How other codes can survive the World Cup
Roar Rookie By chief, 19 Jan 2010 chief is a Roar Rookie
- Tagged:
- AFL, FIFA, football, NRL, State Of Origin, Super 15, World Cup, World Football
110 Have your say
Related coverage
- State of Origin 2012 news
- Football news
- World Football - EPL, Champions League & Europe 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
Australia celebrate their win over Uzbekistan in their World Cup Asian Qualifying match in Sydney, Wednesday, April 1, 2009. Australia defeated Uzbekistan 2-0. (AAP Image/Dean Lewins)
If the FIFA World Cup comes to Australia during 2018 or 2022, the four football codes could be in for a big dispute, with each other, with FIFA and with the government.
As with every controversy, not everyone comes out pleased.
But here could be a possible solution to keep a few parties happy during the World Cup.
The 12 Stadiums that could probably be used for the FIFA World Cup are:
- Adelaide Oval
- ANZ Stadium
- Canberra Stadium
- Cararra Stadium (Gold Coast)
- Central Cost Stadium (Gosford)
- Dairy Farmers Stadium
- Energy Australia Stadium
- Melbourne Cricket Ground
- Melbourne Rectangular Stadium
- New Perth Stadium
- Suncorp Stadium
- Sydney Football Stadium
Of course, for the FIFA World Cup, all the venues would need to be upgraded. Every one of them. A very severe upgrade, as well.
You will notice Ethiad Stadium has been left out. This is due to the AFL desperately needing a fairly big venue to play at.
FIFA regulations are very strict. They do not allow for the stadiums to be used during the World Cup. Melbourne would need to sacrifice that stadium to please the AFL loving population, which crowds the Melbourne area.
Midweek games during the NRL, AFL, Super 15, would all have to be explored to ensure that the major stadiums are being shared. Who knows? The 500,000 plus people who come to visit Australia might decide to check a game or two out during the week.
NRL teams in NSW will have to revert to other venues.
The SCG is a certainty, Sydney Showgrounds is an alternative venue, Belmore Stadium, Concord Oval … These stadiums too would have to undergo an upgrade to ensure that the needs of the fans are met.
For example, temporary seating, and more staff on hand to scan the tickers, and temporary food and drink outlets. As well as lighting.
It is not ideal, but it is how it needs to be done for about eight weeks.
NRL teams in Queensland will be allowed a slightly better deal.
North QLD Cowboys could play at a re-developed Stockland Park at the Sunshine Coast for a few matches. This would need to be developed into a stadium to cater for about 20,000. This upgrade is already on the cards for the next ten years.
Gold Coast Titans would not be affected in all of this, because Skilled Park would not be used for the World Cup. The Brisbane Broncos have really three alternatives: that is to play their games at QSAC (former ANZ Stadium) or to play games at Ballymore or possibly the Gabba.
For AFL, Ethiad Stadium would need to be made available, as well as taking the game to places like Geelong (Skilled Stadium). A lot of games would have to be held at Docklands.
If FIFA were to take Ethiad, the AFL would be very hard to go ahead.
The new Super 15 competition is set to be going until July.
This competition couldn’t be shortened due to the Rugby World Cup the next year and its International status. Games in Melbourne, NSW, Queensland, and possibly ACT would be affected by this quite severely.
If the MRS was to be selected, there would be very big problems.
Melbourne have no real alternatives, as Ethiad would be solely based for AFL games as they desperately need the ground.
Melbourne has no other stadium that would cater for the Rebels.
Sydney Football Stadium could not be used, so one would think the possibility of Concord Oval or the SCG would be explored. Concord is ideal for rugby, but lacks the facilities, while the SCG is round in shape and doesn’t provide the best view for the fans.
Queensland has Ballymore, but the stadium is dying a slow death, thanks to the Queensland Government.
An immediate upgrade to cater for this would certainly be needed as the Broncos could possibly play there as well as the Reds.
It is only about a ten minute drive away from Suncorp Stadium.
The stadium would probably need about 15,000 seats or even the more if they wanted to have the possibility of hosting a State of Origin match.
If Canberra were to receive hosting status, Manuka Oval would be explored. However, it is far from being fit to host a Super 15 rugby game.
Viking Oval would also be an option, with temporary seating, and lighting a priority.
State of Origin would have to explore a few options: delaying it a few weeks to go for the traditional rotating system of one game in Sydney, and one in Brisbane. Move one game overseas to say New Zealand, one game in Melbourne at Eithiad, and one game in Brisbane or Sydney.
Sydney and Brisbane missing out on a game is rubbish, I agree.
But with SFS, and ANZ Stadium, and Suncorp being only available to the World Cup, only it makes it incredibly difficult to fit the schedule.
The Gabba could potentially hold it, but its lack of capacity and its oval shape makes it difficult.
The Wallabies mid-year tests which are played annually would have to be moved overseas. You could not, for example, play a team like France at Skilled Park. It couldn’t be given the go ahead, because so much more money is to be made overseas for that game.
I think what the FFA needs to acknowledge, as well as the Government, is that they cannot put our sporting codes out of business for the eight weeks while the FIFA World Cup is occurring.
Answers need to be sought immediately, because a lot of codes could be left out to dry while the FFA becomes premier.
Recommend this story.
The Turkey 10
The Turkey 10 teams have now been selected, as Wild Turkey Bourbon's sport sponsorship kicks into the next exciting phase.
Choose which side you're going to support and get in the running to win $2,500!
Simply visit Wild Turkey Australia on Facebook for your chance to win.
Find out more.
- Explore:
- AFL, FIFA, football, NRL, State Of Origin, Super 15, World Cup, World Football
January 19th 2010 @ 12:02pm
Mick said | January 19th 2010 @ 12:02pm | Report comment
Chief,
What’s the logic in moving NQ Cowboys games to the Sunshine Coast? They are a NORTH QLD team. That’s where the majority of supporters live. I doubt that we would go all the way to the Sunny coast to see them play (in excess of 3000kms), nor would the Cowboys have the numbers from the local population down south. I want the world cup to come to Australia (and Townsville) as much as anyone else but the reality is that a sharing arrangement is going to have to be worked out if FFA wants to hold matches in Townsville.
January 19th 2010 @ 12:07pm
Mister Football said | January 19th 2010 @ 12:07pm | Report comment
No logic.
Just as you wouldn’t move AFL games to regional centres – not unless you wanted to cop a massive financial loss.
January 19th 2010 @ 2:59pm
Chuq said | January 19th 2010 @ 2:59pm | Report comment
For reference: http://users.on.net/~chuq/img/wc/afl-2022-v2.png
In this worst-case scenario proposal, only two more matches at minor venues will need to be played compared to what is played now. Launceston or Geelong can hold over 20,000 and there were plenty more than two matches at Docklands which drew less than 20,000 last season.
MCG and Docklands will continue to get the numbers of games as required in their existing contracts.
The massive financial loss will be the pre-season cup, yes, the AFL should be compensated for this.
January 19th 2010 @ 5:30pm
Forgetmenot said | January 19th 2010 @ 5:30pm | Report comment
And the corporate losses?? Both during, in the lead up and after a soccer World Cup?
January 20th 2010 @ 2:57pm
Simmo said | January 20th 2010 @ 2:57pm | Report comment
which losses?
January 19th 2010 @ 1:29pm
formeropenside said | January 19th 2010 @ 1:29pm | Report comment
Why the hell would anyone other than a few soccer fans want this world cup, given the disruption it will cause to every other sporting code? It makes no sense to me.
January 19th 2010 @ 1:37pm
jimbo said | January 19th 2010 @ 1:37pm | Report comment
The vast majority of Australians want a Football World Cup played in Australia not just a few “soccer fans”.
Football is the number one code in this country and the vast weight of opinion is behind staging a World Cup here and if we cooperated with each other we could do it without major disruption to any code – it just takes an open mind and some true Aussie spirit.
For the compensation money the AFL and NRL are talking about the federal government could build 4 or 5 new rectangular stadiums.
We stage a Rugby League world cup for a few Rugby League fans and a Rugby World Cup for a few Rugby fans and an Olympics for a few athletics fans.
It makes no sense to me that we can’t stage a football World Cup in Australia.
January 19th 2010 @ 2:03pm
Springs said | January 19th 2010 @ 2:03pm | Report comment
The vast majority of Australians would not care either way about a World Cup. Th only people who would be dancing in the streets like we saw at Brazil would be hardcore soccer fans – a minority of sports fans.
As for sports fans, hardcore NRL and AFL fans would not want it. Casual sports fans would be split, I highly doubt anyone who dislikes soccer (a fair few people) would want it. And then there are the taxpayers who don’t care about the Cup, and probably don’t want billions of dollars of their money spent on hosting an event for four weeks.
January 19th 2010 @ 5:43pm
MV Dave said | January 19th 2010 @ 5:43pm | Report comment
Talk about generalisations…got any facts to back them up…nope just guessing… l thought so.
January 19th 2010 @ 10:21pm
Springs said | January 19th 2010 @ 10:21pm | Report comment
Well I’m pretty sure the millions that watch crap shows like MasterChef or whatever while sports are on don’t care about sports at all. And I know hardcore AFL/NRL fans don’t want the World Cup, as we both have seen in polls/papers/forums.
And where is your evidence? What, just guessing?… That’s what I thought
January 20th 2010 @ 7:11am
MV Dave said | January 20th 2010 @ 7:11am | Report comment
Dont know what polls you read but just an eg one in The Age had over 12,000 respondents and 79% were pro WC, and that was 3 times their previous record in respondents.
BTW You made the statements and generalisations and so you need to back them up…which of course you haven’t…just more generalisations.
January 20th 2010 @ 3:06pm
AndyS said | January 20th 2010 @ 3:06pm | Report comment
I’ve no strong feeling on the point of national preference, but I would always caution against much reliance on on-line polls. Given the very large readerships of news sites (and the Age ranks in the millions/month), an equally valid interpretation could be that only 12,000 people felt strongly enough on the subject to even bother clicking a mouse button…
January 20th 2010 @ 3:14pm
MV Dave said | January 20th 2010 @ 3:14pm | Report comment
Maybe but when the record is broken by 300% says a lot and other polls l have seen have been in favour of the WC even in the Herald Scum.BTW Not using it as evidence rather as an indicator which is more than just generalisations the other poster was using.
January 21st 2010 @ 11:15am
Ken said | January 21st 2010 @ 11:15am | Report comment
MV Dave, you would have to acknowledge that those reading the relevant article and then bothering to log a vote in the poll would be a disproportionate amount of people who are actually interested in soccer in the first place. Considering the rabid nature of many of their fans (not unique as seen here most football fans of all codes are a bit crazy) I wouldn’t think it’s a stretch that there would be lots of multiple votes in there as well. All in all, newspaper polls are about as reliable as.. ah…something very unreliable
I don’t think anyone’s questioning that there are people, like yourself, that feel very strongly about this tournament. However, without anything to back me up apart from the zeitgeist as I see it, I think it’s also fair to say that the general populace is vaguely interested but won’t be overly upset if it doesn’t eventuate.
January 21st 2010 @ 12:44pm
AndyS said | January 21st 2010 @ 12:44pm | Report comment
Point understood Dave and I’d agree that it may be some sort of indicator, but at the same time I notice that, as of ~1:45pm EDST, the ARU poll “Which Australian Super 14 team will be the side to beat in 2010?” has the Force running at 65% and the Brumbies at 8%. You only have to compare that with the betting odds (reflecting where the money is actually being placed) and you can see just how removed from reality some of these polls can get.
January 19th 2010 @ 5:31pm
Forgetmenot said | January 19th 2010 @ 5:31pm | Report comment
Mate, you aent even kidding yourself when you say soccer is the number one code in the country. Give it a rest.
Most Australians couldnt care less if the soccer world cup came to Australia.
There is no point building rectangular stadiums as they will be white elephants after the event.
January 19th 2010 @ 1:40pm
MV Dave said | January 19th 2010 @ 1:40pm | Report comment
Want to define a few? From what l have read, seen and heard most Australians want the WC. So there’s at least 11 million…bit more than a few.
January 19th 2010 @ 5:36pm
Forgetmenot said | January 19th 2010 @ 5:36pm | Report comment
Most people i have talked to wouldnt mind the soccer world cup, just as they wouldnt mind an NFL match, or a scouts World Jamboree. But to ‘want’ is completely different.
There is only a small band of people campaigning for a soccer world cup in Australia.
January 19th 2010 @ 5:41pm
MV Dave said | January 19th 2010 @ 5:41pm | Report comment
Errr the Governments of this land, all of them, who represent the people (l think thats right) have stated they want the world cup and are bidding for it…too bad you dont like it. There are plenty of airports to leave from during the WC if you are dont want it. Most people in Oz want it…you are one of the AFL zealots that dont…yaaaawn.
January 19th 2010 @ 10:03pm
jimbo said | January 19th 2010 @ 10:03pm | Report comment
Dave,
I’m starting to think ForgetMe is BeverFever is Mister Football is Pippinu is Andrew Demetriou.
They are all the same person – there couldn’t be more than one AFL fan who doesn’t like Australian football or the chance to watch the FIFA World Cup right here in Australia.
January 20th 2010 @ 3:18pm
Forgetmenot said | January 20th 2010 @ 3:18pm | Report comment
Lol … you are kidding yourself.
If you polled people on the street whether they wanted a soccer world cup:
1. I will actively campaign for it
2. Id would love to have it here, but wont actually do anything.
3. I couldnt care less if it came. Id attend, and will say i want it here, but dont really care.
4. I dont want it here.
5. I will actively campaign against it.
Id say the break up would be.
1. 5%
2. 10%
3. 70%
4. 10%
5. 5%
Do honestly think most people are going around saying, i really hope we get the soccer world cup here!! No, they are going around saying, yeah it would be pretty good if we got it, but in the end i dont really care as we still have other sport to watch.
January 20th 2010 @ 3:29pm
Chuq said | January 20th 2010 @ 3:29pm | Report comment
During the Herald Sun’s “week of World Cup attacks” in December, there were polls on at least four different sites – HS, DT, Age, ABC, I forget which others. The questions were slightly different – but in general they asked if you would support the AFL/NRL shifting/cancelling their season if it resulted in Australia getting the World Cup. In all cases over 50% of respondents approved of the AFL cancelling their season if it meant Australia hosting the World Cup. To me that says 50% of people would be in either category 1 or 2 on your list.
Either:
The AFL is so popular that everyone loves it, and your figures are wrong;
or:
Your figures are right, but the AFL has very minimal support.
Which one is more likely? That’s up for discussion.
January 20th 2010 @ 3:34pm
MV Dave said | January 20th 2010 @ 3:34pm | Report comment
FGMT
Thats your opinion with no supporting info …least l have put forward some indicative info…you have only your opinion to support and of course you are biased against (as l am for)…where’s your supporting data for the above statements? Just guess work?
I’ll do some guessing and say that 70% or more of the Oz population would be very supportive of having the WC here…just my opinion of course.
BTW You certainly seem to do a lot of LOL and kidding of yourself when someone has a different view to you.
January 20th 2010 @ 3:43pm
Forgetmenot said | January 20th 2010 @ 3:43pm | Report comment
Chuq,
You and i both know that soccer fans like to post links to polls like those on their forums in order to hijack them. As someone said above, people voting in polls often have a strong opinion on their outcome.
MV Dave,
Thanks, im a very content person … lol.
No, my estimations are made through dicussion of the issues with many people. Im not going to pay for a poll to be produced, but id say that the FFA has already had one done (probably ongoing). I reckon their may be a Masters poll comingout soon on the issue.
January 20th 2010 @ 3:48pm
Australian Football said | January 20th 2010 @ 3:48pm | Report comment
FGMT
just wondering how your poll would go with the AFL international cup—-did anyone really care apart from MC who wrote about 20 blogs about its importance to Australia and the Australian way of life …
~~~~~~
AF
January 19th 2010 @ 1:49pm
pete said | January 19th 2010 @ 1:49pm | Report comment
Economics of the FIFA World Cup
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics_of_the_FIFA_World_Cup
January 19th 2010 @ 5:04pm
Mick said | January 19th 2010 @ 5:04pm | Report comment
Most business get a couple of years notice if major roadworks / trainlines through cities which last months / years are going on in the vicinity of their business so they can carry out appropriate planning and they receive no compensation
If Oz got world cup, 7.5 years to plan for 2018 & 11.5 years to plan for 2022……..even so called 3rd world nations can do the planning……
January 19th 2010 @ 5:22pm
AndyS said | January 19th 2010 @ 5:22pm | Report comment
Perhaps, but using the same analogy I can’t offhand think of any instances where a business would be told that their premises are going to be commandeered, they have to get out and they may be barred from trading anywhere for the duration…
January 20th 2010 @ 10:06am
Michael C said | January 20th 2010 @ 10:06am | Report comment
and not just commandeered for some unrelated activity – but, commandeered at vastly more favourable conditions by the global parent of your major competitor to conduct their business in your facilities whilst you’ve had to both vacate the facility and at this point seemingly vacate the city altogether…..and this repeated, not just once, but around the country.
Totally different to the scenario of a new major permanent development (rail/road whatever).
The described example by Mick relates more to the works and compromising around AAMI stadium and Adelaide Oval redevelopment.
January 19th 2010 @ 8:25pm
Jim Wilson said | January 19th 2010 @ 8:25pm | Report comment
Pray tell me why is it the government’s fault that Ballymore Stadium is falling into disrepair?
Isn’t the ground owned or leased long term by the Queensland Rugby Union?
January 19th 2010 @ 9:57pm
chief said | January 19th 2010 @ 9:57pm | Report comment
We wouldn’t move all the NQ RL games to Sunny Coast, but it wouild be a good idea, and would attract crowds.
Jim- It is the governments fault because while they are around giving grants to every code other than Union it is us suffering. If the Roar move to Ballymore next year it will probably get more attention to it. You would really think that the Government would pay more attention to Rugby Union as it is a game which has International Profile. For example in 2013 when the British and Irish Lions come over, it will be a boost for all of the Rugby playing States. If the RWC is held in Australia again, it would boost the economy, tourism would be substantially increased, not to mention Stadium’s would be packed, as Rugby is a world game unlike League. I honestly can’t see why the game isn’t receiving more funding particularly towards venues even though the popularity is low in Australia, more players will ultimately mean more success.
I can’t stand Soccer to be honest, but if there was a football world cup I would make a show to a game. The atmosphere there is meant to be amazing and played and watched by supporters with passion. Without a minute’s hesitation I would show up to a game or two.
Australia however will probably not get the World Cup due to the FFA’s lack of cooperation with the other codes, and seeking a resolution, they really better get their act together fast otherwise FFA will have a problem.
January 20th 2010 @ 7:20am
True Tah said | January 20th 2010 @ 7:20am | Report comment
chief
given that the Brisbane Roar was considering a move to Ballymore, I think the Fed Govt might revisit that, given that they have a massive interest in futbol, they will reconsider that move.
January 21st 2010 @ 12:10pm
Jim Wilson said | January 21st 2010 @ 12:10pm | Report comment
Where’s your proof that the 2003 RUWC actually increased tourist numbers & boosted the economy?
This article suggests otherwise:
19 November 2003
CAIRNS POST
(c) 2003 Nationwide News Pty Ltd
THE RUGBY World Cup did little to increase tourist numbers to Australia in October, according to new figures.
The Australian Bureau of Statistics preliminary arrivals figures show 432,000 people arrived in Australia last month, up 0.8 prt cent on October 2002.
However, ABS final arrivals figures for September showed a much larger increase of 7.5 per cent.
According to the Federal Government’s monthly Impact report, about 40,000 visitors were expected for the Cup matches.
If that number did arrive, then international arrivals fell by about 9 per cent.
International arrivals into Cairns for October were 37,376, down slightly from the previous year’s figure of 38,413. Direct flights into the city finally returned to pre-SARS levelson October 27, bringing the direct international caoacity into Cairns up to 63,780 seats a month.”
Note Cairns was a city that had no union WC games played there.
January 21st 2010 @ 12:18pm
Jim Wilson said | January 21st 2010 @ 12:18pm | Report comment
More:
http://edition.cnn.com/2003/SPORT/10/01/rugby.wcup.travel/
…The Australian Rugby Union originally expected around 55,000 international visitors to six-week the event.
But that number has been downgraded to about 40,000 with most of these — some 17,500 — from Britain and Europe.
New Zealand and the Pacific nations account for another 10,000 visitors. African nations, particularly South Africa, should provide another 7,000 supporters.
A combination of high accommodation and ticket prices, security fears and the SARS outbreak in Asia earlier this year may all have had an impact on visitor numbers for the tournament.
Even worse, some tourism operators are saying thousands of non-rugby tourists have deferred or cancelled planned visits to Australia because of inflated hotel prices and reduced choice caused by the Cup influx.
“www.industry.gov.au/…/FinalEconomicImpactOfRWC2003_ 20040604150504.pdf?CFID=37464&CFTOKEN=87738019 –
Overseas Visitors to Australia: 2000-2003 24
Year International Visitors to Australia
2000 (Olympic Games) 4.93 million
2001 4.85 million
2002 4.84 million
2003 4.74 million
January 21st 2010 @ 12:28pm
Jim Wilson said | January 21st 2010 @ 12:28pm | Report comment
NOVEMBER 2003 HIGHLIGHTS Supporting Documents
Visitors by market
Western hemisphere visitors by market
Eastern hemisphere visitors by market
Change in visitors by market
There were 4.2 million visitor arrivals to Australia during the eleven months to November 2003, a decrease of 3 per cent relative to the same period of the previous year.
There were 4.7 million visitor arrivals during the year ended 30 November 2003, a decrease of 2 per cent relative to the previous year.
There were 473,300 visitor arrivals during November 2003, an increase of 8 per cent relative to the same month of the previous year.
Key trends by market are outlined below:
New Zealand
There were 77,700 visitors from New Zealand during November 2003 bringing the total for the eleven months to November 2003 to 756,600 an increase of 5 per cent relative to the same period of the previous year.
Europe
There were 74,300 visitors from the United Kingdom during November 2003 bringing the total for the eleven months to November 2003 to 566,600, an increase of 5 per cent relative to the same period of the previous year.
There were 12,800 visitors from Germany during November 2003 bringing the total for the eleven months to November 2003 to 122,300, unchanged relative to the same period of the previous year.
The Americas
There were 37,000 visitors from the United States of America during November 2003 bringing the total for the eleven months to November 2003 to 379,500, a decrease of 4 per cent relative to the same period of the previous year.
There were 9,400 visitors from Canada during November 2003 bringing the total for the eleven months to November 2003 to 77,300, a decrease of 4 per cent relative to the same period of the previous year.
Southeast Asia
There were 28,300 visitors from Singapore during November 2003 bringing the total for the eleven months to November 2003 to 217,000, a decrease of 13 per cent relative to the same period of the previous year.
Northeast Asia
There were 63,300 visitors from Japan during November 2003 bringing the total for the eleven months to November 2003 to 554,800, a decrease of 14 per cent relative to the same period of the previous year.
There were 22,500 visitors from Korea during November 2003 bringing the total for the eleven months to November 2003 to 189,100, an increase of 11 per cent relative to the same period of the previous year.
There were 19,800 visitors from China during November 2003 bringing the total for the eleven months to November 2003 to 154,100, a decrease of 10 per cent relative to the same period of the previous year.
——————————————————————————–
Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics, Overseas Arrivals and Departures, 3401.0. ABS data used with permission from the Australian Bureau of Statistics.
January 21st 2010 @ 12:50pm
Jim Wilson said | January 21st 2010 @ 12:50pm | Report comment
Year International Visitors to Australia
2000 (Olympic Games) 4.93 million
2001 4.85 million
2002 4.84 million
2003 4.74 million
2004 5.2 million
2005 5.5 million
2006 5.5 million
2007 5.7 million
2008 5.6 million
2009 5.6 million
http://www.tourism.australia.com/Research.asp?sub=0318&al=3134
January 21st 2010 @ 12:32pm
Michael C said | January 21st 2010 @ 12:32pm | Report comment
Too often what people do is compare Month X of year of event to Month X of previous year and claim economic benefit,
but, fail to look at the year in total.
Similarly, re an Olympics – so much economic activity is scheduled in the lead up, there’s a time line – all these nice things are done……..and then, bang – - all over and GDP slump occurs.
I’m putting together an article on this at the moment – but, it’s a case of there’s so much out there to not over do it!!!!!
I reckon though you’d agree that it’s a topic well worth exploring in greater detail. Basically – ‘sports tourism’ – which has implications across soccer, rugby, cricket, Olympics etc.
January 20th 2010 @ 8:47am
Mick said | January 20th 2010 @ 8:47am | Report comment
If sporting organisations get money from the government they will do what the government tells them, they get leases / land for stuff all for stadiums & training centres & all sport venues in australia have governmnet contributions although I think they should do up the rectangle stadium in melboure & not use the mcg or dome which ever 1 it is
Various businesses have had their building demolished for roads / train lines and these buildings reappear when a few years later, in the mean time you work around it although it when it goes on for years it is a pain
January 20th 2010 @ 2:51pm
AndyS said | January 20th 2010 @ 2:51pm | Report comment
“Various businesses have had their building demolished for roads / train lines”….
Yes, they get “resumed” and it comes along with “fair compensation”. Seriously, it is just not an analogy that supports the case for Soccer having untrammelled access to stadia.
Different if the various levels of government are going to throw money/training centres/upgrades etc around – I’d see that as various forms of compensation. But if those agreements (or a very clear and binding framework for them) aren’t in place by the time the bid book is submitted, I can’t see how FIFA could view that as anything but a major risk to the bid.
January 27th 2010 @ 11:47pm
circus said | January 27th 2010 @ 11:47pm | Report comment
Jim Wilson
Can you (or the Cairns Post) tell me how many international visitors came to Australia in 2008 to attend the Rugby League World Cup?
February 4th 2010 @ 2:11pm
Towser said | February 4th 2010 @ 2:11pm | Report comment
Interesting development in South Africa regarding playing other sports during the World Cup.
http://theworldgame.sbs.com.au/2010-world-cup/rugby-crashes-wc-party-286252
February 4th 2010 @ 2:19pm
Jay said | February 4th 2010 @ 2:19pm | Report comment
SA mainly has one other winter code, Aus there are 3.
nrl and afl would demand a large sum of compensation during this time – who is going to pick the bill? probably the government, while the ffa would be left with a financial windfall for hosting the cup. sounds far from equitable.
February 4th 2010 @ 2:33pm
Michael C said | February 4th 2010 @ 2:33pm | Report comment
INteresting that the SBS article and quoted article speak of the deal struck between the SRU and the “FIFA World Cup Local Organising Committee Chief Executive Danny Jordaan”,
so, does this mean the local WCOC has the authority to do this?
In which case can Ben Buckley just come out up front and state that there will be no host city exclusions??
btw – let’s not get too carried away over a single match as compared to regular full rounds or split rounds of BOTH the AFL and NRL and any other RU matches.
February 4th 2010 @ 3:15pm
Towser said | February 4th 2010 @ 3:15pm | Report comment
Could be,but I doubt it knowing the iron fist of FIFA. We only know a fraction of the story behind the scenes IMO. I doubt though that Ben Buckley could do anything without first getting the approval of FIFA. Same as Danny Jordan In South Africa regarding the RU match .
Also there is still negotiations going on in South Africa regarding the Super 14 finals. That is if a SA team makes them.
http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=6&click_id=18&art_id=nw20100202193128385C500117
February 4th 2010 @ 3:50pm
Michael C said | February 4th 2010 @ 3:50pm | Report comment
Oh yeah – certainly, I’d assume that it’s presented using the ‘local’ names to make it look less FIFA dictated and more as if the local lads actually had a say!!!
It’d be a rubbery precedent for Australia you’d imagine.
And, apart from anything else – the AFL and NRL won’t be waiting around to 6 months before the tournament kicks off.
The thing that get’s me is the bias in the SBS report :
“The Australian Football League and National Rugby League hit the panic button last year amid fears their respective competitions could be shut down for up to six months during a World Cup potentially held in Australia.”
ahem – they were reacting to the promise by Fairfax soccer media that AFL and NRL would be shut down for at least 4 weeks and shut out of stadia for 6-8 weeks.
The 6 months was one worst case scenario re the MCG that – again – Buckley simply tried to distance himself from but was unable to rule out.
“Demetriou claimed FFA had not communicated requirements and possible restrictions on stadia used by AFL teams during a season.”
hmmm – ‘claimed’,….as if implying that Demetriou’s version is fabricated? The FFA and Buckley have admitted that they don’t know, how ever, for the FFA to suddenly go public claiming Docklands and to have a secret plan for reconfig of the MCG – - I’d say the AFL has a pretty solid ‘claim’,
and the beauty to finish off with :
“”It would probably mean we would have to cancel the season,” Demetriou said of Australia hosting a World Cup.”
Um……only of the worst case scenario around the MCG reconfig plan – - NOT of ‘hosting the World Cup’ per se.
Or – do the SBS mob seriously still not understand the AFL issues??
I feel sorry for soccer people who rely solely on soccer media for their view of the world.
February 4th 2010 @ 3:28pm
AndyS said | February 4th 2010 @ 3:28pm | Report comment
I would have said that, if FIFA is going to allow the major competing football code in SA to play a NH/SH international match, they are not likely to be at all concerned about any AFL/NRL/S15 match. Which frankly, is as it should be.
February 4th 2010 @ 5:20pm
Punter said | February 4th 2010 @ 5:20pm | Report comment
Like I said before, it’s all a furphy by the AFL CEO & lesser extent the NRL to gain attention, especially thinking this was right after the 2010 WC draw when they started their ‘what about me’ cry especially in Melbourne.
As Lowy said there is plenty of time to sort out the grounds after we win the bid.
February 5th 2010 @ 8:08am
Dogz R Barkn said | February 5th 2010 @ 8:08am | Report comment
For Lowy to say “there is plenty of time to sort out grounds after we win the bid” is quite disrespectful of both the NRL and the AFL.
Under those sorts of circumstances, they have every right to protect their commercial interests.
In fact, there is a story doing the rounds in various forums that Mersiades got the can, at the Government’s request, for precisely that sort of attitude.
All current indications are that no Commonwealth or State Government will do anything that is detrimental to the well being of the NRL and the AFL.
February 5th 2010 @ 2:11pm
Michael C said | February 5th 2010 @ 2:11pm | Report comment
this isn’t the AFL or NRL field of expertise – dealing with FIFA,
and it’s not the AFL or NRL show to run – a FIFA WC,
so, when soccer expert journo’s start running stories that the AFL and NRL will be shut down, will lose training venues and the like – then, how is it a furphy by the AFL/NRL to show concern that the FFA was unable to answer one way or another and was hatching secret plans clearly well beyond what had been communicated/agreed.
Tell us where the furphy’s lie??
if the best that Lowy can offer is effectively this ‘no worries’ line – - that ain’t enough. That effectively requires AFL and NRL to sign blank cheques.
The AFL and NRL gave their qualified support back in Oct/Nov 2008. The FFA has abused it 12 months later.
And the Fed Govt has stepped in to avoid the FFA making more of a laughing stock of Australia than they already have.
February 4th 2010 @ 3:48pm
Dogz R Barkn said | February 4th 2010 @ 3:48pm | Report comment
The real point remains the same one: do we have sufficient stadiums? Do we even have sufficient host cities?? Will the AFL allow the FFA to take Etihad for 9 to 10 weeks in the middle of their season? Will all the NRL clubs be happy to lose their stadiums as training venues for a large chunk of their season?
Whether a rugby game is played in SA on the 2nd day of the WC is neither here or there to be honest.
The Government taskforce gave themselves till the end of February to nut out deals with all the State/Territory Governments and the NRL/AFL.
We really haven’t heard too much on that front – it’s very difficult to see how they could possibly do it in less than four weeks.