Hosting the World Cup comes with a $2.3b bill, but who willl pay it?

VikingSven

Team Captain
Joined
Dec 17, 2003
Posts
533
Likes
0
Location
Stockholm, Sweden
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
www.axemen.se
Thread starter #1
From the Sydney Morning Herald:

A FUNDING brawl is looming over who will foot the $2.3 billion stadium bill if Australia's 2022 World Cup bid is successful this week.

When football's world governing body FIFA published the full evaluation reports for each of the 2018 and 2022 World Cup bidders last week, it also unveiled a comprehensive breakdown of the costs required to either build or upgrade Australia's 12 designated tournament venues.

The figures, which remained a closely guarded secret until now, reveal a total of almost $400 million would be required in NSW to build a new stadium at Blacktown and revamp facilities at the Sydney Football Stadium, ANZ Stadium and EnergyAustralia Stadium at Newcastle.

While the NSW and federal governments say they are fully committed to turning the World Cup dream into a reality, The Sun-Herald can confirm neither party has dared to raise the crucial topic of funding.

A spokeswoman for Premier Kristina Keneally said: ''All Australian governments would share the benefits, costs and risks of hosting the World Cup in Australia … No further work on costing specific proposals would be undertaken by government until the bid is won.''

The federal government has poured more than $45 million into the World Cup bid and at 2am on Friday FIFA's executive committee members will cast their votes.

If Australia is announced as the host, the federal government will need to decide how much of the $2.3 billion it can afford to cover and, more importantly, how that cash is distributed across the 12 projects without causing rows between the states.

Football Federation Australia architects have said $29 million will be needed to upgrade the Sydney Football Stadium at Moore Park.

While previous media reports suggested ANZ Stadium in Homebush would need a $200 million facelift to host either the opening match or the final, FFA believes the job can be done for as little as $19 million.

The two most expensive projects in NSW would be the new rectangular stadium at Blacktown, which has a $245 million price tag, and the renovation at EnergyAustralia Stadium in Newcastle, estimated to cost $104 million.

The single most expensive venue on the list is the proposed 60,000-capacity Perth Stadium, which has been earmarked to host a semi-final and would cost $670 million to build.

A 40,000-seat stadium near the Australian Institute of Sport in Canberra would cost $239 million. The upgrade planned for Adelaide Oval would require $361 million.

A spokeswoman for federal Sports Minister Mark Arbib said the federal government and all states and territories would all share the costs associated with hosting the World Cup, including the costs of stadium upgrades.

However, she said: ''The exact split of costs across infrastructure and operational costs will be determined closer to the event when all requirements and timelines become clearer.''
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Joined
Dec 11, 2009
Posts
352
Likes
0
Location
fitzroy
AFL Club
Hawthorn
#2
Absolutely nothing new here
Sensational agenda driven drivel
And btw,I though we we're finally into a ceasefire with just a few days left.
Some folks just can't help themselves
 

mojito

misfortune comes in threes...
Joined
Feb 21, 2010
Posts
5,131
Likes
812
Location
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Adel. Utd, Manc. Utd, Molde FK
#4
We'll have one big raffle.

Maybe a lamington drive...that will do it.

Maybe it's years worth of following the english press, but I don't believe anything that a) doesn't have quotes or b) has quotes from "sources/spokesmen/spokeswomen" when most of them in the past have spoken some utter cr*p
 

Munro_Mick

All Australian
Joined
Mar 15, 2007
Posts
717
Likes
26
Location
Mill Park
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Danish Vikings
#5
Absolutely nothing new here
Sensational agenda driven drivel
And btw,I though we we're finally into a ceasefire with just a few days left.
Some folks just can't help themselves
The only person with an absolute agenda here is yourself, and you've admitted to it.


re the actual topic - the irony is that over the next 12 years, we know that Subiaco will be rebuilt or refurbished no matter what. The SFS is getting dated and only $29 million would be cheap with respect to it's refurbishment/maintenance over that time frame.

And we know that in Adelaide, the state govt had already committed around $300 million towards AAMI stadium upgrade and public transport link that has been redirected to Adelaide oval.

So, the irony here is that all these 'costs' that would happen anyway have been claimed by the FFA as part of the 'legacy' of the event - - even such that they have invented the notion of a 'pre-legacy'.

Seriously - who is running an agenda of drivel here??

Let's just get a fair appraisal of the bid. WC specific standalone costs are minimal outside of NSW (Blacktown and Newcastle stand out like beacons). Economic benefit is dubious. Being cheap is a good thing. And 12 years is a long, long time in Australian stadium 'geological time'.
 
Joined
Sep 22, 2008
Posts
113
Likes
0
Location
Newcastle
AFL Club
Hawthorn
#6
The stadium in Newcastle is currently being redeveloped and the world cup will have a minimal impact. Of the $104m, approx $50 has already been spent, with the balance to go towards building seats at both ends of the ground. This will happen with or without the world cup.

Pointless article really.
 
Joined
Dec 11, 2009
Posts
352
Likes
0
Location
fitzroy
AFL Club
Hawthorn
#7
The only person with an absolute agenda here is yourself, and you've admitted to it.
Yep-my agenda is I want a World Cup in Australia

I have not slagged off Aussie Rules ffs and not only that I've already stated I certainly won't be running around rubbing people up the wrong way if Australia are fortunate enough to win
For me this has never ever been about Soccer taking over Australia,because it simply won't.It won't get anywhere near it.it was always about our one and only chance to host the Worlds biggest sporting event where I have witnessed first hand the effect at the last 2 world cups.Just hope that everything I currently know comes off
 

Redb#

Club Legend
Joined
Jun 12, 2009
Posts
2,419
Likes
9
Location
red & black hills
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Big V
#8
We'll have one big raffle.

Maybe a lamington drive...that will do it.

Maybe it's years worth of following the english press, but I don't believe anything that a) doesn't have quotes or b) has quotes from "sources/spokesmen/spokeswomen" when most of them in the past have spoken some utter cr*p
If its vanilla slices I'm in. :D
 

Munro_Mick

All Australian
Joined
Mar 15, 2007
Posts
717
Likes
26
Location
Mill Park
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Danish Vikings
#10
Yep-my agenda is I want a World Cup in Australia

I have not slagged off Aussie Rules ffs and not only that I've already stated I certainly won't be running around rubbing people up the wrong way if Australia are fortunate enough to win
For me this has never ever been about Soccer taking over Australia,because it simply won't.It won't get anywhere near it.it was always about our one and only chance to host the Worlds biggest sporting event where I have witnessed first hand the effect at the last 2 world cups.Just hope that everything I currently know comes off
and for me, I've always thought that for Australia to carry it off - it's got to be down multi-laterally, and not be used to screw over 'rival codes'.

I've said many times, one of the best weeks in Melbourne was back in 2003, Int Rules Aust v Ireland on Friday night at the 'G, RUWC Aust v Ireland at Docklands on the Sat night? (might've been Sunday), and Melb Cup on the Tuesday (of course the nags on the Sat too).

So, I'd love to invite my relo's from Denmark to come over, stay with us, be able to go to a couple of WC matches, and be able to go to Docklands (or Ballarat for that matter!!) and watch the footy.

Alas - the way the FFA seemed to envisage it early days was going to make that impossible.

thank god the AFL dug their heels in and negotiated a fairer outcome so that we really can show ourselves off to the fullest.
 

Zidane98

Hall of Famer
Joined
Dec 22, 2009
Posts
34,695
Likes
14,229
Location
South End, AAMI Park
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Socceroos, Liverpool, Victory
#11
and for me, I've always thought that for Australia to carry it off - it's got to be down multi-laterally, and not be used to screw over 'rival codes'.

I've said many times, one of the best weeks in Melbourne was back in 2003, Int Rules Aust v Ireland on Friday night at the 'G, RUWC Aust v Ireland at Docklands on the Sat night? (might've been Sunday), and Melb Cup on the Tuesday (of course the nags on the Sat too).

So, I'd love to invite my relo's from Denmark to come over, stay with us, be able to go to a couple of WC matches, and be able to go to Docklands (or Ballarat for that matter!!) and watch the footy.

Alas - the way the FFA seemed to envisage it early days was going to make that impossible.

thank god the AFL dug their heels in and negotiated a fairer outcome so that we really can show ourselves off to the fullest.
Seriously mate you need to get over it and stop spinning garbage. FFA were not and have never had the sole intention of screwing rival codes over, that's just typical AFL fanboy spin.

FFA were always upfront about making sure rival codes were compensated

FFA submitted to FIFA that they wanted rival codes to continue during the tournament.

When the GF replay was rescheduled, FFA and Melbourne Victory kindly offered bubbledome (which was their right contractually to use) for Collingwood fans to use as a livesite and rescheduled Melbourne Heart vs Melbourne Victory.

Agreements were made under the MOU and let me tell you now that nobody was agreeing to anything with a rival code that was "supposedly" trying to screw them over.

I can't believe you are bringing this garbage up constantly over and over again, you should take a leaf out of Demetriou's book and realise that the FFA aren't out to get everyone and get behind the bid like he has.

Please don't post anymore babble about FFA conspiracies everyone's over it let's just focus on backing Australia right to the final whistle in the race for 2022.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Redb#

Club Legend
Joined
Jun 12, 2009
Posts
2,419
Likes
9
Location
red & black hills
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Big V
#12
Seriously mate you need to get over it and stop spinning garbage. FFA were not and have never had the sole intention of screwing rival codes over, that's just typical AFL fanboy spin.

FFA were always upfront about making sure rival codes were compensated

FFA submitted to FIFA that they wanted rival codes to continue during the tournament.

When the GF replay was rescheduled, FFA and Melbourne Victory kindly offered bubbledome (which was their right contractually to use) for Collingwood fans to use as a livesite and rescheduled Melbourne Heart vs Melbourne Victory.

Agreements were made under the MOU and let me tell you now that nobody was agreeing to anything with a rival code that was "supposedly" trying to screw them over.

I can't believe you are bringing this garbage up constantly over and over again, you should take a leaf out of Demetriou's book and realise that the FFA aren't out to get everyone and get behind the bid like he has.

Please don't post anymore babble about FFA conspiracies everyone's over it let's just focus on backing Australia right to the final whistle in the race for 2022.
Pot Kettle Black. :rolleyes:

"FFA were always upfront about making sure rival codes were compensated"

Sorry that is rubbish. The FFA was candlestine about Etihad and there is no way compensation was possible to account for the magnitude of taking the AFL completely out of Melbourne for up to two months once both stadiums were gone.

All the BS about going to the bush to play AFL games was exactly what the FFA wanted.

I'm glad the AFL called them out and got a good deal more than if they stayed quiet and allowed the FFA to ride rough shod over them.

Now the AFL can play fully in the lead up to the WC and thru part of it, even promote our game properly in a decent stadium in Melbourne.

The AFL should avoid Melb based game clashes to assist with transport and any Socceroo fixtures on TV, plus the WC finals.

If this bid is truly about Australia then all football codes (especially the culturally significant ones like AFL in Melbourne) should be able to maximise their exposure to the world audience.

You cannot separate Melbourne from Australian football (AFL), trams, the MCG,etc
 

Munro_Mick

All Australian
Joined
Mar 15, 2007
Posts
717
Likes
26
Location
Mill Park
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Danish Vikings
#15
Seriously mate you need to get over it and stop spinning garbage. FFA were not and have never had the sole intention of screwing rival codes over, that's just typical AFL fanboy spin.

FFA were always upfront about making sure rival codes were compensated

FFA submitted to FIFA that they wanted rival codes to continue during the tournament.

When the GF replay was rescheduled, FFA and Melbourne Victory kindly offered bubbledome (which was their right contractually to use) for Collingwood fans to use as a livesite and rescheduled Melbourne Heart vs Melbourne Victory.

Agreements were made under the MOU and let me tell you now that nobody was agreeing to anything with a rival code that was "supposedly" trying to screw them over.

I can't believe you are bringing this garbage up constantly over and over again, you should take a leaf out of Demetriou's book and realise that the FFA aren't out to get everyone and get behind the bid like he has.

Please don't post anymore babble about FFA conspiracies everyone's over it let's just focus on backing Australia right to the final whistle in the race for 2022.
Right then -

let's confirm with Frank Lowy what the "excessive demands" were that threatened the WOrld Cup bid??

because, the AFL put forward the following :

A - retain Docklands
B - not be excluded from host cities
C - right to seek compensation if appropriate

so, you reckon the FFA were "always upfront about making sure rival codes were compensated". We'll have to take your word for it.

And you reckon the FFA "submitted to FIFA that they wanted rival codes to continue during the tournament". We'll have to take your word for it.

So, what of A, B and C then comprised excessive (Frank Lowy's word) and outrageous (unnamed FFA insider from Jo'burg) 'demands' by the AFL?

Was it solely Docklands that was excessive?? (given that's where the FFA were exhibited to be acting AGAINST the Govt, and AGAINST the AFL).

- - - - - -

btw - I've admitted all along that the one issue the AFL really pushed on that might make the FFA uncomfortable was the host city access during the tournament. Simply because it's known that FIFA only make a call on this after the host is announced. If the AFL knew this - then, they would know that the FFA couldn't sign anything without exceptional approval from FIFA. This is where one doubts that the FFA would even dare to ask,......but, if you're certain the FFA did, then fine.

As it turned out - it looks as though the FFA couldn't/wouldn't sign off on it - and it took the Govt to get it through.

All I ever heard/saw from the FFA was Ben Buckley mumbling something about the possible precendent set in the USofA with MLB back in '94. Not very strong language on Buckley's behalf. And after the Docklands doublecross - - the FFA was losing it's credibility in negotiations. The 'No worries' bid was burning 'trust'.
 

Munro_Mick

All Australian
Joined
Mar 15, 2007
Posts
717
Likes
26
Location
Mill Park
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Danish Vikings
#16
Pot Kettle Black. :rolleyes:

"FFA were always upfront about making sure rival codes were compensated"

Sorry that is rubbish. The FFA was candlestine about Etihad and there is no way compensation was possible to account for the magnitude of taking the AFL completely out of Melbourne for up to two months once both stadiums were gone.

All the BS about going to the bush to play AFL games was exactly what the FFA wanted.

I'm glad the AFL called them out and got a good deal more than if they stayed quiet and allowed the FFA to ride rough shod over them.

Now the AFL can play fully in the lead up to the WC and thru part of it, even promote our game properly in a decent stadium in Melbourne.

The AFL should avoid Melb based game clashes to assist with transport and any Socceroo fixtures on TV, plus the WC finals.

If this bid is truly about Australia then all football codes (especially the culturally significant ones like AFL in Melbourne) should be able to maximise their exposure to the world audience.

You cannot separate Melbourne from Australian football (AFL), trams, the MCG,etc

The thing a lot of anti-AFL people missed in the flurry of activity in early December 2009 was that the NRL rejected the FFA's proposals for re-scheduling.

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-sport/nrl-rejects-ffas-world-cup-proposal-20091207-kf89.html

NRL chief executive David Gallop said his code was supportive of the World Cup bid but it could not come at any price.
"We are not trying to stand in the way of the World Cup bid but we are not prepared to fall off the face of the planet either,"

So, the FFA, which never got a chance to present it's ideas of rescheduling to the AFL - - the FFA drew this response from the NRL - - that Gallop viewed what the FFA put forward as akin to falling "...off the face of the planet.." perhaps is the clearest indication of just what the FFA was proposing.

The FFA was bullish to say the least. They went hard. It backfired. And thankfully it did. The NRL and AFL both stood their ground and refused to be bullied and the result is a far, far better bid that more appropriately reflects Australia.

What of it??........the worst scenario would've been the one that the FFA seemed to be secretly hoping for - would've seen Govt bulldoze the AFL and NRL and provide us with a serious code-war FFA bid that could not possibly have unified the nation.
 

Munro_Mick

All Australian
Joined
Mar 15, 2007
Posts
717
Likes
26
Location
Mill Park
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Danish Vikings
#17
The stadium in Newcastle is currently being redeveloped and the world cup will have a minimal impact. Of the $104m, approx $50 has already been spent, with the balance to go towards building seats at both ends of the ground. This will happen with or without the world cup.

Pointless article really.
The greatest WC specific expense is around the temporary components it seems.
The reconfiguring of some venues and subsequent deconfiguring.
In the case of Newcastle and Townsville, there's the expansion to ~40,000 and reduction after back down to ~30,000.
So, a good amount of funding is to shuffle deck chairs and then burn them!!! (or will they relocate the temporary seating to other venues?)

Newcastle as you say, is already well advanced towards a 33,000 seat venue - - and will be increased to 42,000 with temporary seating.

The thing I find odd on the Come Play website is in describing the venues, for example - Newcastle, "Net saleable capacity" = 42,000, while the "Legacy seated capacity" is 34,000.

'Legacy'????? That's what it'll be before hand.

With the MCG they claim 88,000 and legacy seated as 95,000. Again.....legacy??? What 'Legacy'???
 

Zidane98

Hall of Famer
Joined
Dec 22, 2009
Posts
34,695
Likes
14,229
Location
South End, AAMI Park
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Socceroos, Liverpool, Victory
#19
Pot Kettle Black. :rolleyes:

"FFA were always upfront about making sure rival codes were compensated"

Sorry that is rubbish. The FFA was candlestine about Etihad and there is no way compensation was possible to account for the magnitude of taking the AFL completely out of Melbourne for up to two months once both stadiums were gone.

All the BS about going to the bush to play AFL games was exactly what the FFA wanted.

I'm glad the AFL called them out and got a good deal more than if they stayed quiet and allowed the FFA to ride rough shod over them.

Now the AFL can play fully in the lead up to the WC and thru part of it, even promote our game properly in a decent stadium in Melbourne.

The AFL should avoid Melb based game clashes to assist with transport and any Socceroo fixtures on TV, plus the WC finals.

If this bid is truly about Australia then all football codes (especially the culturally significant ones like AFL in Melbourne) should be able to maximise their exposure to the world audience.

You cannot separate Melbourne from Australian football (AFL), trams, the MCG,etc
Oh dear, there's so much wrong and pathetic about your obviously biased post that it is almost impossible to find something that isn't biased/delusional in it.

There was zero chance of 2 stadiums being used in Melbourne for starters, everyone knew that from day one. If you did your research the FFA submitted to the vic state government that they wanted to utilise SSS for the World Cup and were told not to, and to submit Etihad as a possible venue.

One of the FFA's earliest proposals was to ensure that AFL games were able to run through the duration of the tournament so your claims about the FFA wanting to send games to the bush is just complete absolute garbage, not surprising comimg from such a pathetically biased AFL fanboy.

The text highlighted in bold represents typical arrogance from the anti-football AFL fanboy side - all football codes in this country are culturally significant to Australia, not just Australian rules.

Of course you would expect the AFL to avoid gameday clashes with World Cup fixtures, that's common sense. FFA kindly allowed Collingwood to use SSS as a live site for the AFL Grand Final replay and offered to reschedule the Melbourne Derby so there wasn't any clash. The FFA would look pretty stupid if it didn't at least offer to reschedule the game.

At the end of the day, you obviously think that there is only one football code in Australia and the rest don't matter. People like you ensure that Aussie Rules football stays the domain of the southern states and never becomes a truly national game. You are pathetic.
 

Redb#

Club Legend
Joined
Jun 12, 2009
Posts
2,419
Likes
9
Location
red & black hills
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Big V
#20
Oh dear, there's so much wrong and pathetic about your obviously biased post that it is almost impossible to find something that isn't biased/delusional in it.

There was zero chance of 2 stadiums being used in Melbourne for starters, everyone knew that from day one. If you did your research the FFA submitted to the vic state government that they wanted to utilise SSS for the World Cup and were told not to, and to submit Etihad as a possible venue.

One of the FFA's earliest proposals was to ensure that AFL games were able to run through the duration of the tournament so your claims about the FFA wanting to send games to the bush is just complete absolute garbage, not surprising comimg from such a pathetically biased AFL fanboy.

The text highlighted in bold represents typical arrogance from the anti-football AFL fanboy side - all football codes in this country are culturally significant to Australia, not just Australian rules.

Of course you would expect the AFL to avoid gameday clashes with World Cup fixtures, that's common sense. FFA kindly allowed Collingwood to use SSS as a live site for the AFL Grand Final replay and offered to reschedule the Melbourne Derby so there wasn't any clash. The FFA would look pretty stupid if it didn't at least offer to reschedule the game.

At the end of the day, you obviously think that there is only one football code in Australia and the rest don't matter. People like you ensure that Aussie Rules football stays the domain of the southern states and never becomes a truly national game. You are pathetic.
You have your spun in hindsight version, I have my own.

When you start throwing names around your losing the argument, clearly your a little upset.

I refer specificially to Melbourne in terms of cultural importance and that my friend means Aussie Rules. You are either so blinded by your hatred of the game (despite being a member of Bigfooty) or your not quite able to understand the point.

I'll repeat, if the WC bid is successful then I'm glad the AFL played hard ball becuase it puts the game in a better position and really for many many AFL fans the World Cup as a special event is just that, an event.

I never had a problem with the stadium issue initially because I thought AAMI park was a monty to be used. It was unfortunate about lead in times at the MCG, but at least now with Etihad the AFL can function and work with WC organisers whilst still running the season with minimal interuption.

People like you put me off your sport.
 

Munro_Mick

All Australian
Joined
Mar 15, 2007
Posts
717
Likes
26
Location
Mill Park
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Danish Vikings
#21
There was zero chance of 2 stadiums being used in Melbourne for starters, everyone knew that from day one. If you did your research the FFA submitted to the vic state government that they wanted to utilise SSS for the World Cup and were told not to, and to submit Etihad as a possible venue.
Mate - where does it say the FFA submitted that they wanted SSS for the WC??

(SSS?)

The FFA had the MCG and were still pushing hard for Docklands as well 2 months prior to the bid book submission date.

Why were they seeking BOTH the MCG and Docklands?? Would they have been willing to commit that no more than 1 of the MCG and Docklands would be used?? This whole no more than 2 venues in more than one city is a crock given the ability for Qatar's bid to progress so far.

John Brumby, Vic premier had proposed Geelong (Skilled Stadium) 18 months prior.

Where have you the evidence that Govt was pushing Docklands??

btw - FFA Come Play website states "The proposed stadiums were selected following a comprehensive, in-depth national infrastructure study, undertaken by industry experts who assessed each stadium against the current FIFA criteria. "

(they just forgot to assess stadium availability).
 

The_Wookie

Queenslander
Joined
Jul 2, 2010
Posts
31,936
Likes
29,262
Location
Adelaide
AFL Club
Carlton
Moderator #23
The greatest WC specific expense is around the temporary components it seems.
The reconfiguring of some venues and subsequent deconfiguring.
In the case of Newcastle and Townsville, there's the expansion to ~40,000 and reduction after back down to ~30,000.
So, a good amount of funding is to shuffle deck chairs and then burn them!!! (or will they relocate the temporary seating to other venues?)

Newcastle as you say, is already well advanced towards a 33,000 seat venue - - and will be increased to 42,000 with temporary seating.

The thing I find odd on the Come Play website is in describing the venues, for example - Newcastle, "Net saleable capacity" = 42,000, while the "Legacy seated capacity" is 34,000.

'Legacy'????? That's what it'll be before hand.

With the MCG they claim 88,000 and legacy seated as 95,000. Again.....legacy??? What 'Legacy'???
Its an odd legacy given it seats 100,000 right now.
 

The_Wookie

Queenslander
Joined
Jul 2, 2010
Posts
31,936
Likes
29,262
Location
Adelaide
AFL Club
Carlton
Moderator #24
The text highlighted in bold represents typical arrogance from the anti-football AFL fanboy side - all football codes in this country are culturally significant to Australia, not just Australian rules.

Of course you would expect the AFL to avoid gameday clashes with World Cup fixtures, that's common sense. FFA kindly allowed Collingwood to use SSS as a live site for the AFL Grand Final replay and offered to reschedule the Melbourne Derby so there wasn't any clash. The FFA would look pretty stupid if it didn't at least offer to reschedule the game.

At the end of the day, you obviously think that there is only one football code in Australia and the rest don't matter. People like you ensure that Aussie Rules football stays the domain of the southern states and never becomes a truly national game. You are pathetic.
Some codes are more culturally significant than others. Especially in melbourne. Dont like it. I suggest you check the figures on crowd attendances and tv viewing. Those are called facts.

Also the FFA didnt have any say over the availability of Aami Park. They loved the heart v victory clash to maximise publicity for the first derby in melbourne FFA history. Once they did that, it was the Government - the owners of the stadium - who proposed it along with Collingwood. FFA permission indeed. I dont think the FFA can grant permission for anything.

We dont think that Australian Football is the only football. Victorians, even South Australians and Western Australians have been shown to support anything sporting wise in various degrees. You think we are the reason the AFL doesnt go beyond its current footprint in popularity, but its people like you who have consistently underestimate the Australian sporting landscape for decades of failed attempts at national soccer leagues. I really dont think soccer supporters can say anything about the way we support our football.
 
Top Bottom