructure and attendances, of course. Ditto climate. Ditto geographical rotation of the tournament. What does Ireland have in its favor? Really only its close proximity to Britain & France - Europe's two most recent Rugby World Cup hosts.

Rowanbi wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:"I have just travelled to Durban from Australia with my wife and 2 young daughters. In a nutshell, don't go.
My wife is from Durban and lived there for 19 years so she is street wise and knows to look for dangerous situations.
This didn't help when she had a gun held at her head and had 4 black males trying to kidnap her. She gave them her bag phon car keys and this still wasn't enough. They wanted her aswel. She managed to fight them off and get away. This was extremely traumatic for her and myself.
I will never be returning to south africa. It is extremely dangerous.
The police were excellent. In the 20 minutes they were taking a report from my wife there was another 3 hijackings in the area. All violent.
People can say be aware. Be streetwise. It doesn't make difference. These pigs will get what they want by any means possible.
Don't go. It is a beautiful country. But you can not enjoy it if your dead.
Not worth the risk."

An Australian tourist gives his view.

Sounds like my last trip to South Auckland. You know Jonah Lomu's uncle was beheaded there, right?

'Uncle was decapitated ...I was stabbed twice': Jonah Lomu details life on South Auckland's mean streets'
https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/sport/rugby/uncle-was-decapitated-i-stabbed-twice-jonah-lomu-details-life-on-south-aucklands-mean-streets.html

Your information is pretty old, that incident, the Tongan Samoan battles in Otara were way back in the mid 1980s. If that was your last visit to south auckland, you probably need to get up to speed with what the situation is now before making comment.

Rowanbi wrote:So the shoot-the-messenger approach now enters the reverse the accusation phase. You can't even think up your own denunciations; just repeat those that have already been made about yourself. The very reason you keep trying to derail this discussion is because your own arguments have been shot down in flames - repeatedly.

Sooo, let's try once again to get the discussion back on track, shall we. The fact the Commonwealth Games is going to be held in South Africa just a year before the 2023 Rugby World Cup makes a complete mockery of fears expressed on this thread about crime. If the rhythmic gymnasts, badminton players, lawn bowlers and netballers are going to South Africa in 2022, I'm not sure why anyone thinks the rugby fraternity should be expected to stay at home quaking in its boots...

I would suggest that the Commonwealth games being awarded to natal was because it was due to be held in South Africa, whereas the next Rugby World Cup to be held in South Africa on the same basis would not be due until about 2066. by that time Rugby in South Africa will no longer exist.

Your information is pretty old, that incident, the Tongan Samoan battles in Otara were way back in the mid 1980s. If that was your last visit to south auckland, you probably need to get up to speed with what the situation is now before making comment.

Good guess, alhough my last visit was actually in the mid-90s, I did live in Auckland in the mid-80s for a year or so. Went to the 84 France test at Eden Park too, among other games. That was a great performance by the All Blacks; Murray Mexted at the peak of his powers - one of my favorite players ever. South Auckland, from personal experience, was one of the most dangerous place I've ever been in my life - with the possible exception of Warsaw. I certainly feel a lot safer in Istanbul than I ever did there.

I would suggest that the Commonwealth games being awarded to natal was because it was due to be held in South Africa, whereas the next Rugby World Cup to be held in South Africa on the same basis would not be due until about 2066. by that time Rugby in South Africa will no longer exist.

I'm not sure what cycle you're on, but if NZ, Britain & SA hosted the first 3 World Cups, shouldn't SA have followed NZ & Britain in 2019??  I mean, I was happy to see Japan get it, but it appears to me SA are already 4 years overdue. The comment about SA rugby no longer existing provides an insight into your feelings about the republic. I personally expect they will have worked through the transition stage by then and may well be back at the top of the pecking order (as they were throughout the amateur era) with a mostly non-white team.

Ireland and Italy also have the big advantage of being debut nations of course. All 3 nations will fill the brief of the requirements to host after that this seems to be a deciding factor.

The way the council operates at the moment, Ireland has a good chance, and their administration and press seem very confident about it - as you would expect. But personally I'd hate to see rugby revert to another small nation host, given the tournament now ranks as one of the biggest in world sports. I also have little doubt many games will be shipped across the Irish Sea, effectively making it a 5th RWC held at least partly in Britain after just 10 tournaments (very sad for a supposedly 'global' game). Italy, I suspect, are not a frontrunner, with World Rugby unlikely to go for two expansion markets in succession. I'd certainly rather see them get it than Ireland, but 2027 just seems to be much better timing in a number of respects - perhaps with France as a junior co-host. France alone shouldn't host it again until the 2030s, at the earliest, though they may well emerge as a major contender for 2027.

You would expect it yes, seems a really good bid. Both Ireland and Italy. They need to start capitalising on new hosts like these.

Rowanbi wrote:The way the council operates at the moment, Ireland has a good chance, and their administration and press seem very confident about it - as you would expect. But personally I'd hate to see rugby revert to another small nation host, given the tournament now ranks as one of the biggest in world sports. I also have little doubt many games will be shipped across the Irish Sea, effectively making it a 5th RWC held at least partly in Britain after just 10 tournaments (very sad for a supposedly 'global' game). Italy, I suspect, are not a frontrunner, with World Rugby unlikely to go for two expansion markets in succession. I'd certainly rather see them get it than Ireland, but 2027 just seems to be much better timing in a number of respects - perhaps with France as a junior co-host. France alone shouldn't host it again until the 2030s, at the earliest, though they may well emerge as a major contender for 2027.

Why would Ireland ship games across the sea? It has identified all the stadia required (presumably from a requirements brief from World Rugby).

Only one small nation has hosted the World Cup so far so I don't understand your reference to 'another small nation'. England & Japan can be regarded as large nations (though perhaps it's worth noting that Ireland has a large nation, just most of them don't live in Ireland.

Are Wales not guaranteed games everytime a 6n team hosts a world cup? Like when France held it.

Yes, that's how the Home Unions voting block operates. It's a form of bribery, really. We vote for you if you ship us games. & Ireland is just too small too host it alone - especially if it is expanded to 24 teams, as hoped. The Irish stadia on their own would certainly struggle, with extensive upgrading required and smallish stadiums being utilized for some games; perhaps as many as half. The hotels and other service industries would simply be overwhelmed. The fans would be climbing all over the top of one another and the typical weather conditions would likely drive them all into the pubs. A World Cup in such a tiny geographical nation as Ireland would demean the status of the tournament in the modern era - the 3rd biggest sporting event in the world, as the governing body likes to brag. So I'm quite sure this is an Irish bid in name only, the tournament would in fact be co-hosted by Britain (& possibly France) yet again, and a similar bid for 2031 would likely follow under the "Scotland" banner.

Any figures to back the stadium claim up? Are you saying Irelands bid is below minimum requirements?

Typical weather would bring good conditions and while I like pubs the weather in SA would drive me inside quicker!

Rowanbi wrote:Yes, that's how the Home Unions voting block operates. It's a form of bribery, really. We vote for you if you ship us games.

That is not bribery.

& Ireland is just too small too host it alone - especially if it is expanded to 24 teams, as hoped.

Whats the point of bringing teams like Belgium to a 24 team world cup to get a thrashing (Top 20-24 at the moment are: Belgium, Trinidad & Tobago, Hong Kong & China). If they did bring them to a world cup for a thrashing, most of their games could be played in any amateur club because they are not going to be a lot of travelling supporters from any of those countries.

The Irish stadia on their own would certainly struggle, with extensive upgrading required and smallish stadiums being utilized for some games; perhaps as many as half.

The cost of upgrading existing stadia (mainly media, corporate entertainment & dressing room facilities) has been costed at €38m).

The hotels and other service industries would simply be overwhelmed. The fans would be climbing all over the top of one another and the typical weather conditions would likely drive them all into the pubs.

You don't get that its quicker to get from Dublin to London than it is to get from Capetown to Jo'burg and Dublin Airport is capable of handling 100,000 passengers a day (as it recently did over the Christmas period).

As happened in the UK, the European visitors could just fly in and out for a game. It is only the SH supporters who will stay affording them the opportunity to visit other parts of Europe between games.

A World Cup in such a tiny geographical nation as Ireland would demean the status of the tournament in the modern era - the 3rd biggest sporting event in the world, as the governing body likes to brag. So I'm quite sure this is an Irish bid in name only, the tournament would in fact be co-hosted by Britain (& possibly France) yet again, and a similar bid for 2031 would likely follow under the "Scotland" banner.

How is Europe a tiny geographical location? Direct flight Dublin-Istanbul is €228 - 2 flights a day, duration 4hr20mins.

If it was going to be co-hosted by say France, why are they also putting in a competing bid?

By the way, there is no such country as Britain involved in World Rugby. We have England, Wales & Scotland.

Rowanbi wrote:Your information is pretty old, that incident, the Tongan Samoan battles in Otara were way back in the mid 1980s. If that was your last visit to south auckland, you probably need to get up to speed with what the situation is now before making comment.

Good guess, alhough my last visit was actually in the mid-90s, I did live in Auckland in the mid-80s for a year or so. Went to the 84 France test at Eden Park too, among other games. That was a great performance by the All Blacks; Murray Mexted at the peak of his powers - one of my favorite players ever. South Auckland, from personal experience, was one of the most dangerous place I've ever been in my life - with the possible exception of Warsaw. I certainly feel a lot safer in Istanbul than I ever did there.

I would suggest that the Commonwealth games being awarded to natal was because it was due to be held in South Africa, whereas the next Rugby World Cup to be held in South Africa on the same basis would not be due until about 2066. by that time Rugby in South Africa will no longer exist.

I'm not sure what cycle you're on, but if NZ, Britain & SA hosted the first 3 World Cups, shouldn't SA have followed NZ & Britain in 2019??  I mean, I was happy to see Japan get it, but it appears to me SA are already 4 years overdue. The comment about SA rugby no longer existing provides an insight into your feelings about the republic. I personally expect they will have worked through the transition stage by then and may well be back at the top of the pecking order (as they were throughout the amateur era) with a mostly non-white team.

Point One:
Rowan, it was hardly a guess, I am more than familiar with South Auckland criminal activity in Otara in the eighties, Up to 1980 I was stationed on the corner of Princes street and Great South road, Otahuhu. I also played senior Rugby for Otahuhu. South Auckland has changed a lot since the mid 90s let alone 80s... so has South Africa.


Point Two:
A. The Commomwealth games have been going something like eighty years plus and only now has awarded Durban the event, being the first time a South African city has hosted the Games, if Rugby followed the same cycle then SA would not get a second tournament for another 60 odd years at the earliest.
B. My comment that rugby will not exist in South Africa (meaning more the demise of the mighty Springboks) is not an insight into my feelings on the Republic, but rather an insight into my feelings on what is happening in the Republic.


The awarding of the Commonwealth Games to Durban could be a very good thing for South African Rugby, in a number of ways, and at the moment South African rugby needs all the help it can get. But the Rugby World cup? No.

The commonwealths are a medium sports event but requires much infrastructure. Most countries host this as a pre-cursor to bidding for the olympics... i.e. you don't run before you can walk or showing the IAAF that you can host a multi sport single venue event.

SA proved they can host huge single sports events. They hosted the 2010 FIFA world cup and saw gates of over 3MM persons, more than this current record breaking RWC.

Rugby in SA will remain strong. The market is huge, the number of register players is huge and the conveyor belt of talent is huge. Are they as strong as they were in the amateur era... no but professionalism has had impacts around many nations, some better equipped to deal with it. SA still competes, are 2 time world champions and hell I mean they got as close as anyone to beating NZ at the RWC, leading at half time and 4 points down come full-time... for a team that has beaten them thoroughly over the last RWC cycle that's not bad.
Politics is dragging the sport down, dragging the country down but it will survive and I can't see it losing pace to the NH etc anytime soon. Kids coming through are simply better than near the most.

That is not bribery.

Depends on your interpretation. It's certainly not illegal bribery, agreed.

Whats the point of bringing teams like Belgium to a 24 team world cup to get a thrashing

More likely Russia would return, possibly Spain or Portugal too, either Kenya or Zimbabwe, and perhaps Chile or Brazil. & many thought the same thing before expansion in 1999: Do we really want teams like Georgia, Spain and Uruguay at the tournament? Well, not of them disgraced themselves in the end, did they?

The cost of upgrading existing stadia (mainly media, corporate entertainment & dressing room facilities) has been costed at €38m).

Thanks. I'd imagine it would be much less in SA, which has gone through the process recently, and has sufficient rugby-purpose or dual rugby-football purpose stadiums for the purpose.

As happened in the UK, the European visitors could just fly in and out for a game.

Whereas fans in South Africa will engage in a month-long carnival, providing a far greater windfall to the local economy

How is Europe a tiny geographical location?

Oh, so it's a European bid now? The "Home Unions" tag is rejected (though apt), but when talking about geography, suddenly it's not an Irish bid at all, but a European bid

If it was going to be co-hosted by say France, why are they also putting in a competing bid?


Obviously that's plan !. Plan B would be to co-host with Italy.

The Commomwealth games have been going something like eighty years plus and only now has awarded Durban the event

The Apartheid era might have had something to do with that. They should be rewarded for dispensing with it, not further penalized, surely.

Politics is dragging the sport down, dragging the country down but it will survive and I can't see it losing pace to the NH etc anytime soon. Kids coming through are simply better than near the most.



I understand the number of non-whites involved in the game is increasing steadily as well, if perhaps not at the pace we would like it to.

None of which has much to do with why SA should be awarded the rights to host the wc though.

LeinsterFan4life wrote:Are Wales not guaranteed games everytime a 6n team hosts a world cup? Like when France held it.

No, they are not.
France originally submitted a bid to host it alone. They then re-submitted a bid, sharing pool matches with Wales, England and Scotland. Ireland declined due to planned upgrading.

The Home Unions do not vote as a block.

Any cursory study of voting by England, Scotland, Wales shows they do not agree.  
Ireland and Scotland voted against RWC.  England and Wales for.
England did not do any deal with the other NH unions, except Wales, to host RWC 2015.
The ELV trials were supported by Scotland.
The debate on PI players, etc getting a second chance at test rugby for another nation was equally divided.
Ireland supported NZ in their bid for the RWC 2011, other unions supported other bids.

The proposed bid by Ireland for the 2023 RWC is based on an all-island bid using stadia on the island.  It is not proposed to use any other external stadia.  Any bid must state in advance which stadia will be used.

A list of the proposed stadia has been set out earlier in this thread that Ireland would propose to use in its bid.  

The total attendance capacity for these stadia is in the region of 537,000.  
In comparison, the total stadium capacity attendance for RWC 2015 in England was 612,000
The total stadium capacity attendance at South Africa's Soccer World Cup was 520,000.  Some of those stadia capacities - if used for the bid - would be increased or reduced for use in rugby union.

In short, there is sufficient capacity stadia in both countries.   Depending on which stadia were selected in South Africa, travel would be more dispersed and elongated for fans moving between venues.    In contrast, the 13 stadia proposed to be used in Ireland are spread uniformly through the island, with particular concentrations in high-volume tourism areas.

Both SA and Ireland would have to do upgrading of their stadia facilities for a RWC.
The Irish ones have been costed in partnership with the GAA and this cost is absorbed into the planning/operational costs of the bid.  It has no impact whatsoever on the bid selection criteria or the financial out-turn for World Rugby.  

Ireland has a similar annual number of foreign tourists as South Africa.  World Tourism estimates would see these increase by 12-15% by 2023.

Statements that Ireland would be unable to cope with an influx of rugby tourists at the shoulders of the high season are just laughable - given the prominence of tourism in the economy and the tourism infrastructure that currently exists.

The time of year that a RWC would be held in Ireland would be approx 2nd week Sept- 3rd week Oct.   Temperature highs for that time of year would range from 17 celsius to 12/13 celsius. Daylight hours would be approx 10/11 hours per day.

Italy and France's bids would be worthwhile examining in more detail.

The Home Unions do not vote as a block.

On RWC hosting rights, generally they do.

he total attendance capacity for these stadia is in the region of 537,000.  
In comparison, the total stadium capacity attendance for RWC 2015 in England was 612,000
The total stadium capacity attendance at South Africa's Soccer World Cup was 520,000

Firstly, the 2010 FIFA World Cup was held in 10 stadiums, and match attendances averaged just over 50,000. The 2015 RWC in Britain used 13 stadiums, also averaging just over 50,000 per match. Ireland are expected to use 12 stadiums for the RWC, should their bid be successful. I wasn't aware official lists of venues had been presented by any of the bidders at this early stage. There was a report in the Irish Independent about the stadiums the IRFU would likely use. I've just added up the total attendance and it comes to 468,000. I've also just counted up the total attendance of South Africa's dozen largest rugby & football stadiums, and that came to 664,000. These would certainly require less upgrading than Ireland's collection of mostly Gaelic and hurling venues.  

Any bid must state in advance which stadia will be used.

England named their stadia AFTER being awarded the hosting rights for 2015, including the controversial choice of Cardiff.

Depending on which stadia were selected in South Africa, travel would be more dispersed and elongated for fans moving between venues.  In contrast, the 13 stadia proposed to be used in Ireland are spread uniformly through the island, with particular concentrations in high-volume tourism areas.

This is how Donald Trump would describe it. What it really means, is that the pools could be comfortably staged in different provinces, and that fans would only need to travel to other centers for the play-offs fixtures (quarters, semis, 3rd & final). In most instances this could be achieved comfortably enough by bus or train. In fact, the distance from Joburg to Pretoria is about the same as from Auckland to Hamilton (under an hour's drive), from Joburg to Bloemfontein about the same as from Auckland to Napier (400kms), from Joburg to Durban about the same as from Auckland to Wellington (500kms), from Joburg to Port Elizaberth about the same as from Auckland to Christchurch (without the Strait), and from Joburg to Cape Town about the same as from Auckland to Dunedin (also without the Strait). So really South Africa is no more difficult to get around than NZ is. &, really, who is going to want to stay in the same spot for five weeks or so anyway? Meanwhile, in Ireland, the whole tournament would have to revolve primarily around Dublin and its major rugby and Gaelic stadiums in order to be profitable. Which is why I suggest the fans would be climbing all over the top of each other and the hotels and other service industries would be overwhelmed.

The time of year that a RWC would be held in Ireland would be approx 2nd week Sept- 3rd week Oct.   Temperature highs for that time of year would range from 17 celsius to 12/13 celsius. Daylight hours would be approx 10/11 hours per day.


According to the Irish meteorological service the average temperatures in Dublin for September and October are 14 and 11, respectively, there are 4 and 3 hours of sunshine, a 60% chance of rain 80% chance of wind, and only a 20% chance of a sunny day. Belfast, of course, has worse weather than Dublin. Ok, no problem for the players, of course, but not much fun for the fans, and certainly not conducive to the entertaining style of running rugby. The average temperature in Cape Town, for example, during the same period is 21 & 23 degrees, respectively, with only a few days of rain likely. Perfect weather not only for watching rugby, but for getting around and exploring the many wonderful attractions the republic has to offer.

The Home Unions do not traditionally vote as a block - on RWC bids or many other rugby issues.

Any cursory study of voting in the past by England, Scotland, Wales shows they often do not agree.  
Ireland and Scotland voted against the trial Rugby World Cup.  England and Wales voted for.
England did not do any deal with the other NH unions, except Wales, to host RWC 2015. Ireland did not vote for England's bid.
The ELV trials were supported by Scotland, and opposed by other unions.
The debate on PI players, etc getting a second chance at test rugby for another nation was equally divided.
Ireland supported NZ in their bid for the RWC 2011, other unions supported other bids.

The proposed bid by Ireland for the 2023 RWC is based on an all-island bid using stadia on the island.  It is not proposed to use any other external stadia.  Any bid must state in advance which stadia will be used, and these have already been outlined at various stages by the bid team.

These would likely include Croke Park, Lansdowne, Ravenhill, RDS, Pairce Ui Chaiomh, Nowlan Park, Gaelic Grounds, Thomond Park, Fitzgerald Stadium, Casement Park, McHale Park, etc. Some of these have been upgraded and completed in the last 2-3 years, others are already planned for expansion/completion in the next 3-4 years e.g. RDS, Pairc Ui Chaoimh, Casement.

The total attendance capacity for the 13 stadia is in the region of 537,000.  
In comparison, the total stadium capacity attendance for RWC 2015 in England was 612,000
The total stadium capacity attendance at South Africa's Soccer World Cup was 520,000 using ten FIFA-approved stadia.  Some smaller stadia would need to be added to these to cater for smaller attendances as occur in all RWC - in the 10k-18k range, giving it a likely capacity estimate of 560,000.

So there is sufficient capacity stadia in both countries.   Depending on which stadia were eventually selected in South Africa, fan/stadium clusters could be created in parts of the country, or spread out more to make travelling numbers more dispersed and elongated for fans moving between venues.    

In contrast, the 13 stadia proposed to be used in Ireland are spread uniformly through the island, with particular concentrations in high-volume tourism areas, allowing for short-hops between stadia and cities and towns around the country and creating a country-wide festival experience for the duration of the RWC, similar to what was achieved during the Special Olympics with over 7,000 athletes from 120 different countries being hosted across cities and towns across the island.

Whilst both SA and Ireland would have to do some upgrading of their stadia facilities for a RWC, these costs are absorbed into the planning/operational costs of the bid. It has no impact whatsoever on the bid selection criteria or the financial out-turn for World Rugby.  

Similar to the other bidding countries of Italy, France and SA, Ireland has a substantial number of foreign tourists each year - 8m approx.  World Tourism estimates these would increase by 12-15% by 2023.

Ireland would be more than able to cope with an influx of rugby tourists at the shoulders of the high season - given the prominence of tourism in the economy and the tourism infrastructure that currently exists. 2.2m visitors went to the south-west alone in 2014. 1m went to the Shannon region. 1.4m to the West, 1.5m to the East/South-East. In other words, tourism visitors go to every part of the country, and the stadia selected match those tourism hotspots.

The time of year that a RWC would be held in Ireland would be approx 2nd week Sept- 3rd week Oct.   Temperature highs for that time of year would range from 17 celsius to 12/13 celsius.  Daylight hours would be approx 10/11 hours per day. As was seen in the recent RWC 2015, the weather was ideal for rugby and for touring around. 15-20% of all visitors choose to come to Ireland during Sept/Oct - making it one of the most popular times of the year for scenery, weather, climate, environment, and attractions - outside of the peak months during May-Aug.

Accommodation capacity vs Occupancy ratio is around 65% for hotels & guesthouses showing there is sufficient capacity in the market to cater for once-off increased numbers that occur with various events during the year around the country.

If you were to sum up the main reason for choosing SA what would it be Rowanbi? 1 reason.

The fifa world cup is a bigger tournament than the rugby world cup. SA has proved it can put on a good tournament, a well attended tournament with over 3MM attendees and there was little criticism coming from fans or teams. They have showed they have strong rugby infrastructure and strong tourist infrastructure to cater for such influx in fans.

SA will not have to spend much, upgrade much and to say so that SA will face big challenges is not true. Regardless of what people views on the RWC and where it should be held anybody stating that SA has problems with their bid is frankly trying to find holes in its bid.

fa0019 wrote:The fifa world cup is a bigger tournament than the rugby world cup. SA has proved it can put on a good tournament, a well attended tournament with over 3MM attendees and there was little criticism coming from fans or teams. They have showed they have strong rugby infrastructure and strong tourist infrastructure to cater for such influx in fans.

SA will not have to spend much, upgrade much and to say so that SA will face big challenges is not true. Regardless of what people views on the RWC and where it should be held anybody stating that SA has problems with their bid is frankly trying to find holes in its bid.

Very good points, fa0019. Couldn't agree more.

If you were to sum up the main reason for choosing SA what would it be Rowanbi? 1 reason.

Returning the tournament to the rapidly developing region of Africa for the first time in a generation.

That aside, continental rotation, fatastic rugby stadiums, passionate supporters, a true super power and rugby heartland which is has applied four times for the event since that highly memorable RWC in 1995 and is long overdue its second turn. Also by default, Ireland too small, every 2nd tournament in Home Unions/France cycle needs to be broken, Italy could use another 4 years to get up to speed, Europe should wait another 4 years (at least), and France hosted it just 8 1/2 years ago. Plus there factors mentioned earlier:

Rowanbi wrote:The Home Unions do not vote as a block.

On RWC hosting rights, generally they do.

he total attendance capacity for these stadia is in the region of 537,000.  
In comparison, the total stadium capacity attendance for RWC 2015 in England was 612,000
The total stadium capacity attendance at South Africa's Soccer World Cup was 520,000

Firstly, the 2010 FIFA World Cup was held in 10 stadiums, and match attendances averaged just over 50,000. The 2015 RWC in Britain used 13 stadiums, also averaging just over 50,000 per match. Ireland are expected to use 12 stadiums for the RWC, should their bid be successful. I wasn't aware official lists of venues had been presented by any of the bidders at this early stage. There was a report in the Irish Independent about the stadiums the IRFU would likely use. I've just added up the total attendance and it comes to 468,000. I've also just counted up the total attendance of South Africa's dozen largest rugby & football stadiums, and that came to 664,000. These would certainly require less upgrading than Ireland's collection of mostly Gaelic and hurling venues.  

Any bid must state in advance which stadia will be used.

England named their stadia AFTER being awarded the hosting rights for 2015, including the controversial choice of Cardiff.

Depending on which stadia were selected in South Africa, travel would be more dispersed and elongated for fans moving between venues.  In contrast, the 13 stadia proposed to be used in Ireland are spread uniformly through the island, with particular concentrations in high-volume tourism areas.

This is how Donald Trump would describe it. What it really means, is that the pools could be comfortably staged in different provinces, and that fans would only need to travel to other centers for the play-offs fixtures (quarters, semis, 3rd & final). In most instances this could be achieved comfortably enough by bus or train. In fact, the distance from Joburg to Pretoria is about the same as from Auckland to Hamilton (under an hour's drive), from Joburg to Bloemfontein about the same as from Auckland to Napier (400kms), from Joburg to Durban about the same as from Auckland to Wellington (500kms), from Joburg to Port Elizaberth about the same as from Auckland to Christchurch (without the Strait), and from Joburg to Cape Town about the same as from Auckland to Dunedin (also without the Strait). So really South Africa is no more difficult to get around than NZ is. &, really, who is going to want to stay in the same spot for five weeks or so anyway? Meanwhile, in Ireland, the whole tournament would have to revolve primarily around Dublin and its major rugby and Gaelic stadiums in order to be profitable. Which is why I suggest the fans would be climbing all over the top of each other and the hotels and other service industries would be overwhelmed.

The time of year that a RWC would be held in Ireland would be approx 2nd week Sept- 3rd week Oct.   Temperature highs for that time of year would range from 17 celsius to 12/13 celsius. Daylight hours would be approx 10/11 hours per day.


According to the Irish meteorological service the average temperatures in Dublin for September and October are 14 and 11, respectively, there are 4 and 3 hours of sunshine, a 60% chance of rain 80% chance of wind, and only a 20% chance of a sunny day. Belfast, of course, has worse weather than Dublin. Ok, no problem for the players, of course, but not much fun for the fans, and certainly not conducive to the entertaining style of running rugby. The average temperature in Cape Town, for example, during the same period is 21 & 23 degrees, respectively, with only a few days of rain likely. Perfect weather not only for watching rugby, but for getting around and exploring the many wonderful attractions the republic has to offer.

& btw, SA's major cities are all connected by major expressways - unlike NZ's.

And that can be trumped by taking it for the first time to Italy or ireland. You see my issue.

Indeed, 7&1/2.

Notwithstanding the desire of SARU to host the RWC a second time, the arguments for countries who have never hosted it before on their own are attractive. In effect, the Big 5 unions have dominated the hosting of the RWC and the decision to award it to Japan is welcome. That trend could continue with Italy or Ireland being the next hosts since neither have had the opportunity to host the entire event in their country.

The Home Unions do not traditionally vote as a block - on RWC bids or many other rugby issues.
Ireland supported NZ in their bid for the RWC 2011, other unions supported other bids.

The proposed bid by Ireland for the 2023 RWC is based on an all-island bid using stadia on the island.  It is not proposed to use any other external stadia.  Any bid must state in advance which stadia will be used, and these have already been outlined at various stages by the bid team.

These would likely include Croke Park, Lansdowne, Ravenhill, RDS, Pairce Ui Chaiomh, Nowlan Park, Gaelic Grounds, Thomond Park, Fitzgerald Stadium, Casement Park, McHale Park, etc.   Some of these have been upgraded and completed in the last 2-3 years, others are already planned for expansion/completion in the next 3-4 years e.g. RDS, Pairc Ui Chaoimh, Casement.

The total attendance capacity for the 13 stadia is in the region of 537,000.  
In comparison, the total stadium capacity attendance for RWC 2015 in England was 612,000
The total stadium capacity attendance at South Africa's Soccer World Cup was 520,000 using ten FIFA-approved stadia.  Some smaller stadia would need to be added to these to cater for smaller attendances as occur in all RWC - in the 10k-18k range, giving it a likely capacity estimate of 560,000.

So there is sufficient capacity stadia in both countries.   Depending on which stadia were eventually selected in South Africa, fan/stadium clusters could be created in parts of the country, or spread out more to make travelling numbers more dispersed and elongated for fans moving between venues.    

In contrast, the 13 stadia proposed to be used in Ireland are spread uniformly through the island, with particular concentrations in high-volume tourism areas, allowing for short-hops between stadia and cities and towns around the country and creating a country-wide festival experience for the duration of the RWC, similar to what was achieved during the Special Olympics with over 7,000 athletes from 120 different countries being hosted across cities and towns across the island.

Whilst both SA and Ireland would have to do some upgrading of their stadia facilities for a RWC, these costs are absorbed into the planning/operational costs of the bid. It has no impact whatsoever on the bid selection criteria or the financial out-turn for World Rugby.  

Similar to the other bidding countries of Italy, France and SA, Ireland has a substantial number of foreign tourists each year - 8m approx.  World Tourism estimates these would increase by 12-15% by 2023.

Ireland would be more than able to cope with an influx of rugby tourists at the shoulders of the high season - given the prominence of tourism in the economy and the tourism infrastructure that currently exists.  2.2m visitors went to the south-west alone in 2014.  1m went to the Shannon region. 1.4m to the West, 1.5m to the East/South-East.   In other words, tourism visitors go to every part of the country, and the stadia selected match those tourism hotspots.

The time of year that a RWC would be held in Ireland would be approx 2nd week Sept- 3rd week Oct.   Temperature highs for that time of year would range from 17 celsius to 12/13 celsius.  Daylight hours would be approx 10/11 hours per day.  As was seen in the recent RWC 2015, the weather was ideal for rugby and for touring around.   15-20% of all visitors choose to come to Ireland during Sept/Oct - making it one of the most popular times of the year for scenery, weather, climate, environment, and attractions - outside of the peak months during May-Aug.  

Accommodation capacity vs Occupancy ratio is around 65% for hotels & guesthouses showing there is sufficient capacity in the market to cater for once-off increased numbers that occur with various events during the year around the country.

Pot Hale

I think your comment on the home nations not voting on a block may be a little distorted. In 2011 the option was NZ or Japan. The home nations had little interest into which vote went where as either way it didn't impact them. Maybe some went with NZ in return of some future tours home and away.
I think it would a little different if it was a choice of a home nation or say South Africa.

fa0019 wrote:Pot Hale

I think your comment on the home nations not voting on a block may be a little distorted. In 2011 the option was NZ or Japan. The home nations had little interest into which vote went where as either way it didn't impact them. Maybe some went with NZ in return of some future tours home and away.
I think it would a little different if it was a choice of a home nation or say South Africa.

I've already replied to Pot Hale's post, pointing out the numerous distortions and providing the actual facts, which are quite different - but he simply repeats the same post again. At least he's move on from the shoot-the-messenger approach . . .

Well we'll find out soon enough if its back to SAor off somewhere new. I do like peroni.

fa0019 wrote:Pot Hale

I think your comment on the home nations not voting on a block may be a little distorted. In 2011 the option was NZ or Japan. The home nations had little interest into which vote went where as either way it didn't impact them. Maybe some went with NZ in return of some future tours home and away.
I think it would a little different if it was a choice of a home nation or say South Africa.

It would be nice to think it was so simple but rugby politics rarely is.

There are plenty of reasons as to why the four unions might vote differently. Horse trading is the order of the day between all the various unions on issues such as this.

For example, let's say Union A offered to vote for a particular bid if a future commercial undertaking linked to that bid could be agreed. But they get turned down. Meanwhile another bidder offers Union A another commercial proposition in return for securing their vote.

This has happened on previous bid processes; no reason to think it wouldn't happen again. Assumptions about Home Union harmony and accord are misplaced.

Gents,
I am in South Africa this week. Currently in Johannesburg. I have been investigating the RWC issue and will apprise conclusions and next steps for any bid. Unfortunately, due to the work I have been doing this week I have been able to investigate any appropriate public houses so far. I should be able to include this in my assessment starting Wednesday night.

Just getting back to an earlier point about travel distances in South Africa, any reason they couldn't hold one pool principally in Gauteng (with one or two games in Bloemfontein). another pool principally in Natal (with one or two games in Nelspruit), another pool in the Eastern Cape (with one or two games in Bloemfontein), and the fourth pool in the Western Cape (perhaps a game or two in Windhoek)? Therefore fans would be able to more or less stay put during this stage of the tournament. & if pool winners were able to stay put in the quarters (as occurs at most FIFA World Cups), only the fans of the four pool runners-up would be required to travel for that stage of the tournament.

NB: If it goes to 24 teams, presumably with 6 pools of 4, perhaps the Free State (Bloemfontein) and Mpumulanga (Nelspruit) could also host their own pools.

I have friends/family living in South Africa. Pretty much everyone of them has suffered at the hands of a violent crime. One friend has been shot in the leg running from the criminals, my god parents have been tied up in their own home while the criminals beat an elderly relative (90 years old) to get them to tell them where their safe was. Others have been mugged etc etc.

wrfc1980 wrote:I have friends/family living in South Africa. Pretty much everyone of them has suffered at the hands of a violent crime. One friend has been shot in the leg running from the criminals, my god parents have been tied up in their own home while the criminals beat an elderly relative (90 years old) to get them to tell them where their safe was. Others have been mugged etc etc.

I haven't personally WRFC although cape town based which is reasonably safe. From time to time bad things happened but in truth its not that much worse than say some parts of London. Some parts of Cape Town which are nice do have bad crime rates. Claremont for instance suffers a lot from break-ins. Why, well you have old English colonial houses, security is poor, transport links are close to freeways (nice getaways). You have to be smart, be aware and also a little realistic. You don't go into certain areas.

Much of the violence tends to occur in the townships. They do over-spill, that is undeniable but the figures can be a little misleading.

Look it hardly ever, hardly ever spills onto tourists. I've been to Rio and hands down its worse than SA. I don't know many who have been to SA and not said it is one of the finest countries in the world to visit. If you haven't gone, go. Yes there are a lot of ex South Africa's who don't like it... but if I'm being honest with you, yes many of those will have suffered violence (and yes even worse), but many of those quite simply harbour back to the old days. They don't like it that non whites now have equal rights or at least are now free to live in the same areas, shop in the same shops etc and taken many of their jobs. That's my overall opinion of expat saffa's generally. Gauteng can be dangerous and generally I try to avoid when possible but why go outside of business? Nothing there anyhow.

Will tell you a story of a friend of mine who came to visit me a few years back from the UK. His rental car broke down on route to PE from Cape Town. He and his wife were worried, didn't know what to do. All of a sudden 3 men started walking towards them. Looked poor, looked a little dodgy.  Right there they thought they were going to be raped and killed. Literally without much communication they simply went to work on the car, got it working again and told them to go on their way. My friend tried to give them some money, they wouldn't have it. These were by his account persons who were as poor as you'd find. That's a true story.