Shaggy
Both Argentina and Italy have hosted age grade tournaments. Argentina broke the record of specators on the openning weekend this year. Italy hosted the FIFA World Cup in 1990, Argentina did in 1978. Obviously both have experience and will be able to not only cope with hosting a Rugby World Cup but do so well.
Population size does matter - the IRB have themselves pointed this out. For me personally, a new host is always better than a previous host getting a second or third go. There is no fixed number of stadiums required but IRB staff have hinted at 12 being desired and 9 the absolute minimum. Pool matches should see 10 venues hosting 4 matches each. 30,000 is a figure refered to as the minimum capacity for hosting matches. The smallest France used was 32,000 (Montpellier). A small population can be an issue in this regard. New Zealand has gone for 13 venues but 8 are under 30,000. New Zealand´s population cannot justify larger stadiums.
Lets say Scotland and Wales want to host together and Italy have a solo bid. Scotland and Wales together have a larger population than New Zealand but they are far smaller than Italy and in this sense they cannot compete. Both have national rugby stadiums - two of the best on the planet but Scotland has one other 30,000+ venue (Glasgow) and Wales not one. They could upgrade smaller venues but this would still see them come up short - and by quite some margin when compared to Italy.
The home record of
spectators is a crucial area. There is talk of the USA hosting or even RWC debutants Russia in the future. Both are interesting options but neither country has a record of filling stadiums. Neither will host before Italy or Argentina who should host in 2023 with Argentina hosting and 2007 being in Italy. Both Argentina and Italy receive strong home crowds.
Games need to be
spread. Wales never do this. Ireland and Scotland once a year at most. Argentina and Italy do so constantly. Argentina has everything in place - history, stadiums, new host, public support, and a competitive team. Some venues would be upgraded of course as all hosts do but far less than what New Zealand has had to do for 2011. 2023 is the right time as the Americas have never hosted. All other regions would have by 2019.
I believe so firmly in Argentina hosting a Rugby World Cup that I have my own site which I ensure always has new material daily.
www.rugbyworldcup-argentina2023.blogspot.com
I have listed 15 venues. I think it is actually too many but I have nonetheless this many and have argued a case for all of them. Go to my site and look on the right-hand side and you can see all the
Potential venues for Argentina 2023. I would go for the following ten without question. All have hosted Pumas matches.
Buenos Aires - River Plate (65,645)*
La Plata (53,000)
Cordoba (48,800)
Rosario (41,654)
Mendoza (40,268)
Mar del Plata (35,354)
Tucuman (32,700)
Santa Fé (32,500)
San Juan (25,000)
Salta (20,400)
* River Plate was over 75,000 for the 1978 FIFA World Cup.
Some are already due to be upgraded to be better and larger so really Argentina 2023 is ready to happen. Two of the five other venues could be used for Argentina to have 12 stadiums. Possibly Velez (BSAS) and Jujuy being the next theese two.
I would not call the Italian grounds undersized. Similar to Marseilles which hosted two Quarter Finals at Rugby World Cup 2007. Italy certainly have sufficient stadiums. Too many to choose from in all honesty. The 6 videos below are Italy´s home matches from November 2009 and November 2010. Every game was played at a different venue. As you can see the crowds were positive, despite not always being full. For a country considered soccer mad with rugby having no following in comparison clearly the FIR are doing a great job and clearly there is a lot of growth taking place in Italian rugby. 2027 is perfect for Italy and would return the Cup to Europe after 12 years - the largest gap ever.
!
