How the NRL and AFL can work around a World Cup
Roar Rookie By Alez Valez, 18 Mar 2010 Alez Valez is a Roar Rookie
- Tagged:
- AFL, Australian world cup bid, football, NRL, Qatar, Rugby League, World Cup, world cup bid
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
Well there has been plenty of debate over what chance a World Cup bid has if the NRL and AFL will be left out of pocket. Is this the case though?
An ideal situation for the rugby league and AFL during a World Cup would be as follows.
Host 4 NRL rounds over 5 or 6 weeks overseas in the UK, Qatar and the USA.
Whilst the World Cup is on in Australia, the UK and USA would all be watching it in early morning hours their time while there local footballing comps are all shut down, meaning they will have a lack of live sport for a number of months.
This is a perfect situation for the NRL to test the waters overseas and whilst doing so, make a fair amount of money with guaranteed sell outs in the UK, having curious locals and many Australian expats turning up.
This would more than compensate for missed ticket sales in local Australian stadiums, and also cover air travel and accommodation for each club overseas.
The NRL and FFA can monitor each clubs financial situation while overseas and if any club is in the red, then compensation would be paid.
This can also potentially boost the possibility of increased international TV rights to the game for the following season. If not for NRL rounds, then for a highlights show.
State Of Origin games could be played at 3 separate points world wide; the UK (Wembley) which already follow the game, Qatar which is a rich sports nation and Lebanon, where the game has a huge following.
As for the AFL, a country road show of rounds in the outback areas would give more back to the locals they draw their players from at a young age. Providing FIFA ok this.
Financially though, the AFL would need some government assistance or FFA compensation from ticket sales from World Cup games played at AFL stadiums or training grounds rented out to international football teams.
Maybe this all sounds like a huge long shot, and farcical, but i think its worth a mention anyhow.
I do also realise this still inconveniences Australian NRL and AFL fans who like going to live games and have season tickets, plus having to watch there beloved game being played at 10/11pm at night (sorry kids!). Discounted season tickets for the World Cup year could be an option.
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, Australian world cup bid, football, NRL, Qatar, Rugby League, World Cup, world cup bid
March 18th 2010 @ 10:45am
Sammy - Cowboys r better than broncos said | March 18th 2010 @ 10:45am | Report comment
Why dont they telecast soccer WC to Australia, no on plays it here
March 18th 2010 @ 11:51am
jimbo said | March 18th 2010 @ 11:51am | Report comment
Where do you live Sammy – under a rock?
Soccer is the biggest participation football code in all of Australia.
Go the Cowboys!
March 18th 2010 @ 12:48pm
jimbo said | March 18th 2010 @ 12:48pm | Report comment
Australia is second favourite to win one of the two world cup bids.
The federal government and ALL state governments have already signed off on the financial guarantees which is in writing and has gone to FIFA. This means that they will finance the staging of the World Cup with the FFA, no matter what it costs.
So what are we going to do if we win one of the bids?
Politely decline and ask some other country to take our place.
March 18th 2010 @ 1:46pm
AndyRoo said | March 18th 2010 @ 1:46pm | Report comment
Politely decline and ask some other country to take our place.
Yes.
I did an IP check and you and Lazza are the only posters not from Qatar
Which explains why they don’t think “no worries” is a legitimate way of doing business as that phrase doesn’t translate well into Arabic.
March 18th 2010 @ 1:55pm
Michael C said | March 18th 2010 @ 1:55pm | Report comment
well, Jimbo – - at the moment they are endeavouring to put together a bid book – - – if they fail to put that together then the bid stalls at that stage irrespective of the Govt sign off back in December.
The Govt sign off is effectively a theoretical commitment,
the Bid Book stage is very much designed to weed out the dreamers from the doers in the bid process – - and you well know that.
if the Australian Bid Book is able to be signed off on by all parties and presented and is successful – - all well and good and then we all sit back and see how much the costs blow out by (because, they will, they always do…….and we’ll hope and pray that it’s run better than the insulation scheme!!!!!!).
March 19th 2010 @ 8:32am
jimbo said | March 19th 2010 @ 8:32am | Report comment
So do all the other bidders.
This is not a valid reason to withdraw our bid.
March 19th 2010 @ 10:28am
Ken said | March 19th 2010 @ 10:28am | Report comment
Yeah government guarantees are great. As an inhabitant of North West Sydney we’ve had 3 government guarantees about a train line in the last 20 years and they’re now talking about it again. The Sydney metro line that just got canned was guaranteed to, in all of it’s different forms and iterations, plenty of businesses complaining about the millions they dropped on tendering and preparation for that one now that it’s not going ahead.
Governments love to guarantee stuff that will not happen until after their term is up – then it’s the next guys problem to back out.
March 18th 2010 @ 1:15pm
ac said | March 18th 2010 @ 1:15pm | Report comment
Can I say I dont blame the AFL or NRL for not being happy with what is proposed. Not too many other organisations would just roll over and allow the “opposition” free mileage. Look, personally i am for all the codes coexisting. AFL is different to Rugby League and that goes for soccer (ooops football) and Union. But, this is a little unfair i believe that the domestic competition has to be stopped for a “Event” which seems not to deliver the benefits back to the communities that put so much into running the event. The AFL is a very good well run business lets be fair to them why should they move. Why cant the world cup be played out of the football season in Australia?
March 18th 2010 @ 1:58pm
True Tah said | March 18th 2010 @ 1:58pm | Report comment
“why should they move”
because FIFA tells them too.
March 18th 2010 @ 2:12pm
Michael C said | March 18th 2010 @ 2:12pm | Report comment
and what’s FIFA’s jurisdiction over the AFL and NRL again…..oh that’s right,…..they gain it when the Govt changes the locks and hands over the keys on venues.
March 18th 2010 @ 1:53pm
Rob said | March 18th 2010 @ 1:53pm | Report comment
Neither the AFL or NRL qualify as major sporting events as far as FIFA are concerned. They wont be required to reschedule the season. Seriously, just imagine your a FIFA delegate sitting in an office in Zurich…”Yeah I know Australia, my son went backpacking there….Skippy, Crocodile Dundee, Harry Kewell….They play what?….AF-who?
A couple of “Heritage” rounds back at the old suburban grounds are the ideal solution.
Any talk of stopping the season is just because these sports realise it would be pointless to get head to head with the WC.
March 18th 2010 @ 2:01pm
Michael C said | March 18th 2010 @ 2:01pm | Report comment
Rob – ah, but by the ‘major international’ sort of interpretation – - then why did the MLB in the US in ’94 required special ‘permission’ (even if just a face saving token permission – or otherwise).
And why is the FFA still unable or unwilling to publicly clarify the situation rather than that they’ve only ever alluded to the US ’94 MLB scenario as a possible precedence that might apply…….
at any rate – - that’s a gamble for the FFA to take. NOt the AFL or NRL. It’s not their job.
btw – a couple of heritage rounds around the suburban venues would be great – no argument there – - not sure how many of them would be up to scratch to even squeeze in 10,000 anymore let alone 25-30K….most have had old fire hazard stadiums demolished, walls knocked down, terraces replaced with grassy mounds and they are perfect now for a summers arvo picnic whilst watching the first grade district cricketers (where the cricketers still have access!!!!).
The talk of stopping the seasons was initiated back in October 2009 by Fairfax Soccer journos Michael Cockerill and Michael Lynch. And the FFA still has been unable to state categorically that host city exclusions wouldn’t apply – - because, apparently these things are never confirmed by FIFA until AFTER the host city is announced…….so, it seems to me that the FFA is in an impossible position. The AFL is in an impossible position. And the NRL is in an impossible position.
March 18th 2010 @ 2:05pm
AndyRoo said | March 18th 2010 @ 2:05pm | Report comment
From the artilce linked by Dogz and Towser
“The AFL has agreed to vacate the MCG for up to 10 weeks and draw its schedule around the World Cup fixture, so that there is no clash of match days”
March 18th 2010 @ 2:22pm
Millster said | March 18th 2010 @ 2:22pm | Report comment
I’m on my way to CDG airport right now, on my way to the A-League Grand Final (GO SYDNEY!). Yesterday and today I’ve had my first look at this site for a while to see what’s going on, to get me up to speed for my temporary return to Australia.
First – hi to the regulars who I used to chat to. Good to see you haven’t lost your gift of the gab Michael C… and the new DAFL avatar in your profile is a nice, and funny touch.
Second though – just how many of this identical thread are we going to get between now and 2018? Its not just that this argument has been had many times before, but what makes it wierd is that its been had between the same people (except I notice that Pippinu seems to be absent…).
March 18th 2010 @ 2:46pm
Michael C said | March 18th 2010 @ 2:46pm | Report comment
Millster -
cheers
Pippinu is now “Mr.Football”, KB is now “Australian Football” which is his nom de guerre rather than nom de plume (i.e. a rather arrogant distortion of the phrase).
My gab was bought = = not gifted!!
There’s nothing funny about the DAFL Vikings……..never laugh in the face of a viking…….lest you might be burned, pillaged or the other one…..
This ‘identical’ thread aspect is true enough other than that we just feast on the tiny morsels of updates that eminate from the current behind closed doors meetings by those with actual influence.
btw – QLD 4-121, carna Vics, we need to get into the tail proper……sooner we get to work on their 10th wkt partnership the better after the last Vic vs QLD game!!!
March 18th 2010 @ 3:59pm
Tifosi said | March 18th 2010 @ 3:59pm | Report comment
No surprise that the AFL endorse the Geelong Stadium upgrade, as it means a nice shiny stadium for AFL that will never see a soccer match after 4 or so group games!!
As for the costs, stadium/infrastructure upgrades are always needed so you cant say its a cost per se. Airports roads etc are always needing improvement.
The costs are things like policing, security etc, which by the way FIFA say is each cities responsibility to pay for.
End of the day I hardly think FIFA are going to be impressed by what Australia submits in its bid book, thats if it even gets submitted in the first place.
March 18th 2010 @ 5:30pm
mds1970 said | March 18th 2010 @ 5:30pm | Report comment
I can’t see playing a month’s worth of AFL in the bush is a viable option. Most AFL members have 30-40,000 season ticket members, and those grounds barely hold 10,000.
If a club such as West Coast is locked out of Subiaco, it’s physically impossible to fit their 40,000 members into a smaller ground. To make them do a country tour, they would be forced to cap their membership at 10,000. That’s 30,000 regular members who are disenfranchised – at $400 per season ticket, a cost of $12 million. Also the corporate facilities at country grounds are vastly inferior; so corporate sponsorship would also be adversely affected.
AFL clubs are looking down the barrel of a hit of $15m-$20m each. All clubs will be severely weakened by having to dip that much into their reserves, and many won’t survive. The legacy of this World Cup therefore is one of debt and devastation to Australia’s traditional sporting culture.
March 18th 2010 @ 9:20pm
bozo said | March 18th 2010 @ 9:20pm | Report comment
Get real. It won’t happen. It is $40mil for the government to get the support of Westfield.
March 19th 2010 @ 3:51am
AndrewMc said | March 19th 2010 @ 3:51am | Report comment
Seriously people, lets just have a think about this. We are talking 5 weeks in 12 years time.
By 2022, there will be 9 AFL games a round.
Week 1
First half of split round with a game at docklands on friday night, saturday arvo and sunday arvo, and then a game at AAMI in Adelaide, and the Gabba in Brisbane.
Week 2
Second half of split round with the remaining 4 games. 2 at docklands, and you can take your pick for SCG, West Syd, Gold coast, perth or adelaide for the other two games
Week 3
Special state of origin week. The AFL did this the other year. This mean an extra game for the AFL, which also means extra $$$
Week 4
Another split round. 2 games at docklands and the other two at interstate venues.
Week 5
The second half of the split round.
Easy Peasy!! with minimal distruption to the AFL season. It would only add an extra 3 weeks to the AFL season (probably start 2 weeks early and finish one week late) and the tactics used here are not new to AFL fans and it is not exactly rocket science.
The days of particular games would have to be planned in conjunction with the World Cup schedule. This would be especially the case in the first week and a half when most WC games are. After that it wont be a problem.
I am an AFL fan and a Football fan and I am sick of people arguing and yelling at eachother over a storm in a tea cup. Let’s all have a think about this whole thing and if you don’t have anything constructive to put forward than quit your whinging!!
March 19th 2010 @ 8:35am
Dogz R Barkn said | March 19th 2010 @ 8:35am | Report comment
I still have trouble seeing how that can work.
The MCG will be unavailable for 10 weeks (perhaps longer if the FFA goes forward with its preferred option – and I suspect there would be a lot of pressure to do so if Australia were to win the bid).
The AFL grounds in Perth and Adelaide will be unavailable for the same period, perhaps slightly less (if Perth and Adelaide end up becoming host cities).
Carrara will be unavailable for at least 4 weeks.
The Geelong ground will be unavailable for at least 4 weeks.
ANZ stadium will be out of action for about 10 weeks.
So that leaves 9 games (might even be 10 games by 2022) that can only be played on Etihad, the SCG and the Gabba, maybe in Lonnie, for up to 10 weeks.
March 19th 2010 @ 9:12am
Michael C said | March 19th 2010 @ 9:12am | Report comment
Ah, but, that’s assuming no host city exclusions,
and you’re spreading 2 rounds plus a SoO over that 4-5 weeks – - so that leaves another 20 or 22 or however many rounds plus 4 or 5 weeks of finals (not sure how the AFL is planning to run an 18 team comp – - let alone if a Tassie or ACT or 3rd WA side has entered by then).
Because – the main aspect is that the AFL will be minus the MCG for up to 10 weeks,
and minus the other WC venues for the 4 weeks leading in – -
so, the cramming before hand is made much more difficult – - by virtue of the fact that it’s NOT JUST the AFL – - the NRL are also going to be cramming. Fair enough – there’s only so much venue overlap b/w those two codes – - – but if all the soccer/rugby shared venues are turned over to FIFA for 8 weeks – - then it’ll make it an interesting process for the NRL to fit their season in satisfactorily.
Perhaps we’ll see SCG hosted NRL/AFL doubleheaders!!!!!
It’s not so absolutely easy – - but, the AFL have not been saying it can’t be done………at least, not that it can’t be done without the AFL retaining Docklands.
Now the NRL is eyeing off Docklands to host an SoO match in Melbourne in the middle of the FIFA WC.
Actually the main thing the AFL will want ensured is that they get the MCG back as rapidly as possible after that last round ball penalty shot is taken…..
….I am curious as to whether FIFA would want all FIFA WC venues to retain all signage etc for the full 4 weeks of the tournament or once a venue hosts its last game – can it then transition straight back to it’s real world identity???
March 19th 2010 @ 12:01pm
Timmypig said | March 19th 2010 @ 12:01pm | Report comment
I’m still concerned about the ‘legacy’ … take Geelong for example. The good folks of Geelong, and the AFL, and obviously the Cats, will want the legacy to be an Aus Rules oval. Is a proposal to build such a beast going to wash with FIFA? I’d have thought that the Docklands, MCG & Homebush would be given a kind of ‘pass conceded’, but the other grounds … ? Surely FIFA will want football (and thus rugby / rugby league) compatible stadia?
Unless someone has some kind of proof of a waiver of the pitch dimension specs, or maximum sight length specs …? Surely the Australian bid is behind the 8 ball on this basis alone? And what if the propsed new stadia are designed to FIFA compliant dimensions – they’d be white elephants in Adelaide and Perth.
March 19th 2010 @ 1:38pm
Black Diamonds said | March 19th 2010 @ 1:38pm | Report comment
Please see this:
Re: That very issue. (From Bloomberg)
Portugal Debates Razing Soccer Stadiums to Cut Public Costs
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=awSfYB6pE3fY
Is that really a debate we want to have here in 2030?
How crazy would that be.
March 19th 2010 @ 1:51pm
Michael C said | March 19th 2010 @ 1:51pm | Report comment
FIFA’s technical doc’s around stadia DO recognise ‘multi-purpose’ as being important – - they DO recognise the ongoing benefit to the community…..however, in FIFA’s mind, normally that’s around a rectangle that might also be a US-Football or Rugby type venue,…….far less on FIFA’s horizon are cricket/Aust Football ovals.
They really only cover the issue of more ‘oval’ style stadia from the Olympic stadium perspective in a soccer dominant nation – - so, their document in it’s spirit at least shouldn’t have an issue of multi-purpose venue that is NOT primarily a soccer venue pre and post the event.
btw – Black Diamonds – excellent link – - and to think that that is in a soccer nation in Europe. Helps to illustrate why there’s more ‘shared’ bids by smaller soccer nations – - -which really makes the solo bid by Australia look odd and ONLY sustainable on the basis of the ongoing usage (pre/post event) of venues other than by soccer.
I’ve said before – the AFL more so, and to a lesser by still fair degree the NRL – - are crucial in justifying Australia being able to successfully host such an event.
Legacy schmegacy…….
April 1st 2010 @ 8:30pm
etat said | April 1st 2010 @ 8:30pm | Report comment
You’re absolutely right about the stadium legacy issue here mike.
However, the AFL isn’t likely to be a beneficiary of a world cup. Rugby and League are most likely to get a nice little collection of refurbished or brand new stadia in Brisbane, Sydney, Perth and Adelaide. The AFL will get the chance to play in a refurbed Melbourne Cricket Ground.
The bankbooks will open up if we win this bid and League and Union, on soccer’s back, will benefit quite nicely from new and reburbished rectangular venues.
March 19th 2010 @ 9:23pm
Moonface said | March 19th 2010 @ 9:23pm | Report comment
Demountable stadiums, like the London Olympics.
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/05/london-olympic-flatpack-stadium.php