Co-host Football World Cup with New Zealand
Roar Pro By Rich_daddy, 9 Dec 2009 Rich_daddy is a Roar Pro
- Tagged:
- AFL, football, New Zealand football, NRL, Rugby League, World Cup
Related coverage
- Football news
- Rugby League news
- NRL news
- AFL news
- Toyota Premiership news
- World Cup Favourites news
- World Cup Roar of the Crowd Competition news
- Football World Cup - South Africa 2010 news
New Zealand coach Ricki Herbert, left, and captain Ryan Nelsen reacts after their team's 1-0 win over Bahrain in the World Cup qualifying playoff second leg soccer match at Westpac Stadium in Wellington, New Zealand, Saturday, Nov. 14, 2009. (AP Photo/NZPA, Ross Setford)
Back in June, I wrote an article speculating whether the NRL and AFL would “play ball” (pun intended) with Australia’s bid to host the 2018/2022 Football World Cup. It appears since then that some of the concerns raised have come to fruition.
As I see it, there appears to be two major problems with Australia’s Cup bid.
The first is that the other major sporting codes are concerned their seasons will be dramatically affected, mainly due to lack of access to stadiums.
The second is a lack of suitable stadiums period, hence the need to build more if the bid is successful.
However, building new giant stadiums just for a World Cup has the potential to create white elephants that never get filled again. These concerns are currently playing out with South Africa’s 90,000 capacity Soccer City stadium.
So it got me thinking: why not put a joint bid with New Zealand?
This idea has some merit for several reasons.
First of all, joint bids for World Cups are not uncommon. They occur regularly for the European championship and occurred with Japan/South Korea hosting the World Cup in 2002.
Sometimes I think a joint bid can have more sway as you have more people behind the bid.
Second, it would take the pressure off the FFA to provide all the stadiums, hence reduce the friction with the AFL and NRL as more stadiums will be available.
Thirdly, New Zealand’s interest in football will have jumped recently after the All Whites qualified for the 2010 World Cup. They also have decent stadiums that can cater for World Cup games.
It sounds plausible, but there are some problems with the joint bid set up.
Isolation and travel is the major concern.
This has already been highlighted as the major stumbling block for an Ocenania bid, simply because it is so far away from other countries. Throwing New Zealand into the mix adds potential additional travel and difficulty in setting up base camps for teams.
Plus, Perth may be concerned about missing out altogether in favour of New Zealand.
The other problem is childish squabbling between Australia and New Zealand authorities.
A deal to jointly host the 2003 rugby World Cup fell through, and I wouldn’t be surprised if that reared its ugly head. The key would be to be sensible about it, just like Japan and Korea were.
They agreed one would host the first game, the other the final.
All options should be thought through on this bid.
Even with New Zealand as host, Australia would still get the major games and most likely the final due to our stadiums having larger capacity.
So let us bring the boys from across the Tasman along for the ride.
Recommend this story.
- Explore:
- AFL, football, New Zealand football, NRL, Rugby League, World Cup
December 9th 2009 @ 3:46pm
Rich_daddy said | December 9th 2009 @ 3:46pm | Report comment
Freud of Football,
The whole idea of sharing the World Cup with New Zealand would eliminate the need to build any more stadiums as the two countries would have enough stadiums between them to cater (only upgrades would be neccesary).
“And put it on who? It’s great to take the pressure of the FFA but ANY partnership of Aus/NZ for a WC bid wouldn’t be 50/50, you’re talking more 80/20″
As I said in the original article Australia would still probably get most of the big matches. Obviously this would be negotiated with the Kiwis.
“Oh yes, they were most cordial. They hate each others guts, they squabbled over the rights from the start, they didn’t ever want to share the WC”
Well this may be true but I think they produced a very succesful world cup and Australia and New Zealand have a much better relationship so I am sure they could work something out.
December 9th 2009 @ 4:15pm
Freud of Football said | December 9th 2009 @ 4:15pm | Report comment
Only upgrades would be necessary? I see, and are all the grounds capable of being upgraded? You’ve not outlined which stadiums would be used and which cities would be included, by adding NZ does Perth or Adelaide miss out? Or do they just get less games to fund the redevelopment that will cost the same?
It’s not viable on so many levels. Look at any aspect of the bid and you will see just how stupid the idea is. Australia will have difficulties enough as is without having NZ complicating everything further.
FIFA will not award another WC to a joint bid, you can forget the idea and I’ll stick with what I said earlier – it’s one of the dumbest I’ve heard in a while.
December 9th 2009 @ 6:11pm
Rich_daddy said | December 9th 2009 @ 6:11pm | Report comment
Oh right sorry, I wasn’t aware that I had to outline every fine detail in a pie in the sky idea. Take a chill pill
December 9th 2009 @ 6:31pm
Freud of Football said | December 9th 2009 @ 6:31pm | Report comment
Yeah man, I’ll do that dude. If you want to put a theory forward, you should at the very least give us a basis, you’ve simply said “let’s do this” and not put any thought into how it would for if you did you would never have submitted this ridiculous idea.
December 9th 2009 @ 9:07pm
Rich_daddy said | December 9th 2009 @ 9:07pm | Report comment
This idea was based around alleviating some of the problems the Australia world cup bid is facing at the moment. There are clearly some issues with Australia’s bid at this time (stadium and fixture issues with NRL and AFL among other things). If you think you have better idea to please feel free to post them in a blog.
December 9th 2009 @ 10:04pm
Freud of Football said | December 9th 2009 @ 10:04pm | Report comment
How could I have a better idea? I do not have the time or the oversight to plan how the hell an Australia or Aus/NZ bid could work and if I did I’d be getting a full-time salary from some football body, not posting simplistic ideas on The Roar about such a complex issue.
You don’t seem to realise that this all involves a little more than will power. You’ve suggested it will help “some” of the issues, but did you consider how much bigger it made the problem of transportation which is already huge with Australia alone without putting a sea between the groups? Or the genuine financial implications?
No.
I’m all for ideas but think it through.
I simply think yours is rubbish
December 10th 2009 @ 12:47pm
Rich_daddy said | December 10th 2009 @ 12:47pm | Report comment
If you don’t have the time or the oversight then what makes you think I do. This is a blog where people simply put their views forward on a certain issue. They don’t claim to be experts and they certainly don’t have power or influence in any decision making process. It is a place where people can put forward weird and whacky views. That’s it.
If you think the idea is that rubbish, why not just ignore it? By repeatedly ranting on about how bad the idea is, you inadvertently give the idea merit. It appears that you repeatedly need to keep slamming the idea for fear of someone taking the idea seriously.
December 10th 2009 @ 6:38pm
Freud of Football said | December 10th 2009 @ 6:38pm | Report comment
“you inadvertently give the idea merit. It appears that you repeatedly need to keep slamming the idea for fear of someone taking the idea seriously.” – Sure I do.
I don’t care if anyone takes this seriously but let them, I don’t care, my comments are directed at you and your idea, no-one else and still, your idea is rubbish.
December 11th 2009 @ 10:08am
Rich_daddy said | December 11th 2009 @ 10:08am | Report comment
So you have made that perfectly clear. Have a nice day.
December 9th 2009 @ 6:04pm
Tifosi said | December 9th 2009 @ 6:04pm | Report comment
Didnt Australia and NZ try and host a Rugby World Cup once?
We all know how that turned out !!!
December 9th 2009 @ 7:36pm
footyfreak said | December 9th 2009 @ 7:36pm | Report comment
nz is aussie rules territory so there is no way they will support soccer after the way soccer treats footy
i still cant work out how they still have rugby comps over there considering how strong footy is i call shenanigans
December 13th 2009 @ 7:54pm
Nick F said | December 13th 2009 @ 7:54pm | Report comment
You’re joking, surely.
December 10th 2009 @ 2:09pm
Ora said | December 10th 2009 @ 2:09pm | Report comment
The year just keeps getting better for NZ Soccer,
Auckland City pulled off an upset overnight to win their(NZ) first ever World Club Championship match and secured nearly $1.4million in the process. Oh and guess what it was over an Asian team (Al Ahli) the AFC is going to be sh!tting bricks over this one!
December 10th 2009 @ 2:12pm
AndyRoo said | December 10th 2009 @ 2:12pm | Report comment
I read a preview of the game from someone who was obviously west asian becasue it banged on about the other team and it’s history.
He predicted a 3 nil win over “amateur” Auckland City.
December 10th 2009 @ 4:47pm
NCB619 said | December 10th 2009 @ 4:47pm | Report comment
Well, they won’t be getting s#!tty as much as if it was the Wellington Phoenix
December 10th 2009 @ 6:31pm
Ora said | December 10th 2009 @ 6:31pm | Report comment
This just once again highlights that NZ football is not as bad as some would like to make it out to be.
If given regular competition against stronger opposition NZ could be a a formiddable side in Asia.
Look where they have got with next to no competition in Oceania.
I think deep down the powers that be know all too well the potential NZ has and how good they could become should they be included in Asia and this worries them a little.
December 10th 2009 @ 6:41pm
Freud of Football said | December 10th 2009 @ 6:41pm | Report comment
Australia got to the same place while in Oceania so what’s your point? That Asia has made them better? No, all the Australian players are playing in Europe, they don’t need to play Bahrain or Qatar to improve, they would learn more against English second tier teams.
NZ is the same. All that Asia offers is an easier route to the WC and some additional revenue but it won’t improve the football side of things a great deal.
December 10th 2009 @ 7:59pm
Ora said | December 10th 2009 @ 7:59pm | Report comment
The point is oh great one that Asia likes to think of themselves as all high and mighty, Australia joining Asia has done little for the competition really if it had you would think that there 5th best would have qualified would they not? With Australia going into Asia it has resulted in two non Asian teams going to the World Cup.
this was definately something Asia didn’t plane for, it’s rather obvious they expected the 5th team to waltz on into the WC.
The fact now that little Auckland City a team made up of guys who hold down real jobs and study have beaten and knocked out another Asian team will also have put another huge dent in what is the ego of Asian football.
What I am saying Freud is that with consistant competition on another level above what is Oceania and lets be realistic here, Oceania is not even close to the competition that is offered in Asia. New Zealand could and would be regular challenges for a top 5 spot outright I believe and that is my opinion only.
Don’t even start down the we are so great Australia campaign either as is Australia has only qualified for one more WC than NZ.
New Zealand has managed to do what over a hundred other teams have failed to do and they did it with next to no competition with barely any english premiership players and a team full of part timers and phoenix players so Ai believe their feat is all the more worthwhile.
So mate the point is here while high and mighty people think they have some god given right to dismiss the achievements that New Zealand football has made is rather comical. I think that the fact NZ football is doing so well in a climate where it is barely recognised is something many outside of NZ and Oceania are finding hard to swallow. Everything has been stacked against this team (All Whites) and Auckland City yet they have still beaten the odds.
Maybe instead of being such a cynic you may want to take a step back and look at what they have acheived or is that beyond you.
December 10th 2009 @ 8:09pm
Freud of Football said | December 10th 2009 @ 8:09pm | Report comment
Australia qualified via the Oceania route, I’m not discounting it, it’s simply not as amazing and rare as you might like to think. Everything you said applies to Australia ‘mate’ so I don’t see what your point is yet again.
Asia ARE high and mighty, Australia joining them has done nothing for their competition, Australia just rolled into the WC this time around but it hasn’t improved Australian or AFC standards, it’s just a lot easier when you don’t have to play the 5th ranked South American’s.
And NZ isn’t made up of part-timers. They’ve got a number of players in Britain, the Blackburn Rovers captain, half the Phoenix team which is part of the A-League (all Pro’s), a couple playing in the MLS and just a couple of players who play domestically.
December 10th 2009 @ 8:18pm
Ora said | December 10th 2009 @ 8:18pm | Report comment
Anyone with half a brain knows what an accomplishment NZ have made getting to the finals Most of Ausdtralias team is made up of players plying their trade in either the EPL or other European leagues.
Off the top of my head NZ has one EPL player in Ryan Neilsen and two others who are playing in the nest tier down. The others are made up of A-league and domestic players. Not exactly the greatest pool of talent now is it. Say what you like in your attempts to negate NZ acheivements but it really is futile.
Also How do you explain Aucklanmd City there cobber at the WCC now try and tell me that is a full professional outfit
December 11th 2009 @ 12:13am
Freud of Football said | December 11th 2009 @ 12:13am | Report comment
The Auckland City player you are probably referring to is Ivan Vicelich who played for a number of years in the Netherlands – more experience than most of the rest of the team and apart from that, how many players do they use from NZ on a regular basis?
December 11th 2009 @ 5:47am
Ora said | December 11th 2009 @ 5:47am | Report comment
Freud the Futile debater would be a good name for you.
I said explain Auckland City did I not and you can only bang on about one player.
Oh thats right it’s because you’ve never heard of anyone else in the team much the same as most people in NZ. AKL City are a team of students and guys who hold down real jobs, But that doesn’t fit with your argument and like you have done with others in this thread and others is you try and twist the facts to suit your opinion however I and others can see right through it.
Like I have said to you before, “Is it that hard to congratulate them on their achievements” or is it out of touch with your cynic nature?
December 11th 2009 @ 6:01am
Freud of Football said | December 11th 2009 @ 6:01am | Report comment
What is there to explain with Auckland City?! They don’t make up the numbers for the All Whites, (they have ONE player who spent a large part of his career and Europe) and that is what your initial comment was about, just how amazing they were to make the WC.
And how did they make the WCC? Oh my god. Europe sends one representative. South America sends one and so on and so on so Auckland’s strongest competition is coming from Samoa or some other little pissant island. OF COURSE a NZ team made the WCC.
I have no problem congratulating NZ, I’ve said countless times that for such a small nation they consistenly punch above their weight but Australia is no different, in fact while Australia has a larger population, to give them a higher chance of being successful, they have had bigger obstacles ie. distance, infrastructure, the presence of THREE football codes.
December 11th 2009 @ 6:16am
Ora said | December 11th 2009 @ 6:16am | Report comment
You really are quite pathetic Futile and your just showing your arrogance with every post you make. And no that was not what my initial comment was about either futile go back and have a read buddy once again trying to turn the posts to suit your argument it really is quite silly.
Run along son I’m sure you’ve got school to attend.
Your arguments and reasons to justify thenm are pathetic.
Australia has 5 times the population of NZ and while it has three codes New Zealand has rugby where it’s an absolute religion so don’t go throwing up arguments you cannot back up. Football in NZ is consigned mostly to late night TV and highlights packages. New Zealands path to the WC is very noteworthy due to the circumstances that surround football in this country and the obstacles put in their way. The fact they are doing so well when they have a lot more hurdles than Australian Football ever did and will have has irked you immensely. Football numbers in Australia are huge compared to New Zealand and Australia has much greater resources. So maybe you actually might want to do your homework a little before posting such rubbish and obvious disdain for what has been a remarkable year for New Zealand football.
December 11th 2009 @ 6:52am
Freud of Football said | December 11th 2009 @ 6:52am | Report comment
“New Zealand has managed to do what over a hundred other teams have failed to do and they did it with next to no competition with barely any english premiership players and a team full of part timers and phoenix players so Ai believe their feat is all the more worthwhile.” – how am I making the argument suit myself? You’re talking up the All Whites and marvelling at their use of domestic players which is utter rubbish, the domestic players are well and truly the exception.
I’m not going to bother retaliating to your petty comments, that you try to call me childish for using facts, well it shows a lot.
I’ve seen some of your brilliant work over on another thread, attempting to make some ridiculous point against Greg Russell whose intellect and knowledge make you look stupid and I’ll note that you couldn’t even spell Ryan NELSEN correctly which is probably an indicator of your footballing knowledge.
December 11th 2009 @ 9:50am
Ora said | December 11th 2009 @ 9:50am | Report comment
Freud you are such liar it’s beyond belief, you are now cutting and posting comments that you are trying to say is my initial comment which in fact it wasn’t. Also please show me where these other comments are buddy because I’d love to see them. In this thread alone you have attacked another poster and made derogatory remarks and now your here trying to downplay and negate the achievements NZ football has made. You have been pulled up not only by me but another pooster and you resort to rather childish rants.
So like I said Freud go back and see my initial comment because it definately is not what your saying it to be!!!
I’ll give you a clue it’s right above a comment made by Andy Roo
It’s pathetic when one feels the need to manipulate an argument to suit themself. All you have done is try to discredit my opinion and enforce yours on me which is really quite juvenile!!!!
December 12th 2009 @ 6:22am
Ora said | December 12th 2009 @ 6:22am | Report comment
Freud,
Your arrogance is beyond belief and I really pity you.
Your attempts to skewer the posts to suit your argument really are below par.
Once again you have failed to actually highlight the first comment. You are also now trying to insinuate AKL City is a team of professionals.
Your attitude towards those who do not agree with you is absolutely disgusting and I think its about time to pull your head in a little!
So lets summize this for you shall we.
I initially made a comment regarding AKL Citys win at the WCC, you then got on your high horse and said whoppie not like it hasn’t been done before.
Well thats where your wrong it is the first time a NZ team has done it and if I am lead to believe it is the first time a club with so little resources and professiional players has ever made it that far.
Secondly you then go on a rant about New Zealand soccers year being nothing to be proud as I ereferred to above you say its been done before, blah blah blahg the rest of your tyrade is just pure dribble. Reality is you can not accept that AKL City a minnow in World Soccer acheievd above expectation at the FIFA WCC, the fact NZ qualified for the world cup is also something that clearly irks you.
Australia has only qualified for one more world cup and the last time the two countries played it was a 1-0 result not a huge thrashing by anyones standards.
NZ soccer has there backs against the wall 99% of the time through no fault of their own, this year has been a golden year for them in they have achieved what many people like yourself thought they could never do and it is proving a very bitter pill to swallow.
December 10th 2009 @ 10:16pm
HJS` said | December 10th 2009 @ 10:16pm | Report comment
Firstly, FIFA hates joint bids. The main reason being that it has to give to spots to the host countries, so one of the traditional super-powers of soccer will miss out on being “seeded”. The complaints from said super-power (Holland, England, Italy, Argentina, France etc) would be heard all the way to the top level at FIFA as these countries have a lot of power.
Secondly, its fine for NZ to accept games, BUT look at stadiums other countries are offering. USA has loads (20 i think) of stadia with a capacity of 70K+. England has 5 stadia which have 70K+ and around 10 which will have 50K+. Spain & Portugal similar to England.
The NZ stadiums would have to have a minimum of 40K (seating) to pass a a WC venue. Can NZ cater for this?
December 11th 2009 @ 10:35am
Rich_daddy said | December 11th 2009 @ 10:35am | Report comment
Thanks HJS for highlighting concerns about the idea without being a smart arse. All of your concerns are legitimate.
The super power influence is going to be an issue for an Australian world cup bid anyway, particularly when games will be shown at graveyard hours in the northern hemisphere. Secondly I don’t understand why the host nation automatically gets seeded. I think the fact that South Africa is a seeded team for 2010 when it is by far the lowest ranked side to qualify is a joke. This is a seperate issue so I won’t go too much into that. I think making sure the two host nations didn’t end up in the same group would be the main issue.
In terms of stadium infastructure, yes other countries with have a more impressive arsenal to present to FIFA. Australia or Australia/New Zealand is going to fall short on this issue. The argument an Oceania bid would have to take would be “Give us a go, we haven’t hosted it before and we want to grow the game”. World cups in the USA, Asia and Africa were awarded to grow the game in areas away from traditional soccer strongholds of Europe and South America. That’s the angle Oceania would need to take and try and promote the bid as one for “Asia Pacific” just like the Australian Open tennis.
FIFA would have to accept that it would be a bit of a risk and the main reason for the decision would be the grow the game.
It is definently not the most convincing argument but its probably Australia’s best shot.
December 14th 2009 @ 6:12am
HJS said | December 14th 2009 @ 6:12am | Report comment
To answer the question of why the hosts are seeded, its because FIFA want said country to get through the group staqges, so that local interest is kept up in terms of stadium attendance. The hosts also DON’T have to play any qualification games, as hosts they automatically qualify, so if Australia “win” the bid for 2018 or more likely 2022 then you don’t have to go through Asian Football Confederation qualifying. Attendance is then at least partially guaranteed for a lot of the games. Mind you tickets put aside for locals at a fair cost say $40, quickly get sold on for a huge profit. Fans from other countries will pay upwards of $1000 for group matches and if England (say) get further in the tournament the price fans are willing to pay goes up aswell. An easy buck for a poor south african!!!
the “we’ve never had it before” is the strongest reason to give a WC to Australia. Mind you i’ve read that rival aussie codes (AFL and rugger) are trying to derail the bid by saying they won’t give up their games and stadiums. If this does happen, FIFA would struggle to ever give Australia a WC because they think the same thing (rivals codes being bitter) will occur again.
December 12th 2009 @ 2:58pm
allblackfan said | December 12th 2009 @ 2:58pm | Report comment
Eden Park will seat 66,000 (approx) after its upgrade for that other world cup — rugby.
AMI Park (Christchurch) will seat 40,000 (?) while Wellington’s Cake Tin already seats close to 40,000 (36,000 is official capacity, I think) and won’t need a major upgrade (although the city’s winds will make kicking VERY interesting).
Not sure aboout the revamped Dunedin stadium.
December 11th 2009 @ 9:55am
Ora said | December 11th 2009 @ 9:55am | Report comment
Here you go Freud just for you might give you a little more of an insight and wake you up a little to reality !
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=10614837