Should Japan be awarded the 2011 Rugby World Cup instead of NZ?

Question

The IRB is trying to spread the game around the world but not doing a good job since awarding the RWC 2011 to NZ. Asia has a lot to offer to rugby and been ignored again.

Answer 1

The better country won the rights to host the world cup come 2011 but it would be nice to see a country other than the top 10 rugby nations host the world cup. Now that would be a sight for sore eyes

Answer 2

Until relatively recently Japan had the second largest number of licenced rugby players in the world. That's no longer the case but having the RWC in Japan wouldn't necessarily have the desired effect - the football world cup there in 2002 wasn't great - it was too hot.

I think that the RWC should be played in the US some time soon. That would have a direct effect on the global interest in the game.

Answer 3

Yes Japan must get it.

To spread the game.

Answer 4

Yes, but Japan has a small percentage of population who are interested in Rugby. These people are more interested in Football & Baseball than Rugby,so, as a Rugby fan you decide.

Answer 5

I think Japan should have been, but it's a bit late to do anything about it now.  It would definitely have been a good way of moving the game forward, rather than making a rather predictable choice.  I wonder if the IRB was influenced by New Zealand's claim that the tournament is getting too big for such a small country to host, so that if they didn't get it in 2011, they'd never be able to host it again... emotional blackmail?

Answer 6

In my opinion, Japan should have been given the chance, if you are talking about spreading the game. However, Japan is the top rugby nation in Asia, though their world ranking is not so high.