Jump to content

2025 World Cup - Not in US


Damien

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 191
  • Created
  • Last Reply
4 minutes ago, southwalesrabbitoh said:

Embarrassing. Relying on one person?! You must be stupid. RU would never allow that. I see the NRL as the governing body, and they should be officially made the governing body for Rugby League. 

Just because they would like to be doesn't mean it should happen. The game is much bigger than just the NRL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, southwalesrabbitoh said:

Embarrassing. Relying on one person?! You must be stupid. RU would never allow that. I see the NRL as the governing body, and they should be officially made the governing body for Rugby League. 

The purest bait I've seen on this site yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RLIF still looking at North America for 2025 https://www.sthelensreporter.co.uk/sport/2025-rl-world-cup-tender-process-to-be-re-run-after-usa-plans-scrapped-for-now-1-9636421

Wood also confirms England will participate in the 9s World Cup. 

RLIF also working on an enhanced women's and emerging nations calendar, and Armed Forces tournament in Turkey (to commemorate Gallipoli).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

"There have already been discussions with people who are interested in exploring how a World Cup would look in that continent "

I would be extremely curious to know who these people are. I'd love to see the World Cup here in the US of course, but it would need to be re-announced this year and work would need to be done pretty much immediately to build towards it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have an issue with this. The USA was provisionally awarded the comp subject to meeting some criteria. The Denver game was a test. They failed, it now goes out for tender again. 6 years in advance. That is fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Harsh to say the Denver test failed,  Got more than we got in Hull. Its probably fairer to say the Denver test was deliberately scuttled and its of no real surprise that the promoters cut their losses and ran.

I think the problem with a tender process for it is that you are almost certainly not going to get anyone but Australia/NZ bidding. We arent in a postion really where the comp sells its self, we still have to go out and sell it by working with promoters, with authorities etc etc etc.

Personally I think the RLIF should be working with the french federation to sell it to the French government and Authorities.

The only way a Tender process would give that result is if it was only sent out to Aus and NZ.  If it was an open Tender there is no reason to believe another country would not submit their proposal.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Harsh to say the Denver test failed,  Got more than we got in Hull. Its probably fairer to say the Denver test was deliberately scuttled and its of no real surprise that the promoters cut their losses and ran.

I think the problem with a tender process for it is that you are almost certainly not going to get anyone but Australia/NZ bidding. We arent in a postion really where the comp sells its self, we still have to go out and sell it by working with promoters, with authorities etc etc etc.

Personally I think the RLIF should be working with the french federation to sell it to the French government and Authorities.

Either way there needs to be some type of well thought out plan.  I have no doubts that NA could host a successful World Cup if it was planned out properly.  They have just sold over 70 000 tickets for the Sevens tournament in Vancouver this weekend.   There is a market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Harsh to say the Denver test failed,  Got more than we got in Hull. Its probably fairer to say the Denver test was deliberately scuttled and its of no real surprise that the promoters cut their losses and ran.

I think the problem with a tender process for it is that you are almost certainly not going to get anyone but Australia/NZ bidding. We arent in a postion really where the comp sells its self, we still have to go out and sell it by working with promoters, with authorities etc etc etc.

Personally I think the RLIF should be working with the french federation to sell it to the French government and Authorities.

I don't disagree about the Denver Test, I think ideas a qualified success and could have led to bigger and better things, but the promoter failed to make it work and failed the test (by not paying his bills!). He was as much on trial as the US itself was.

I don't think it just needs to be a tender where you post a doc and leave it at that, I would absolutely take your approach of trying to cultivate bids. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Realistically where could this go?

France is definitely an option. If the Wolfpack continue going from strength to strength a Canada Plus (if you'll ignore the Brexit connotations) arrangement with games in Select USA cities could also work imo. Can't see Australia being overly keen considering last time. Do the kiwis want to host alone? Only other options would be rogue and out of the blue. England again, a celtic joint bid or South Africa?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

An open tender process still requires the bidders to have sufficient backing from the other stakeholders to actually make it doable. the competition as it is simply isnt big enough to get that support from governments and local authorities "on spec" outside of England and Oz and Nz

Tender processes don’t work like that at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

The most certainly do, it is exactly how they work. I work with tenders far bigger than the RLWC regularly and the very first things assessed are the abilities of the bidder to actually deliver what they have promised and that they have the financial backing to actually perform what they are promising. In fact, if you don't we wouldnt even asses your bid. It doesnt even form part of the evaluation criteria, its the qualification criteria. The things you need to do before i bother reading your bid.

In this context, it is quite literally a prerequisite of the bidding process for the Fifa World Cup and Olympics that they have government backing.

There is no way that any evaluation criteria of the RLWC doesnt include the backing of national and local governments to host it, such a thing would be preposterous.

We can set whatever criteria we want. We can choose to award it to France and self fund it with no government support if we wanted. I wouldn't recommend it, but it is our property that we can do what we want with.

I suspect the US bid didn't have major government support.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

The most certainly do, it is exactly how they work. I work with tenders far bigger than the RLWC regularly and the very first things assessed are the abilities of the bidder to actually deliver what they have promised and that they have the financial backing to actually perform what they are promising. In fact, if you don't we wouldnt even asses your bid. It doesnt even form part of the evaluation criteria, its the qualification criteria. The things you need to do before i bother reading your bid.

In this context, it is quite literally a prerequisite of the bidding process for the Fifa World Cup and Olympics that they have government backing.

There is no way that any evaluation criteria of the RLWC doesnt include the backing of national and local governments to host it, such a thing would be preposterous.

What a wierd last paragraph.  When have I suggested that?  

If an expression of interest was made to all nations involved in RL as well as outside Country’s such as North America, UAE as well as France, NZ, Australia and the United Kingdom and all returned positive assessments based on whatever criteria was required, then it is quite possible that we could have more than just Eng//NZ, which you suggest.  Whom we Tender to is up to us.

France would be a very real option as the infrastructure as well as existing municipal stadia is available already.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, scotchy1 said:

You suggested it here.

 

If the evaluation criteria does include a pre-requisite for national and local government support (which it almost certainly does), and if the game simply isnt big enough to get that support 'on spec' outside of England, Oz and NZ (which all evidence points to it being so), then simply letting an open tender will only results in bids from England, Oz and Nz because only those areas could meet the criteria to bid and that is how a tender process works.

We can increase the number of countries able to bid through pre and early market engagement. Of going out and engaging with and working with potential bidders to create that bigger market. You know, like I suggested.

Weird.  Nowhere do I suggest that.

Er, no.  Your suggestion was that ‘almost certainly’ we would get ‘Australia/ NZ bidding’ when it is quite clear that an Open Tender could provide completely different bids.  Unfortunately that doesn’t fit with your initial  ‘Aus/NZ’ quote, but I see the last paragraph now includes ‘we can increase the number of countries through pre and early market engagement’.

What is the criteria BTW?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.