NationStates Jolt Archive

New Zealand to host RWC 2011 17/11/05
New Zealand get second helpings
New Zealand has won the right to host the 2011 Rugby Cup World, beating off the challenge of Japan and South Africa in the International Rugby Board's vote in Dublin on Thursday.



1987: David Kirk lifts the Webb Ellis Trophy on home soil
South Africa was eliminated from the race after losing out in the first round of voting.

The failure of the South African bid, led by former captain François Pienaar, left Japan and New Zealand free to contest the final vote.

But the New Zealand delegation, supported by prime minister Helen Clarke and All Blacks captain Tana Umaga, overcame competition from populist choice to win the rights to stage rugby's showpiece tournament.

It will be the second time the RWC has been held in New Zealand, who staged the inaugural event alongside Australia in 1987.

They had also been due to co-host the 2003 tournament with Australia before being stripped of the right by the IRB after a row over stadium advertising.

Concerns existed over whether New Zealand have the infrastructure to stage such an event - they struggled to find shelter for the fans who followed the Lions tour earlier this year and were forced to siphon the overflow into floating hotels.

But in terms of rugby pedigree few could argue with their success - New Zealanders cherish the game of rugby above all else.

"I want to acknowledge Japan and South Africa," said jubilant New Zealand Rugby Union chairman Jock Hobbs.

"It was a very tough day so we feel their disappointment. We thanks the IRB councillors and we won't let them down.

"Winning the right to host the World Cup is an enormous honour and great responsibility. We will honour that responsibility. It's a proud day to be a Kiwi."

IRB chairman Dr Syd Millar said: "I'm confident that any of three could have hosted a successful tournament as all three bids were of the highest order.

"But I would like to congratulate New Zealand, a a great rugby nation."

Nveleli Ncula, deputy chief executive officer for South African Rugby Football Union, said he was shocked that his country failed to even make the final round of voting.

"We thought we'd done our homework, this has come as a complete shock," said Ncula.

"We thought we'd prepared for every eventuality, we did a very very good job.

"We had the support of the government, and we had very positive responses from the unions but in a secret ballot anything can happen."

Japanese Rugby Football Union president Yoshiro Mori expressed disappointment over his party's unsuccessful bid.

"Many people supported our goal of making rugby global," said Mori.

"We did not receive the exact vote but we think that a lot of sympathy was with New Zealand because they weren't able to host the World Cup in 2003.

"All the boys in the meeting were saying that we have to make rugby global, so why do we have to wait for another five or 10 years to make this happen?"

More to follow...

http://www.rugbyrugby.com/TOURNAMENTS/World_Cup_2003/Tournament_News/story_47479.shtml

Just hand it over now!

yeah..you cheating bastards will get a chance to spear tackle on home soil

yeah..you cheating bastards will get a chance to spear tackle on home soil

Ooh... snap!

mother Fucking Bullshit!

and there was me thinking that rugby could of gone global....


but i guess the old farts at the irb have made it clear that they would rather give it to a country without the infrustracture and keep rugby a private club between the few rather than open it up and *gasp* share out the profits


oh wells..

mother Fucking Bullshit!

Something wrong? :D

mother Fucking Bullshit!
OMG A JARPY!
So they do exist on NS......

yeah..you cheating bastards will get a chance to spear tackle on home soil
I'm confused, what are you referring to when you imply some spear tackle or other that occured on soil not appropriately described as 'home'?:confused:

I'm confused, what are you referring to when you imply some spear tackle or other that occured on soil not appropriately described as 'home'?:confused:
........

yeah..you cheating bastards will get a chance to spear tackle on home soil

I'm with you, thats 2 Irish centres, 2 spear tackles, yet only one citing?

Shite citing officer anyone?

I'm with you, thats 2 Irish centres, 2 spear tackles, yet only one citing?

Shite citing officer anyone?

Yeah, why don't you come down here and we'll spear tackle you too! Its a national pastime.

Yeah, why don't you come down here and we'll spear tackle you too! Its a national pastime.

We're gonna flatten you tomorrow, don't know why, just a hunch that our pack will dominate, and your backs have no ball for the most part.

I'm with you, thats 2 Irish centres, 2 spear tackles, yet only one citing?

Shite citing officer anyone?
I get the feeling they don't like the Irish much...

Maybe because alot of Irish got deported to the colonies a while back and they all wish they were back home instead of in shitty New Zealand :P

But seriously. NZ will win every match they play for the next couple of years. Maybe not 2011 Cup, nobody can predict that far, but for along while anyway.

They're playing brilliantly right now. A joy to watch (if you ignore the dodgy tackles)

How the voting may have gone 18/11/05
The hidden transparency
Syd Millar, the chairman of the International Rugby Board, announced that New Zealand would host the 2011 Rugby World Cup. He also said, in an interview, that the process had been transparent.


It was in all probability above board, audited by PriceWaterhouse Coopers, whose leader presented the envelope with the name to Millar, and the leader was that great Irish wing and captain, Tom Grace.

Nobody will doubt at all that the process was fair and honest. But how transparent was it?

The voting was done by secret ballot. Millar, who did not have a vote, said that nobody knew - or would know - how many votes were cast for each of the tendering countries - Japan, New Zealand and South Africa.

It would be fun to speculate, and what follows is pure speculation by an outsider who was not in Dublin and who has not spoken to anybody who was there. So this is not leaked information - lest we spark an investigation.

There were 24 votes available. The foundation members had two each - Australia, England, France, Ireland, New Zealand, Scotland, South Africa and Wales. That's 16 votes.

Argentina, Canada, Italy and Japan have one vote each. That makes it 20.

Africa, Asia, Europe (FIRA) and Oceania have one vote each. That makes it 24. (It is not immediately clear why the Americas have only observer status.)

Japan, New Zealand and South Africa did not vote in round one. That means that there were 19 votes available.

Let's speculate on who voted for whom.

For Japan

Australia voted for Japan and said afterwards that it was a pity that they did not get it.

Presumably the Asia vote would have gone to Japan though the representative there, Jamie Scott, is a New Zealander by birth. He would have had a mandate.

Canada may well have voted for Japan. After all they have regular competition with Japan and are just across a short(ish) sea from Tokyo.

Then England may well have voted for Japan as well.

That would make 6 votes.

Why would Australia and England vote for Japan? It could of course be that they thought it was the right thing to do - for rugby's sake and the growth of rugby, and so on.

Suspicious people who always suspect ulterior motives may suggest that Australia and England, two countries with a realistic expectation of winning a World Cup, would prefer to play New Zealand or South Africa in Japan rather than in their own backyards.

It may also be that the Australians, lacking much by the way of internal competition at provincial level, would like to link up with Japan.

Mind you Japan is less likely to fill Twickenham or Telstra than New Zealand or South Africa!

For New Zealand

Oceania, which is their fiefdom and would be hoping for greater support and protection from New Zealand where so many of their kith and kin have found prosperity, would vote for New Zealand.

Scotland and Wales would appreciate the All Black brand and hope that it will bring the people to their stadiums. But would they not want neutral ground for a World Cup encounter? Perhaps - but perhaps their World Cup sights are set lower. Ireland may just have had a change of heart and moved from the springbok to the silver fern.

Italy may have spun a coin between New Zealand and South Africa, but perhaps, just perhaps, they have had more New Zealanders than South Africans playing for them and coaching them. Italy of all countries may be the hardest to guess.

That would make 8 votes.

For South Africa

Africa would vote for South Africa.

Argentina has historical reasons for voting for South Africa, dating back a century.

France, too, has reasons of history and tradition to vote for South Africa and they perhaps would take FIRA with them.

That would make 5 votes.

That would mean that South Africa would drop out.

The voting would have been 6-8-5. Mind you, it is quite possible that Italy would have voted with South Africa and FIRA with New Zealand.

Dropped out, the South Africans would then have a vote and in this round there would be 21 votes available - 24 minus two New Zealand votes and a Japanese vote.

South Africa had said beforehand that it would vote for New Zealand if it had a second-round say. It was the only country to declare its hand beforehand.

Presumably South Africa and Africa then voted for New Zealand which would take them to the eleven votes that they required.

Even if Italy had not voted for them in the first round they would surely do so now.

Presumably Argentina would go along as they have far greater ties with New Zealand than with Japan and more to hope for from New Zealand than from Japan. That would make 12.

Even if France and FIRA voted for Japan, New Zealand was home and dry - 12-9. If they voted for New Zealand, from whom they have more to gain, then the vote would have been 15-6. 12-9 looks reasonable, possibly 11-10 if Italy thought Japan a good bet.

To get the vote, delegates from the three countries wandered the world. Japan also had the voices of top players, such as Martin Johnson and Nick Farr-Jones, to speak for them. Paid? Possibly!

The delegates probably went with their voting minds made up. If they had not done so and could still be swayed, there were the presentations from the bidding countries to sway them.

Certainly the New Zealand presentation was far and away the best.

Japan relied mainly on film footage of supporters - Nick Shehadie, Nick Farr-Jones, Martin Johnson, Ieuan Evans and Andy Nicol. There were also filmed statements by the former Japanese Prime Minister Yoshiro Mori, who is now the President of the JRFU, Yoshiji Nogami, who is the Japanese Ambassador to London, Koji Tokumasu, CEO of the JRFU, and Kazuma Naito, an investment banker and member of the Japanese bid committee.

None of that was likely to affect a change of heart.

Then you could pit New Zealand and South Africa.

* New Zealand's chairman was there - Jock Hobbs, lawyer by training, former New Zealand star and captain.
* South Africa's president was there - Brian van Rooyen, much under attack and investigation at home, certainly not in Hobbs's league.

* New Zealand's prime minister was there - Helen Clark, and she was able to give guarantees of government support and infrastructure upgrading.
* South Africa had the minister of sport - Makhenkesi Stofile, just not in the same league as Helen Clark.

* New Zealand had one of the great rugby legends of all times - Colin Meads with his compelling sincerity.
* South Africa had diplomatic François Pienaar. Probably a draw.

* New Zealand had an impassioned plea form captain Tana Umaga.
* South Africa had Mthobi Tyamzashe, chairman of the bid - not in the same league.

* New Zealand had CEO Chris Moller.
* South Africa had consultant and former CEO, Rian Oberholzer, the man who ran the 1995 World Cup. Another draw perhaps.

That would suggest that waverers would get swept along with New Zealand.

Right throughout their campaign New Zealanders presented a united front. South Africa, until some sort of uneasy silence fell on them, were fighting and snarling at each other and undergoing all sorts of undignified investigations and accusations.

Anyway, this is all conjecture. or a conspiracy...................

http://www.rugbyrugby.com/news/story_47501.shtml

I get the feeling they don't like the Irish much...

Maybe because alot of Irish got deported to the colonies a while back and they all wish they were back home instead of in shitty New Zealand :P

But seriously. NZ will win every match they play for the next couple of years. Maybe not 2011 Cup, nobody can predict that far, but for along while anyway.

They're playing brilliantly right now. A joy to watch (if you ignore the dodgy tackles)
Actually It is just the islanders.
They get jealous of the Whiskey or something.

The pom tabloids are now complaining about the process that let us get the WC, mostly because they spent weeks explaining why we didn't have a shitshow of getting it and got it horribly wrong.

Complete and utter bollocks. New Zealand are not even close to having the infrastructure required to host the RWC anymore.

I was in NZ for the Lions tour and, while the cities did put on a good show, there weren't even enough hotel rooms for the travelling fans!

Thousands were based on a cruise ship in the harbour & loads more were living in camper vans in carparks...and even then, many of those campervans were actually shipped across from Australia to meet demand.

There will be around 4 times as many fans at the RWC as there wer for the Lions tour and there is no way that the country will be able to cope with that much travelling support.

Unless New Zealand really pulls out the stops in the next few years, the 2011 RWC will be a complete flop in terms of coping with regular travelling fans. Only the Corporates will be able to afford the packages & all atmosphere will be lost.

Japan shuld have got the Cup, they have the infastructure, the enthusiasm and the brains. They are a upcoming rugby nation and should be given the games. NZ are, no offence meant, a old rugby nation. Rugby is already embedded there. In Japan the RWC could have done so much more.

The pom tabloids are now complaining about the process that let us get the WC, mostly because they spent weeks explaining why we didn't have a shitshow of getting it and got it horribly wrong.
We just wanted to expand the game you know...

Complete and utter bollocks. New Zealand are not even close to having the infrastructure required to host the RWC anymore.

I was in NZ for the Lions tour and, while the cities did put on a good show, there weren't even enough hotel rooms for the travelling fans!

Thousands were based on a cruise ship in the harbour & loads more were living in camper vans in carparks...and even then, many of those campervans were actually shipped across from Australia to meet demand.

There will be around 4 times as many fans at the RWC as there wer for the Lions tour and there is no way that the country will be able to cope with that much travelling support.

Unless New Zealand really pulls out the stops in the next few years, the 2011 RWC will be a complete flop in terms of coping with regular travelling fans. Only the Corporates will be able to afford the packages & all atmosphere will be lost.

Japan shuld have got the Cup, they have the infastructure, the enthusiasm and the brains. They are a upcoming rugby nation and should be given the games. NZ are, no offence meant, a old rugby nation. Rugby is already embedded there. In Japan the RWC could have done so much more.
I completley agree i wanted Japan to win hosting rights.
-20000 people were on that Cruise ship.
-60000 are expected to come for the WC
-Aucklands Motorway extension is expected to be completed 4 years after the WC
-Eden Park is shit
-Carrisbrook is shit
-Jade stadium is shit.
All are shabby and Eden Park looks like a poorly made cardboard box.
Dont ask me why Auckland's Eden park gets to host the final It needs to be developed just like the rest of them.

Well there are gonna be other world cups and this will probably be the last one new zealand gets. Eden park is getting a huge extension and make over for the cup, and Carisbrook probably will too. We have good smaller stadiums which will be perfect for the bunny teams playing each other and only 12k people turn up. The stadiums will actually be full.

I was watching the news about it. Most nations voting didn't disclose who they voted for except well, Australia who voted for Japan.

I was watching the news about it. Most nations voting didn't disclose who they voted for except well, Australia who voted for Japan.

South Africa voted for New Zealand in the second round.

Hehe, the current Australian team aren't much of threat.
I guess you have to watch for South Africa and England as the biggest competitors to winning the cup.

I completley agree i wanted Japan to win hosting rights.
-20000 people were on that Cruise ship.
-60000 are expected to come for the WC
-Aucklands Motorway extension is expected to be completed 4 years after the WC
-Eden Park is shit
-Carrisbrook is shit
-Jade stadium is shit.
All are shabby and Eden Park looks like a poorly made cardboard box.
Dont ask me why Auckland's Eden park gets to host the final It needs to be developed just like the rest of them.
That was on one ship, let alone the thousands more that where in caravans (Like me!) your hotels took full advantage charging premium rates and the whole place was overcrowdered. I wouldn't be suprised if there are 50,000 going over just from the home nations!

Well there are gonna be other world cups and this will probably be the last one new zealand gets. Eden park is getting a huge extension and make over for the cup, and Carisbrook probably will too. We have good smaller stadiums which will be perfect for the bunny teams playing each other and only 12k people turn up. The stadiums will actually be full.
Damn right theyll be full!
Probably even have games at the Hutt Rec.....
I know it aint happening

That was on one ship, let alone the thousands more that where in caravans (Like me!) your hotels took full advantage charging premium rates and the whole place was overcrowdered. I wouldn't be suprised if there are 50,000 going over just from the home nations!
I know and i'd like to think that New Zealand could put together a decent World Cup where 20,000 Poms didnt have to stay in Campervans for 6 weeks that afterwards smelt like Rotten Farts and Guinness.

But i doubt that could happen under a Labour Government they just like passing Laws that most people dont approve of.
Them and their Pro Union Social Engineering Laws.

Well there are gonna be other world cups and this will probably be the last one new zealand gets. Eden park is getting a huge extension and make over for the cup, and Carisbrook probably will too. We have good smaller stadiums which will be perfect for the bunny teams playing each other and only 12k people turn up. The stadiums will actually be full.
Yeah but i am doubting they will have construction completed by 2011.
Do you know how slow our construction Industry is?
Sure they will be full but people will probably miss out.
What about the Cricket Wickets in the middle of our Playing fields?
Especially if we also won rights to the Cricket World Cup which is around January/Febuary/March of the same year?
-I guess they could rip out that section and get some real uniformity between the two surface areas but would they?

But on a different note I dont care if they increase Eden Parks cappacity to 65,000+ and then use the argument oh but it will be empty.
If you build it they will come.
But it looks empty during the NPC anyway so who cares?
Cricket shouldnt be played there it is too oddbal so who cares?