Argentina will be candidate to Organize 2027 World Cup

[Cheesada]

http://www.lanacion.com.ar/1943924-...idata-para-ser-sede-del-mundial-de-rugby-2027

 

[McTallshort]

That would be good, Start saving now could sneak in a big of world class fly fishing while Im out there.

 

[TheOvalBall]

If this happens, i'm learning spanish, and saving money. I've been wanting to go to South America for a while now.

 

[Brigantine]

I think Argentina have missed the boat. 2027 will be USA, 2031 will be Russia, 2035 will be China, 2039 will be India, 2043 will be, like, Nigeria or somewhere.

Or maybe Argentina does have a chance: USA 2027, Argentina 2031, China 2035, Russia 2039, India 2043, Nigeria 2047.


Not meaning these countries necessarily host the tournament on their own. E.g. "Russia" might co-host with other black sea coast countries. Bucharest, Chisinau, Odessa, Sevastopol, Sochi, Tbilisi. Same principle for the more futuristic options. "China" would still need Hong Kong and Korea, "India" might barely include India, and be mainly in Sri Lanka, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore. Basically a major developing market teaming up with some smaller more developed/competitive countries.

 

[Superalexmarket]

You are a troll, right?

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

I'm guessing although IF USA decide to host the 2027 RWC it will prob win.

USA and Russia are prob the only major players outside the usual suspects that would want to or could host the RWC.

I expect Canada to host one aswell TBH.

I could see after 10/15 years countries like Spain, Germany etc etc could be interested.

 

[TheOvalBall]

It's time that USA host a rugby world cup.

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

Is it? Really? I can't think of many places as unappealing.

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

It's time that USA host a rugby world cup.

My issue with it being in the USA is that it's simply too big. To really be a USA Rugby World Cup it would have to have games played all over the country, which would be far too much travelling for players IMO. Unless they sectioned the country into 4, and assigned each section a pool, in which case it could work, although the sections would still be enormous. Otherwise it's potentially 8 weeks on the trot travelling 4000 miles from one side to the other. Although I guess it's not too dissimilar to what's done in the Rugby Championship.

 

[TRF_heineken]

Is it? Really? I can't think of many places as unappealing.

No? What about Qatar? Syria? Ukraine? Iraq? Zimbabwe?

 

[ncurd]

Is it? Really? I can't think of many places as unappealing.

Infrastructure? Yup
Rich? Yup
Enough interest to fill stadiums and make profit? Probably
Ability to showcase sport in untapped rich market? Yup

What more do you think World Rugby cares about in terms on appealingness?

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

My issue with it being in the USA is that it's simply too big. To really be a USA Rugby World Cup it would have to have games played all over the country, which would be far too much travelling for players IMO. Unless they sectioned the country into 4, and assigned each section a pool, in which case it could work, although the sections would still be enormous. Otherwise it's potentially 8 weeks on the trot travelling 4000 miles from one side to the other. Although I guess it's not too dissimilar to what's done in the Rugby Championship.

TBF with USA you could have it split in half (east coast and west coast) and host separate tornuments for example 2027 East coast and 2039 West coast or something.

Esp if the first one makes a profit say.

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

@Heineken

I wouldn't mind any of those places to be honest, but i acknowledge i am the minority. I've been to the US too many times, maybe it's that. I have nothing against them, nothing at all. I've enjoyed every time i was there, i just don't see it as a rugby destination.

Consider if it is in the US you might not be allowed in. Food for thought.

What more do you think World Rugby cares about in terms on appealingness?

For me, atmosphere. One of the things i literally adore of countries like Scotland, France, Aus, NZ, England, Wales, etc, is that i could walk into any pub on a game day, order a local craft on draft, sit down next to a complete stranger and have an intense yet amicable conversation about the game we love. That will not happen in the US. Distances don't help either. Going from the EC to WC is a ****ing pain in the arse, time and expense wise. Travelling on a budget (or not) across Europe is 10x times better than doing so in the US.

Arguably my favourite RWC moment last year was entering a ****ty pub near Pimlico Station to watch what i thought would be a one sided boring game only to end up hugging and jumping with a Welshman and a Fijian after Japan beat South Africa. I ended up watching Argentina vs Georgia in Rotterdam with two guys from Batumi, again fantastic.
That, i believe, would never ever happen in the US and i enjoy those things. Last world cup in terms of atmosphere was simply brilliant.

You can make the argument "well, with that attitude they'll never get there. It's a self fulfilling prophecy". Maybe, but i don't buy it. I think the sport is literally minuscule in the US.
I wouldn't be surprised if you would have a hard time finding a bar that shows the games in some (pretty big) cities.

 

[ncurd]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Football_League#Clubs
Looking at the map the furthest distances are between Oakland and Kasas City which is 1353miles and Boston/Miami 1259 miles
The distance between Edinburgh and Rome is 1199 miles.

You could probably in world cup co-locate groups far better than the NFL does/can.

East-Coast Groups A&B
West-Coast Groups C&D

If you allow team to meet up again in the semi-final's as opposed to Final the only bit of bad logistics will be the final venue but you can pick a fairly central location to the semi-final venues like say the AT&T Stadium (Dallas Cowboys) for the final and hold semis on both coasts.

Holding accross world cup in the USA is quite reasonable from a logistic PoV not as ideal as say England but good enough.

- - - Updated - - -

The atmosphere would be better but I dodn't think World rugby could give a flying hoot about that when it comes to gets hosting rights.

 

[George Ford]

If South Africa don't get 2023, then definitely 2027.

I think after the next RWC 2019 in Japan, World Rugby is gon want to bring the game back to it's traditionally top sides.

 

[ncurd]

I agree 2023 will be if only because it's already only between South Africa, France & Ireland

2027 though is different if Japan is a success (and I suspect it will be). I can see them trying further afield from traditional heartlands again.

 

[FrenchFan]

For me, atmosphere. One of the things i literally adore of countries like Scotland, France, Aus, NZ, England, Wales, etc, is that i could walk into any pub on a game day, order a local craft on draft, sit down next to a complete stranger and have an intense yet amicable conversation about the game we love. That will not happen in the US .

So true. The RWC if staged in the US will go under the radar, it'll be a non event. It has to happen in a rugby country to be successful.

PS Not an anti-US post. I've had many enjoyable trips to the USA.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Ermm I think that is a narrow minded way of looking at it TBH.

The REC will def have to be on the marketing ball so to speak but the RWC is at a decent time in America. (It would have to make sure it sits mainly in August),

And how do you define success the NZ RWC in 2011 was hardly a success in a lot of ways.

Although I think from a tornuments POV Canada before USA might make more sense. Less comp from other sports, Rugby is bigger, hasn't held many major Summer international sports, would be a good tester for USA market as next door and you could maybe hold a couple games in Chicago or somewhere in the north east.

7's RWC in the US could do a good job in creating interest.

 

[Peat]

You don't hold the World Cup in the USA today, although I know no few small number of Americans interested in or who have played rugby.

But eight years from now? Eleven? Fifteen? The interest is growing there and while you'll never get the same level of general interest as in rugby mad countries, you'll get some. Enough to make it profitable. And, well, hooking the US as a rugby market is the holy grail for the game at the moment. Rugby could be a pretty tiny sport there and still be one of the game's biggest markets. So prepare your anuses, it happens sooner or later.

To get back onto topic though, a World Cup in Argentina would be pretty cool and crucially, its the only SH location that hasn't done it that would make any sense.

 

[pagliaccio_euforico]

TBF with USA you could have it split in half (east coast and west coast) and host separate tornuments for example 2027 East coast and 2039 West coast or something.

Esp if the first one makes a profit say.

i was worried about the geographic distances of well for a US cup, Australia pulled it off but they only had one site that wasn't on the east coast

I think you're right that if we host we need to have it in one specific area... American rugby fans would be willing to travel, hell we do it for our own tournaments anyway

Probably northeast corridor and a West Coast bid

- - - Updated - - -

You don't hold the World Cup in the USA today, although I know no few small number of Americans interested in or who have played rugby.

But eight years from now? Eleven? Fifteen? The interest is growing there and while you'll never get the same level of general interest as in rugby mad countries, you'll get some. Enough to make it profitable. And, well, hooking the US as a rugby market is the holy grail for the game at the moment. Rugby could be a pretty tiny sport there and still be one of the game's biggest markets. So prepare your anuses, it happens sooner or later.

To get back onto topic though, a World Cup in Argentina would be pretty cool and crucially, its the only SH location that hasn't done it that would make any sense.

if it was held today in the United States, we would smash the average attendance record