Louisa Wall: Back to the future on cup bid

In the debate about the merits of New Zealand applying to host the 2011 rugby World Cup, it is useful to look back to go forward and to make a comparison with another code.

New Zealand lost the right to co-host the 2003 event with Australia when it couldn't guarantee stadiums clean of advertising due to lack of communication with corporate box holders.

Given that, I hope the NZRFU has consulted the Eden Park residents group, a highly motivated and vocal collection of interested parties who have to live with the disruption to their normal lives when events are staged at Eden Park.

They will have to be kept informed of such a bid, given their special interest in developments in and around the park.

Westpac Stadium chairman Paul Collins believes it would be impractical and a financial disaster, but IRB rules are serious and we know from history that we must comply.

This time, the NZRFU has the backing of central and local government. This is fantastic, and I am sure most New Zealanders would agree this investment of their public money in an event that is highly significant to us as Kiwis is justified.

And, contrary to the situation in the last cup bid, there seems to be much confidence in NZRFU chief executive Chris Moller and chairman Jock Hobbs.

Having representatives of the IRB here when we host the Lions is a coup, given this experience will provide an insight into New Zealand's capability, commitment and passion over hosting the World Cup.

The public will have to do their bit and ensure that all the games are well attended; we should aim for the fixtures to be sold out.

We have to take full responsibility for the success of hosting the 2011 World Cup and must be 100 per cent committed to securing the event.

The IRB mission is to create an environment in which the game can be expanded globally.

To achieve that, the IRB says it must maximise the profile, profitability and value of the World Cup as a means of generating resources to increase the number and competitiveness of unions and to increase participation in rugby worldwide. A key outcome is for rugby to rejoin the Olympic Games.

IRB criteria also includes key financial data, the minimum return a host nation must guarantee and other commercial realities like clean stadiums.

How can a New Zealand bid contribute to these outcomes?

The Japanese bid, for example, aims to contribute not only to the rapid development of Japanese rugby, but also focus on the Asian region, which will greatly contribute to the globalisation of the sport.

South Africa is the other nation seeking hosting rights.

IRB inspection teams are scheduled to tour each country in June and July before a final decision is made in November.

It is interesting to compare our bid with the ICC announcement that the 2007 cricket World Cup will be hosted for the first time in the West Indies.

Part of the rationale for the selection of the West Indies is that they are one of the powerhouses of the sport.

In addition, Caribbean culture is seen as vital in the execution of such a world-class event and tourism and the benefits for the economies of many of the countries in the region was also a factor in the success of the bid.

Maybe another way to strengthen New Zealand's bid would be to host matches in the Pacific Islands and to gather political support from the Pacific Islands Forum.

Who said sport and politics don't mix?

* Louisa Wall is a former New Zealand netball and rugby representative