They probably deserved it more than us, but my only concerns are:
1. Terrorist threats
2. Wasnt the 2007 World Cup in France?
Pro3,372 posts
15 Nov 2017, 13:06
#1
15 Nov 2017, 13:06#1
France 2023
Started by Chippo42 REPLIES1,454 VIEWS· 15 Nov 2017, 13:06
Coach57,555 posts
15 Nov 2017, 13:15
#2
15 Nov 2017, 13:15#2
I think the chaotic political situation at home and the poor state of the SA economy ultimately counted against SA. The other problem is the interference in rugby by the SA Government insofar as race-based selections are concerned. I could not see how under present circumstances SA could qualify for the bid.
The situation is probably a lesson to the SA Government as well as SARU and they will have to shake up the situation.
The situation is probably a lesson to the SA Government as well as SARU and they will have to shake up the situation.
Captain49,914 posts
15 Nov 2017, 13:18
#3
15 Nov 2017, 13:18#3
Sorry to hear that.
Club Pro246 posts
15 Nov 2017, 13:21
#4
15 Nov 2017, 13:21#4
Makes sense. At least France is a rugby playing country.
Captain49,914 posts
15 Nov 2017, 13:35
#5
15 Nov 2017, 13:35#5
I listened to as much of the press conference as I could stand....Beaumont when on about it being an open and transparent process, that they were proud of (imagine being proud of the process rather than being responsible for the result). Two questions rather stumped him though:
..
1 “Doesn’t the fact that the recommendation was rejected rather make a mockery of the process?”
.
and the killer question:
.
2 “When the Olympics and SWC use open voting how can you call it a transparent process when you still use a secret ballot?”.
..
France seems to have worked the delegates more effectively.....it was clearly not the NH’s turn.
Pro3,372 posts
15 Nov 2017, 13:38
#6
15 Nov 2017, 13:38#6
Ka Mate...
"Makes sense. At least France is a rugby playing country."
Um, the Boks fu#ked them up 3 - 0 earlier this year.
Think before you speak you total idi0t!
"Makes sense. At least France is a rugby playing country."
Um, the Boks fu#ked them up 3 - 0 earlier this year.
Think before you speak you total idi0t!
Pro3,695 posts
15 Nov 2017, 13:50
#7
15 Nov 2017, 13:50#7
I guess they preferred Bordeaux over Boerdo wine
Pro3,372 posts
15 Nov 2017, 13:55
#8
15 Nov 2017, 13:55#8
ISIS must be licking their lips!
Captain26,388 posts
15 Nov 2017, 14:01
#9
15 Nov 2017, 14:01#9
We are proudly a rugby playing banana republic!
Still, why hire PWC to do an evaluation, just to ignore the recommendation? Burning money.
Still, why hire PWC to do an evaluation, just to ignore the recommendation? Burning money.
Pro7,008 posts
15 Nov 2017, 14:24
#10
15 Nov 2017, 14:24#10
What a farce
I for one don't believe that South Africa did not deserve to host this world cup, and France themselves hosted this very event, as recently as 2007.
It's been 22 years since we hosted it, so it seemed about the right time to do it all over again.
Everything from employment to the major economic influx for the country, would have been just a few of the many benefits of hosting this event
Why even bother with the entire proposal to host it and choosing a "preferred" host country, if it all comes down to another vote.
Crazy
Captain49,914 posts
15 Nov 2017, 14:39
#11
15 Nov 2017, 14:39#11
Agreed DA, the secret ballot allowed persuasion to take it’s course.
Pro7,008 posts
15 Nov 2017, 14:51
#12
15 Nov 2017, 14:51#12
Fully agree mozart
Club Pro421 posts
15 Nov 2017, 15:40
#13
15 Nov 2017, 15:40#13
Bitter sweet.. But the ANC and SARU do not deserve any kind of endorsement whichwould go hand in hand with selecting SA. Will be interesting to see if the Goats qualify.Glad it went to France and not Ireland.
Captain49,914 posts
15 Nov 2017, 16:12
#14
15 Nov 2017, 16:12#14
Another bit of stunning info...if accurate:
..
“Both of Rugby Africa's votes apparently went the way of France in the final voting process to determine the 2023 World Cup hosts.
According to French newspaper L'Equipe, the eighteen votes that went to France in the first round came from five countries: Scotland (3), Italy (3), Japan (2), Georgia (1), Romania (1) – and four confederations – Africa (2), Asia (2), South America (2), Oceania (2).
In the second round, the votes of the votes of England (2 of 3), Canada (1), United States (1) and North America (2) also reportedly went to France, handing them the outright majority from a possible total of 39 votes.
South Africa can certainly feel aggrieved to have not received the vote from their African counterparts, and perhaps also that of Japan, who now have a team competing in Super Rugby.”
Captain49,914 posts
15 Nov 2017, 16:17
#15
15 Nov 2017, 16:17#15
Knowing the Japanese mentality, they would have been very anxious to be voting for the winning side. Given that occurred on the first ballot suggests to me it was a done deal before the voting and our boys weren’t in the loop. This reminds me of Chicago’s bid for the Olympics, when the totally confident locals thought Obama would swing the deal, but the fix was already in.
Pro3,695 posts
15 Nov 2017, 16:23
#16
15 Nov 2017, 16:23#16
Hopefully Saru can abandon their race targets. That was part of the deal in order to get the back from the ANC government. Remember Mbula spouting rubbish last year that he will ban all tournaments if teams like Cricket and Rugby did not meet the race targets for this world cup.
The new sports minster came crawling at the beginning of the year that they would back SARU if they made use of the Fifa world cup stadiums and not their own.
Hopefully SARU can stick 2 fingers to the ANC and start selecting players on merit to strengthen our player base. Who knows we might be back in contention in 6 years time.
We all have fond memories of 2007.
The new sports minster came crawling at the beginning of the year that they would back SARU if they made use of the Fifa world cup stadiums and not their own.
Hopefully SARU can stick 2 fingers to the ANC and start selecting players on merit to strengthen our player base. Who knows we might be back in contention in 6 years time.
We all have fond memories of 2007.
Captain49,914 posts
15 Nov 2017, 16:34
#17
15 Nov 2017, 16:34#17
Well no criticism Corn, but the ambivalence from SA rugby fans at losing the opportunity to host the RWC is a sad commentary on just how broken things are.....especially given the magnificent 1995 WC.
Pro4,003 posts
15 Nov 2017, 17:47
#18
15 Nov 2017, 17:47#18
This bid and the failure of SA to get it when they had the best offer is once again met by the same denial.
With no surprise, people tried to tie it to things like the quota policy to turn the table to themselves.
People do not care if a nation fields a team that can win the event. Or they would not have given it to Japan.
SA is a isolated rugby nation (which begs the question of the introduction of rugby in SA) and increasingly a smaller and smaller prospect to make quids.
France is surrounded with rugby nations and will ensure a lot of money is done.
The conclusion is as always: termination of rugby in SA.
With no surprise, people tried to tie it to things like the quota policy to turn the table to themselves.
People do not care if a nation fields a team that can win the event. Or they would not have given it to Japan.
SA is a isolated rugby nation (which begs the question of the introduction of rugby in SA) and increasingly a smaller and smaller prospect to make quids.
France is surrounded with rugby nations and will ensure a lot of money is done.
The conclusion is as always: termination of rugby in SA.
Club Pro421 posts
15 Nov 2017, 23:50
#19
15 Nov 2017, 23:50#19
Agreed, as long as the ANC runs the Springboks they should be terminated. Resurrection can come if we are ever as lucky as Zimbabwe.
Captain49,914 posts
15 Nov 2017, 23:53
#20
15 Nov 2017, 23:53#20
Another data point, apparently the French bid produced more money to the RWC.
..
"They had reasons. Scotland wanted to go for the money and Wales wanted to effectively support Gareth Davies [Chairman of the WRU], who was part of the evaluation process.
"To be fair to Scotland, they have said consistently that they wanted to wait for the evaluation report was produced and they consistently said that they'd go with the bid that produced the greatest amount of revenue to RWC.
"In terms of Wales, the situation was that they wanted to see what the evaluation report was like, what the outcome of that was, and they felt duty bound, honour bound to support Gareth Davies who was on the board of RWC and part of the evaluation process,"
Coach57,555 posts
16 Nov 2017, 02:09
#21
16 Nov 2017, 02:09#21
You may differ, but the recent criminal attacks on tourists on the way from the Oliver Tambo airport to their hotels must have ben used by the French and played a role in the decision by some members.
Pro7,008 posts
16 Nov 2017, 05:59
#22
16 Nov 2017, 05:59#22
I still think it is a bloody farce
You have a 18 month "prelim" period where the full evaluations are done on each competing nation, to host the rugby world cup.
Multiple visits are conducted over this same 18 month period, and detailed inspections are made by this "oversight committee"
After this 18 month period, after millions have been spent....... a proposal is put forward by this same committee on who they think would be the best suitable candidate to host this event.
Then... a few weeks after their proposal.... a "transparent" process is held where "secret" ballots are made on who should host that same event.
I have no problem with countries legitimately winning and hosting any event, but I do think it is a farce, when you spend millions on trying to determine who the best candidate is, only for any or all recommendations you make, be null and void because of a simple voting process.
Why then, have the entire 18 month evaluation process to begin with, which costs millions.
As I said.... a farce..
Pro2,580 posts
16 Nov 2017, 06:54
#23
16 Nov 2017, 06:54#23
Bit of a dent to Rugbys Transparency and Integrity tbh. I am not suggesting SA should of got the hosting rights. But World Rugby and the Governing Body gave SA their reccomendation. They ignored that completley. Bit of a farce.
Captain21,007 posts
16 Nov 2017, 07:08
#24
16 Nov 2017, 07:08#24
Well I think it's good that SA didn't get the WC.
Were we handed the right to host it could easily be seen as an endorsement of policies requiring teams to be picked along racial lInes.
It's just pity that nobody stood up and said "We refuse to vote for a country that uses race as a selection criteria in this day and age."
Were we handed the right to host it could easily be seen as an endorsement of policies requiring teams to be picked along racial lInes.
It's just pity that nobody stood up and said "We refuse to vote for a country that uses race as a selection criteria in this day and age."
Pro7,008 posts
16 Nov 2017, 07:58
#25
16 Nov 2017, 07:58#25
Plum
Status: Bok regular
Posts: 1732 RE: France 2023
November 16, 2017, 07:08:07
Status: Bok regular
Posts: 1732 RE: France 2023
November 16, 2017, 07:08:07
It's just pity that nobody stood up and said "We refuse to vote for a country that uses race as a selection criteria in this day and age."
Agreed Plum
I would fully support this as well, even if it meant that we lost the chance to host this WC.
I just don't support how this entire "transparent" process unfolded, and France got the nod
Pro6,663 posts
16 Nov 2017, 09:08
#26
16 Nov 2017, 09:08#26
Damn shame the filthy Frogs won ,no doubt plenty of euros went into offshore accounts in order to go against the reccomendations .My commiserations to you chaps.Sure plenty of average saffas would have benefit ed as well as the pollies.
Pro7,008 posts
16 Nov 2017, 10:45
#27
16 Nov 2017, 10:45#27
I see the world rugby council are being lambasted over this, and rightly so
Here is a good factual article on the issue.
Pro4,003 posts
16 Nov 2017, 12:51
#28
16 Nov 2017, 12:51#28
Agreed, as long as the ANC runs the Springboks they should be
terminated. Resurrection can come if we are ever as lucky as Zimbabwe.
Rugby will be terminated in SA despite the ANC effort to keep it alive.
The quota policy efficiency as a diversion is over.
Story: SA have the greatest players in the world. If selection on merit was allowed, SA would dominate the world.
But a quota policy prevents from selecting on merit.
As other nations are eager of getting dominated by SA, they refused to attribute the WC to SA.
This is the kind of stories expected to be believed.
Rugby will be terminated in SA despite the ANC effort to keep it alive.
The quota policy efficiency as a diversion is over.
Story: SA have the greatest players in the world. If selection on merit was allowed, SA would dominate the world.
But a quota policy prevents from selecting on merit.
As other nations are eager of getting dominated by SA, they refused to attribute the WC to SA.
This is the kind of stories expected to be believed.
Pro4,003 posts
16 Nov 2017, 13:26
#29
16 Nov 2017, 13:26#29
You may differ, but the recent criminal attacks on tourists on the
way from the Oliver Tambo airport to their hotels must have ben used by
the French and played a role in the decision by some members.
SA could have done the same since attacks on tourists in France are frequent.
Another useless point used by SAns to blind themselves.
Rugby in SA is abnormal. There should not have been rugby in the first place. It was a waste of resources that is going to make school books.
Rugby must be terminated in SA.
Captain26,388 posts
16 Nov 2017, 14:06
#30
16 Nov 2017, 14:06#30
The rugby fans are mostly paying for the school books too. you ignorant fool...and we are paying full price DSTV in order for the soccer fans to pay half price. Educate yourself before running your big trap on a sports forum.
Pro4,003 posts
16 Nov 2017, 18:16
#31
16 Nov 2017, 18:16#31
Knowing the Japanese mentality, they would have been very anxious to be
voting for the winning side. Given that occurred on the first ballot
suggests to me it was a done deal before the voting and our boys weren’t
in the loop.
Actually, Japan voted their own interest. France won the bid because they went the expansion path. They helped Japan to get their WC and as it followed, Japan sticks to the path: expansion.
It does not bide well for the SH as Japan's loyalty is driven by something the SH does not offer.
Actually, Japan voted their own interest. France won the bid because they went the expansion path. They helped Japan to get their WC and as it followed, Japan sticks to the path: expansion.
It does not bide well for the SH as Japan's loyalty is driven by something the SH does not offer.
sharkbok
Captain23,257 posts
Captain23,257 posts
16 Nov 2017, 18:42
#32
16 Nov 2017, 18:42#32
@Traditionalist, The World Cup is a one-off thing in 7 years time. It is all over in a few weeks.
I would say that Pro14 is a bigger opportunity - and it is right now.
This could be the start of a global season - and more SA teams could become involved. This may make the French and English want to get involved- as it may become a better tournament than the European cup.
This will ensure the game remains strong in SA. Fewer players will leave SA to play for these teams- instead remain in SA and play against them.
More opportunities for resource consumption. The euro will bring in the extra ability for resource utilization and mass consumption.
Pro14 is the biggest opportunity for South African rugbysince Super12 rugby.
I favour putting three SA teams in the Pro14- and three in Super15.
(Tournament Names to be changed with number count)
I would say that Pro14 is a bigger opportunity - and it is right now.
This could be the start of a global season - and more SA teams could become involved. This may make the French and English want to get involved- as it may become a better tournament than the European cup.
This will ensure the game remains strong in SA. Fewer players will leave SA to play for these teams- instead remain in SA and play against them.
More opportunities for resource consumption. The euro will bring in the extra ability for resource utilization and mass consumption.
Pro14 is the biggest opportunity for South African rugbysince Super12 rugby.
I favour putting three SA teams in the Pro14- and three in Super15.
(Tournament Names to be changed with number count)
Pro4,003 posts
16 Nov 2017, 19:02
#33
16 Nov 2017, 19:02#33
Actually, the WC was the last opportunity for SA to refound their rugby. This would have channelled resources to SA to fund the effort.
Beside, it would have been a powerful lever to ensure the commitment of players by offering them the chance to win a WC at home.
Without that perspective, major players are going to leave home.
As to seeing pro14 as a bigger opportunity, it takes self inflicted blindness.
Pro14 will not provide resources as those teams live in the NH, there will be no flow in revenues, all of it will be absorbed by living in the NH.
Beside, it is a direct outlet to the NH, players will join in hope they are drafted by NH sides.
It will work at the opposite of the WC. The WC could have strengthened rugby in SA, help to settle players in SA.
The pro14 will weaken SA rugby, will drive players to move.
WC: resources would have flown into SA to support SA rugby.
Pro14: resources fly out of SA to support other rugbys.
SA, the feeder nation. Better to get used to it.
Beside, it would have been a powerful lever to ensure the commitment of players by offering them the chance to win a WC at home.
Without that perspective, major players are going to leave home.
As to seeing pro14 as a bigger opportunity, it takes self inflicted blindness.
Pro14 will not provide resources as those teams live in the NH, there will be no flow in revenues, all of it will be absorbed by living in the NH.
Beside, it is a direct outlet to the NH, players will join in hope they are drafted by NH sides.
It will work at the opposite of the WC. The WC could have strengthened rugby in SA, help to settle players in SA.
The pro14 will weaken SA rugby, will drive players to move.
WC: resources would have flown into SA to support SA rugby.
Pro14: resources fly out of SA to support other rugbys.
SA, the feeder nation. Better to get used to it.
sharkbok
Captain23,257 posts
Captain23,257 posts
16 Nov 2017, 19:05
#34
16 Nov 2017, 19:05#34
As long as there is ongoing resource consumption, I am happy.
If the players get paid in Euro's that will easily beat Curry Cup salaries, and perhaps even Super Rugby salaries.
Certainly better than the Kings getting paid in food vouchers- after Cheeky Watson and his comrades robbed them blind.
If the players get paid in Euro's that will easily beat Curry Cup salaries, and perhaps even Super Rugby salaries.
Certainly better than the Kings getting paid in food vouchers- after Cheeky Watson and his comrades robbed them blind.
Pro4,003 posts
16 Nov 2017, 19:26
#35
16 Nov 2017, 19:26#35
As an activity, rugby requires resources to be sustained.
No more resources, no more rugby. The more resources are consumed, the closer the termination of rugby.
The WC would have extended rugby life in SA by bringing in resources.
The Pro14 will shorten the life by shipping away resources.
Glad to see that people are embracing the prospect of termination of rugby in SA.
Glad to see that people are happy by the prospect of its termination.
No more resources, no more rugby. The more resources are consumed, the closer the termination of rugby.
The WC would have extended rugby life in SA by bringing in resources.
The Pro14 will shorten the life by shipping away resources.
Glad to see that people are embracing the prospect of termination of rugby in SA.
Glad to see that people are happy by the prospect of its termination.
Captain26,388 posts
16 Nov 2017, 20:10
#36
16 Nov 2017, 20:10#36
Trad, rugby will never be terminated in South Africa. The Boks might get poorer and poorer and professional rugby might implode and fail, but rugby will survive and SA will stay a net exporter of rugby players...white and non-white.
Pro7,008 posts
17 Nov 2017, 07:07
#37
17 Nov 2017, 07:07#37
The latest financial numbers for SA to have hosted this world cup is as follows.
R27.2 billion generated in direct revenue
38 500 jobs directly created by the tournament, both permanent and temporary
Big numbers indeed
Captain26,388 posts
17 Nov 2017, 15:21
#38
17 Nov 2017, 15:21#38
Yes, we were robbed big time. I could have taken a narrow loss, but after the preferred bidder was awarded to SA, one would expect an award or a close loss. The whole thing was a farce and I for one won't be surprized if money changed hands or irregular promises were made.
Pro4,003 posts
18 Nov 2017, 12:41
#39
18 Nov 2017, 12:41#39
The robbery was to build those infrastructures working at over capacity. The upkeep costs are huge and a burden. They bring nothing to SA, only a deficit.
SA chances have been burned for a very long time as other rugby nations applied a specific measurement.
SA are stuck with an expensive, improper infrastructure that is a liability.
SA chances have been burned for a very long time as other rugby nations applied a specific measurement.
SA are stuck with an expensive, improper infrastructure that is a liability.
Captain26,388 posts
18 Nov 2017, 13:13
#40
18 Nov 2017, 13:13#40
We are stuck with a largely poorly educated populace. The government has no intention of correcting this. They are doimg their outmost to keep the plebs subjected in ignorance for them to stay in power.
↓ LOAD MORE (page 2 of 2)
