OPINION: Hosting a Rugby World Cup really is the domain of the rich and the rich alone

SA Rugby president Mark Alexander’s recent remarks about the possibility of South Africa ever hosting a Rugby World Cup may have caused quite a stir, but he was only echoing what many in the rugby community locally see as hard truth that needs to be faced.

For those who missed it, Alexander said the possibility that the country would ever host a World Cup again is remote, as the government guarantees that would be needed would be a bridge too far for a country with a struggling economy like South Africa’s.

It isn’t a comment that will go down well with most rugby fans, who have watched the Springboks capture back-to-back World Cups away from home in far flung places like Yokohama and Paris, and would desperately like to revisit the amazing times that 1995’s World Cup victory brought the Rainbow Nation.

But while we can quibble if Alexander’s comments are spot on or not, the reality is that the bar that has been set by World Rugby for hosting the tournament now is so high, that only the uber rich can afford to be hosts.

Most of the profits from the tournament go to World Rugby and the hosting nation sees very little in terms of monetary benefit from hosting the World Cup other than the spinoff benefits that come with the tournament.

So the question now is - going forward - how sustainable will the Rugby World Cup be and can it ever be hosted outside a few rich nations?

BIDDING PROCESS FOR 2031 UNDERWAY

Australia has the rights for 2027 and the USA will host 2031, while the bidding process has started for 2035, with Spain leading a Middle East consortium in early reports for the right to host. Spain’s magnificent football stadiums are a lure, but Middle East cash can sway many things, as we have seen in other sports.

On the surface everything seems to be moving smoothly, but scratch a little and you can see how rugby’s traditional hotspots look less and less likely to ever host a World Cup again.

Other than South Africa - who had the 2023 World Cup hosting stolen from them by France in a move that has been well documented, New Zealand already publicly said their last chance to host the World Cup was in 2011.

At the tournament, their administrators made no bones about it that they had neither the infrastructure or the money needed to host another World Cup, as they are a relatively small country.

Given that the two nations have won seven World Cups between them, and the last five on the trot (including both being in the 2023 final), it is a hard pill to swallow.

But what about other nations? Ireland made a big bid for 2023, but even talk afterwards of a joint home nations bid was shelved. Wales and England have financial issues to deal with and Scotland doesn’t have the resources.

Argentina and the South American continent deserve a World Cup, but while they could probably pull off the resources needed to host it, would they trump a Middle East bid that is flash with cash? And then you better hope that the tournament is successful - as France found out when they declared a whopping €28.9-million loss from the 2023 tournament (that’s just more than R625-million loss at the time of writing).

FRANCE 2023 MADE HUGE LOSSES

While some reports talk of an investigation into “mismanagement” of the World Cup tournament - it is notable that World Rugby raked in a massive €500-million revenue from the tournament (almost R11-Billion). World Rugby says this money goes to grow the game, but with ever increasing demands for revenue, how long before the tournament can only be held in a few venues, and out of reach for many bidding nations?

Already there is talk that the World Cup will return to Europe for 2035 and then perhaps Japan - which was the most lucrative tournament yet - for 2039. Either way the picture is clear, to host it you need to have a lot of cash, and that excludes many nations.

It isn’t just rugby. The Commonwealth Games has struggled to find hosts, and Glasgow cut a number of sports - including Rugby 7s - from their next Games to cut costs of hosting it.

The Olympics remain the ultimate prize, but the spiralling costs have put it out of reach of many countries - with Cape Town’s prospective bid detailing a minimum cost of R218-billion to host an Olympics.

OLYMPICS LEAVE A FINANCIAL BURDEN ON HOSTS

And that is without the overruns. Paris went 100 per cent over the budget at $8.7-billion, while Barcelona was 266 per cent over budget and Rio de Janeiro in 2016 went 352 per cent over their budget. The hosting may bring short term joy, but long term it can be a massive financial burden for a hosting city.

It isn't as if rugby is flash with cash at the moment. The French Top 14’s recent financial report was eye-popping. Revenues in the league with the biggest budgets are up 10 per cent but so are costs.

And collectively clubs in Top14 and ProD2 have lost more than 35-million Euros. Ten of the Top 14 clubs have gross operating losses in the millions with five of them topping losses of 5-million Euros.

Cardiff Rugby recently went into administration while the English Premiership has lost two clubs in recent years to financial difficulties and was it not for a huge loan Australian rugby would have gone under in Covid.

RUGBY NEEDS TO BE MORE SUSTAINABLE

Rugby clearly needs to find a way of becoming more sustainable, and SA Rugby’s recent efforts to leverage the Springboks’ success are signs that locally rugby bosses are looking more long term in their outlook to ensure they can survive an unprecedented crisis like Covid brought on the sport.

But the reality is that ideas of hosting a World Cup are a world away. And not just for South Africa. For most of the rugby world, it remains a dream and not an attainable one.