# Future Rugby World Cup Hosts



## vino_93 (Nov 15, 2019)

Home Nations set to set a bid for 2031 ? 
Home nations weigh up joint bid for 2031 Rugby World Cup | Rugby World Cup | The Guardian


----------



## Rokto14 (Dec 2, 2013)

vino_93 said:


> Home Nations set to set a bid for 2031 ?
> Home nations weigh up joint bid for 2031 Rugby World Cup | Rugby World Cup | The Guardian


Just after 16 years? Since England hosted the 2015 edition, I am surprised that the home nations are bidding for 2031.


----------



## Rob73 (Jun 18, 2014)

mrErythroxylum said:


> MCG, Melbourne, VIC - 100,000
> View attachment 339093
> 
> View attachment 339095
> ...


I'm sorry but ovals are absolutely shit for rugby as a spectator. Australia should be able to host without using any ovals.


----------



## Leedsrule (Apr 6, 2010)

Rob73 said:


> I'm sorry but ovals are absolutely shit for rugby as a spectator. Australia should be able to host without using any ovals.


I'd rather watch a match from the worst seat at the MCG than at home because fewer tickets were available at a smaller rectangular stadium.


----------



## Rokto14 (Dec 2, 2013)

Australia launches an official bid for the 2027 Rugby World Cup.

Australia launches 2027 Rugby World Cup bid forecast to deliver $2.5bn boost


----------



## Ramanaramana (Mar 24, 2021)

Rokto14 said:


> Australia launches an official bid for the 2027 Rugby World Cup.
> 
> Australia launches 2027 Rugby World Cup bid forecast to deliver $2.5bn boost


It would really help the game to host it again as rugby union here is struggling in the popularity stakes.



Leedsrule said:


> I'd rather watch a match from the worst seat at the MCG than at home because fewer tickets were available at a smaller rectangular stadium.


I've watched a football match in the first few rows of the first tier behind the goals. The only good thing about it was watching the crowd towering over you as you pan around. You're right in that there'd be no issue selling tickets for a RWC, but give me TV over first tier seating at MCG any day. 

I'll never understand people who will attend something where they can't see every aspect of the game they're watching in detail, but I'm told people have different opinions on things, so all the power to them.


----------



## Ramanaramana (Mar 24, 2021)

US Rugby World Cup bid for 2027, 29 and 31 includes NFL and college stadiums


USA Rugby proceeds to candidate phase after feasibility study as sources say World Rugby leans to Australia and US for ’27 and ’31




www.theguardian.com





All signs point to USA for 2031 for mine.


----------



## Leedsrule (Apr 6, 2010)

Ramanaramana said:


> US Rugby World Cup bid for 2027, 29 and 31 includes NFL and college stadiums
> 
> 
> USA Rugby proceeds to candidate phase after feasibility study as sources say World Rugby leans to Australia and US for ’27 and ’31
> ...


Out of interest more than anything, I started to pull together a list of stadiums that could host an international standard Rugby field without changes to the seating bowl. The minimum dimensions of a rugby field are 106x68m, (which is similar to the FIFA preferred 105x68m for football- so this might also be useful for speculating on USA 202, but many American Football stadia and even some MLS venues don't have that width. In reality you'd also need a good couple of metres clear for run-offs, ad boards and photographer areas before the first row but this isn't a precise exercise- this is base on Google Maps or information available online. It also ignores other things that will be important when considering a stadium, like press seating, size and location of changing rooms, quality of access, playing surface type, and the separate host city requirements. Ballparks are excluded- most could fit a compliant field but the number of obstructed views would make them impractical.









USA RWC - Google My Maps


American stadiums capable of hosting RWC matches




www.google.com





The 12 stadium's I'd probably pick are on a separate layer there, but there are about 54 in total. Feel free to copy and play around with these. 

One major barrier to a RWC in the USA could be attendances. In 2018, Ireland v Italy, a fairly juicy fixture by RWC standards, only attracted 35,000 to Soldier Field, despite Chicago having large Irish and Italian communities. The home nations, NZ and Australia will all take thousands of fans wherever the RWC is played and their matches are always likely to sell out, but I doubt there will be much local interest for group matches of less significance. I could be wrong. There's a good choice of small, high-quality MLS stadiums for those fixtures. 

OT Thoughts: FIFA will have to be strict with pitch sizes for the World Cup in 2026. 64m is wide enough for other international competitions but for the World Cup I doubt they will allow variations in pitch sizes, surfaces or run-offs. Therefore the stadiums listed here are likely to be the realistic options for the FIFA WC too. The AT&T Stadium, Levi's Stadium, FedEx Field and Lincoln Financial Field were all part of the bid but look to me like they could not accommodate a 68m wide pitch + run-off areas, unless they make changes to the seating bowl (Which they may do for an event of this scale). I'm sure FIFA require a certain % of seats to be covered, too.


----------



## Ramanaramana (Mar 24, 2021)

In the bid book (https://img.fifa.com/image/upload/w3yjeu7dadt5erw26wmu.pdf), these are the listed pitch + total area listed for each proposed stadium

Atlanta.....105x68, total area (TA) 122x79
Baltimore...105x68, TA 117x70
Boston....105x68, TA 118x74
Cincinnati...105x68, TA 113x76
Dallas....105x68, TA 124x77
Denver....105x68, TA 115x78
Houston...105x68, TA 125x85
Kansas City....105x68, TA 122x74
LA Rose Bowl...105x68, TA 115x73
Miami...105x68, TA 114x74
Nashville...105x68, TA 124x80
New York...105x68, TA 115x74
Orlando....105x68, TA 126x76
Philadelphia...105x68, TA 128x79
San Francisco...105x68, TA 122x72
Seattle...105x68, TA 129x82
Washington DC...105x68, TA 119x78

Attendances could be a concern, though it's hard to judge based on a Test match. The world cup is a different beast. 

Take Copa America 2016 held in US. It was a very successful tournament, averaging 47,000 across 32 matches. Yet, to use two examples, both USA and Brazil were involved in matches that got nowhere close to capacity. Tens of thousands of empty seats. That doesn't happen in a world cup held on US soil. The prestige of the tournament elevates demand significantly. USA 94 remains the attendance record holder, and I think 2026 will finally best that record.

The same will happen for the rugby world cup. I think it will draw well, but I agree that some matches like those involving a Tonga or Georgia would struggle to fill large stadiums, and would be better suited to MLS stadiums. 

I say that knowing full well that rugby popularity in the US is well behind football. But I think USA 94 is a good example of how a tournament can sell itself irrespective of broader interest in the game.

I do think there'll be a mixture of large and smaller stadiums, not dissimilar to what happens in other rugby world cups. England 2015 was a good example of appropriate scheduling.


----------



## Leedsrule (Apr 6, 2010)

Ramanaramana said:


> In the bid book (https://img.fifa.com/image/upload/w3yjeu7dadt5erw26wmu.pdf), these are the listed pitch + total area listed for each proposed stadium


Yes, but without meaning to remain off-topic for too long, that simply isn't possible in some of the stadiums listed without either raising the playing surface or demolishing the first few rows. These stadium's also aren't designed for a pitch that wide so the sightlines from the upper deck to the near touchline will probably have negative c-values. FIFA will accept some compromises where the additional income makes it worthwhile, but probably not at the expense of player comfort or safety.

Take Levi's Stadium, you can see on Google a 64x100m pitch marked out and there's already very little run-off areas in those corners for ad boards, ball boys, photographers ect, where FIFA require 5m. the bid document says a playing surface width of 72m, meaning just 2m run-off either side- that isn't enough to take a long throw or corner. There's no way you could fit a longer Rugby pitch in there either because of the shape of the bowl. 









Google Maps


Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.




www.google.com
























These run-offs are similar in Rugby, and slightly more critical given the speed and physicality of the game. Having a hard concrete wall 2m from the touchline could be very dangerous. It's also far less likely that stadium operators will make fundamental changes to their stadia in order to host a Rugby World Cup, it just isn't a big enough event for them to bother.


----------



## Ramanaramana (Mar 24, 2021)

Leedsrule said:


> Take Levi's Stadium, you can see on Google a 64x100m pitch marked out and there's already very little run-off areas in those corners for ad boards, ball boys, photographers ect, where FIFA require 5m.................. It's also far less likely that stadium operators will make fundamental changes to their stadia in order to host a Rugby World Cup, it just isn't a big enough event for them to bother.


This is taken from an article in relation to hosting a football world cup, which brings up the same concerns you have:



> What about Levi's Stadium? As it's configured now, the field is too narrow to host a World Cup match. The dimensions for the tournament call for fields that are 70 to 80 yards wide and 110-120 yards long. A football field is 53.3 yards wide, and the 49ers' desire to bring fans as close as possible to the NFL action means they can't achieve the necessary width … without some tinkering.
> 
> *I'm told that with “a few million dollars” worth of work, the corners in Levi's Stadium can be removed to accommodate a few matches. The 49ers didn't want a wider-than-desired field for a one-time event. But they'd likely concede to a quick facelift if it meant hosting some World Cup matches.*
> 
> ...


If Levi's hosts the one of All Blacks, England, or USA more than once, or if it's promised a big name in group stages + knockout ties that are guaranteed to sell out, the value proposition could change and spending money to reconfigure could be worth it for the 49ers. It would all depend on how big a role the stadium has to play in the world cup. 

The bigger problem I see is that the rugby world cup takes place at the same time as the NFL season. I don't follow rugby that closely so I haven't come across any proposed solutions to this, as the pitch would not look pristine during rugby matches. We've seen this with US stadiums that have both NFL and MLS where the markings of each sport are visible in the other's. 

I know FIFA demands long exclusivity of stadium for a period leading up to matches. I don't know if rugby is the same, but it would not be a good look to have faint NFL pitch markings during matches. Maybe there is a solution I haven't considered though.


----------



## Temporarily Exiled (Sep 12, 2018)

A US Rugby World Cup would likely utilise venues with athletics tracks, I imagine, of which there are plenty in the United States. Large college stadiums would be suitable for most games, and perhaps the LA Memorial Coliseum could be used for the final.


----------



## Light Tower (Nov 29, 2020)

I would love to see Australia host the 2027 Rugby World Cup and USA hosting the 2031 Rugby World Cup, it would be awesome to see these countries host.


----------



## flierfy (Mar 4, 2008)

England should host in 2027 and France in 2031. Only England and France are capable of providing enough big grounds and attract crowds to fill them, while keeping the distances between the venues bearably short. The lesson learnt from the World Cups in New Zealand and Japan is that there will never be a quality World Cup outside of big established Rugby nations. And there are only two of them.


----------



## Walbanger (Jan 10, 2006)

Utter rubbish


----------



## Temporarily Exiled (Sep 12, 2018)

flierfy said:


> England should host in 2027 and France in 2031. Only England and France are capable of providing enough big grounds and attract crowds to fill them, while keeping the distances between the venues bearably short. The lesson learnt from the World Cups in New Zealand and Japan is that there will never be a quality World Cup outside of big established Rugby nations. And there are only two of them.


I don't think this is true. Frankly, Scotland or Wales alone could each host a Rugby World Cup if they were allowed to follow in France's footsteps and use only nine venues.

There are 14 seemingly suitable stadiums in Scotland with a capacity above 10,000, and 10 seemingly suitable stadiums with a capacity above that of Sandy Park in 2015 (which hosted three fixtures during the 2015 Rugby World Cup). These are Murrayfield (67,155), Celtic Park (60,411), Hampden Park (51,866), Ibrox (50,817), Pittodrie (20,866), Easter Road (20,421), Tynecastle (20,099), Rugby Park (17,899), Tannadice (14,223), Fir Park (13,677), Dens Park (11,775), East End Park (11,480), McDiarmid Park (10,696) and Firhill (10,102). As far as I can make out, all but three of these (Tannadice, Fir Park and East End Park) have hosted rugby union or sevens matches in the recent past. Plenty for a suitable bid. I haven't included the Excelsior Stadium (due to its 3G pitch), Cappilow or Somerset Park (due to their large stretches of uncovered terraces) in this count.

I don't need to be quite so imaginative about Ireland, given that they made an (unsuccessful) bid to host the 2023 Rugby World Cup.





The RFU could use World Cups as an opportunity to grow the game (the rationale for picking Japan for 2019). In this vein, while Italy isn't as mad about rugby as France or England, it would be trivial for fans from those countries to watch matches there and may help grow the game. They have enough sufficiently large stadiums (football stadiums can be used, as they were in England in 2015). Likewise, Romania has suitable venues, a core of rugby fans, and is easy enough to visit for European fans that good attendances could be guaranteed.

In none of these countries would distances between venues be an issue.


----------



## Leedsrule (Apr 6, 2010)

Temporarily Exiled said:


> Frankly, Scotland or Wales alone could each host a Rugby World Cup if they were allowed to follow in France's footsteps and use only nine venues.


I think there's two key points here.

The first is that you've literally listed every stadium big enough in Scotland. That would mean the Scottish Premiership effectively halting for six weeks while this is played. They'd probably also rely on England for help with training bases for each team and other infrastructure (such as hotels and airports) for fans. 

Secondly, and more importantly, the RWC have two main drivers in picking RWC hosts. Firstly- money- income from ticket sales. Secondly- the opportunity to grow the game which results in more money in the long term that they can reinvest into the game. 

The US bid arguably delivers both of these things (although I'm sceptical about crowds, particularly for the smaller matches). A tournament in England, Australia or South Africa will use big stadiums and attract big crowds. A tournament in Scotland does neither. The 13 largest stadiums in Scotland total just 60% of the total capacity of the 13 venues used in 2015, and significantly fewer seats than a Australian, South African, American or Russian bid could offer. 

I don't know what stadiums you envision a Welsh bid putting forward but the issue would be even worse. Ireland only gets away with it as they have several large gaelic stadiums which have huge uncovered terraces, but even then the average ticket price would probably be lower with the average spectator standing in the rain and fewer hospitality options.


----------



## Temporarily Exiled (Sep 12, 2018)

Leedsrule said:


> I don't know what stadiums you envision a Welsh bid putting forward but the issue would be even worse.


Wales would have to be part of a joint bid. I was supposed to remove the part about Wales hosting a RWC alone!

As for scheduling issues, the RWC hasn't always been in October / November. When South Africa won in '95, it was on a June afternoon. Also, regarding scheduling, I'm sure a creative arrangement could work around the issues posed. In 2023, eight of the nine home stadiums chosen are used by football clubs (who will presumably not stop competing during October). The strains are alleviated by having seven of the nine used only for group matches, with the Stade de France and Stade Vélodrome sharing knockout matches. For a Scottish bid, knockout matches could be split between Hampden Park and Murrayfield, two stadiums without football clubs as tenants.

Some quick maths says that, if 9 venues were used, which means taking out the three I mentioned that haven't hosted rugby matches in recent history (Tannadice, Fir Park and East End Park) as well as the two remaining smallest venues (McDiarmid Park and Firhill), half of Scottish Premiership teams would be able to host fixtures. The six teams with grounds not being used for rugby would play a few matches in a row at home, but no fixtures would need be postponed.

The remaining stadiums would be: Murrayfield (67,155), Celtic Park (60,411), Hampden Park (51,866), Ibrox (50,817), Pittodrie (20,866), Easter Road (20,421), Tynecastle (20,099), Rugby Park (17,899) and Dens Park (11,775). Honestly, that's not a bad bid all things considered, and that's without spending a penny on potential expansion.

Also, a coda. This is clearly 100% hypothetical, and was only put together to show that countries other than France and England can capably host a RWC.


----------



## Light Tower (Nov 29, 2020)

France isn't bidding for 2031 as they are focusing on the 2023 edition. I think USA could host the 2031 Rugby World Cup sunce the North American country has never hosted the Rugby World Cup.


----------



## Ramanaramana (Mar 24, 2021)

Temporarily Exiled said:


> As for scheduling issues, the RWC hasn't always been in October / November. When South Africa won in '95, it was on a June afternoon.


South Africa is in the southern hemisphere, where June is wintertime. But even in the southern hemisphere it's now in October as was the case in 2003 and 2011.

Don't see much chance of a summer world cup in northern hemisphere.


----------



## Light Tower (Nov 29, 2020)

South Africa did the June-July time for the 2010 FIFA World Cup.


----------

