Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

REPORT: South Africa shelve World Cup 2027 and 2031 bids

(Photo by David Rogers/Getty Images)

The Rainbow Nation of South Africa will not be witnessing a World Cup on home soil in the near future. Following the unsuccessful World Cup 2023 bid, the South African Rugby Union will not hand in a bid to host the 2027 or 2031 World Cup tournaments.

ADVERTISEMENT

According to the Afrikaans newspaper Rapport, SA Rugby can no longer afford to host the tournament, therefore it wouldn’t make sense to bid.

In 2017, South Africa was the prefered candidate to host the 2023 World Cup ahead of France and Ireland.

Video Spacer

Stormers presser – Warrick Gelant and Labeeb Levy

Video Spacer

Stormers presser – Warrick Gelant and Labeeb Levy

However, in a very dramatic and controversial move the World Rugby Council voted for France, who received 24 votes compared to South Africa’s 15 in the second round of voting. Ireland were eliminated in the first round.

“The government will not currently be able to secure the guarantee of R2-billion, which was last required by World Rugby,” a source told Rapport when asked if SA Rugby could bid again.

“Not now with the state of the economy, and especially not with what the economy will look like after the Covid-19 pandemic,”

Thus far, SA Rugby has handed in bids to host 2011, 2015 and 2019 tournaments and were unsuccessful on all occasions.

ADVERTISEMENT

Meanwhile, Australia is expected to be awarded the right to host the 2027 World Cup, while the United States of America (USA) will top the early queue to host the 2031 event.

World Rugby is set to vote and make the announcement in May 2022.

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
JW 4 hours ago
Does South Africa have a future in European competition?

I rated Lowe well enough to be an AB. Remember we were picking the likes of George Bridge above such players so theres no disputing a lot of bad decisions have been made by those last two coaches. Does a team like the ABs need a finicky winger who you have to adapt and change a lot of your style with to get benefit from? No, not really. But he still would have been a basic improvement on players like even Savea at the tail of his career, Bridge, and could even have converted into the answer of replacing Beauden at the back. Instead we persisted with NMS, Naholo, Havili, Reece, all players we would have cared even less about losing and all because Rieko had Lowe's number 11 jersey nailed down.


He was of course only 23 when he decided to leave, it was back in the beggining of the period they had started retaining players (from 2018 onwards I think, they came out saying theyre going to be more aggressive at some point). So he might, all of them, only just missed out.


The main point that Ed made is that situations like Lowe's, Aki's, JGP's, aren't going to happen in future. That's a bit of a "NZ" only problem, because those players need to reach such a high standard to be chosen by the All Blacks, were as a country like Ireland wants them a lot earlier like that. This is basically the 'ready in 3 years' concept Ireland relied on, versus the '5 years and they've left' concept' were that player is now ready to be chosen by the All Blacks (given a contract to play Super, ala SBW, and hopefully Manu).


The 'mercenary' thing that will take longer to expire, and which I was referring to, is the grandparents rule. The new kids coming through now aren't going to have as many gp born overseas, so the amount of players that can leave with a prospect of International rugby offer are going to drop dramatically at some point. All these kiwi fellas playing for a PI, is going to stop sadly.


The new era problem that will replace those old concerns is now French and Japanese clubs (doing the same as NRL teams have done for decades by) picking kids out of school. The problem here is not so much a national identity one, than it is a farm system where 9 in 10 players are left with nothing. A stunted education and no support in a foreign country (well they'll get kicked out of those countries were they don't in Australia).


It's the same sort of situation were NZ would be the big guy, but there weren't many downsides with it. The only one I can think was brought up but a poster on this site, I can't recall who it was, but he seemed to know a lot of kids coming from the Islands weren't really given the capability to fly back home during school xms holidays etc. That is probably something that should be fixed by the union. Otherwise getting someone like Fakatava over here for his last year of school definitely results in NZ being able to pick the cherries off the top but it also allows that player to develop and be able to represent Tonga and under age and possibly even later in his career. Where as a kid being taken from NZ is arguably going to be worse off in every respect other than perhaps money. Not going to develop as a person, not going to develop as a player as much, so I have a lotof sympathy for NZs case that I don't include them in that group but I certainly see where you're coming from and it encourages other countries to think they can do the same while not realising they're making a much worse experience/situation.

144 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ Does the next Wallabies coach have to be an Australian? Does the next Wallabies coach have to be an Australian?
Search