Show us the money or move World Cup - leading nations want action from IRB

profitius

:rolleyes:

A PROPOSAL to stage World Cups later in the year to prevent key competing nations losing income will be discussed at an International Rugby Board meeting next month.
The Australian Rugby Union annual report, which will be released next week, reveals that the 10 tier-one unions will forfeit about $95 million due to the closure of the June and November Test windows this season. This year the ARU will lose about $16m in net revenue.
The 10 tier-one nations recently sought financial compensation from the IRB, working on a figure of about $75m. The IRB agreed on $20m, or $2m per nation. The unions will continue their push for better compensation when the IRB hosts a conference in London next month on the ''economics of rugby''.

ARU chief executive John O'Neill said yesterday that scheduling this year's World Cup in September-October had ''caused us significant financial pain''.
''We're not alone. But Australia, New Zealand and South Africa have no inbound tours, and a reduced Tri Nations. We make money usually out of six or seven Test matches at home. This year we have three - Samoa, South Africa and the All Blacks. Through a reduction in sponsorship, broadcasting and gate takings, that equates to a $16m revenue loss.''
O'Neill said the northern hemisphere nations were impacted by having no November Tests but would be partly compensated by playing World Cup warm-up matches.
He said the IRB conference in London had been convened ''as a direct result of the agitation and the concern that was generated around the loss of income from the top-10 nations in a World Cup year''.
''To be fair to the IRB, they've recognised the problem. Still, it's not very sensible that when the IRB pocketed £122 million [$188m] from the last World Cup, and will make £80-90m from the World Cup in NZ, the major participants who contribute to the IRB making that profit lose £48m out of their own businesses.''
O'Neill said the conference would ''hopefully come up with a solution where tier-one nations don't find themselves out of pocket''.
While it is doubtful the IRB will provide any major boost in funds to the tier-one nations, there has been a call to stage the World Cup at a time when it would be less disruptive. One proposal is to shift the tournament at least a month to October-November, which would allow the southern hemisphere nations to have inbound tours in June.
Meanwhile, the NSW Rugby Union reported a net profit of $223,127 for the year ending December 31, 2010, at its annual general meeting yesterday. It is the first profit for the union since 2007, turning around a $1.88m loss for an extended 14-month period to December 31, 2009.
The NSWRU recently underwent a major restructure, establishing a subsidiary, Waratahs Rugby, which has a licence to conduct all the activities of administering professional rugby in NSW under the ''Waratahs'' brand. The licence fee is 5 per cent of revenue, plus 50 per cent of net surplus, with a minimum payment of $1m in 2010.
NSWRU chairman Will Jephcott said in his report another significant change was the ''ongoing financial impact of the transfer of NSWRU development and educational staff to the ARU in 2009''.
''This resulted in the ARU reducing their community rugby development grant from $1.95m [in 2008] to $500,000 [2009] and $250,000 [2010]. No grant will be received in 2011,'' he wrote. ''This reduction in funding will have a significant impact in 2011. All of the development funding has been redirected to community development programs under the control of the ARU.''

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/show-us-the-money-or-move-world-cup--leading-nations-want-action-from-irb-20110420-1dozw.html

The money should be for developing rugby around the world not for the countries who already have it.

Otacon

profitius wrote: »

The money should be for developing rugby around the world not for the countries who already have it.

If that was the case, wouldn't/shouldn't they be playing the RWC in countries where the sport is not big yet? Like FIFA are doing?

jacothelad

Otacon wrote: »

If that was the case, wouldn't/shouldn't they be playing the RWC in countries where the sport is not big yet? Like FIFA are doing?

I would hope the IRB aren't a bunch of bribable crooks.

daveharnett

Are they seriously suggesting that they would run a full international calendar in addition to the world cup if the dates suited? Because that's pretty obviously bull. Even if the fixtures were there, they would be filled with third string players (at best), and wouldn't draw anything like 'normal' gates or sponsorship.

thunderthing

Otacon wrote: »

If that was the case, wouldn't/shouldn't they be playing the RWC in countries where the sport is not big yet? Like FIFA are doing?

To be fair the 2019 world cup is going to Japan which, even though it's decently popular over there, isn't exactly a rugby powerhouse yet..

B0X

thundercunt wrote: »

To be fair the 2019 world cup is going to Japan which, even though it's decently popular over there, isn't exactly a rugby powerhouse yet..

Yeah I thought that was a good idea, Italy and the US/Canada should also be given the chance to host it in the future.

daveharnett

B0X wrote: »

Yeah I thought that was a good idea, Italy and the US/Canada should also be given the chance to host it in the future.

Afair the plan is to alternate - every other world cup from here on is to be hosted by a 'developing' nation.

Piliger

There is no doubt that serious money is being lost by the big clubs across many of the major rugby nations.

The problem is that ANY time of the year is a 'problem' in some respect.

What needs to be done is to introduce predicability. Like any business, clubs need to plan. If they know that every four years for the next 12 years they will lose Xmillion due to the WC then they need to plan and budget for it and incorporate that plan into their overall planning. If they know in advance they can do this and I believe they need to be told to get on with it.

Where they cannot do this is when the WC is moved around the calendar from one to the next.

BoarHunter

they should have given to Italy for 2015 ... England had it already. Would have been a brilliant event in Italy in great stadiums.

tolosenc

If they put the World cup in November or in the Summer, then at least we'd get one tour in a world cup year, rather than it ousting both from the calendar...

profitius

Teams can't have everything their own way. They knew all along the world cup is coming so they should have planned in advance. No doubt the tri nation teams will be compensated once again.

Theres only a limited amount of games that can take place during the year because of the nature of the game. The rugby world cup will boost the game world wide so its good in the long term. If more nations play there'll be more TV rights money etc and everyone will be happy.

CIARAN_BOYLE

tolosenc wrote: »

If they put the World cup in November or in the Summer, then at least we'd get one tour in a world cup year, rather than it ousting both from the calendar...

clubs would revolt if they had to supply players to 6Ns, summer tour WC warm ups and a WC all in the one year

can't have it all their own way

PhatPiggins

jacothelad wrote: »

I would hope the IRB aren't a bunch of bribable crooks.

You mean like Ireland voting for the 2011 WC to be held in NZ over the far, far superior bid of Japan? A convient coincidence that the Kiwi's agreed to play a test in Croker in 08 and in Thomond Park soon after Ireland flip flopped.

Yeah,yeah Justin I know................