ANZ Stadium should host World Cup Final
Roar Pro By Michael Turner, 28 Aug 2010 Michael Turner is a Roar Pro
- Tagged:
- AFL, FIFA World Cup Bid 2022, football, MCG, World Cup football, World Football
Related coverage
This is one of the most debated topics that has plagued the FIFA World Cup bid, 2022. Who will host the Grand Final? The argument has roared between Melbourne and Sydney fans alike.
It is by obvious standards that the MCG is the biggest and most historic stadium in Australia. However, it is not fit to host FIFA’s showpiece event.
And here’s why.
MCG
The MCG carries a large amount of history, as well as a large capacity. This seems to be all that’s needed for the final. However, there are many problems that will ruin the experience for the fans.
Number one problem? Boundaries.
According to FIFA regulations, the boundaries at the MCG are much too far away to be included. Despite this, it has still been named in Australia’s bid book. Recently FIFA edited its regulations to allow stadiums such as the MCG.
Despite this, I still recommend that the MCG should not be used to host the FIFA World Cup final.
The match day experience is half of that if the games were to be hosted at Etihad Stadium, or any other stadium with a more rectangular shape.
If Melbourne want a stadium for the World Cup, don’t use a cricket ground. Etihad Stadium was the only other viable option. However, the greediness of the AFL has renderred that path useless.
I am a supporter of the AFL. However, the un-sportsmanship like behavious of their administration has marred it’s reputation for the pure sport lover.
ANZ Stadium
The knockout punch on Melbourne’s bid to have the final is ANZ Stadium. The projected upgrades to the stadium are revolutionary, fitting in with the World Cup’s ideal path (according to FIFA).
The upgrades entail a revolutionary retractable and transparent roof, while extra seats bring the capacity to 90,000, which will also bring the stadium to a more rectangular shape.
The lower tier will be similar to Etihad Stadium in terms of retractable seating.
ANZ Stadium is located in the heartland of Australia’s biggest city, with strong transport connections, and a big track record of hosting major events. As a result, ANZ Stadium is the most viable choice for the FIFA World Cup Finals.
Nevertheless, an Australian World Cup will be one of the best, thanks to our ingenuity and fantastic track record in hosting major international events.
No matter where the final will be held, I will be there
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 World Cup Bid 2022, football, MCG, World Cup football, World Football
August 28th 2010 @ 12:41am
Chuq said | August 28th 2010 @ 12:41am | Report comment
The final should be in Sydney for one simple reason: The Government of Victoria has demonstrated that they don’t want it. If they did, they would have put Demetriou in his place when he was mouthing off in December. The government’s inaction told us everything we need to know.
There’s no point having the discussion as to which should get it when only one city is going for it.
August 28th 2010 @ 1:29am
Dan said | August 28th 2010 @ 1:29am | Report comment
I hope those upgrades to ANZ stadium (formerly Stadium Australia) are as revolutionary as you say mate, because as it stands it’s one of the worst places to watch footy in Sydney… I’ve been to several State of Origin and Bledisloe tests there, and the place is just plain crap for rectangular footy codes. You’re generally too far from the action, the place holds no noise (so crap atmosphere) and the seating on the lower level is angled too horizontally, meaning if you’re sitting at the back you should bring specs.
Personally I bloody hate the place. The SFS kills it in terms of atmosphere and view. They should just upgrade that. After all, who wants to go to bloody homebush anyway? it’s the very definition of “hole”
August 28th 2010 @ 9:37am
Michael Turner said | August 28th 2010 @ 9:37am | Report comment
They are confirmed by the NSW Government, however we all know how tacky those bubs are, its a 200 million dollar upgrade to help us get the final.
It should make the atmosphere better, with the retractable roof, all the sound will stay in the stadium. Bring it on!
And Homebush really is a hole…it was a brickpit
August 28th 2010 @ 1:51am
Kurt said | August 28th 2010 @ 1:51am | Report comment
Absolutely, we Victorians don’t deserve the WC final, we’re just not cultured or sophisticated enough. In fact, I heartily recommend punishing us (along with the greedy, selfish AFL) by not letting Victoria host ANY WC games at all. We’re simply not worthy.
August 28th 2010 @ 7:57am
Australian Football said | August 28th 2010 @ 7:57am | Report comment
Finally you have written a post that makes sense and we both can totally 100% agree on.
______
AF
August 28th 2010 @ 9:52am
jimbo said | August 28th 2010 @ 9:52am | Report comment
I second that!
Motion passed – unanimous.
August 30th 2010 @ 9:38am
mahony said | August 30th 2010 @ 9:38am | Report comment
I agree also. I will just go to Sydney for a month to see Brazil, Argentina, England and the Socceroos while everyone else from here can stay in their comfort zone watching Essendon v St Kilda. My State does not deserve the honour…..
August 28th 2010 @ 7:24am
Farqwar said | August 28th 2010 @ 7:24am | Report comment
The renovated ANZ should be permanent rectangle configuration. Making it convertable for a couple of AFL games a year is the biggest waste of money in the history of money wasting.
August 28th 2010 @ 10:14am
Fez's are cool said | August 28th 2010 @ 10:14am | Report comment
Agreed.
Especially since the SCG keeps getting upgrades towards a +60k capacity, and the pitch reshaped to suit AFL, AND $45m public money being spent on the Showground. The AFL doesn’t need ANZ.
Meanwhile Sydney has been dieing for an +80k proper football stadium. While the retractable ends and roof are a step in the right direction for ANZ, I wonder if it will be enough… the upper tiers are still miles from the action.
I am pretty sure that rectangularising the lower bowl and adding a roof were part of the original plan post Olympics for the stadium, before they decided to spend all the budget on retractable seating.
August 28th 2010 @ 11:31am
Michael Turner said | August 28th 2010 @ 11:31am | Report comment
the swans dont even like playing in ANZ Stadium, they believe that the AFL is suited for the SCG, because it is a more historic venue and more fitting for the sport. Same with Cricket.
August 28th 2010 @ 8:41am
Fussball ist unser leben said | August 28th 2010 @ 8:41am | Report comment
I consider myself to be a proud Melburnian, but I wholeheartedly endorse the views of Michael Turner.
During disccussion about Australia’s bidding for the FIFA WC, I was disgusted by the level of negativity emanating from prominent Victorians and, to be honest, I would be quite happy if Melbourne didn’t host a single game during the FIFA WC.
Unlike the pettiness from prominent Melburnians, the people of Geelong seem to have embraced the concept of being a WC Host City and, I reckon, Kardinia Park Stadium in Geelong should be the only venue in Victoria used during the 2022 WC.
Having watched many football matches at the MCG, I can categorically state that the MCG is the worst venue I’ve ever been to watch a football match.
Whilst the Docklands Stadium size makes it a more “football friendly” venue, the surface at Docklands has been consistently voted the worst playing surface in Australia by players from the A-League and AFL and the surface will never improve – unless, a synthetic turf is used.
I never thought I’d ever say this but, if I had to vote on where the 2022 FIFA WC final should be held, I would be shouting “GO SYDNEY”!
August 28th 2010 @ 10:26am
Fez's are cool said | August 28th 2010 @ 10:26am | Report comment
I recon we should make (upgraded for rectangular codes) ANZ in Sydney the Final venue, get the new Perth stadium built to 70k and use it for a semi and get Adelaide oval to 66k for a semi. Then let AFL have the MCG, and the WC bid can use Etihad.
August 28th 2010 @ 10:50am
Danny_Mac said | August 28th 2010 @ 10:50am | Report comment
Sadly I just cant agree…
At the end of the day, it will come down to capacity.
2006 WCF was held in Berlin, with a running track around the pitch no less, ahead of the AMAZING stadium in Munich. the AllianzArena in Munich is possibly the most sophisticated, modern stadium in the world, but the renovated Olympiastadion in Berlin held nearly 15,000 more people.
The only way that Stadium Australia will host the WCF is if they bring back the Tampon Wings on the sides and increase the capacity to 110,000 again. Otherwise the MCG at 98,500 will get it.
My concern is that the “upgrades” will not be as promised. AFL manages to sell out the MCG for more than just the grand final each season, there are no NRL or A-League matches that sell out SA. Infact, the Socceroos are starting to play more matches at the SFS. Whilst the money generated from Hosting the WC would offset the cost of the upgrade, the ongoing cost of maintaining the ground is potentially a white elephant. and the NSW government needs another white elephant like a hole in the head.
It is a shame, as I’ve been to see the Socceroos play at Stadium Australia, MCG and Etihad, and out of the three, SA is probably the best for football.
August 28th 2010 @ 11:33am
Michael Turner said | August 28th 2010 @ 11:33am | Report comment
The ideology of Soccer at SA with a rectangular shape would create a stronger atmosphere. Depending on how the NSW government apporach the upgrades will determine it’s elephant status. I shall keep everyone posted
August 28th 2010 @ 9:38am
MVDave said | August 28th 2010 @ 9:38am | Report comment
MCG to host the opening game of WC 2022…which will involve the Socceroos so not such a bad 2nd prize and Sydenee to get the final…which most likely wont involve the Socceroos (although we should expect to get into the last 8).. The AFL and its media cronies have ensured this outcome.
August 28th 2010 @ 9:46am
Australian Football said | August 28th 2010 @ 9:46am | Report comment
Off topic—-but just like to say Chelsea off to a fine start…
______
AF
August 28th 2010 @ 9:52am
Michael Turner said | August 28th 2010 @ 9:52am | Report comment
I will agree with that, its a good compromise since Melbourne is a very sport passionate city, however I believe an upgrade of the Geelong stadium is on the cards according to the bid book. A 44,000 Seater in the heart of Geelong, a major upgrade to Kardinia Park.
August 28th 2010 @ 9:53am
Midfielder said | August 28th 2010 @ 9:53am | Report comment
We all know the good folk of Victoria have two heads three feet and no sense of humour…
Beyond this obvious reason is you cannot trust them down there … like for a start they have no brains … prove is in they stay in Melbourne…
Furthermore is that dirty little creek they have … nothing on the harbour city…
End of debate … the two head, three footed, no brains hayseads, that wash only on the change of seasons would be a bad image for our overseas guests.
August 28th 2010 @ 10:33am
Fez's are cool said | August 28th 2010 @ 10:33am | Report comment
The one big white elephant currently in the bid book will be Blacktown with a legacy capacity of 26k.
Rugby League and Soccer should be working together to share a sensible distribution of venues in Western Sydney. With Penrith (24k) Parramatta (22k planned to be upgraded to 26) and Campbelltown (25k but very upgrade-able) already in the west, a 26k Blacktown is stupid. The current 3 stadiums are distributed in the population hubs within the established public transport network
Blacktown would have only 1 tenant, the Rovers, and maybe 1 or 2 NRL games a year. And it isn’t even in a good location population-wise. Western Sydney is a dispersed population with a few hubs. People from Penrith or Campbelltown or Liverpool won’t want to travel to Blacktown. The rovers are better off splitting their home games between Parramatta and Campbelltown.
If you were to build a centralised stadium in Western Sydney, you would build it in Parramatta due to it being a hub of road and rail infrastructure. That isn’t really possible for the WC because its too close to ANZ.
But upgrading Campbelltown to say 35k permanent, 45k temporary makes a lot of sense. Campbelltown is near a major road interchange in an area with far greater population growth than Blacktown, with an existing rail link and station near by.
I get the feeling the politicians know Blacktown is a white elephant, but are happy to waste the money because of preassure from FFA, and the fact it would look good “legacy”wise to FIFA. Building in Liverpool or Campbelltown would be far, far better.
August 28th 2010 @ 4:29pm
Midfielder said | August 28th 2010 @ 4:29pm | Report comment
They will ne called the Rovers and will fill it every week////
August 28th 2010 @ 5:36pm
Fez's are cool said | August 28th 2010 @ 5:36pm | Report comment
I know… noticed I used the name Rovers above?
Even if theey sell out “every week” as you claim, it makes more financial sense to have a stadium occupied all year.
August 28th 2010 @ 10:51am
Dave said | August 28th 2010 @ 10:51am | Report comment
Maybe we should wait to see if we winit first.
August 28th 2010 @ 11:03am
Danny_Mac said | August 28th 2010 @ 11:03am | Report comment
Firstly, we haven’t won the world cup bid yet, so everybody just calm down a little bit.
The reality is that you cant avoid melbourne, we need stadia, and melbourne has two, ready to go, at FIFA spec. everybody has been complaining about the Etihad pitch, but i can guarantee that if WC games needed to be played there, they would drop in a pitch that would be immaculate. Australia is a proud nation, and we’re not going to be made a laughing stock over pitch quality.
The other thing that nobody considers is the access to training facilities and suitable accomodation. You move outside of the major metro areas and it gets harder to sustain more than four nations.
Also, Stadium Australia already has retractable seats. And if you’ve ever been to Etihad when the seats have been pushed in, its not all its cracked up to be, infact it is better without. Once the novelty wears off, it just creates a vacuum between the 10,000 seats pushed in and the 45.000 that aren’t.
Melbourne is the strongest footballing city in the country. Look at the support that the Melbourne Victory have had over their existance, and the early signs are that the Heart are also going to be a very strong club in terms of support. the AFL has always been strong-handed in defending their game, and good on them… if the FFA were in a position to be so overtly defensive of football, i’d want them to do the same.
Its all just a bit of scaremongering to ensure that melbourne/AFL (which needs to be a key part of the plan for the bid to be successful) gets the best deal it can.
August 28th 2010 @ 11:23am
Michael Turner said | August 28th 2010 @ 11:23am | Report comment
Etihad has been dropped from the FFA’s bid, with the Geelong Stadium and MCG still listed, however these are subject to change. Etihad has been completely ruled out by the unsportsmanlike behaviour of the AFL. I do believe that AAMI should be made at 50 000 capacity at least for the World Cup, to give Melbourne an alternative rectangle park to Etihad, however the 44 000 Geelong Stadium is the replacement for the moment.
August 29th 2010 @ 12:14am
solaris said | August 29th 2010 @ 12:14am | Report comment
and here in lies the concerns of the afl michael turner – as far as the afl were concerned docklands was NEVER – repeat NEVER on the table to be used as part of the wc bid – that ffa officials sought to shop the stadium around in the face of that understanding rightly got under the nose of the afl – does that make the ffa and those who have supported the bid “unsportsmanlike”