Ireland to host Rugby World Cup in 2023?

First topic message reminder :

Ireland to host Rugby World Cup?

I was listening to a piece on Newstalk on Friday evening about this and it seemed quite serious truth be told. Economist David McWilliams was on, former Irish coach Eddie O Sullivan, IRFU spokespeople and transport and sport Minister Leo Varadkar was on too lending his support.

All spoke about it being a distinct possibility that Ireland would submit an application to host the 2023 RWC.

Many points for and against this obviously.

The main issue seemed to be stadiums of the right quality. NZ spent 300m or something like that on developing their stadiums to make sure they were to a certain standard for the RWC. The people on air recognised early on that without the support of the GAA Ireland's bid would die as they own a lot of stadiums, but more importantly the only stadium in Ireland over 60,000 (a necessity to host a RWC final).

Assuming the GAA would support the bid (which is by no means a sure thing) Ireland's stadiums would include:

Croke Park
Lansdowne Road
Thomond Park
Ravenhill -needs to be developed
The RDS -needs to be developed
The Sportsground- needs to be developed
A GAA stadium in Castlebar can't remember the name
Another GAA stadium in the midlands can't remember the name

There are others like Musgrave Park and Donnybrook etc too.

On the stadiums front, they may be a bit small to host 1/4 and 1/2 finals. Obviously the final would be in Croke but in the 1/4's we'd need 4 big stadiums and we may be a bit short there IMO. I'm not sure what stadiums the kiwi's used for the 1/4's tbh.

Other things that were discussed on the show were, the Irish volunteering spirit. The Kiwi's really bought into the RWC as it's such a huge part of their culture and they really made it a good place for supporters to go. I (like the panel on the show Friday evening) believe we Irish could put on a serious show for the travelling supporters. Our hospitality is renowned and we take rugby seriously. I'd like to think we are a welcoming people and respectful (for the most part). I think the atmosphere at some of the games would be amazing and we could really try an infuse some of our Celtic culture into pre match routines the way the Kiwi's did with the Maori culture. We did a good job with the Special Olympics.

Our infrastructure is quite good now.
There are motorways to the main cities and trains and buses are relatively regular. One thing is for sure, no one would need to fly!

The IRFU said they'd be willing to do it and I think mentioned meeting the government at some point and said it may be an idea to look at doing it with Scotland or Wales as well as an option. The Government said they'd be interested in looking at the opportunity

David McWilliams said that even though RWC 2011 was supposed to be a financial disaster for NZ, they actually have made money off it. Only just but they did and obviously it will do great things for their tourist industry.

Some things that may be an issue:
The GAA not wanting to be involved.
The IRFU making a hames of ticket prices again
The lack 30,000+ stadiums for 1/4+1/2 finals
The IRB may want to send it to a developing nation.

What do people think?
Would you like the 2023 RWC to be in Ireland?
Will Stadiums be a huge problem?
Any other set backs you can think of?

as a rugby fan, and discounting any arguments about spreading/expanding the game, etc. then I think Ireland would be a cracking choice. Without wishing to stereotype too much, the Irish certainly know how to organise a party, and for me a RWC in Ireland would be a brilliant occasion.

Obviously, pitted against that you have the will to expand the game to less traditional rugby countries, but I'm not sure I want to go there...

Croke Park:

Looks like the perfect venue for a WC final to me.

GunsGerms wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:Any idea how much the tournament fees are going to be? It was £80M for England, about £100M for Japan

They have estimated a cost yet. The campaign or bid itself will cost €1.5 million.

According to one source:

If Ireland’s cross-border bid proves successful, it is believed a fee in excess of €130million would have to be paid to Rugby World Cup, the organisation which oversees the competition, as a guarantee.

http://thescore.thejournal.ie/philip-browne-irfu-world-cup-1817242-Dec2014/

So it's not been announced yet. 130M euroes is about £100M so they're assuming the fee will be at least the same as for Japan (which makes sense).

I believe they'll be announcing the 2023 and 2027 at the same time so I'm guessing one established and one development. So my guess would be South Africa or Ireland for one and Argentina, Italy or US for another.

GunsGerms wrote:

Croke Park:

Looks like the perfect venue for a WC final to me.

I dunno. Looks like rain. Or is it blowing in the other direction?

On to the main thrust of the topic, Ireland will make a great host nation (I think, never been). They have the stadia, they've riding a rugby wave for the last decade or two with a massive surge in popularity, and, most importantly, they're close to England.

Good luck to them, hope the tickets will be a bit cheaper than next years RWC.

£85 to watch Ireland vs Canada in the MS
£125 Wales vs Uruguay
£75 Aus vs Fiji

out of my reach with those prices

Probably the fact its in England in 2015 counts in favour of South Africa. Japan is nominally in the Northern Hemisphere so that would be three World Cups in a row away from the Southern Hemisphere powerhouses.

On the other hand, they've all hosted this competition before and as sole hosts too. If you want to bring a new host on board without the risks of going to a country where rugby doesn't have much of a foothold, then Ireland is yer only man.

Shush Argentina. Come on now...

TightHEAD wrote:Good luck to them, hope the tickets will be a bit cheaper than next years RWC.

£85 to watch Ireland vs Canada in the MS
£125 Wales vs Uruguay
£75 Aus vs Fiji

out of my reach with those prices

Yes the prices are nonsense. Really annoying. Not going either.

I think its time that both American continents should at least be considered.

TightHEAD wrote:Good luck to them, hope the tickets will be a bit cheaper than next years RWC.

£85 to watch Ireland vs Canada in the MS
£125 Wales vs Uruguay
£75 Aus vs Fiji

out of my reach with those prices

Aus vs Fiji appears to be a bit of a bargain, Would it not?

http://www.independent.ie/sport/rugby/world-cup/here-are-the-12-stadiums-likely-to-be-used-in-irelands-rugby-world-cup-2023-bid-30802033.html

Link is the story in Irish Indo detailing the 12 stadiums that could be used for the RWC. There's no question that some of the GAA stadiums need an upgrade to be ok for the RWC, but that's alrready in train with Pairc O'Caoimh set to be increased to 40,000. Most of the upgrade work would not be massively expensive as the basic fabric of most of the grounds is fine - it's stuff like car parking, media facilities and corporate boxes for the liggers that would be needed.

Good mixture of Croke Park for the final and one or both of the semis, Lansdowne and some of the GAA grounds with 40,000+ capacity for QFs, big grounds for group games between the big Tier 1 teams, smaller grounds for games between the lower level teams in groups.

Ireland is a big tourism country, north and south, and we have bucketloads of hotel rooms in Dublin, Belfast, Cork, Limerick, Killarney, Galway - and all the cities are well-connected transportwise by train and motorway, with airports in Dublin, Belfast (2), Kerry, Cork and Knock.
We even have decent restaurants all over the island now - gone are the days of the grilled cheese sanger in a plastic bag that used to be the staple of the Irish pub - now loads of gastro this and gastro that - and loads of really good craft breweries and distilleries to lubricate our visitors.

Of course, we'd have to persuade our hoteliers, B&B owners and publicans not to fleece visitors as they are prone to do on big match or concert weekends.

Just looking at those photos would not Semple, the Limerick Gaelic ground and Pearse be too short to play an International test?
Even though you could take out some seating for enlargement.

aucklandlaurie wrote:Just looking at those photos would not Semple, the Limerick Gaelic ground and Pearse be too short to play an International test?
Even though you could take out some seating for enlargement.

On the contrary, as the size of a GAA pitch is 35-45 metres longer then a rugby pitch, the issue with using GAA for rugby has always been the crowd is too far from the action. This is how it felt a bit for any Ireland rugby matches I saw at Croke park.

check out the image here to see what i mean:

http://swinglow.rugbyweek.com/venues/CrokePark.asp

Yep, rugby pitches are dwarfed by GAA ones. In Croke Park, the rugby field outline looked like a stamp on an envelope

Wow I never appreciated that, Wolfball's photo makes the point perfectly.

Good luck with the bid Ireland. I'll be backing you. Would love to go, and probably will if you get it.

Now that the Aviva Stadium is built has that old covenant of 'no rugby at Croke Park' come back into play? Wasn't there a thing about no rugby at GAA grounds? Or was that a bit of an old wives tale? Will they allow it again in the interests of getting the WC?

Griff wrote:Good luck with the bid Ireland. I'll be backing you. Would love to go, and probably will if you get it.

Now that the Aviva Stadium is built has that old covenant of 'no rugby at Croke Park' come back into play? Wasn't there a thing about no rugby at GAA grounds? Or was that a bit of an old wives tale? Will they allow it again in the interests of getting the WC?

The bid pretty much relies on not only Croke Park but several other GAA stadia. Now the initial taboo has been broken and the world didn't end, it's not so much of an issue. Co-operation between the sports seems much more easy now.

Croke Park could still be theoretically offered to IRFU for BIG games at any time in any year, that's not an issue anymore.
But Lansdowne have bills to pay on their new stadium and they have a Sponsor that wants all International games held in their Namesake Stadium, so the IRFU would say to the GAA 'Thanks for the offer but we have contractual obligations now that requires us to use Aviva'.

But for a WC.  Croke Park and the other GAA grounds will be available - no problems,  A good deal of the new fanbase for rugby over the last decade or so is guys with GAA backgrounds.
It'd be seen as a big non-partisan Irish sporting occasion and everyone in the country would want to make it work

That'd be great Fly. You have some awesome stadia in Ireland. In fact, I've always been impressed (and a little envious) at the amount of sports participation and support in Ireland. To have a good number of large stadia, with a relatively small population, is fantastic. All Ireland population is perhaps double the size of Wales? And what do we have? 1 big stadium?!

I genuinely hope that Wales don't get any games (and why would we?). I'm not a fan of sharing out games between nations. It dilutes it a bit for me. But you have more than enough capacity there to host it solo, so no problems I guess.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-30350162

The fans interviewed will not be up for going when they see the prices I suppose.

When you see whats been done with Ravenhill it's quite sad and frustrating to see Casement still in that state. Concerned local residents strike again.

I think a WC in Ireland would be superb, but if to meet their £80m bid guarantee England are needing to sell 2.5m tickets (their original bid predicted 2.8m but they were denied some bigger stadiums) making use of the following all-seater capacities:

90,000
82,000
74,500
56,000
54,000
52,387
42,788
37,900
32,262
30,750
30,500
16,500
12,500

With less capacity than that and a larger bid guarantee to meet would Ireland increase ticket prices or just absorb operational loss?

We're going to have four finals, and 16 semis It's an original idea but the IRB seem to think it might work if they can make two more Webb Ellis Cups on time.

Much as I don't doubt Ireland couldn't host a great WC think it's a bit close to England for 2023 possibly 2027. Italy & Argentina are possibilities but dont know if the countries' finances could afford it. My preference is for US as IMHO it could be the incentive to get a Pro league up & running there.

I doubt that that will happen overnight in the US, which has a very congested sports market, as the result of one big event. It would, however, do wonders for the profile of the game over there

GunsGerms wrote:

Cyril wrote:The 'African' idea looks interesting.

Italy or Argentina would be my choice though I'm sure USA could put on a good tournament.

Not really keen on it being in Ireland so soon after England. It'll feel a bit like more of the same. Maybe a 'Celtic' bid for Wales/Scotland/Ireland to share it a few tournaments later would be better?

Why host it with Wales and Scotland we we can do it by ourselves? One of the main criticisms of past world cups is that there hasnt been enough of a sense of occasion or party atmosphere where WCs were spread out over large countries or across multiple countries.

Having it in Ireland will make it by far the most concentrated to one space WC there has ever been. Ireland is 4 times smaller than NZ. Therefore whoever is lucky enough to experience it will be in no doubt wherever they are staying in Ireland that there is a major event going on.

There would also be a very interesting sub plot of unity between the north and south as it would be a joint effort. The sort of feel good story that embodies the spirit of rugby union and could IMO make the bid even more attractive.

recognise that ireland has the lowest potential to grow the game out of any of the other potential candidates. Its already a big game.

rugby needs to look past the end of its nose. usa or argentina 100pc gets my vote ! In fact id say argentina will be serious front runners given their need for a better domestic league

Who cares about growing the game. Why do people obsess about it so much? Aggressive expansion isn't always a good thing. Hosting a great WC in a country that can put on a good show that is already a custodian for the sport will do more for the game globally than shipping it off to China etc.

I would argue that Argentina or Italy should host it because they deserve it because they have contributed a lot to rugby already and would be good hosts. By the same logic Ireland would be great hosts.

So let me get this right on a few of the arguments.

One:  Games in a small country with smaller stadiums would mean that less money would be generated to pay the bills.  Meaning; such a situation would never likely be let happen and therefore, TICKET PRICES would be hiked to astonomical levels.  Putting out the fan who wouldn't be able to afford the expence?

Two:  Therefore it might be best always having the WC in nations that have the size and infrastructure to handle big crowds and therefore are capable of having Ticket Prices in a more affordable range.

So far so good.

But what about the idea that in a small country, you can travel around it pretty much on a bike if you felt inclined - short distances, more compact, never too far away from the centre of a party on any given day where any particular match might be.  
Indeed, no matter where the individual games might be on any given day, the ability of all fans to collect together again in one area a few hours later intensifies the idea of a United sporting party of maginificent proportions (if you were so inclined - I understand there are loner fans too who might like a quieter life. They'll get it in the midlands where even sheep have mental issues due to isolation )

Whereas in bigger Nations, you're on planes, trains and automobiles for hours, you're never going to meet up again with new friends you might have met at one event, all the parties are isolated into little communities that might struggle to create an atmosphere AND all the travelling adds to any budget in the same way that cheaper tickets might ease a budget.

So it comes down to choice.  Do you want to spend the big money on plane tickets/petrol or on match tickets?

GunsGerms wrote:Who cares about growing the game. Why do people obsess about it so much? Aggressive expansion isn't always a good thing. Hosting a great WC in a country that can put on a good show that is already a custodian for the sport will do more for the game globally than shipping it off to China etc.

I would argue that Argentina or Italy should host it because they deserve it because they have contributed a lot to rugby already and would be good hosts. By the same logic Ireland would be great hosts.

the IRB might think growing the game was a top priority . a truly ridiculous comment

alive555 wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:Who cares about growing the game. Why do people obsess about it so much? Aggressive expansion isn't always a good thing. Hosting a great WC in a country that can put on a good show that is already a custodian for the sport will do more for the game globally than shipping it off to China etc.

I would argue that Argentina or Italy should host it because they deserve it because they have contributed a lot to rugby already and would be good hosts. By the same logic Ireland would be great hosts.

the IRB might think growing the game was a top priority . a truly ridiculous comment

There should be balance though. Having every World Cup in countries with little interest in rugby is not in the best interests of the game. It's going to Japan in 2019 remember. I applaud that choice, but you'd want a guaranteed success for the next tournament.

Note I wouldn't consider Argentina to be 'growing the game', more rewarding a nation where there is genuine passion for rugby and has been for some time.

With a response like that Im guessing you dont even know why you think expansion is good.

I have been to see sports all over the world. In my experience the greatest sporting events I have seen are often those that are confined to one nation. GAA for example.

By contrast football is ruined by corruption and olympics by drugs. Give me a good reason why aggressive expansion is good?

Notch wrote:

alive555 wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:Who cares about growing the game. Why do people obsess about it so much? Aggressive expansion isn't always a good thing. Hosting a great WC in a country that can put on a good show that is already a custodian for the sport will do more for the game globally than shipping it off to China etc.

I would argue that Argentina or Italy should host it because they deserve it because they have contributed a lot to rugby already and would be good hosts. By the same logic Ireland would be great hosts.

the IRB might think growing the game was a top priority . a truly ridiculous comment

There should be balance though. Having every World Cup in countries with little interest in rugby is not in the best interests of the game. It's going to Japan in 2019 remember. I applaud that choice, but you'd want a guaranteed success for the next tournament.

Note I wouldn't consider Argentina to be 'growing the game', more rewarding a nation where there is genuine passion for rugby and has been for some time.

you are inferring there is little interest in japan in rugby ? fyi there is already a decent and improving professional league and a huge potential given the 130m population ! thats real potential , and i bet you the japanese put on the one of if not the best wc ever given their superb stadiums and unrivalled organisation.

as for Argentina , they have a pretty rubbish domestic league thats why all their player play overseas so i expect their bid to get serious attention.(assuming they are bidding ?) There is also rugby in chile brazil and uruguay remember . thats a big market you can aim at

Us scots should also get a bid in lets face it there were calls to kick us out of 6n as recently as March this year so if anyone needs a leg up we do ! 1.5 professional teams isn't sustainable  

Overall id like to see it outside of lets say the big 4, nz england france and sa more rather than how its been so far (once in 8 events) ,  then you can cover hopefully both developed and developing nations.

Let's look at the big four and see when last they hosted the RWC?

GunsGerms wrote:With a response like that Im guessing you dont even know why you think expansion is good.

the IRB do thats all that counts

I have been to see sports all over the world. In my experience the greatest sporting events I have seen are often those that are confined to one nation. GAA for example.

Gaelic sports ? not too many countries could compete with that lets be honest

By contrast football is ruined by corruption and olympics by drugs. Give me a good reason why aggressive expansion is good?

give me one reason its not ? i mean how many rugby fans dont want to see more rugby played in more countries by more players ? come on !

Biltong wrote:Let's look at the big four and see when last they hosted the RWC?

Ireland are the only big rugby nation never to have hosted the rwc by themselves.

Biltong wrote:Let's look at the big four and see when last they hosted the RWC?

Attendance figures[31]
Year Host(s) Total attendance Matches Avg attendance % change Stadium capacity % of capacity
1987 Australia, New Zealand 604,500 32 20,156 -- 1,006,350 60%
1991 England, Wales, France,
Ireland, Scotland 1,007,760 32 31,493 +56% 1,212,800 79%
1995 South Africa 1,100,000 32 34,375 +9% 1,423,850 77%
1999 Wales 1,750,000 41 42,683 +24% 2,104,500 83%
2003 Australia 1,837,547 48 38,282 -10% 2,208,529 83%
2007 France 2,263,223 48 47,150 +23% 2,470,660 92%
2011 New Zealand 1,477,294 48 30,777 -35% 1,732,000 85%

alive555 wrote:

Biltong wrote:Let's look at the big four and see when last they hosted the RWC?

Attendance figures[31]
Year Host(s) Total attendance Matches Avg attendance % change Stadium capacity % of capacity
1987 Australia, New Zealand 604,500 32 20,156 -- 1,006,350 60%
1991 England, Wales, France,
Ireland, Scotland 1,007,760 32 31,493 +56% 1,212,800 79%
1995 South Africa 1,100,000 32 34,375 +9% 1,423,850 77%
1999 Wales 1,750,000 41 42,683 +24% 2,104,500 83%
2003 Australia 1,837,547 48 38,282 -10% 2,208,529 83%
2007 France 2,263,223 48 47,150 +23% 2,470,660 92%
2011 New Zealand 1,477,294 48 30,777 -35% 1,732,000 85%

actually you should probably add Australia to that , so it would be every year bar 1 so far., which was wales in 1999.

GunsGerms wrote:

Biltong wrote:Let's look at the big four and see when last they hosted the RWC?

Ireland are the only big rugby nation never to have hosted the rwc by themselves.

Ireland have never gone past qf stage in 7 attempts

alive555 wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

Biltong wrote:Let's look at the big four and see when last they hosted the RWC?

Ireland are the only big rugby nation never to have hosted the rwc by themselves.

Ireland have never gone past qf stage in 7 attempts

And this fact has something to do with the awarding of the Competition? How far has Japan got so far?

alive555 wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

Biltong wrote:Let's look at the big four and see when last they hosted the RWC?

Ireland are the only big rugby nation never to have hosted the rwc by themselves.

Ireland have never gone past qf stage in 7 attempts

Well in fairness there was a couple of times were we didn't actually make the QFs so I'd say that's technically only 5 attempts .

Personally, I'd love Ireland to host a world cup. The sooner the better. I'm sure it would be absolutely fantastic.

I think the big mark against Ireland potentially missing out will be the three world cups held in the UK (I know the Irish republic isn't part of the UK). With nations scrambling for the tournament I'm sure it will be used. You have South Africa and Argentina as probably the leading contenders for 2027. It's an Irish Italian fight for 2023 for me. A northern Italian/ southern France bid would make it interesting.

alive555 wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

Biltong wrote:Let's look at the big four and see when last they hosted the RWC?

Ireland are the only big rugby nation never to have hosted the rwc by themselves.

Ireland have never gone past qf stage in 7 attempts

Your logic to ship it off to a developing nation isnt particularly water tight therefore. Anyway Ireland are 6 nations chamption, ranked 3 in the world and have a rugby history that spans more than a century.

If that doesnt qualify them to be considered a big rugby nation in your mind Im not sure what will.

Nothing probably. Not withstanding their poor world cup record getting to the quarter finals regularly suggests that are at least a top 8 nation. In the current top 8 Ireland and Scotland are the only nations not to have hosted a tournament by themselves.

GunsGerms wrote:

alive555 wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

Biltong wrote:Let's look at the big four and see when last they hosted the RWC?

Ireland are the only big rugby nation never to have hosted the rwc by themselves.

Ireland have never gone past qf stage in 7 attempts

Your logic to ship it off to a developing nation isnt particularly water tight therefore. Anyway Ireland are 6 nations chamption, ranked 3 in the world and have a rugby history that spans more than a century.

If that doesnt qualify them to be considered a big rugby nation in your mind Im not sure what will.

Nothing probably. Not withstanding their poor world cup record getting to the quarter finals regularly suggests that are at least a top 8 nation. In the current top 8 Ireland and Scotland are the only nations not to have hosted a tournament by themselves.

Argentina were ranked 3rd at one point (I fail to see the relevance of the rankings at this moment in the location of the Cup in 9 years time, Argentina were 3rd within the last 7 years). They're a RC team and have been playing for more than a century.

When did Wales host a tournament by themselves? Pretty sure they had a lot of 'help' (out of the 18 venues, only 3 were in Wales).

Ireland have a decent bid for the cup. As does South Africa (not as good IMO due to '95). As does Italy. As does Argentina. As does the US. I have no idea at the minute who else is bidding but I'm guessing the one that will promise the most cash to the IRB will get it.

The 99 RWC was hosted by Wales.

The rankings demonstrate that Ireland are a big rugby nation. I never claimed Argentina arent. I actually said previously that they shouldnt be given a RWC because they are considered a developing nation bet rather because they deserve to host it based on their rugby history which they do. For me anyway that is a stronger arguement for giving it to Argentina or anyone plus the fact they havent hosted before whereas SA have.

HammerofThunor wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

alive555 wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

Biltong wrote:Let's look at the big four and see when last they hosted the RWC?

Ireland are the only big rugby nation never to have hosted the rwc by themselves.

Ireland have never gone past qf stage in 7 attempts

Your logic to ship it off to a developing nation isnt particularly water tight therefore. Anyway Ireland are 6 nations chamption, ranked 3 in the world and have a rugby history that spans more than a century.

If that doesnt qualify them to be considered a big rugby nation in your mind Im not sure what will.

Nothing probably. Not withstanding their poor world cup record getting to the quarter finals regularly suggests that are at least a top 8 nation. In the current top 8 Ireland and Scotland are the only nations not to have hosted a tournament by themselves.

Argentina were ranked 3rd at one point (I fail to see the relevance of the rankings at this moment in the location of the Cup in 9 years time, Argentina were 3rd within the last 7 years). They're a RC team and have been playing for more than a century.  

When did Wales host a tournament by themselves? Pretty sure they had a lot of 'help' (out of the 18 venues, only 3 were in Wales).

Ireland have a decent bid for the cup. As does South Africa (not as good IMO due to '95). As does Italy. As does Argentina.  As does the US. I have no idea at the minute who else is bidding but I'm guessing the one that will promise the most cash to the IRB will get it.

This is probably the real point, who can provide the most cash? If you think ticket prices are expensive for England 2015, if the required amount goes up by 30m each WC then they will be seriously dear by then! Personally I think the stadia in Ireland and the relatively small size of the country would make for a very good WC. Having said that, I like the idea of an autumn in Italy watching the rugby...

I think the RWC will be good wherever it's played but personally I would want it in Italy.

I just feel that the Italians need something to get them interested.

I am annoyed that Italy got snubbed this year in the European Champions Cup. I might be English but I thought it was wrong that the final won't be played in Rome.


What makes someone a "big" rugby nation?

I reckon a big rugby nation is an country in the rugby championship or 6 nations. They all also tend to be in around the top 10 in the world and the countries with the longest rugby history. Italy being the worst with an average ranking of 10-11.

There is no definition obviously so opinion on this will inevitably vary.

beshocked wrote:What makes someone a "big" rugby nation?

At least 3 heineken cups and a flexible tax regime?

beshocked wrote:I think the RWC will be good wherever it's played but personally I would want it in Italy.

I just feel that the Italians need something to get them interested.

I am annoyed that Italy got snubbed this year in the European Champions Cup. I might be English but I thought it was wrong that the final won't be played in Rome.


What makes someone a "big" rugby nation?

One that can try to dictate that Italian rugby get no guaranteed entries into that European Champions Cup, the forerunner of which played its important part in keeping them interested.
Luckily enough, the compromise! ... gave them One place. Helping Italian rugby is not giving them an ERCC final in Rome. That's Italy as observers. That's passive. That's pointless. That's Italy as a film set. They're fed up being a film set.

GunsGerms wrote:I reckon a big rugby nation is an country in the rugby championship or 6 nations. They all also tend to be in around the top 10 in the world and the countries with the longest rugby history. Italy being the worst with an average ranking of 10-11.

There is no definition obviously so opinion on this will inevitably vary.

Actually the World Rugby Fed (IRB) does refer to the 6n and 4n teams as tier 1 nations.

Tier 2 being Canada, Fiji, Japan, Samoa, Tonga, United States, as well as Georgia and Romania.

Everyone else being tier 3.

Gunsgerms fair definition though I am sure you'll find some disagreeing!


Secretfly so does that mean by your definition only France and England are big rugby nations?

Surely Italian rugby do get one guaranteed entry.

If Italy are fed up being a film set they can earn top tier rugby, the old fashioned way - by working for it.

Look at a team like Exeter - they are not one of the established big boys in the AP yet they have made their way onto the scene and look to stay. They haven't done this through the spend,spend,spend strategy.

I know the concept of qualification for a competition is alien to you secretfly - you believe that no Pro12 team should have to qualify for top tier rugby.