KEY POINTS:
The company set up by the rugby union to organise the game's 2011 World Cup in New Zealand has made a promising start. Last week it held a round of briefings with local bodies and media in the main centres and found near unanimous approval of its plans so far.
Its only definite decision as yet is the date for the final, the Sunday of Labour weekend, which means the semifinals will almost certainly be played on the previous weekend and both, like the final, will be at Eden Park. The reasons for holding all three matches in Auckland were explained to the other centres and they, according to Rugby NZ 2011 Ltd, have concurred.
The logic is sound; fairness to the teams means the semifinals have to be held the same weekend, giving each winner a week to prepare for the final, and about 30,000 visitors are likely to arrive here with tickets for all three matches. The logistics of moving them between two main centres in consecutive days is simply beyond the country's capacity, according to Rugby NZ's chief executive, Martin Snedden.
But if the "sharp end" of the tournament is to be held in Auckland, the organisers are determined that the bulk of it will be spread as widely around the country as possible. In meetings with smaller town councils the company is outlining a range of roles that might involve them. Some may host a visiting team, others hold a game. There will be some contests, says Mr Snedden, for which a small stadium is well suited.
Other places might concentrate on creating a lively venue for crowds to watch matches on a big screen. "Live sites", as they are called, were a feature of soccer's most recent World Cup in Germany, where they drew numbers far greater than could be seated in the stadiums. Fans were able to follow the event for free and with more live entertainment around the telecast than would be possible at a stadium. Advertising at the site ought to cover its cost.
The World Cup in New Zealand could be distinguished by the small towns who take up the challenge to host visiting teams and travelling supporters. They would see the place of rugby in the life of even the smallest communities in this country, and the hospitality it generates. Teams might be given homestays, saving some of the considerable accommodation bill the country will face.
To host the World Cup, New Zealand must not only meet all the costs of the teams while they are here but also provide their international air fares. All up it is expected to cost $310 million and ticket sales are the only source of revenue available to the organisers. Income from advertising, franchising, product labelling, television rights and practically everything else goes to the International Rugby Board.
And the board, sadly, seems determined to reduce the number of teams for the New Zealand tournament from the 20 that will compete in France shortly, to 16. The reason is to reduce the number of mismatches, but only reduce them. Even with just 16 teams a contest between one of the big four and one of the bottom four could produce a three-figure score. Some countries come with no greater hope than to play at a higher level than would otherwise be possible. Why exclude them?
Rugby NZ 2011 wants a festival of at least 40 matches, which with just 16 teams will require some contrived extra rounds. It has put unspecified proposals to the IRB. But whatever shape the tournament takes it must fulfil the local organisation's guiding principle to involve the whole country. The final focus may be on a refurbished Eden Park, but the heart and soul of the event can be everywhere.
