World Cup 2022 Bid [merged]

[Francois Jackson]

daniel - your assertion that Soccer will take over the country and we should sit back and allow this because we would learn from the game and reap untold rewards is hard to swallow. Surely you can see that unless Soccer absorbs all of the youth of Australia, weekly fills the stadiums and then is taken up by free to air TV it will remain a second tier sport to AFL and NRL regardless of a short flurry of interest a World Cup may bring.

Cultural change is the hardest shift to create (as we can see by the millions the AFL have and are about to spend on lifting the crowds to footy games in Sydney and Queensland). To leap frog AFL Soccer would need to not only markedly increase in popularity in general but also hope that the AFL implode, much like what league did to a certain degree with Superleague.

For all the benefits this may bring to the economy, if this hurts the AFL or especially my beloved Tigers in any way, then I'm against it.

Stripes

Striped read my post again.

i wrote "if the AFL or anyone think Soccer will take over this country they are kidding themselves" IT WONT HAPPEN IS WHAT I WROTE.

I cant believe you think it would hurt our game. What do you think people who have Yellow and Black running through their veins will switch off and stop following our game because of this.

To repeat what someone said on here, the cup comes down under then for a few years Australia will be Soccer crazy but thats it. After a few years people will forget and move on, but more kids will be playing "a sport" and thats good for our country.

As for the money it will generate. i cant believe you cant see it i really cant.

millions of people flock into our country, spend their money in our restaurants and stay in our hotels yet some of you think we wont break in.

Ticket sales pail in comparison to the money people would spend in our country.

you want to know what a waste of a sport is. The Grand Prix.

It does nothing to our economy because no one cares yet year after year they still put on a show for a loss.

[Stripes]

I agree with you that the World Cup will generate a large amount of finances for Australia, as I wrote in an earlier post, but I do believe it would hurt our code. It certainly wouldn't sway you or me but it would influence the young kids and it may generate enough support that TV ratings, sponsorship, membership etc are given to Soccer instead of the AFL. The more interest that is generated in another sport, the more money it will take - money which would have been going to the AFL.

People proclaim that their is room enough for everyone and every code to survive in Australia which is true but their isn't room for every code to prosper. If the AFL start to become increasingly popular in NSW then people will start to switch their loyalties to GWS games over Parramatta games, buy memberships, watch on TV etc  People can support more than one team and more than one code but sooner or later funds and/or conflicts will occur when they have to decide which will eat into NRL rating, merchandise sales etc. The same can be said for Soccer.

It is all about interest and exposure. With the World Cup overwhelming Australia via the media and demanding all the major grounds across the country it will generate the ground swell it needs to lift participation, interest and money in its domestic competition. It is the reason the World Cup is being played in South Africa next year too - Soccer is trying to (much like the AFL in GWS and GC) overwhelm and break into foreign markets.

Overall, looking beyond the short term monetary gains the country will make, the World Cup can only prove damaging to our great game, short term and long.

Stripes

[Francois Jackson]

Stripes just reading the papers i can see this happening if we arent careful.

dismiss the World Cup in our state and Sydney picks up the slack then we may find ourselves in a deeper hole.

AFL needs Sydney but Sydney doesnt need the AFL. If they get the World Cup games we should get, including the Final then the AFL can kiss this west sydney crap goodbye. it will be over before it started. FACT!!

Sydney are loving the fact we have said no to Etihad because all that means is everything gets moved across the border.

[cub]

[Penelope]

On the other hand, it will probably mean that AFL premiership matches are played in regional areas, which will be a boon for the local football supporters, (and businesses).
Also Just think of damage to soccer in this country if there is any violent clashes between rival supporters which is always a possability.

I can't see the world cup, on it's own, having any real long term impact on the viability of Aussie rules in this country. We have vast numbers of immigrants from countries where soccer is the number one code or even the only code, yet aussie rules is not the sole domain of anglo saxons. As a spectalce aussie rules has much more to offer than soccer, which has a huge drawback in producing many nil all draws. Hockey administrators realised this years ago and removed the off side law so as to allow more goal scoring, something i cant see FIFA doing in our lifetime, if ever.

If by the time the world cup roled around, soccer was making inroads then yes the world cup could be the icing on the cake. As it stands, if the world cup was played in australia next year, the long term impact would be small.

[one-eyed]

Richmond home games at Princes Park during the World Cup?

Early AFL season, game moves floated in Australia's World Cup soccer bid
Jim Wilson
Herald Sun December 10, 2009 10:17PM

AN EARLY start to the season and possible relocation of games to Visy Park, Skilled Stadium and interstate are among the options given to the AFL by organisers of Australia's World Cup bid.
 
The Herald Sun has obtained a copy of a Football Federation Australia document sent to the other football codes, outlining the options for their sports should Australia host the Cup in 2018 or 2022.

There are five options presented to the AFL - using the 2018 calendar as a guide - which all work on the assumption that the AFL will have moved to a 24-week season.

The Grand Final is locked in for September 28 on all options.

One option is to start the season as early as February 2 and have a nine-week break.

Another is to begin the season as normal in early March and relocate games for nine weeks at alternative venues.

FFA chief Ben Buckley envisaged some clubs, such as Collingwood, Essendon and Richmond, playing home games at the revamped base of arch-enemy Carlton.

Others, such as North Melbourne and the Western Bulldogs, would have bases at Skilled Stadium, while yet others would find themselves playing in Launceston, Darwin and Canberra.

The document also proposes that St Kilda play at Geelong, and factors in a yet-to-be-built or funded "E-Gate" stadium in West Melbourne as another option for AFL matches.

Buckley said the FFA was "working with all the sports and we are not pointing the finger and saying, 'You should do it this way' ".

"It's not our right to tell someone how to run their own sport but we've simply put some options forward.

"We want to explore with the AFL and governments the alternative venues and what it might take to upgrade those and to use on a temporary basis to satisfy the needs."

Buckley, who was Demetriou's No. 2 at the AFL, said he "totally respected" the AFL.

"I grew up in the AFL system and they gave me a huge start in my professional career," he said.

"We've seen from the outset the World Cup is a World Cup for Australia and not just for a sport. It's not just for football and it will have wide ranging benefits for all Australians.

"We respect the fact there are complex issues and I respect other sports have to protect the interests of their own stakeholders.

"We are listening, we will seek to solve the problems in partnership with the sports and the state and federal governments."

Visy Park, which hasn't staged an AFL match since 2005, would need a considerable and costly upgrade if it was required to host games.

"The capacity right now is around 20,000 and it would need plenty spent on it to bring it up to a match venue," a Carlton spokesman said last night.

"There's no seating at one end of the ground where the old Heatley Stand used to be and across the board the outlay would be significant. Media facilities would need upgrading, maybe even a second tier on the Legends Stand would be required and that all costs a lot of money."

The AFL yesterday maintained its stance that the FFA was reneging on a promise made last year that Etihad Stadium was not part of the World Cup bid.

"The AFL supports our bid for the World Cup no question, but we need Etihad Stadium to run a viable competition," an AFL spokesman said.

It remains unclear whether FIFA would permit AFL being played in Melbourne during the cup, even at alternate venues away from the MCG and Etihad Stadium.

 "We want to work with Victoria to bring as many World Cup games to Victoria and we acknowledge taking Etihad out of the AFL fixture for a period of time will be disruptive," Buckley said.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/what-in-the-world/story-e6frf9jf-1225809208392

[WilliamPowell]

One option is to start the season as early as February 2 and have a nine-week break.

Wouldn't that be great?

For people who arent soccer fans and despite what people think there are a number out there, what are they supposed to do for 9 weeks? Play monopoly or chess

That's one of the glaring flaws in this whole World Cup business. The tournament goes for a 1 month (aka 4 weeks) the idea that other codes having to shut down for 9 weeks is unfair and IMHO cannot be justified.

4 weeks is tolerable at best - 9 weeks is unacceptable

Another is to begin the season as normal in early March and relocate games for nine weeks at alternative venues.

FFA chief Ben Buckley envisaged some clubs, such as Collingwood, Essendon and Richmond, playing home games at the revamped base of arch-enemy Carlton.

  what a joke and a disgrace - forc tteams to play games at Visy then the FFA better be prepared to offer compensation to AFL Clubs because clubs wont make any money out there.

Oh and btw to re-furbish Visy back to AFL standard .....um...er.... who's going to pay for that?

The taxpayer? 

Seriously here's a thought Frank Lowry the Chairman of the FFA is one of this country's wealthiest men, perhaps he should start paying for a few things and then I might change my tune

[tdy]

AUSTRALIA has launched its bid to host the 2018 or 2022 soccer World Cup, with the event promising to bring a $3.9 billion bonanza to the nation.

The winning bidders will be announced in December, 2010.

Rival bidders for the 2018 World Cup are Australia, Belgium/Netherlands, England, Indonesia, Japan, Mexico, Portugal/Spain, Russia and United States

The same nations plus Qatar and South Korea will also bid for the 2022 World Cup.

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,25633831-11088,00.html


I reckon we have zero chance for 2018 as it'll go to Europe but 2022 is a chance.

Boo Hiss! I don't want it, I hope the AFL effectively run an interference campaign on this one.

[Francois Jackson]

One option is to start the season as early as February 2 and have a nine-week break.

Wouldn't that be great?

For people who arent soccer fans and despite what people think there are a number out there, what are they supposed to do for 9 weeks? Play monopoly or chess

That's one of the glaring flaws in this whole World Cup business. The tournament goes for a 1 month (aka 4 weeks) the idea that other codes having to shut down for 9 weeks is unfair and IMHO cannot be justified.

4 weeks is tolerable at best - 9 weeks is unacceptable

Another is to begin the season as normal in early March and relocate games for nine weeks at alternative venues.

FFA chief Ben Buckley envisaged some clubs, such as Collingwood, Essendon and Richmond, playing home games at the revamped base of arch-enemy Carlton.

  what a joke and a disgrace - forc tteams to play games at Visy then the FFA better be prepared to offer compensation to AFL Clubs because clubs wont make any money out there.

Oh and btw to re-furbish Visy back to AFL standard .....um...er.... who's going to pay for that?

The taxpayer? 

Seriously here's a thought Frank Lowry the Chairman of the FFA is one of this country's wealthiest men, perhaps he should start paying for a few things and then I might change my tune

we the taxpaer as you so rightly put it WP, should foot the bill for a revamped Visy Park if its going to bring us a return of millions in getting the Cup. Provided of course we get compensated. That i agree with!!

Its a return which would be justified unlike that rubbish of a Grand Prix which nets us a loss every year those fools run around that thing. What a joke!!

FWIW i dont rate the A League at all in fact i have yet to and wont go to a game because i think its a average competetion but the World cup and the Soceroos is a different ball game one which would bring be an amazing thing to happen to our country, in terms of our economy and exposure it will give  us to other countries.

The AFL wont suffer what is wrong with some of you lot. In order for Soccer to be the No1 sport the A league needs to have more money poured into it and that wont happen. NO money for Star players means average competition.

So meladramatic and scared its laughable actually. Soccer is going to take over our AFL what are we going to go..hahaha

[mightytiges]

AUSTRALIA has launched its bid to host the 2018 or 2022 soccer World Cup, with the event promising to bring a $3.9 billion bonanza to the nation.

The winning bidders will be announced in December, 2010.

Rival bidders for the 2018 World Cup are Australia, Belgium/Netherlands, England, Indonesia, Japan, Mexico, Portugal/Spain, Russia and United States

The same nations plus Qatar and South Korea will also bid for the 2022 World Cup.

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,25633831-11088,00.html


I reckon we have zero chance for 2018 as it'll go to Europe but 2022 is a chance.

Boo Hiss! I don't want it, I hope the AFL effectively run an interference campaign on this one.

It would reflect badly on the AFL if they came across as purely and unreasonably obstructive. Not good to be the one that prevents thousands of visitors from 31 other countries flocking to Australia filling up hotels, restaurants and visiting other local tourist spots while they are here. Not to mention the construction jobs. Too many interests want it here. The AFL knows this hence its support for the bid.

At the moment it's FIFA that is being unreasonable because it won't confirm nor dismiss concerns the other major football codes have. Ben Buckley can say he doesn't want to harm the other codes but he doesn't set the conditions to host a World Cup. FIFA does. Demetriou is grandstanding when he says a whole AFL season could be shutdown but he's right for once to defend Aussie Rules and raise legitimate concerns and issues. 

[one-eyed]

Soccer final fix is in as Australia bids to lure the biggest tournament on the globe
Peter Rolfe From: Sunday Herald Sun December 13, 2009

SYDNEY will host the World Cup soccer final if Australia's bid to lure the biggest tournament on the globe down under is successful in 2018 or 2022.

In a move that will infuriate Victorian sports fans, sources involved in the bid say a deal has been done behind closed doors to play the high-profile final in the harbour city rather than Melbourne.

The MCG has been overlooked in favour of Sydney's Olympic Stadium, according to the sources who say the agreement was struck after pressure from Sydney soccer heavyweights and the NSW Government.

A Sunday Herald Sun investigation into the status of Australia's bid also revealed:

THE BRUMBY Government says it is powerless to intervene in a stoush between the AFL and Football Federation Australia over use of the MCG, despite spending more than $77 million to redevelop the ground before the 2006 Commonwealth Games.

A TUG-OF-WAR between the Federal Government and the states over who should pay to host the Cup is unlikely to be resolved until February.

A GROUP of foreign journalists was recently shown around Etihad Stadium and told it would be an integral part of Australia's bid, though the AFL has first rights to the venue and has declared it off limits.

THREE high-placed sources from different areas of Australia's bid have said Sydney has stitched up the final. All three said that Sydney shopping mall king Frank Lowy and Sydney Major Events boss John O'Neil had been major movers behind the deal.

"I think everyone involved sees it that way," one source said. "Frank Lowy, John O'Neil, these groups have been tight for some time and it's very clear that that agreement is in place.

"There will be some unhappy people in Melbourne and rightly so."

Another source said the fact the headquarters of Football Federation Australia, the game's governing body in Australia, was in Sydney also played a part.

"I don't think anyone who has inside knowledge of this thinks the final will be anywhere but Sydney," he said.

Football Federation Australia spokeswoman Bonita Mersiades said decisions on where matches would be played should Australia win the bid were not likely to be made until February.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/national/soccer-final-fix-is-in-as-australia-bids-to-lure-the-biggest-tournament-on-the-globe/story-e6frf7l6-1225809786849

[WilliamPowell]

we the taxpaer as you so rightly put it WP, should foot the bill for a revamped Visy Park if its going to bring us a return of millions in getting the Cup. Provided of course we get compensated. That i agree with!!

Its a return which would be justified unlike that rubbish of a Grand Prix which nets us a loss every year those fools run around that thing. What a joke!!

daniel we are going around in cricles here but actually by raising the Grand Prix as a comparison you actually highlight why I have major problems with Aust bidding for the World Cup and using taxpayers money to do it.

And just as a by and by to date the Fed govt has poured in $43 million into this bid, money IMHO that could be better spent on other services in desperate need of funding.

But back to you example of the Grand Prix. The Govt pay to have and run the thing in Victoria. Year after year the Govt bleats that although it loses money (this yeat it was over $20mil IIRC) the money generated and subsequently bought into the Victoria economy is far greater than the loss we the taxpayer have to cover. It maybe great for tourism but at the end of the day the question is: does the govt re-coup it's losses with this $$ injection into the ecomony? Do the taxes paid back to the state govt cover the loss? That's the question and most people agree the answers is NO but yeap no doubt it is great for individual businesses

Which brings us to the World Cup - you base all your arguments on the belief that their is going to be some great pot of gold at the end of the World Cup.

Can you guarantee it?

Look at the number of countries that have hosted the Olympics and lost money (every heard of Montreal?). Look at what's happening in South Africa and the new stadium they had to build (demanded by FIFA no less) across the road from what is considered one of the best rugby stadiums in the world and that Sth Africa wanted to use for the final but FIFA said NO you must build a new one for soccer...... once the World Cup is over it is extremely doubtful it will ever get used again.

As I said so far the Govt spent $43 million for the bid alone with more funds (taxpayers $$$) available if needed.

Now we are talking about having to fund upgrades to old surburban footy grounds to bring then back up to AFL standard to use them for a few weeks (Visy would cost at least $20 mil) or heaven forbid if Etihad at available build another "boutique stadium" in West Melbourne at the railyards ("E Park") which would cost based on how much the new rectangular stadium cost would be at least $300-400 mil

Australia would also need to upgrade a number of rugby stadiums for use to bring them up to FIFA's demand of all venues having a minimum capacity for 40k people.

Oh and BTW the new rectangular stadium here in Melb can't be used becuase of this very demand as it falls short by 5K. But hey for another $105 mil we can increase its capicity to 40k but it would out of commission for a few years (source The Age Sat 12/12/09).

I've posted a couple of times that the $$$ from tickets sales will not come to Australia - they go back to FIFA. So there clearly isn't any millions coming our from those.

So at the moment if we are successful we are looking at perhaps spending say $500 million taxpayer dollars. Forgive me but I can think of far more important things to spend hundreds of millions of taxpayers $$$ on.

And tell me where are the millions that I keep getting told we are likely to make going to come from?

We know it aint form tickets sales and you can chuck in TV rights too because like the Olympics FIFA gets all of those too.

So it just like our "white elephant" called the Grand Prix it would appear we will be relying on the majority of the millions coming from tourism $$$. Will the govt's cut of that be enough to cover the millions they fork out? For me that's the real question and one that no-one, not the Govt, not the FFA has a real answer to

And finally - am I worried about the future of the AFL if we get the Wolrd Cup? Not in the slighest. The A-League is NO threat to the AFL. I watched it last night on Fox and the standard was terrible, the crowd numbers pathetic so I would think the FFA would be the ones worried rather than the AFL (and if they aren't they should be)

My concerns about this World Cup bid has nothing to do with whether I am concerned about the future of the AFL - it is solely based on the money (taxpayers $$$) being spent on something that we are no certainties to get and in the overall scheme things I question whether we really need to have

[Francois Jackson]

we the taxpaer as you so rightly put it WP, should foot the bill for a revamped Visy Park if its going to bring us a return of millions in getting the Cup. Provided of course we get compensated. That i agree with!!

Its a return which would be justified unlike that rubbish of a Grand Prix which nets us a loss every year those fools run around that thing. What a joke!!

daniel we are going around in cricles here but actually by raising the Grand Prix as a comparison you actually highlight why I have major problems with Aust bidding for the World Cup and using taxpayers money to do it.

And just as a by and by to date the Fed govt has poured in $43 million into this bid, money IMHO that could be better spent on other services in desperate need of funding.

But back to you example of the Grand Prix. The Govt pay to have and run the thing in Victoria. Year after year the Govt bleats that although it loses money (this yeat it was over $20mil IIRC) the money generated and subsequently bought into the Victoria economy is far greater than the loss we the taxpayer have to cover. It maybe great for tourism but at the end of the day the question is: does the govt re-coup it's losses with this $$ injection into the ecomony? Do the taxes paid back to the state govt cover the loss? That's the question and most people agree the answers is NO but yeap no doubt it is great for individual businesses

Which brings us to the World Cup - you base all your arguments on the belief that their is going to be some great pot of gold at the end of the World Cup.

Can you guarantee it?

Look at the number of countries that have hosted the Olympics and lost money (every heard of Montreal?). Look at what's happening in South Africa and the new stadium they had to build (demanded by FIFA no less) across the road from what is considered one of the best rugby stadiums in the world and that Sth Africa wanted to use for the final but FIFA said NO you must build a new one for soccer...... once the World Cup is over it is extremely doubtful it will ever get used again.

As I said so far the Govt spent $43 million for the bid alone with more funds (taxpayers $$$) available if needed.

Now we are talking about having to fund upgrades to old surburban footy grounds to bring then back up to AFL standard to use them for a few weeks (Visy would cost at least $20 mil) or heaven forbid if Etihad at available build another "boutique stadium" in West Melbourne at the railyards ("E Park") which would cost based on how much the new rectangular stadium cost would be at least $300-400 mil

Australia would also need to upgrade a number of rugby stadiums for use to bring them up to FIFA's demand of all venues having a minimum capacity for 40k people.

Oh and BTW the new rectangular stadium here in Melb can't be used becuase of this very demand as it falls short by 5K. But hey for another $105 mil we can increase its capicity to 40k but it would out of commission for a few years (source The Age Sat 12/12/09).

I've posted a couple of times that the $$$ from tickets sales will not come to Australia - they go back to FIFA. So there clearly isn't any millions coming our from those.

So at the moment if we are successful we are looking at perhaps spending say $500 million taxpayer dollars. Forgive me but I can think of far more important things to spend hundreds of millions of taxpayers $$$ on.

And tell me where are the millions that I keep getting told we are likely to make going to come from?

We know it aint form tickets sales and you can chuck in TV rights too because like the Olympics FIFA gets all of those too.

So it just like our "white elephant" called the Grand Prix it would appear we will be relying on the majority of the millions coming from tourism $$$. Will the govt's cut of that be enough to cover the millions they fork out? For me that's the real question and one that no-one, not the Govt, not the FFA has a real answer to

And finally - am I worried about the future of the AFL if we get the Wolrd Cup? Not in the slighest. The A-League is NO threat to the AFL. I watched it last night on Fox and the standard was terrible, the crowd numbers pathetic so I would think the FFA would be the ones worried rather than the AFL (and if they aren't they should be)

My concerns about this World Cup bid has nothing to do with whether I am concerned about the future of the AFL - it is solely based on the money (taxpayers $$$) being spent on something that we are no certainties to get and in the overall scheme things I question whether we really need to have

you raise some good points

[Penelope]

As I said so far the Govt spent $43 million for the bid alone with more funds (taxpayers $$$) available if needed.

What in the Sam Hill has this money been spent on. Does this bidding work like that for the Olympics, where you need to lavish gifts onto the delegates to win the bid?

[mightytiges]

Lots of hidden sources but no direct quotes from anyone that matters. Sydney doesn't have a 100,000 seat stadium and based on the A-league the support for the game is overwhelmingly stronger in Melbourne. Mind you given the Sydney-centric nature of those that run soccer in Australia it wouldn't be surprising if all the Socceroos' group games in a World Cup and the final were held up there.