Having read over the lengthy and arduous bid evaluation report, Australia and New Zealand should earn the rights to host the 2023 Women’s World Cup.
But it’s no fait accompli. It never is with FIFA.
First things first, it’s worth noting FIFA, under new leadership in Gianni Infantino, will award this World Cup host with unprecedented transparency, with all 35 votes to be made public.
But a valid argument could be made for voting either Australia/NZ or Colombia, so don’t expect that to mean our bid is home. Infantino may preach he wants the winner determined on merit not politics, but the other 34 FIFA Council voters may have other agendas, as they have in the past.
We’ll find out in the early hours of Friday morning (AEST) when the announcement is made from an online meeting.
From reading the bid evaluation report and assessing the technical evaluation it’s clear that Australia/New Zealand’s case is extremely strong. Our bid out-ranked Colombia in 12 criteria on the risk assessment. Five criteria of the 17 were equally graded and in none were Colombia ahead of Australia/NZ.
But FIFA doesn’t award hosting rights purely based on risk assessment or technical evaluations. The key objectives are maximising FIFA’s women’s football strategy alongside sporting and commercial values.
(Photo by Pier Marco Tacca/Getty Images)
Australia/NZ’s bid is comprehensive, professional and backed by government funding, with a sound commercial basis. Colombia’s bid lacks detail and is short on committed government support. It makes promises without concrete targets.
Clearly if Colombia’s bid wins, there’s a pile more work to do to bring the event to life than if Australia/NZ’s bid succeeds. FIFA would likely need to hold Colombia’s hand through the process, but it is not an insurmountable task.
That won’t deter FIFA, particularly on the front of achieving their women’s football strategy, which is the joker in Colombia’s pack.
In eight editions, the Women’s World Cup has never been hosted in South America.
The Women’s World Cup has been played three times in the Americas timezone, but on all occasions up in North America – the United States in 1999 and 2003 and Canada in 2015. Strategically, holding the event on South American soil is vastly different.
Colombia’s bid has plenty of flaws but it talks about changing South American society and redefining the female’s role within it. That’s a trump card.
South America is the sleeping giant of women’s football. No South American team has ever won the Women’s World Cup and besides for Brazil, remarkably only one CONMEBOL team has ever reached the knockout stages: Colombia in 2015.
The FIFA Council members will ask would hosting the event in Colombia help awaken it to the whole continent?
Colombia is not the first CONMEBOL member to bid to host the event either, with Peru putting their hand up in 2011 before voluntarily pulling out, along with Brazil in the 2023 race.
Colombia’s bid has its issues, so on paper it doesn’t feel like the breakthrough bid for the continent. But it’s also the first to make it this far. There may be unquenched appetite.
Lacking for Colombia are precise figures on female participation growth and details on how it’ll support FIFA’s women’s football strategy. There’s the issue of a low revenue forecast thus commercial risk for FIFA. There’s a lack of government contribution, plus the nominated international broadcast centre isn’t up to standard and the stadium in the capital Bogota, nominated to host the opening game and final, is 15,000 seats short of the required capacity. The issues are lengthy, but they’re not insurmountable. And FIFA will look at the upside.
Australia/NZ presents the low-risk option. Like Colombia it is groundbreaking in that it is the first ever joint and cross-confederation bid too, but in some ways that separates it from the rest of the region, impacting potential legacy in Asia and Oceania.
Costs may be high due to co-hosting and geography but that’s offset by strong revenue forecasts based on higher estimated ticket sales, corporate hospitality, sponsorship plus significant government funding. Twelve of the 13 stadiums are built, with the Sydney Football Stadium underway, while team facilities and accommodation options are good.
The downsides are the multiple and confusing time zones, which don’t lend themselves well to TV audiences in European evenings but neither does South America. There’s also the two countries’ sheer vastness, creating travel headaches for teams, officials and fans, but that won’t decide the bid.
The key question is what’s the legacy within the FIFA women’s football strategy beyond Australian and New Zealand shores? Will it actually grow women’s football in the Asia-Pacific and Oceania?
Compare that to Colombia’s potential impact in South America, and you’ll ask is the latter worth the risk?
Jo-Ryan Salazar
Guest
In the end, this article didn't age well.
Jo-Ryan Salazar
Guest
The African votes will go to Colombia. The more things change the more they stay the same. Also, meltdowns.
Jo-Ryan Salazar
Guest
Which is why I have Colombia winning.
Jo-Ryan Salazar
Guest
Three reasons why I am tipping Colombia. 1. The African delegates. Black Lives Matter. 2. The social media meltdown and investigation demands from armchair observers. 3. 1. and 2. and Because I Say So!
Roberto Bettega
Roar Rookie
Waz you appear to be forgetting that ours is now the sole Asian bid. You cannot be suggesting in all seriousness that there is more kudos to expanding the womens game in South American than expanding it in Asia??
13th Man
Roar Rookie
New Zealand being involved makes the bid stronger. It guarantees the OFC votes and having it spread over two confederations makes it a more interesting proposition. If it was just Aus v Colombia I doubt we would stand a chance.
Stevo
Roar Rookie
Yes, it's not in the bag until it's in the bag. Some have pointed to EUFA siding with Colombia. It appears that "UEFA and CONMEBOL renewed their memorandum of understanding in February, promising “an enhanced collaboration in a variety of domains to foster the development and growth of football on both continents”." https://www.footballparadise.com/uefa-members-could-vote-for-colombia-to-host-next-womens-world-cup/ So UEFA might be inclined to vote for Colombia to demonstrate their commitment to the MOU. Who knows but we'll find out tomorrow.
13th Man
Roar Rookie
There's been several articles I've seen this morning about it. The Guardian and Fox Sports two of the ones I've seen. Not generally always reliable sources but when multiple sources are confirming as much I'd say it's more likely to be true than untrue.
Rodger King
Roar Rookie
What is your link to the UEFA position? It isn't something I've seen or heard about and I've been following it pretty closely now.
Rodger King
Roar Rookie
I'm confused Waz, i know that's easily done, but are you saying that the reach and growth of the game will be greater in South America if Columbia are hosting it than the growth and reach in Oceania and Asia if Aust/NZ host it? I'm not convinced it will be, I understand that is just an opinion on you part, however, South America have hosted several World Cup events, albeit the men's game, and we here in Asia and Oceania haven't. We all know that we can take nothing for granted when it comes to FIFA and their voting practices, and I'm not sure where Jamesb heard that UEFA were fully supportive of the South American's bid over ours.
Nick
Roar Guru
This post would be good if any of it were true and backed up by fact. Instead, it's the ramblings of a fool.
Nick
Roar Guru
I'm inclined to agree. I can also see Qatar getting it.
NoMates
Guest
It will be New Zealand's fault if we lose this bid, they have done sweet fk all for there bid where as Australian has been pushing things along in great time. The biggest fall is New Zealand leeching off Australia and pushing for the return of Australia back to Oceania. New Zealand's government want nothing to do with the bid because its not Rugby.
Brian
Guest
Its all down to the 7 CAF votes. AFC/OFC is 9 for ANZ bid. Infantino himself makes it 10 CONEMBOL & Central America is 7 votes for Colombia. UEFA and USA/Canada is 14 votes which I expect most but not all to go to Colombia. USA, Canada, England, Italy & France all vote and we would be a good chance since we have the higher rated technical bid. Even if we only got 1 another + CAF 7 that would get us to the win with 18. Alternatively even if we got 5 or 6 from NATO but lost CAF we would lose on 15/16. So its all on the 7 CAF votes
Nick Symonds
Guest
MARKET SIZE: Australia + New Zealand = 30 million people Australia + New Zealand + Rest of Oceania = 42 million Colombia = 50 million South America = 422 million Central America = 44 million South America + Central America = 466 million North, South and Central Americas = 1 billion Asia + Oceania = 4.5 billion - There's plenty of growth potential in our region too you know. But it does seem like it could be a case of FIFA + EUFA = Colombia
clipper
Roar Rookie
Comprehensive review. Surely it has to be taken into account how much effort and growth has happened to women's sport in Australia compared to Columbia.
Waz
Roar Rookie
You misread football - it’s a global game not restricted to one or two States in a small country like Australia. Playing the tournament in Colombia will extend the reach of the womens game in South America. That’s got to be high up on the list of priorities. Colombia only need to deliver a good tournament it doesn’t have to be the best.
13th Man
Roar Rookie
Just can only see Colombia winning this. UEFA are supporting the Colombian bid, that is huge. I think FIFA are probably more interested in building Women's football in South America than in AUS/NZ where it's already quite strong. Sorry to say but I think Colombia has it.
Nick
Roar Guru
The timezone issue both works for and against the ANZ bid. The games are going to played across a 4 hour block of timezones (Perth to Auckland). The real time difference between NZ and the West Coast of America is 4-5 hours, and 7-8 to the East coast. Any midday match in NZ is smack bang in East Coast prime time, any mid afternoon match is smack bang in West Coast prime time. Australian afternoon matches and evening matches line up perfectly for Asia (obviously), the middle east and are sensible for Europe. Everyone actually gets a fair shake. But, what impacts Australia and NZ the most is that Europeans will always view us as isolated backwater posts. Always have, always will.
jamesb
Roar Guru
Ok, hypothetically, if Colombia had the superior bid, would Aust/NZ still have a chance? Anyway, whatever evaluation reports have been submitted , it all comes down to the lottery of voting. A penalty shootout.