Kiwis claim shock win in battle for RWC 2011
South Africa were eliminated first, and New Zealand then beat Japan in the second round of voting.
“Winning the right to host 2011 is an enormous honour and privilege but also an enormous responsibility,” said NZ rugby spokesman Jock Hobbs.
New Zealand hosted - and won - the first World Cup in 1987. South Africa did the same in 1995, while Japan was hoping to host the event for the first time.
The Kiwis were thought to have slipped out of the reckoning with the bidding process effectively reduced to a two-horse race between populist choice Japan and favourites South Africa.
But New Zealand, aided by the presence of prime minister Helen Clark, powered to victory in yesterday’s vote.
“We genuinely felt this was our last shot,” said New Zealand Rugby Union chairman Jock Hobbs.
“If the tournament does continue to grow the way it has done then it could be beyond New Zealand post-2011. That was a factor that was driving us.
“This is a victory for small countries. It shows you don’t necessarily have to be a big nation to win. Instead, you have to have a good message. It shows it’s not about money either.”
New Zealand’s rugby pedigree is beyond dispute but there have been doubts whether the country’s infrastructure could cope with the influx of fans a World Cup entails.
Profit projections saw their bid trail those from rivals South Africa and Japan while the time zone is problematic from a European perspective. Hobbs felt his team had impressed in other areas.
“We had the confidence in our strategy and in the skill of our team. We believed we could get there. Some didn’t.
“The country will be absolutely buzzing. I’m so pleased for New Zealand. There have been so many people involved and this means so much to the nation.
“This will help validate and reaffirm that the game is our national sport. The whole country will galvanise behind the effort to make Rugby World Cup 2011 successful.”
While there was a sense rugby was “going home”, the result was tough on Japan and the sense the “old pals act” prevailed will linger.
As a developing rugby nation, Japan had neatly positioned themselves as the only choice if the game was genuinely interested in opening new frontiers. Also on their side was the sport’s need to push its global image in order to gain Olympic recognition.
But their bid was hamstrung by their lack of influence in behind-the-scenes politics crucial to determining the outcome and New Zealand, backed by Australia and South Africa, triumphed.
It was a bitter pill for their bid chief Yoshiro Mori to swallow and the former Japanese prime minister accused the bigger rugby powers of protecting their monopoly.
“Our bid was not for the benefit of the Japanese Rugby Football Union but for the benefit of the world,” he said. “The established nations keep passing the ball around their friends. World rugby has lost a big opportunity because of this decision.”
South African bid leader Francois Pienaar, who led the Springboks to World Cup glory in 1995, remained philosophical over the defeat.
“The hours and effort that went into this were huge. But it was just not meant to be,” said Pienaar.
Asked about the decision to go for one of the traditional rugby union countries over Japan, International Rugby Board chairman, Syd Millar, said: “I think they’ll be strong contenders next time.”
CONNECT WITH US TODAY
Be the first to know the latest news and updates
