Get ready for a bold statement: the future of the Rugby World Cup may be in jeopardy for two of its most successful nations, New Zealand and South Africa. SA Rugby CEO Rian Oberholzer has dropped a bombshell, suggesting these rugby powerhouses might never host the tournament again. Why? It all comes down to money.
The Springboks and All Blacks have dominated the Rugby World Cup, collectively winning an impressive seven out of ten quadrennial competitions. New Zealand co-hosted the inaugural tournament in 1987 with Australia and then hosted it solo in 2011, while South Africa has only had the honor once, in 1995. Despite their success, both nations have struggled to secure hosting rights again, with South Africa losing out to France for the 2023 bid.
But here's where it gets controversial: Oberholzer believes the tournament's financial model is the main obstacle. The Rugby World Cup is World Rugby's sole revenue stream, and it needs to fund the entire rugby ecosystem for four years. Taking the competition to markets like America, Europe, and even the Middle East is simply more profitable than hosting it in South Africa or New Zealand.
"It's a challenge for us," Oberholzer told reporters in Cape Town. "The Rugby World Cup is World Rugby's only revenue source, and it must fund the entire rugby community. All members rely on this funding, so World Rugby must take the tournament where it can generate the most revenue and where it has government support."
Oberholzer's comments seem to dash hopes that South Africa would bid for the 2035 tournament. Last year, there were reports of discussions with World Rugby, but it appears those plans have been put on ice. Instead, World Rugby CEO Alan Gilpin has hinted at a return to Europe in 2035, with Spain already announcing its bid. Other potential hosts include Japan, aiming for its second tournament after 2019, and a joint South American bid from Argentina, Uruguay, Chile, and Brazil.
Italy is also in the running for 2035 or 2039, while Middle Eastern nations like Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE are considering bids, possibly for the former.
"If you compare us to Europe or the Middle East, I don't see how South Africa can generate the same revenue," Oberholzer continued. "It's a World Rugby decision, and they'll drive the World Cups to where they believe they'll make the most money. We have to accept that."
The SA Rugby boss adds that the focus has shifted from giving everyone a fair chance to host to a purely financial perspective. "I think we've moved away from the philosophy of equal opportunity. A World Cup in New Zealand or South Africa won't generate the revenue World Rugby needs. I don't see it as a negative for us, but rather what's best for World Rugby."
So, what do you think? Is it time to rethink the Rugby World Cup's hosting model, or should we prioritize financial gains over tradition? Let's discuss in the comments!
