Government support for WC is about business

The word you are looking for is globalisation. Rugby Union and Football have it.

Was invited today to a lunch/ gathering / meeting / party in total about 30 people some quite close to government in they work for the public service, ... lots of season cheer maybe a tad to much wine drank.... old story a drunks words are a sober man thoughts ... mainly business folk at this gathering Anyhow I raised the question the same question I raised in the thread expecting almost no reaction... without trying to relay everything said ... remember I am bias anyway so hearing what you want to hear is remembered ... BUT I was taken back at what was said [whether in truth or believed by rumour] ... the feeling was football can unlock doors in many countries and not only in Asia... But the Asian presence gives weight to the Australian team... to explain how it was put to me... say Redb purchased my Central Coast Mariners (google location mate) and wanted to do business in South Amercia or Russia owing and or being a major sponsor of an A-League team would unlock doors previously shut ... the same in Asia generally... The WC in Australia would ensure State & Commonwealth governments could invite and get access to many things they have currently shut... How true any of this is ..... I leave open for your understanding many had many Hunter Reds ... it was the last hour of about four hours of speeches and back patting ... with many wanting to big note themselves their inside knowledge and how important they are... having said that, the connections football brings whether true or not appear to accepted as fact by a large number of people.

Ahhh, you are stuggling to get off this 'Merry go around'.

right ;-) So the AFL and NRL are doing soccer a favour by objecting to part of the FFA's stadium plans. Message to Andy D - crank it up ol' son FIFA love it, you soccer folk should be applauding Andy D but you pillor the poor fellow. :-) You guys have to make up your mind here. Jimbo is ready to man the Snickers tank to attack the AFL and your telling Andy D and David G to keep it up. Redb

ah good......time to cut off the life support from the Fed Govt (K.Rudds $32 million into the operational spend of the FFA to keep it afloat).

and why would the NFL, NBA and NHL be concerned when the soccer world cup is played in their off season, doesn't require them to stop or vacate venues or interrupt seasons. Anthony La Paglia is an Australian soccer tragic and is he still part owner of SFC? Hardly an unbiased commentator on this topic. But right up 442 territory.......because, again, hardly an unbiased website. Btw - don't forget, Jeff Kennett sought to bid for a FIFA WC back in the 90s, he sought to build a soccer stadium at Docklands but had no Govt funds and could get zero private equity without the AFL on board. Kennett has been a long time supporter of the idea....but, has come to realise that it's perhaps just that.....a nice idea for a country like Australia. If the AFL standing firm on retaining Docklands stadium is enough to derail the bid......then.....what's that tell you about the bid. (especially when there's a brand new 100% govt funded dedicated rectagnle stadium across the raillines from the MCG .... with foundations to go to 50,000 and was hailed by Govt in May 2009 as being able to be extended if ever we were to host a FIFA WC........and the FFA don't want to negotiate to get this stadium expanded from 31,000 up to FIFA compliance. Just make sure you take note of this fact when you fall for this popular Australian soccer passtime of 'blame culture'.....'cos it's always someone else's fault!!) btw - Pom's laughing.......that's nice dear, have another cup of tea to settle yourself down.

HJS Hole in one! Well done! The amount of fear mongering and lack of confidence in their own codes is laughable. The ironic twist to all this is that FIFA will likely view all this kerfuffle as a strong reason to grant Oz the 2022 WC :)

One of the biggest problems with this whole debate is that various posters come to it with differing levels of understanding. We almost need a FAQ on the Roar to avoid having to explain again. The USA did not have a clash with its main football code in June/July 1994 and baseball was allowed to play on in its own stadiums. Redb

Excellent post!!!!

"Aussie actor Anthony La Paglia has attacked some local attitudes to the FIFA World Cup possibly coming to Australia, saying they could reinforce a perception of Australia as a “backwater" nation." http://au.fourfourtwo.com/news/119057,lapaglia-end-this-island-mentality.aspx From across here in the UK, we've been laughing a bit at your expense because of all of this. Australia has so much going for it that it should do very well in the bidding process, yet, with so many benefits associated with hosting a WC, some Aussies like Kennett and the AFL crowd just want to derail your bid. Your don't see the USA's other codes (NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL) getting scared that a WC will kill their codes. The USA government knows its good for the whole country, which is why you don't see any bickering in America.

"The article seems to ignore the ‘regional backwater’ status of soccer in Australia," If reports are true (it was the Daily Terror after all) looks like your 'regional backwater' code just landed on its feet with the apparent $300 million deal with Fox Sports for 5 years...not too shabby after less than 5 seasons in operation me thinks. Just to think a few years ago it was $1-2 million per year now $60million per season...ahhhh how times are changin.

FYI - The English have just completed their bid book of venues for the WC. 17 venues in 12 host cities. As you can see in the article I have pasted below, even the English are also having issues as to which venues they are going to use. As the article notes - Fifa has the final call and will ultimately slim the list down to 12 stadiums if England's bid is successful. http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2009/dec/16/england-2018-world-cup-bid-venues "The venues the bid team hope will play host to an English World Cup in 2018 will mix "the famous, the excellent and tomorrow" in "probably the best" line-up of stadiums anywhere in the world, they said yesterday as the final list was revealed. Lord Mawhinney, the Football League chairman who oversaw the host city bidding process, said that the inclusion of new stadiums with capacities of 40,000-plus in Bristol, Nottingham, Milton Keynes and Plymouth alongside the most iconic grounds in English football reflected a desire to ensure the entire country could share in a World Cup and to construct a bid that could leave a lasting legacy. In London, Arsenal's Emirates Stadium and Wembley will be joined by either the new Olympic stadium or the new White Hart Lane, which is not due to be completed until 2016. The announcement will add to the uncertainty over the future use of the Stratford stadium after the Olympics minister, Tessa Jowell, had insisted that it should be reduced to a 25,000-capacity athletics venue. But the debate was then reopened by Baroness Ford, the Olympic Park Legacy Company chairwoman, who wants to look at the options for retaining it at either 55,000 or 80,000 capacity. The legacy body is due to deliver its verdict early next year and will have to take into account the sustainability of a larger stadium between 2012 and 2018. "We were looking for a mix. We have some world-famous stadiums and the world wouldn't have understood if we had missed those out," said Mawhinney, who chaired a seven-month process that culminated this week in three days of final presentations. "But we thought we should have a sprinkling of tomorrow as well." Derby, Leicester and Hull were the three cities that missed out. The inclusion of Plymouth was a surprise to some, but the 2018 chief executive, Andy Anson, said that the city's team had made an "excellent" case in favour of the new 43,874-capacity Home Park as a catalyst for regeneration. It will be operated by AEG, the US giant that runs the O2. Despite yesterday's announcement of the 17 grounds in 12 host cities that will be included in England's bid book when it is submitted to Fifa next May, there remain unresolved questions surrounding key stadiums in Liverpool and London. Following the rejection of planning permission for Everton's proposed new stadium in Kirkby and continued speculation over whether Liverpool will find the funds to build a new Anfield, Mawhinney said the club had promised to upgrade their existing home if the new one was not forthcoming by the time Fifa came to make their decision in 2013. Anson said he was confident that Liverpool's managing director, Christian Purslow, would find the investment that would allow the new ground to be built. "They have a clear plan for getting investment into the club and then the business plan for the stadium must be among the easiest projects to get away because it makes perfect sense as a stand-alone proposition, it's just going to increase Liverpool's profitability," he said. Fifa has the final call and will ultimately slim the list down to 12 stadiums if England's bid is successful."

Great article : "Last week, AFL boss Andrew Demetriou claimed – incorrectly – an entire AFL season would be shut down if Australia hosted the FIFA World Cup." Huh?? Demetriou stated that if one of the possible scenarios identified by the FFA were to occur - that being the $130 million temporary rectangularisation of the MCG - then running a season would be pretty well impossible. HOw does this article come around to claim 'incorrectly'. What a soccer lovin' crock!!! The article seems to ignore the 'regional backwater' status of soccer in Australia, such that, like Basketball, it will only ever be a 'feeder' league to other larger external ones. The article ignore's the notion of tribalism and the desire to have an uncompromised 'domestic league' it seems to ignore the value of 'national ownership' of a code that boys are only so satisfied playing a 'soft and sissy' (I'm quoting here!!!) sport and in a market with a variety of choice - as clearly illustrated via attendances - that, people just don't get 'turned on' by watching a 2nd rate regional backwater soft/sissy soccer league compared to other options. because, quite frankly, comparing Australia or the US with some 2 bit country in Europe or South AMerica is a bit of a crock too. Really. Perhaps instead, the author might want to ponder the capacity of the over inflated soccer bubble to not burst and come crumbling down in a red ink heap.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc...

"If you walked through a shopping mall and posed the question, ''Do you want Australia to host the 2018 or 2022 World Cup?'' a few throwbacks from the ''Sheilas, Wogs and Poofters'' days might shake their heads. Otherwise, the overwhelming majority would say bring it on." By the sound of the throwbacks described in the first paragraph it is more like it was aimed at your crowd down in the land of the dinosaurs. :lol: Talking of zealotry, wasn't it your former Roar compatriot Pippinu who said, and I quote: "Not even the second coming of Jesus would get in the way of an AFL season"?!

Will you yield the floor for a question? Is this article aimed at folk like you? :-) http://www.smh.com.au/sport/football/zealotry-undermines-support-for-cup-bid-20091211-kolw.html

I think you have a good point.

Here's one for Redb and Michael C ;) http://www.theworldgame.com.au/australia/expert-warns-of-afl-demise-268817

MiddyYou may be interested in this also. The world cup not only provides a boost up to and during the cup but in the following year(s) from a tourism viewpoint at least. http://www.germany-tourism.de/pdf/DZT_WM_Bilanz_Bro2008_Eng.pdf Also from a non business point of view the effect on the image of the country and the host town is believed to be very significant. Personally I wouldn't mind if Melbourne had only one stadium and we could get Tassie involved.

haha lets not put you in charge of marketing.