Race for World Cup too close to call

A few months back, Japan and South Africa were favoured to win the 2011 World Cup hosting rights.

Now, just five days before the announcement, New Zealand has roared into the frame and the inside word is that the race is too close to call.

Even the International Rugby Board bigwigs have been quietly whispering that they don't have any sense of who might win.

And that is why there is a quiet confidence within the New Zealand bidding team. They know they're still in the race despite the bookies still seeing them as a distant third.

But the bookies got it wrong with the 2012 Olympics and there is evidence to suggest they may also have got it wrong with the World Cup.

"We still haven't made up our minds and won't do so until very late in the piece," says Welsh Rugby Union chief executive Dave Moffett.

"The three bids are very compelling and that is a great position for rugby to be in. In the past, we have had two bids to consider. Now we have three very committed countries and we will take as much time as possible to decide," he says.

If New Zealand ever was some way off the pace, then in the last few months, it has made up ground.

In June and July, the country successfully hosted the 11-match Lions tour.

There had been some dire predictions before the Brits arrived. It was feared New Zealand's infrastructure was hopelessly equipped to deal with an estimated 25,000 beer-thirsty Brits.

Those fears never materialised. The IRB sent executives to evaluate New Zealand's potential to host a major rugby event and what they saw was a rugby-mad country capable of filling grounds from Auckland to Invercargill.

The IRB executives were impressed enough to write favourably about New Zealand when compiling their reports evaluating the three bids.

The Sunday Times in London received a leaked copy of the report and claimed New Zealand was being touted by the IRB as "a safe option". The only concern was the lack of top-class accommodation, but it was satisfied those issues could be dealt with before 2011.

It was maybe not inspiring but it was a far more glowing endorsement than Japan received. The report supposedly raised concerns about the commitment of the Japanese government and ability of the country to fill stadia.

South Africa, according to the Sunday Times, came out the best, with the IRB taken by its potential to balance financial returns with a rich rugby culture.

Despite not winning a rave review in the technical report, Japan remains the favourite. The popular view is that Japan's ability to deliver corporate sponsors and its promise of returning a profit of 100 million will be too much to resist.

The World Cup is the IRB's only pay day and the money raised is used to fund all major developments and promote the game globally.

Throw in the added attraction of taking the World Cup to an untried venue and you have two big reasons why Japan is untouchable.

But well-placed sources say the IRB is not obsessed with the dollar and has encouraged delegates to look at the big picture and not just the bottom line.

New Zealand is selling itself as a country steeped in rugby heritage. Its bid promotes the game, the players and the supporters. The NZRU doesn't like the term but effectively it is trying to sell New Zealand as the spiritual home of rugby.

NZRU chief executive Chris Moller and chairman Jock Hobbs spent most of October meeting the voting delegates to present the bid.

The theme was well received. Wales, Scotland and Ireland are wary of the World Cup becoming too focused on economic return to the point where only three or four countries have the infrastructure to deliver the necessary profit.

Which is why, just days out from the vote, Hobbs says: "It certainly feels very close. It is difficult to know where the votes will fall. Making predictions is dangerous but I think we're in with a real chance.

"We recently completed a tour around the world and I think the message was well received. That was encouraging. It isn't all about money and nor should it be. There is a balance and there are other factors equally as important.

"We have a lot of factors in our favour. We have outstanding rugby facilities. We offer visiting fans a great rugby experience at an affordable cost. The reaction is positive but that does not mean they will translate into votes."

That month of lobbying was useful, as it also allowed Moller and Hobbs an opportunity to impress upon delegates that New Zealand's shortcomings were perceived and not real.

The perception was that New Zealand wouldn't be able to turf enough green stuff into the coffers. Being half a day ahead of Europe and South Africa - the two key markets - would reduce the potential income from broadcast rights.

The message banged home by Hobbs and Moller was that the government has underwritten the tournament fee. The IRB is guaranteed to make what it believes to be enough money to fund its initiatives.

When IRB chief executive Mike Miller was in New Zealand in July, he stressed that all three bids offered the financial returns he was looking for.

As a former head of sport for BBC TV, Miller also made the point that European broadcasters are keen on New Zealand as there is a blossoming market for televised breakfast-time sport in the UK.

All the evidence supports the view that New Zealand is a contender. But to be successful on Friday, it needs a trump card to win votes.

All three bids are capable of satisfying the IRB's financial goals so the decision will come down to other issues.

Japan has a high profile endorsement from rugby legend Martin Johnson and a track record of running major events after hosting the 2002 soccer World Cup.

South Africa have Nelson Mandela on board and are widely acknowledged to have hosted the best-ever Rugby World Cup in 1995.

New Zealand possibly has the highest valued card - the All Blacks.

No team has done more to raise the profile of the game and the World Cup.

On their Grand Slam tour, tickets for the matches in Cardiff, Dublin and London sold out in hours.

"One of the messages that has been made is the fact that New Zealand has been contributing to the growth of rugby around the world for more than 100 years," says Hobbs.

"Kiwis are sharing their passion and knowledge of the game all over the world. We have that background and heritage. We believe a World Cup in 2011 will help us continue that tradition. New Zealand has made an important contribution to world rugby and we hope that is taken into account in terms of the vote."

The answer to that will be known on Friday. And even if it doesn't go New Zealand's way, the bidding team will at least have the consolation of knowing they came close.

"It is going to be an incredibly difficult choice to come out in favour of one of the bids," says Bill Nolan, one of the two Scottish delegates with a vote. "It's a shame we can't accept all three, as all have been impressive. It is probably one of the hardest decisions I have had to make."

- HERALD ON SUNDAY