As is the case in the aftermath of any significant moment in human history, the identification of winners and losers will take place.
It will be no different in the afterglow of the Women’s World Cup.
Spain will be the most obvious winner, raising a trophy that was probably not predictable at the start of the tournament, particularly after all the turmoil that had taken place within the squad during 2022.
Good on the Spanish federation for backing a coach that is obviously up to the task and full credit to a group of players containing individuals that were only included due to the absence of others.
The Matildas are obvious winners, along with Sweden, despite the Scandinavians’ continued frustration at not being able to break through at a World Cup. For their consistency alone they are to be admired.
From a team perspective, the United States are obvious losers, bundled out in the Round of 16 amidst a heck of a lot of hoo-haa and messaging around social and political issues that did nothing more than distract the team. That much was clear.
Netherlands and Germany also walk away from the tournament disappointed. Early exists for both whilst sitting inside the top 10 on the FIFA women’s rankings was not what either had planned. Credit to Japan and Colombia, who both looked good for some time during the tournament yet just lacked that touch of class in the big moments.
Colombia’s Linda Caicedo. (Photo by Maddie Meyer – FIFA/FIFA via Getty Images)
Honourable mentions to Nigeria and Morocco, whose groundbreaking performances will have made a serious impact on their respective populations. Perhaps the biggest winner of all was Philippines, who debuted, won a match and continue their meteoric rise. Sadly for them, coach Alen Stajcic has moved on and the Filipinas’ loss will be Perth Glory’s gain.
FIFA come out of the World Cup looking rosy. Pre-tournament concerns around the Americans’ desire to make stances on issues would no doubt have had them worried, yet with the armband issues tidied up just prior to the opening match in the most politically-correct manner, the event ran seamlessly across both host nations.
Nearly 2 million attendees easily surpassed the previous record, ratings were astonishing and the visual backdrop provided in excellent weather and with mostly full stadiums, captured the attention of the globe and no doubt, when all the figures are released, will translate into the most successful Women’s World Cup ever.
Domestically, the biggest winner was Channel Seven, after it picked up the rights when Network 10 baulked at the $5 million dollar price tag, despite holding the rights to football played in Australia, and international matches outside of the World Cup for both the men’s and women’s national teams.
Nice one, 10. Talk about dropping the ball.
Channel Seven executives will be doing cartwheels through the offices, knowing that their investment could well return itself multiple times over. Needless to say, FIFA’s corporate partners will be grinning like Cheshire cats.
The Seven commentary team also performed well. John Aloisi, Heather Garriock, Elise Kellond-Knight and other ex-professionals brought the credibility and despite Mel McLaughlin often being cringy and clumsy with her expression, Bruce McAvaney silenced many a pre-tournament critic, with a polished display based on preparation and experience.
The fans were big winners. Despite a few public transport concerns, the matches were played in safe environments, tickets bought early on were reasonably priced and the experience was one that most people will take with them to the grave, such was the excitement of the month.
Big losers were every other sport taking place in Australia whenever the Matildas were in action. Ratings would have taken a whack, as international football involving an Australian team was played in prime time, such a rare occurrence.
Although FIFA did well to allow AFL fans to dream of what could be, as they watched the global spectacle on big screens whilst attending matches last Saturday night.
The Matildas will have enhanced their reputations and those not playing in the top two or three leagues in the world will have drawn attention to their performances.
(Photo by Justin Setterfield/Getty Images)
Cortnee Vine will stick with Sydney FC for now, as will Clare Hunt with Western Sydney, yet it seems outrageous that both will not find themselves in Europe fairly soon.
Kyra Cooney-Cross has drawn plaudits for her performances and is another likely bound for the Women’s Super League in the UK.
The Legacy ’23 funding initiative helped with infrastructure in the lead-up to the tournament and the $207.7 million has hopefully been wisely spent. However, the wave of support from ex-players, media, football executives and the Matildas themselves, for the urgent need to fund the game more enthusiastically, particularly at the grassroots level, has become deafening to the point of being a din.
And it is about time. We have been citing the disproportionate funding given to sports such as swimming and basketball for many years and 2023/24 will see no significant improvement in what football will receive from the Australian Sports Commission; a paltry $1.9 million and well off the numbers allocated to others.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s proposed $200 million investment into continued infrastructure building and assistance for women’s sport is promising, yet its execution will be key in terms of seeing just where the money heads and subsequently having a tangible impact on football at the park level.
Right now, there are a heck of a lot winners, with few disappointed outside of the nations who failed to meet high expectations. However, there is one group still yet to benefit; perhaps the most important group of all.
The thousands of young girls who have taken up the game of football, and the many more set to do so after the inspiration of the World Cup, have gained nothing at this point, aside from that inspiration.
They need fields, change rooms, better access to the game, cheaper registration fees, kits designed for female players and a safe supportive environment in which to play.
Achieving all of the above would be the biggest win of all, and not the fat cats rolling around in their money after such a corporate and emotional success. All Australian football needs now is the will and the financial support.
Sydneysider
Roar Rookie
I've posted this already, outside of the final, the women's cricket world cup had 22 matches at an average of just under 2,300. women's football world cup - average 30,000+ for 64 games. Multiple games above 40,000 across Australia and NZ. women's cricket world cup? just the one match above 10,000 - the final. chalk and cheese. not even in the same ballpark. Next.
Grem
Roar Rookie
How many teams in a cricket world? 8-10? Let’s call it a cup.
Munro Mike
Roar Rookie
#pete4 It's about the trajectory of women's sport......in Australia. That final - - was a big moment. Very much on the back of a home world cup. Sadly lost somewhat in the fog of covid - however for those attending/watching - - it was a watershed moment in this country and arguably made the WWC a little less surprising. And as I mentioned - - throw in the subsequent rise of the Womens IPL and the big money to many of Australia's top female cricketers and the 'game changing' had already well and truly begun. That's all. The Matilda's have taken it to the next level - - very much on the back of the home WC.
Buddy
Roar Rookie
Stuart, I want to pick up on the whole business of the proposal to spend a few hundred million dollars on grassroots football and facilities for females. On the one hand, I am cheering at the idea of the investment being promised but on the other I balk at the idea of how it will be distributed. I hear that there will be a panel of sports experts appointed to oversee grants. The burning question for me is how the money will be split between states? who needs most money? Will it be according to registration numbers and doled out on a pro rata basis? We keep hearing about the need for changing room facilities and better quality fields but those two issues are problems across grass roots as a whole and apply equally to both sexes. The crux of the issue concerning fields and facilities is that with a few exceptions they are owned and managed by local councils and therefore any expenditure will have to go through that channel and in my experience they have a habit of spending ways more money than necessary employing contractors that often do sub standard work or use materials that just waste money so everything gets inflated. I can just see an awful lot of money going down the “gurgler” with not a lot to show for it. To me, the biggest challenge for players is the pathway or lack of that gets you to the Matildas or the Socceroos. We live in a society where in football, like so many other areas of life, we don’t necessarily develop the most gifted and talented, we develop the ones that can afford to play. Whilst the a League clubs joined the NPL and youth development with the promise of no fees, they are in a small minority with all the major players (and here I’m talking NSW ) charging astronomical fees for our young players in order to pay match fees for their first grade players and maybe reserves. Typical fees for the season sit at close to $3000 in registration fees and so the first thing you have to consider is whether a family can afford for a player to have a go at playing beyond grass roots. Personally, I’d sooner see the money spent on centres of excellence right throughout the states - based on number of players. You build good facilities and employ good people and attract the best because they don’t have to pay. The centres are formed into a league and that is where the competition comes from. I totally get that this might not work in smaller states and it is Sydney centric but this is where the numbers are. We could have 12 centres in Sydney, the same number as associations and the smallest association has over 10.000 registered players and some closer to 18000 so there is a large pool to draw from and now you have the makings of a clear and meaningful pathway. What about grassroots? - well that is where you draw from and its available to all. Meanwhile, local facilities have to be dealt with in the traditional way but with more support from the national and state bodies and various levels of government.
Kangas
Roar Rookie
England women cane 4 th last World Cup and still decided to change their coach. Have since won the euros and 2 nd in World Cup with their best 3 players missing. Better to be ahead of the game, if a better coach is available then it’s worth some consideration.
pete4
Roar Rookie
Not sure you can compare this as being similar to ICC womens WC cricket in 2020. Total attendance: 136,549 (includes the 85k final)
Football is Life
Roar Rookie
Stu, this is so true, and as someone who's been around football for well over 40 years, I will believe it when I see it. Is there a politician in this country outside of Lambie and Pocock, who actually deliver on what they say? I will irk me no end if those plonkers funnel the better part of the funding into AFL and NRL because they are the sports governance personnel support. That's flat out bias. I am no economic guru swami, but you would suggest that it's a case of supply and demand. If the surge in participation estimated comes to fruition, that means we will exceed the 2 million participants mark. You really have to question the effectiveness of the education undertaken by our politicians if they don't see votes in that lot. My 16yr old nephew constantly and intelligently questions the decisions made by our governance personnel, and he hasn't even voted yet.!!!! I was disappointed that 10 didn't build on the Paramount construct by securing the rights. Image what it would have done for them. Maybe one of the 10 execs is related to one of our federal politicians? Bottom line is that A) paying customers got out of their seats at the MCG to go out the back and watch the Matildas B) We filled stadium after stadium, after stadium and I reckon there were a few backyard code kids sweating it C) the news was nothing but the Matildas and backyard codes were relegated to second and third in the pickings. D) the Australian public have had one heck of a positive experience so watch the crowds for our girls at the Olympic and Asian Cup qualifiers E) A truck load of parents will want their kids both boys and girls, to play football F) Australia is now on the football radar. As Chris1 said to me this we need to stop saying Australia is not a football nation. Now it officially is!! In closing, you watch how much leeching, copying, imitation etc there is from the other codes to try and benefit from ours. It's pretty cheap and tawdry, but as they say, imitation is the cheapest form of flattery.
Kangas
Roar Rookie
No doubt the Socceroos brand suffered over the last 20 years because of lack of home internationals imo , although there is still a lot of support and interest . The men’s soccer calendar is incredibly busy . I’m hoping that the Socceroos get 5-6 home games a year from now on .
Grem
Roar Rookie
The Socceroos also had great viewing figures at the last World Cup, despite the games being on at ridiculous times and they had live sites as well. The both teams are followed by many and not just “theatre goers” / “circus has left town”(not cynical either?) Perhaps I should have written – I don’t know how many people I know could name one AFL player, besides Buddy Franklin. And that’s with all the saturation.
Lionheart
Roar Rookie
pleased they've finally realised there's more than Sam Kerr in the team
Grem
Roar Rookie
That’s not an investment by the AFL, that’s a giant subsidy from governments TO the AFL. The more it is thrown around the more sickening it is - 200 million for ALL female sport and 250 million for the AFL stadium. It’s actually quite a shameful effort by our federal government, but I know you won’t think so.
Munro Mike
Roar Rookie
#Grem What's cynical about my remark? The reality is that the Matilda's have had some saturation prime time coverage over the last fortnight and unprecedented numbers of people have been seeing the players both live at the ground, on tv, at live sites etc. Many, many sports 'theatre goers'. The Socceroos have never had that sort of coverage - even in 2006 when we all knew Viduka and Kewell. So again - - how does the game go about grabbing hold of them now the circus has left town?
Kangas
Roar Rookie
Stuart says “ Netherlands and Germany also walk away from the tournament disappointed. Early exists for both whilst sitting inside the top 10 on the FIFA women’s rankings was not what either had planned.“ The Netherlands are a top 10 , they made the final eight , on that logic they actually overachieved they were undefeated in the group stages, they took eventual champions Spain to extra time and lost by one goal, their best player arsenals meidermeir was out with an acl . I never heard any expert tip them to do as well as did .
Grem
Roar Rookie
Responding to your cynical remark.
Munro Mike
Roar Rookie
I'm worried for you and your infatuation with the game of Australian Football. You seem obsessed with it - - you can't run a conversation without dragging it into it no matter how irrelevant.
Munro Mike
Roar Rookie
#Grem And how much did SA/FFA/FA invest into Stadium Australia? or into Hindmarsh? or into Lang Park? That $15 million you dismiss so readily......when's the last time Soccer in Australia directly invested $15 million into a public asset???
Grem
Roar Rookie
More than could name the Australian Rules national captain.
Grem
Roar Rookie
Wow – 15 million out of over 700 million. They certainly know how to stretch their dollars. I wish I could do the same at a supermarket! Just google the stadium – it’s basically called the AFL stadium. Yes, after it’s built for the AFL some other groups will be able to use it … providing it doesn’t interfere with AFL! That’s how other AFL grounds work.
Munro Mike
Roar Rookie
#Grem Why don't you set up the Matilda's in Hobart and lobby for money for a stadium for them. Better still - - share the new Macquarie Point one with the AFL and whomever else becomes a tenant of a publicly available asset (to which the AFL will have contributed funds)........Hindmarsh Stadium for example - got $52 million from the SA state Govt......how much did FA put into it? (I'm guessing SFA). Now while you can play soccer, rugby, cricket and AFL at the proposed Macquarie Point stadium......Hindmarsh is very much more limited - isn't it. With no RU or RL tenants......that was a $52 million soccer grant - - wasn't it. 100% to soccer. Correct???
Grem
Roar Rookie
There’s even a book that’s been written about it – The Matilda Effect. “At Stadium Australia in Sydney, there was a crowd of almost 76,000 for the Matildas’ win against Denmark in the World Cup, and the broadcast of the game became the highest-rating TV program of 2023. An astounding and record-breaking 6.54 million people tuned in to watch them and their next quarter final game against France could break that record again.” They did and then they beat it again! “We always knew it was incredible, and we always hoped for something as good as this but I feel like we’re still pinching ourselves,” says Dr Crawford. “It’s going to take us a while to process just how phenomenal it’s actually been.” Mike, you need to come out of denial!