Latest news from the inside

[Barkly St End]

I've just had lunch with a good mate of mine, who happens to be a senior staffer with one of the Ministers involved in the bid (which spans a number of portfolios).

Needless to say, he is pro-World Cup bid, but he was candid enough to offer the following perspectives from inside the Government camp:

1. It's all Rudd's baby - he is the one driving it.

2. Lowy's got Rudd in his back pocket.

3. The original appropriation for the bid of $46 million, has already blown out to well over $100 million in actual expenditure, and is climbing rapidly.

4. Virtually all of the Ministers involved in the bid, in one capacity or another, are aussie rules supporters, and their main motivation at the moment is to see money directed to the further development of ovals (for footy and cricket). They otherwise have zero interest in soccer and the World Cup, and the whole trade question has not even come into their internal discussions.

5. There is wide acknowledgement amongst Government ranks that building large rectangular stadiums are a waste of public money - spending on the World Cup can only be justified if its directed to stadiums to be used by the AFL (in terms of long term use).

6. It's acknowledged that we don't stand a chance in 2018, but that we have a reasonable chance in 2022, with only the US being our main opposition (although interestingly, my mate was unaware that the US had hosted as recently as 1994).

7. Following on from the last point, none of Rudd, or his Ministers, know anything about soccer, the World Cup, FIFA, or anything related - they are going into this absolutely blind.

8. He also confirmed that all the states know that it's Rudd's baby and that he's waving the blank cheque and that SA, WA and the ACT, in particular, are not really interested in spending a cent on it. Rudd will have to come up with all of the money.

Ellis' taskforce was set up primarily to deal with the last point, but it's hard to imagine how they can except just getting the Federal Government to pay for it.

[Gibbo_88]

What'd you have for lunch?

[Barkly St End]

Originally Posted by Gibbo_88

What'd you have for lunch?

A flat white and a fruit salad!

[WorldCup2022OZ]

Originally Posted by Barkly St End

I've just had lunch with a good mate of mine, who happens to be a senior staffer with one of the Ministers involved in the bid (which spans a number of portfolios).

Needless to say, he is pro-World Cup bid, but he was candid enough to offer the following perspectives from inside the Government camp:

1. It's all Rudd's baby - he is the one driving it.
Nope - the whole country is behind it
2. Lowy's got Rudd in his back pocket.
Yeah, whatever. Conspiracy theory, here we come. This absurd view only comes from soccer detractors (like yourself)
3. The original appropriation for the bid of $46 million, has already blown out to well over $100 million in actual expenditure, and is climbing rapidly.
Show me a government funded project that hasn't gone over budget. Nothing abnormal about that.
4. Virtually all of the Ministers involved in the bid, in one capacity or another, are aussie rules supporters, and their main motivation at the moment is to see money directed to the further development of ovals (for footy and cricket). They otherwise have zero interest in soccer and the World Cup, and the whole trade question has not even come into their internal discussions.
Yes, im sure all of the ministers from NSW and QLD are ardent AFL lovers. Besides, whether or not they have interest in soccer is not their job. Their job is to organise major events.
5. There is wide acknowledgement amongst Government ranks that building large rectangular stadiums are a waste of public money - spending on the World Cup can only be justified if its directed to stadiums to be used by the AFL (in terms of long term use).
No - that is your footy tinged glasses view. AFL have no influence on Canberra, EAS, Robina, Suncorp or DairyFarmers. Otherwise, multipurpose stadiums are the way to go. The victorian government expects to recoup the costs on SSS within 5 years, by the way, and then sell it to a private operator. Good piece of business IMO.
6. It's acknowledged that we don't stand a chance in 2018, but that we have a reasonable chance in 2022, with only the US being our main opposition (although interestingly, my mate was unaware that the US had hosted as recently as 1994).
Bravo - you got one correct
7. Following on from the last point, none of Rudd, or his Ministers, know anything about soccer, the World Cup, FIFA, or anything related - they are going into this absolutely blind.
That's why they had someone write and report and study into the benefits of hosting a World Cup. You do need to do that in this country, you know. That's the law.
8. He also confirmed that all the states know that it's Rudd's baby and that he's waving the blank cheque and that SA, WA and the ACT, in particular, are not really interested in spending a cent on it. Rudd will have to come up with all of the money.

Ellis' taskforce was set up primarily to deal with the last point, but it's hard to imagine how they can except just getting the Federal Government to pay for it.

State governments are negotiating for their share of the proposed World Cup stadium fund. Once they get what they want, they will then proceed with their funding of the event.

For the record, what is the name of this supposed minister you supposedly had lunch with?

[Barkly St End]

Originally Posted by WorldCup2022OZ

For the record, what is the name of this supposed minister you supposedly had lunch with?

I did not say I had lunch with a Minister. Nothing like it.

[WorldCup2022OZ]

Originally Posted by Barkly St End

I did not say I had lunch with a Minister. Nothing like it.

What is the name of this supposed minister that has these supposed views then?

[scotto_01]

Originally Posted by Barkly St End

I've just had lunch with a good mate of mine, who happens to be a senior staffer with one of the Ministers involved in the bid (which spans a number of portfolios).

Needless to say, he is pro-World Cup bid, but he was candid enough to offer the following perspectives from inside the Government camp:

1. It's all Rudd's baby - he is the one driving it.
BULLSHIT
rudd may want it, but its lowys baby, vision and dream

2. Lowy's got Rudd in his back pocket.
meh, you need govt support in these bids

3. The original appropriation for the bid of $46 million, has already blown out to well over $100 million in actual expenditure, and is climbing rapidly.
again meh. if your claiming the money is being used for improper means id say thats wrong too.

4. Virtually all of the Ministers involved in the bid, in one capacity or another, are aussie rules supporters, and their main motivation at the moment is to see money directed to the further development of ovals (for footy and cricket). They otherwise have zero interest in soccer and the World Cup, and the whole trade question has not even come into their internal discussions.
so, who cares what the ministers prefered sport is

5. There is wide acknowledgement amongst Government ranks that building large rectangular stadiums are a waste of public money - spending on the World Cup can only be justified if its directed to stadiums to be used by the AFL (in terms of long term use).
oh yes, your the only sport that matters in australia . get off your high horse and realise you got competion, not just from football. also, how can you claim upgraded rectangle stadia doesnt benefit the rugby codes. ffs look beyond your own code (and city?) and see the sporting landscape in other cities, rectangle stadiums are relevent.

6. It's acknowledged that we don't stand a chance in 2018, but that we have a reasonable chance in 2022, with only the US being our main opposition (although interestingly, my mate was unaware that the US had hosted as recently as 1994).
well duh- englands got 2018, aslong as all of europe votes together.

7. Following on from the last point, none of Rudd, or his Ministers, know anything about soccer, the World Cup, FIFA, or anything related - they are going into this absolutely blind.
so what? rudd doesnt need to know anything about football, the ffa, and particularly frank lowy know everything that needs to be known

8. He also confirmed that all the states know that it's Rudd's baby and that he's waving the blank cheque and that SA, WA and the ACT, in particular, are not really interested in spending a cent on it. Rudd will have to come up with all of the money.

again, its lowy's baby and vision, not rudds. maybe rudd wants it aswell, but id guarantee not as much as lowy.

Ellis' taskforce was set up primarily to deal with the last point, but it's hard to imagine how they can except just getting the Federal Government to pay for it.

im sensing alot of fear on this forum about the world cup bid, couple of questions

1) do you honestly believe that australia hosting a world cup will change the sporting landscape?
2) futhermore, do you really think it will have severe negative effects the afl, like some of the media believe (eg- herlald scum)?
3) is it that hard for the afl to restructure their season to have a 6 week gap?
4) do you think its worthwile continuing your season while the world cup is on?

[Barkly St End]

Originally Posted by scotto_01

im sensing alot of fear on this forum about the world cup bid, couple of questions

1) do you honestly believe that australia hosting a world cup will change the sporting landscape?
2) futhermore, do you really think it will have severe negative effects the afl, like some of the media believe (eg- herlald scum)?
3) is it that hard for the afl to restructure their season to have a 6 week gap?
4) do you think its worthwile continuing your season while the world cup is on?

Are these directed at me?

1. The Government position is that it won't - that's why they are planning stadiums that can be used by the AFL post WC.

2. It would be silly for anyone to think it would not have a sever financial effect on the AFL, I'm not sure how anyone could argue otherwise.

3. You say 6 weeks, most experts are citing 8 to 10 weeks; and the rectangularisation of the MCG was more like 16 to 20 weeks - that's a lot of resctructuring!

4. Only someone North of the Murray would truly believe that the WC would completely swamp the AFL if they ran side by side.

ps you lose a lot of credibility by coming on to an aussie rules forum and opening with Hill's "smell the fear" garbage. I mean, honestly, do you really think AFL fans in Melbourne, Adelaide and Perth are truly smelling the fear??

[scotto_01]

Originally Posted by Barkly St End

Are these directed at me?

1. The Government position is that it won't - that's why they are planning stadiums that can be used by the AFL post WC.

2. It would be silly for anyone to think it would not have a sever financial effect on the AFL, I'm not sure how anyone could argue otherwise.

3. You say 6 weeks, most experts are citing 8 to 10 weeks; and the rectangularisation of the MCG was more like 16 to 20 weeks - that's a lot of resctructuring!

4. Only someone North of the Murray would truly believe that the WC would completely swamp the AFL if they ran side by side.

ps you lose a lot of credibility by coming on to an aussie rules forum and opening with Hill's "smell the fear" garbage. I mean, honestly, do you really think AFL fans in Melbourne, Adelaide and Perth are truly smelling the fear??

not directed at you, just open questions

the mcg restructre wont happen, its pointless and a waste of money.

hills "smell the fear" garbage???

and yes, i do sense fear from afl supporters about the world cup bid, why else is there a sub forum about it on an afl forum?

[WorldCup2022OZ]

Originally Posted by scotto_01

not directed at you, just open questions

the mcg restructre wont happen, its pointless and a waste of money.

hills "smell the fear" garbage???

and yes, i do sense fear from afl supporters about the world cup bid, why else is there a sub forum about it on an afl forum?

Excellent point.

[Barkly St End]

Originally Posted by scotto_01

and yes, i do sense fear from afl supporters about the world cup bid, why else is there a sub forum about it on an afl forum?

If we retain our stadiums and run our normal season, there'd be no problem from the AFL perspective (there'd be the usual questions as a taxpayer)

[WorldCup2022OZ]

Originally Posted by Barkly St End

If we retain our stadiums and run our normal season, there'd be no problem from the AFL perspective (there'd be the usual questions as a taxpayer)

I think everyone on here knows that the AFL season will need to have some scheduling changes if the World Cup goes ahead, but it will still run.

[scotto_01]

Originally Posted by Barkly St End

If we retain our stadiums and run our normal season, there'd be no problem from the AFL perspective (there'd be the usual questions as a taxpayer)

so provided you get your own way its all good, thats not gonna happen

been over this before, your going to lose the 2 in melb, adelaide oval and possibly subiaco.

run your normal season, i cannot see that happening or being feisable. start the regular season at the time of the nab cup(surely can be sacraficed for 1 year?) , thats 4 weeks made up right there.

then maybe get creative and play 1 game a week on wednesday for a period of 8 weeks, that makes up another round.

[WorldCup2022OZ]

off topic, HAURITZ WHAT A ****ING CATCH!!! Pity he broke his finger!!!

[Admiral Byng]

Originally Posted by scotto_01

so provided you get your own way its all good, thats not gonna happen

been over this before, your going to lose the 2 in melb, adelaide oval and possibly subiaco.

run your normal season, i cannot see that happening or being feisable. start the regular season at the time of the nab cup(surely can be sacraficed for 1 year?) , thats 4 weeks made up right there.

then maybe get creative and play 1 game a week on wednesday for a period of 8 weeks, that makes up another round.

The same could be said for the FFA and their World Cup bid. It just isn't that important for Australia to host the event that everyone else needs to step aside and bend over backwards to help out the FFA. It is a luxury we don't really need, and I for one would rather we just quietly forget withdraw the bid. It is too expensive and too distruptive.