World Cup bidding process to be overhauled following 2023 debacle

In the wake of the controversy which followed France’s shock victory over Ireland and South Africa to host the 2023 Rugby World Cup, the bidding process is now expected to be overhauled.

France won the right to host the World Cup after a secret ballot in November and today, speaking to the Telegraph, World Rugby’s chief executive, Brett Gosper, said a review would now take place after admitting the current process had left the governing body “open to what is a perceived contradiction that doesn’t look tidy”.

He suggested, that it was likely the policy of the board recommending a host in future bidding processes would be scrapped, while the policy of secret ballots and the two-week gap between the announcement of the independent evaluation and the vote taken by World Rugby’s council would also be under review.

Bidding process for future Rugby World Cups to be overhauled in wake of France 2023 controversy | @GavinMairs https://t.co/HUzmsZrL36

— Telegraph Rugby (@TelegraphRugby) November 30, 2017

Gosper also revealed that World Rugby chairman Bill Beaumont had “not been happy” to inherit the policy of the board recommending a nomination when he was elected in 2016 and had already looked at changing it.

“There are parts of the process that we will probably change next,” said Gosper. “I guess the hardest part of the review and the most contentious part of the review was actually providing a recommendation. To be fair on Bill and Gus [Agustin Pichot], when they arrived on the scene, they found that and they weren’t happy with that.

“But because we had embarked on a system, there were certain elements that certain countries were really keen that we were not to change. In the end we felt that was probably the right route to take. To change course halfway through the process was going to be uncomfortable for all sorts of reasons.”

Gosper also acknowledged the objections which were raised over the secret ballot, “I know we have been criticised a few times. If the fors and against were equal, from a perception point of view an open vote sounds transparent and maybe we should consider that.”