At the end of several World Cup 2023 bid presentations, in far-flung rugby outposts, the hosts would wonder aloud: “What are you going to do for us?” The lesson here is not to confuse sport with politics. France secured the votes in ways the Irish delegation did not know how.
"I have an email from one of the North American unions, who said, 'We probably needed the money more, but we are glad our region supported you'," Kevin Potts, head of Ireland's bid, told The Irish Times.
In May the wily Bernard Laporte was pictured with United Arab Emirates rugby chief Qais Abdullah Al Dhalai after suggesting a test match might go to Dubai.
Singapore came cheaper. “The memorandum of understanding between us will allow us to share resources, but also allow Singapore players and officials to get practical experience in Europe,” said Low Teo Ping, Singapore Rugby Union president last April.
This is how votes are gathered. Too much emphasis has been placed on the much-maligned evaluation report. World Rugby’s search for “transparency” utterly failed because the exact opposite tends to occur with a secret ballot. Even South Africa, the governing body’s recommended bid, branded the entire process “opaque”.
The IRFU also believes it got taken for a ride. “I think the French had most of the smaller regions on board,” said Potts. “The South Africa recommendation, in what we consider to be a flawed evaluation report, may have played into France’s hands as a lot of council voters, I suspect, were surprised South Africa came out as clear leaders.
“It was a perfect storm for France. They had already done a lot of work, I would think, behind the scenes and with the regions and their unions who would not have a lot of funding or resources.”
Sober morning
And still, on this sober morning, the Irish bid would change nothing. It believes in playing by the rules even after France tore up the code of conduct with Laporte’s “lies, incompetence, amateurism” assessment of World Rugby.
This was one of several clean strokes by Laporte. He pounced on the report’s several weaknesses knowing South Africa, given its perilous political and economic state, would be unable to sway French pals in the Persian Gulf, Asia and beyond. Even the African votes went north despite two employees being based in Cape Town offices.
The French were warned during the process about promising television rights and other benefits to voters. The inexperienced Irish bid refused to wade into such murky waters. It played by the rules, and spend €3.25 million of taxpayers’ money to learn valuable lessons that may never be put into practice.
“We really put our best foot forward in every way financially; Government guarantees met or exceeded all of World Rugby’s requirements,” Potts said. “We left nothing on the pitch. As we said we wouldn’t.”
But this is not sport. Leaving nothing on the pitch proved insufficient. Quiet deals decided this process. And, for now, Ireland does not belong in these back rooms.
“It’s hard to see what aspects we would change,” said Potts. “Our stadia proposals can’t be better than they were. The commercial commitment we gave was as much as Ireland should be putting forward. There is a line you have to draw.”
Laporte readily, and unchecked, crossed that line.
Geopolitics
Most of the regions don’t care who gets the World Cup. They care about themselves, about their facilities, and about what they do not have. The French inherently understand the machinations of geopolitics.
“We went into this process believing it was a transparent, above-board process but...it became about France or South Africa, with the big all-seated soccer stadia being of paramount importance. But I would find it difficult to accept or, as some commentators suggest, that that the process was engineered [by World Rugby] for South Africa,” said Potts.
“I believe the consultants ended up with too much control and [the report] became too mechanical a process, and they dropped the ball in pretty important key areas.”
None of this matters now. The report is binned. The consultants paid.
In October 2016 the IRFU was assured by World Rugby that currently unsuitable GAA grounds and the heavy lean on a terraced tournament would not impact negatively on its bid.
But look at this from World Rugby's perspective. It has been under immense pressure to deliver the 2019 tournament ever since Japanese prime minister Shinzo Abe informed it, in July 2015, that construction on the final stadium had been abandoned. This left the original plan in ruins.
Sorry chaps, we won’t have it done until Tokyo 2020. How about Yokohama?
To World Rugby’s horror the same problems may be revisited with 2023 now existing in the shadow of Paris 2024. It was not getting burnt twice. No risks. It was too late to find a new host for 2019.
It was too late last month to tell the Irish bid it was an also-ran. So it looked Philip Browne in the eyes and smiled. Sorry chaps, just business.
Politely bowing
The Japanese have been politely bowing to Alan Gilpin and his World Cup cohort ever since. Meeting upon interminable meeting will eventually produce a stunning tournament because Japan is a ruthlessly efficient place.
Spare a thought for South Africa. Four bids, no joy. It was assured the report would get it over the line this time.
Ireland even came third in the disgruntled category.
At the end of Bob Geldof's autobiography, Is that it? there's a boy standing alone in Wembley stadium after Live Aid. Geldof is drained. He hears the lad wondering the title of the book aloud, and thinks the same.
Epilogue. 30 years later, just before handing back the keys to Dublin city, Sir Bob, now a wise and simple man, recites a poem for the Irish bid about the peacefulness of home. Is Ireland still waiting for the world?
Dust off and try again, says Joe Schmidt, or listen to bid ambassador Brian O'Driscoll and leave 2027 to the Argentineans (already a done deal?)
Most questions are irrelevant now. What did the council members see in the evaluation report? Did they read it? Did they read Le Figaro? How do they see us? What of Browne's "junk" letter adding to his "blip" comment, and the recent "part time casual" advertisement by the IRFU?
Seemingly none of this matters. The French dragged their opponents from integrity-driven sporting paddocks. Everyone goes home with scars.
First rodeo
Clearly this was not France’s first rodeo. Laporte did his colonial forefathers proud, while Ireland was abandoned by Wales, Italy and Scotland. Roll on the next Pro 14 gathering, with Browne propping up that three-legged table.
The Irish bid – clear favourites until October 31st – shot out of the blocks. The evaluation report began with each nations “vision and hosting concept”.
Sounds important, right?
There it is on page 2 (appendix 3) of the report released on that fateful Halloween morning. "Bid presents an exciting and innovative concept for Rugby World Cup 2023 that has clear and tangible objectives that align with World Rugby's strategic goals."
South Africa scored 17.5 of a possible 35 per cent. That’s very bad. France got 21.88 per cent. Ireland 26.25 per cent.
That should have been it. Job done. Get the finger out with Bord Pleanála’s counterparts in Belfast. Tell the GAA to keep all its receipts and get to work.
But beneath this initial endorsement came the multiple blows as World Rugby firmly placed Ireland in also-ran category.
The last bullet point on page 2 dismissed one of Ireland’s structural promises: bringing rugby into the homes of gridiron obsessed Patriots, Steelers and Redskins. “The ability to turn support from the United States of America into participation will need to be further explored.”
The flawed report routed Irish hopes. The stadiums need improvements, and so deemed a “risk,” in the heart of rugby cities like, eh, Castlebar and Killarney.
This was echoed as a strength by an Taoiseach. “Almost everything has happened before.”
Not this, Leo.
Security
Security on all three bids was scored equal. It’s what Ireland did not say about nuclear attacks and volcanoes, World Rugby explained.
The same happened in the technology category. Unasked, France and South Africa cogged from their football bids and named tech partners. Ireland neglected to mention Googletown is in spitting distance of the Aviva stadium. It even hosted the Women’s World Cup in August. That went well.
GAA stadiums won’t be sufficiently upgraded before the 2027 process begins.
The Irish delegation feel used but it missed the point, failed to grasp the unwritten rules of engagement on too many levels.
World Rugby wanted a global tournament to compare visually with the Olympics Games, the Euros, the Russian World Cup next June. It rejected an intimate gathering. They sought the biggest tournament imaginable in Soweto, Durban and Bloemfontein. This it failed to achieve.
Just how blurred the World Rugby communication lines can get was evident at its council meeting last year. Big issues, serious men.
Bret Gosper, the CEO, came before us and ruled out any change to the three-year residency rule. “There didn’t seem to be any appetite to change it. There was a consultation with the unions, it was discussed, and it was decided it would remain as is.”
Not two minutes later Gus Pichot, the World Rugby vice-chairman, stood on the same patch of expensive carpet.
“We need to change it. I think it is wrong. It should be for life, like in football. I would understand a five-year [qualification period] and I think that will be on the agenda in the next six months.”
Wonderfully inspiring stuff.
Rugby origins
Anyone got the stomach for 2027?
"..While I stand on the roadway, or on the pavements grey.."
Yeats simply wanted to return to the place he loved most. Ironically, Geldof hated his rugby origins, a modern day Fiddler of Dooney, he hated how Blackrock College made him feel.
This was about us, not them. That could be the lesson for next time. Or we could leave them to these global games in their "shiny stadia", stop seeking external praise and just listen: "..I hear it in the deep heart's core.."
Greasy tills are what filled the council men with minds to vote.
“For our unions and regions, [finance] is probably their number one weighting and we respect that,” Gosper admitted. “The France bid delivered substantial outcomes for unions and regions in this area.”
Next time maybe Ireland’s bid will be as cold and as passionate as the dawn.
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
Question to Brett Gosper, CEO of World Rugby. Will WR change the evaluation process before 2027?
“We are confident in our evaluation process, which delivered three exceptional candidates, all perfectly capable of delivering an exceptional Rugby World Cup, and therefore the decision is a reflection of that status.”
SA Rugby CEO Jourie Roux: "World Rugby ran an exhaustive, transparent process for 15 months to identify the best host nation, only for the process to go entirely opaque for the past two weeks"?
WR response: "The recommendation and report was a technical guide. Not allowing this period of evaluation and discussion would not have been democratic."
IRFU chief executive Philip Browne: "Unless you've a shiny new stadia you've got to wonder why you bid...Do smaller nations have a chance for 2027 and beyond?"
WR response: "Absolutely. As reflected in the report, there was very little to choose between the host candidates. Ireland were up against two candidates with exceptional stadia, but they did very well, and who knows who they will be up against next time should they wish to bid."
On Bernard Laporte breaching code of conduct with the “lies, incompetence, amateurism” comments about WR.
WR response: "We publicly addressed this matter, expressing our disappointment at inaccurate comments, for which Laporte apologised. We understood the emotion of the recommendation given how much passion each of the candidates demonstrated."
