AFL seeks compensation for World Cup disruption

[DaVe86]

From what I can tell, this is so far a 50/50 debate. I think it has been a good one too and it is what this board is about. Nothing wrong with a heated debate.


So far, on this board, I think 50% would want to host a world cup, 50% dont.

But this is an AFL centered board, so in the general public, I reckon that it would be more like 75% would want the cup, 25% wouldn't. Obviously no facts on the matter, just what I think would be the case.


Therefore, opinions like the earlier poster that said "fifa can accomdate the afl or go get f###'d are just so stupid.


We have not won the cup yet. We are bidding. FIFA have set their rules. Despite the fact that they are very onerous rules, the government has still bidded.

It is not in a position to bid whilst imposing conditions. FIFA may be sporting's equivalent to Hitler, but at the end it is Australia that has to suck up to it if they want to host the cup. ANd i'd think the majority of people in Australia would be right behind a cup being held in Aus.




I was accused earlier of laying the blame on the AFL. I am doing no such thing. So far, all I've heard out of the AFL is that they'd like some compensation...which is a fair request.


My point out of this whole argument is that the bid is going to happen. And I have a feeling that FIFA would be very interested in hosting a cup in Aus, especially that we are now around the top 15 nations in the game.


I'm not saying whether we should host the cup or not. All I am discussing is what should the AFL do IF we win the bid?? My opinion is that they should not get in the way.

 

[Dasher39]

so are you seriously, hand on heart, suggesting that a bugeria/cameroon (say) match will out rate a richmond/cartlon match in Melbourne ?

Without a shadow of a doubt and you suggesting otherwise just highlights your lack of understanding of the World Cup.

To quote you "LOL, just LOL". Of course the AFL is a major competition & would be regarded as such by FIFA.

Because in the eyes of FIFA it's not, it's just a regional Football tournament. Don't forget the MLB was allowed to continue in 1994 when the USA hosted the World Cup.

The MLB in America is bigger than the AFL in Australia.

Chuq has already answered the other question as to why Australia should host the World Cup. Asia is where the new money is at in the world of Football and has only ever hosted one World Cup.

When they announce 2018-2022, IMO, they'll go for one "traditional" country (i.e. England) and one new frontier (i.e. Australia) and they'll announce 2022 so early to give that new frontier that extra few years to get ready.

 

[sherb]

Without a shadow of a doubt and you suggesting otherwise just highlights your lack of understanding of the World Cup.

Because in the eyes of FIFA it's not, it's just a regional Football tournament. Don't forget the MLB was allowed to continue in 1994 when the USA hosted the World Cup.

The MLB in America is bigger than the AFL in Australia.

A "regional football tournament" shouldn't be the slightest distraction at all to the biggest show on earth should it?

If so then, there shouldn't be any issue with the AFL continuing on with their season during the World Cup then, should there?

 

[Chuq]

Why is FIFA scared of a little competition if Soccer is all so powerful then they can go head to head.

It's not about competition, it's about logistics. When the World Cup comes to town, it puts a huge demand on accommodation, airports, roads, security, restaurants/bars, media, communications, and so on. Obviously events such as the Ashes and Wimbledon being on at the same time would cause undue strain on the system.

Now the question is, would AFL/NRL have the same issue? Unsure. People may occasionally travel for away games (and for Melbourne supporters most of your away games are in your home city anyway). Remember, no-one has publicly been able to confirm that AFL/NRL home-and-away matches are classed as a 'major sporting event' for this purpose.

 

[jihg]

It's not about competition, it's about logistics. When the World Cup comes to town, it puts a huge demand on accommodation, airports, roads, security, restaurants/bars, media, communications, and so on. Obviously events such as the Ashes and Wimbledon being on at the same time would cause undue strain on the system.

Now the question is, would AFL/NRL have the same issue? Unsure. People may occasionally travel for away games (and for Melbourne supporters most of your away games are in your home city anyway). Remember, no-one has publicly been able to confirm that AFL/NRL home-and-away matches are classed as a 'major sporting event' for this purpose.

Logistically no problems media can cover both if they went head to head home and away games wouldn't place much pressure and I have no doubts both could be easily accommodated in those regards.

If FIFA didn't class AFL or NRL as a major sport and they were to be played at the same time then as the AFL has a contract with the MCG FIFA would gladly work around that then would they? To me it isn't a problem with can they play it is an issue of where they can play.

 

[Chuq]

so are you seriously, hand on heart, suggesting that a bugeria/cameroon (say) match will out rate a richmond/cartlon match in Melbourne ?

To follow up on what Dasher39 said, only about 3 or 4 matches at 2006 WC didn't sell out. Some of the "minnow" nations (I presume that's what you mean when you say Bulgaria/Cameroon):

Ukraine v Tunisia - 72k sellout
Togo v Switzerland - 65k sellout
Cote d'Ivoire v Serbia & Montenegro - 66k sellout

By the way, the last time Cameroon played in Australia - not even their senior team, their under-23 team - the attendance was 110k.

 

[greennick]

From what I can tell, this is so far a 50/50 debate. I think it has been a good one too and it is what this board is about. Nothing wrong with a heated debate.


So far, on this board, I think 50% would want to host a world cup, 50% dont.

But this is an AFL centered board, so in the general public, I reckon that it would be more like 75% would want the cup, 25% wouldn't. Obviously no facts on the matter, just what I think would be the case.

So much flawed logic in this comment it is not funny. People on this board are also obviously sports fans, so it is reasonable to assume many would like soccer as well. In real life though there are many people that don't care for sport at all, this would probably be more than 25% of the population for sure. Then there would be those that don't give a crap about soccer, but like other sports. However, this would be partially offset by those who think it would be good for the economy (though this is debateable) and those who would directly benefit from it, who would probably support it even if they don't like soccer. There are so many factors here a simple analysis like yours is flawed to say the least.

 

[Here2tellyouwhy]

If FIFA force the AFL to put a season on stop for 3 months surely it will start a bloody war.

Honestly, after the wog diving incident in the last world cup, plus the "hand of god" Maradonna thing and now the French guy who said he handballed on purpose, I dont want the game in my country let alone pushing a perfectly good sport like aussie rules aside to display that poor effort of sportsmanship to every corner of the globe.

In a whole WC there might be 100 goals or something. In 3 months of footy it would be more like 2000+

I'd rather watch the footy thats for sure.

Its not the end of the world thats for sure and as long as I can play footy and the local leauges are still on I wont even know theres something on.

Might have to skip a channel on my TV for 3 months but thats ok.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

AFL won't block the WC, but they are entitled to compensation, the same as if "Freds Hardware Store " would be entitled to compesation if they were forced to cease trading for a period of time.
They will also be entitled to payout of any stadium contracts they have in place.

Europe has 730 million people. The WC in germany attracted less than 1% of this population from outside Germany. They didn't all stay in $300/night hotel rooms they stayed in billot accommodation, tents whatever. Some of them didn't go to the WC events at all. They hung out and watched it on big screens.

It would not be the same in Australia.

 

[mickctiger]

To follow up on what Dasher39 said, only about 3 or 4 matches at 2006 WC didn't sell out. Some of the "minnow" nations (I presume that's what you mean when you say Bulgaria/Cameroon):

so how would it be different in Melbourne, vis a vis matches played between "minnow" nations,. when compared to two rivals in a sport that the locals new and cared about ?

Ukraine v Tunisia - 72k sellout
Togo v Switzerland - 65k sellout
Cote d'Ivoire v Serbia & Montenegro - 66k sellout

o.k. but that was in Germany (in their off season) a country that has a tradition of playing soccer(and even then some games were still not sell outs), and here were it would be held during our football season and where we don't have a soccer tradition.

By the way, the last time Cameroon played in Australia - not even their senior team, their under-23 team - the attendance was 110k.

would they still attract that playing Bulgeria on a drizzly winters night at the MCG ?

 

[mickctiger]

My hunch?
we may very well being awarded the rights to stage the event, However, I reckon it wont be held during the "traditional" june/july time period.
Why?
because the last thing that FIFA would want would be the spectacle of a Uraguy Vs Bahrain at the MCG being played during a winter storm and 12 degree day in front of less than 60,000. all beamed live into the loungerooms of Europe at 3 am.

 

[blueblooded]

Bam!! That's it. I'm happy to support any code. I love sport. The government/FFA want to disrupt AFL/NRL/Super 15 for the benefit of soccer, because almighty and conquering FIFA can't handle working out a solution that profits all. Southern Hemisphere summer world cup, An extended Christmas break for soccer, cricket fixture worked around it.

We're trying to win this bid, one that will benefit our country, and we should go to the organisers of this event and ask them to work around what's best for us??

Possibly the silliest thing i've heard, if Australia wants to win this event and showcase our country to the rest of the world in the process we'll bow to whatever FIFA wants us to do, it is their tournament not ours, they will award it to the country who'll accommodate it best, if we want to start challenging their rules and protocol they'll take it to another country who'll happily play by the rules.

 

[Mars II]

if Australia wants to win this event and showcase our country to the rest of the world in the process we'll bow to whatever FIFA wants us to do, it is their tournament not ours, they will award it to the country who'll accommodate it best, if we want to start challenging their rules and protocol they'll take it to another country who'll happily play by the rules.

Thats exacly why we shouldnt host the world cup and to be frank i'd be happy to never see the world cup played in australia if they want to stop the football season.

 

[DaVe86]

Remember, Major League Baseball was allowed to continue to be played in the USA in 1994, so I'm sure AFL matches could still be played in cities hosting World Cup matches so long as they're not as the actual grounds being used.

Now, suppose an agreement is reached where the venue limitations are for 8 weeks.

The AFL has an 18-team competition, with 9 games per week normally. Over those 8 weeks, 54 AFL games are scheduled (6,6,6,6,6,6,10 and 8 per week over those eight weeks.) That means every team has 3 byes.

That means it becomes a 25 week season where everyone plays 22 games.

Now surely Telsra Dome would be available as the tournament nears its end. Any big games in Melbourne (quarter-finals, semi-final, or Final) would be at the MCG. The Dome would only be used for group matches, surely.

But putting that aside, we need to find grounds for 54 games over those 8 weeks.

- 5 at Kardinia Park (which is the maximum remembering Geelong, like all teams, has 3 byes)

- 2 at Darwin (One Dogs home game, one Melbourne home game)

- Two at Canberra (say, a Kangaroos home game and Dogs/Dees home game)

- 10 at the SCG (5 home games for GWS and 5 for the Swans.) The SCG is not a world cup venue.

- 5 at Cararra and 5 on the Gold Coast (5 home games for Bris and 5 for the Gold Coast) Surely Suncorp would be the World Cup venue in Brisbane. The World Cup decrees venues have to hold more than 40,000.

- 4 at Launceston (Hawthorn's 4 home games)

- 10 at AAMI or Adelaide Oval (5 home games each for Port and the Crows.) Where would Adelaide World Cup gams be held? A newly built venue?

- 10 at Subiaco ( 5 home games for the Eagles and 5 for Fremantle.) I assume Subi would not be used for World Cup games? Would a new venue be built.

That's 53 games. One game at the Dome after it has ceased being used after the group stage makes 54. In fact, the Dome could probably host 4-5 games after that group stage finishes.

We would have the unusual situation of both Sydney teams having home games in the same round. Same with bribane, Perth and Adelaide, but so what? The most important thing is to get the games scheduled.

It can certainly be done with a bit of creative fixturing and it can be done with the existing venues.

It just means the Victorian venues are maximised during the early part of the season and the later part of the season.

In fact, if the Dome ceases to be used for the last two weeks of the World Cup (after the group stage) you could cram in 4 matches per week at the Dome on Fri, Sat, Sun, Mon for the last two weeks of the World cup tournament making it 8 games at the Dome.

It would no doubt work...but would the AFL really want to go for it??


It would lose so much money in lower crowd atendances and it would get less television and less sponsorship as the focus goes onto the World Cup.


The AFl would not be keen on this. It would have to run at a loss for that year. 3 months of football would be a write-off.


I would think it would be much better for the AFL to start early and finish later, play without competition from soccer, play more night games to deal with the heat (including a night GF as a trial in November).

That way crowds won't be affected and it would still have the sponsorship and television rights.


Your solution would work, but AFL would lose a lot of money as fans move towards soccer for that 3 month period.

 

[DaVe86]

So much flawed logic in this comment it is not funny. People on this board are also obviously sports fans, so it is reasonable to assume many would like soccer as well. In real life though there are many people that don't care for sport at all, this would probably be more than 25% of the population for sure. Then there would be those that don't give a crap about soccer, but like other sports. However, this would be partially offset by those who think it would be good for the economy (though this is debateable) and those who would directly benefit from it, who would probably support it even if they don't like soccer. There are so many factors here a simple analysis like yours is flawed to say the least.

I never claimed any of my comments to be facts. I said that my hunch would be that the majority of people in Australia would be for hosting a world cup.


I'm actually truly suprised by the feedback on this board. I actually thought way more people would be all for us hosting the Cup. Ultimately, I think it is a massive over-reaction to a one off event that will never be coming back again for 100 years.

I agree that AFL is our indigenous sport, and we should never allow soccer to take over. A lot of the morals in soccer are un-Australian...and as a people, I think we look down at a lot of soccers shortcomings.

But there is no denying it is the biggest sport in the world, and it would bring a lot of attention to Australia. And as a one off (and only a one off)...it would be pretty awesome.

I'm happy to follow the Aussies in a World Cup in Aus. I don't care about the soccer any other time, but for 3 months it would be a great ride. Then I'd go back to supporting my Magpies and never give a crap about soccer again.

 

[Hollow Knight]

Going to laugh my ass off when our World Cup bid is unsuccessful.

**** Soccer.

 

[Ron The Bear]

I'm happy to follow the Aussies in a World Cup in Aus. I don't care about the soccer any other time, but for 3 months it would be a great ride.

Except for the fact that the tournament only runs for one month. The sheer volume of media dribble in the lead-up would have me climbing the walls!

 

[Jakko]

We're trying to win this bid, one that will benefit our country, and we should go to the organisers of this event and ask them to work around what's best for us??

Possibly the silliest thing i've heard, if Australia wants to win this event and showcase our country to the rest of the world in the process we'll bow to whatever FIFA wants us to do, it is their tournament not ours, they will award it to the country who'll accommodate it best, if we want to start challenging their rules and protocol they'll take it to another country who'll happily play by the rules.

Fine. Just as you say its their tournament, not ours. Just like its our country, not theirs.


You really wonder what FIFA could gain from hosting it here though. To "grow" the game in a country of 22 million people? Asian TV markets would love it, apart from that theres not a lot of inventive for them to award it to us.

 

[Giants FC]

I never claimed any of my comments to be facts. I said that my hunch would be that the majority of people in Australia would be for hosting a world cup.

At first the idea of hosting a soccer World Cup is attractive and would have a lot of support.
But when the extent of the damage it would do to the AFL/NRL become known to sports fans, and the extent of what it would cost taxpayers become known to non sports fans, I have doubts whether the public support would still be there. And if public opinion swings against the World Cup bid, the government will withdraw their support.

I'm actually truly suprised by the feedback on this board. I actually thought way more people would be all for us hosting the Cup.

Some of us on here follow other sports, including soccer - I'm one of them, although AFL is my number one and if it came to a clash between AFL and another sport I would go for AFL every time.
But this is first and foremost an AFL forum. And when AFL stands to cop such a major financial hit, it's hardly surprising that the reaction among AFL fans is overwhelmingly negative.

 

[Chuq]

so how would it be different in Melbourne, vis a vis matches played between "minnow" nations,. when compared to two rivals in a sport that the locals new and cared about ?

Probably not too different at all (see next reply)

o.k. but that was in Germany (in their off season) a country that has a tradition of playing soccer(and even then some games were still not sell outs), and here were it would be held during our football season and where we don't have a soccer tradition.

It doesn't matter where it is - a significant number of the tickets go to travelling fans of the nations involved. "during our football season" - what does that matter? Most of the people attending wouldn't even know what AFL is. And we certainly do have a soccer tradition - you just choose to exclude yourself from it. Check out the footage of the Green & Gold Army or the Blue & White Brigade (in Melbourne) next time there is a Socceroos or Melb Victory match on TV.

would they still attract that playing Bulgeria on a drizzly winters night at the MCG ?

If those two nations played at the MCG, I would expect it would be a final (just an assumption) in which case, hell yes it would sell out!

 

[Chuq]

Except for the fact that the tournament only runs for one month. The sheer volume of media dribble in the lead-up would have me climbing the walls!

Media dribble? Yeah we couldn't have that. We all know people prefer quality journalism such as where Fevola has been drunk recently, who Wayne Carey has rooted this week and what Ben Cousin's current drug of choice is.

 

[Chuq]

I agree that AFL is our indigenous sport, and we should never allow soccer to take over.

These rules don't obviously apply to New South Wales and Queensland then? Specifically Western Sydney?

 

[Ron The Bear]

Media dribble? Yeah we couldn't have that. We all know people prefer quality journalism such as where Fevola has been drunk recently, who Wayne Carey has rooted this week and what Ben Cousin's current drug of choice is.

Background noise which can be ignored as there is a steady stream of matches to focus on. I don't fancy that being replaced by a 1- or 2-month buildup of a spectacle which, in my eyes, cannot come close to equalling the hype.

 

[finders]

At first the idea of hosting a soccer World Cup is attractive and would have a lot of support.
But when the extent of the damage it would do to the AFL/NRL become known to sports fans, and the extent of what it would cost taxpayers become known to non sports fans, I have doubts whether the public support would still be there. And if public opinion swings against the World Cup bid, the government will withdraw their support.

Thats the nub of the arguement soccer would end up being hated by more people than any that maybe converted.
In any case this event even if if goes to Australia is at least 9 years or more away and thats a long time shit even Collingwood might win a flag in that time LOL.

 

[Ant_]

These rules don't obviously apply to New South Wales and Queensland then? Specifically Western Sydney?

Rugby codes are a English sport...what's your point?

The only Indigenous code is Australian Football