Bill Sweeney: Why Qatar's Nations Championship offer was rejected
RFU boss Bill Sweeney has explained why Qatar was rejected as a venue to host the inaugural finals of international rugby’s new Nations Championship, adding that London would instead be a “natural destination” to stage the event. It was last October in Paris, in the week leading up to the Rugby World Cup final between South Africa and New Zealand, when World Rugby confirmed the introduction of a biennial Nations Championship concept kicking off in 2026.
Last June, it was claimed that Qatar was reportedly close to finalising an eight-year agreement to host the six-game finals series involving 12 tier-one teams. However, negotiations ended without a deal being agreed and Sweeney has now provided an update on the state of play from an English RFU perspective.
Asked what was the current status regarding the new tournament, Sweeney said: “It was well-known about the unsolicited bid that came in from Qatar quite a long time ago and both Six Nations and SANZAAR took a long time to evaluate it. There were certain aspects that we were concerned with, or not entirely happy with.
“A lot of it was around the inaugural finals weekend for a tournament that we think has got huge potential to grow value and grow fan interest going forward, then perhaps it should be in a more accessible environment and maybe in an area with an established rugby market. So that was a conversation.
“It doesn't preclude going to another foreign destination at another period in time, whether it is ’28, or we talked about the US in ’30, one year before the World Cup in ’31. So the decisions were all taken for the right reasons but there is still a commitment there with Nations Cup. Most of the SANZAAR unions are up here this week, so there are a series of meetings taking place there, and we will continue that around the Nations Cup.”
Was the decision not to take up the Qatar offer more to do with access rather than the human rights situation regarding the country that hosted the FIFA Football World Cup in 2022? “It was just more about what we think is the right destination for the inaugural finals weekend. How do we give the concept the best room to breathe and what is right for the fans? That was the prevailing reason.”
Might Twickenham, which has been rebranded in recent weeks as Allianz Stadium for the next 10 years following a newly inked naming rights deal, be in contention to now stage the inaugural finals? “We have talked about that,” revealed Sweeney. “Plan b and fallback is potentially a London venue, so you could have three matches here, two somewhere else, one somewhere else in London.
“That would be a natural destination and conversations are happening and have been ongoing since the Qatar decision to do that. There are other possibilities of other European venues but London is a strong possibility.”
Is the clock ticking on a deal being concluded sooner rather than later? “Yeah, we want to be able to go to market by the end of the year, no later than the end of first quarter next year. So it's important we get this. It has been in conversation a long time, so it's important we get it concluded.”
Latest Comments
Who, Berry?! His rudeness to Kolisi, our freaking captain, was there for all to see!! Utterly disgraceful.
Erm, I only had one statement - as in 'only one full stop' so not sure where the 'irrelevance' comes in?
Go to commentsLet's be clear: Foster did not back unaquivocally players such as Vaa'i, Tamaiti and Roigard. Yes, he selected them in the squad, but it's a stretch to say he backed them. Those three players have only been backed fully this year (and thrived) under the new regime. There was massive hesitation to give those three guys serious game time in games of consequence.
It's another not-so-subtle dig from the old dynasty at any achievements Razor may be credited for.
Roigard in particular was a mind-baffling omission from the finals of the WC. After being the AB's best player against SA in the pre-WC match, he was not sighted in the big games that followed. Roigard is the type of guy who can win a game with a moment of brilliance, yet the established but uninspiring Christie was preferred to close out a close WC final.
So please, Fozzie, spare us the barely veiled laments about your unfair treatment and unseen achievements. The fact you feel you have to point them out is telling in itself. And it shows that despite saying you've moved on, you and your mate Hansen most definitely haven't.
Go to comments