World Cup loses its cheer

[beelzebub 23,382]

Only in the event there was restraint of trade - but this would only be in the event that FIFA somehow stops AFL matches from being played against the AFL's will.

If World Cup matches are held and the AFL loses revenue because ppl attend those matches instead, then the AFL can't sue for that.

Popularity-wise? Maybe not A-League matches, but a World Cup match would be a significant draw as opposed to and AFL game at Visy Park.

Either way, I think that FIFA is a lot like Microsoft and I don't want a World Cup in Australia... unless its held in summer.

If they are unable to exercise their previous arrangements, if they are hindered, if they can not fulfil obligations to contracted providers as well as deliver product as per rights ( TV etc ) then they would I though have every right to sue. Conditions are / will ( possibly ) be imposed on them outside of normal conditions. i.e someone is moving the goal posts.

If they cannot use venues they would normally have access to , or time normally agree to etc...these are all restaints.

[Rogue 585]

Edit: ...and the AFL can't sue for lost earnings because someone comes along with a more popular product. That's insanity.

As BB says, this is a strange comment.

The impact on the AFL is not caused by 'someone [coming] along with a more popular product', it's someone coming along with a product and telling the AFL they have to take their product off the shelf for n time.

EDIT:

Only in the event there was restraint of trade - but this would only be in the event that FIFA somehow stops AFL matches from being played against the AFL's will.

That's exactly the scenario that's being discussed, isn't it? Either the AFL must stop the competition for the duration of the World Cup plus time before and after the event, or the AFL can only stage games outside of the metro areas.

Obviously you're aware that the AFL has stadium deals in place, but if the AFL doesn't agree to submit to the will of the World Cup bid the stadiums can apparently be 'taken over' anyway (refer Etihad).

To return to the analogy used above, if FIFA/FFA aren't telling the AFL to take their product off the shelf and give the round ball game a free run, they're telling the AFL they can still sell their product - as long as they steer well clear of the big markets and utilise substandard showrooms.

[52k2 0]

So yet more emerges about fifa demands, Boy have I been silly for alot of years. I thought the Romanov's were killed by the commos in 1917 when they just fled to Geneva and changed their name to Fifa.

I wasnt against the world cup being held here but they [fifa] are surely testing my resolve. I still cant believe the sheer arrogance of fifa, dont they and their slavish underlings have any idea the harm they will do to the local sports.

If they wanted to compete on a level playing field fair enough, not come in and napalm the locals, and then accuse the locals of being anti soccer. You soon become anti anything when they hold a gun to your head.

To survive the terrible merger years, go down hill on and off the field and finally have light at the end of the tunnel, only to cop a napalming from foreign latte sucking nuf heads, ITS WAR. They can now stuff off with their round ball, privileged members and hold their ego fest and anything else they want to hold in iceland or somewhere where the locals will bend over for them.

[Guest oldman emubitter]

Google 'fifa corruption'

You'll get around 750,000 responses.

[old55 23,687]

The arguments about the various merits of the football games will go on forever. Fans of each code have their legitimate reasons for loving it and some love mutiple codes.

However there is a reason why soccer wont challenge AFL in Australia. It's because the athletes participating in soccer here in Australia are at best 2nd rate and and the standard of the game is therefore 2nd rate - it's like watching the VFL at best.

AFL and NRL still attract the best football athletes, and the elite athletes that play soccer do so in lucrative off-shore leagues - sure Kewell or Viduka may be AFL stars if they played the game - but because they play soccer they don't play here and we don't get to see them on any regular basis. The players playing soccer here are the battlers. No local league players get a look in for the World Cup team.

If AFL was the world game Judd, Ablett, Franklin, Hayes, Rioli etc etc etc - every elite player would be playing somewhere else. Watts, Scully and Trengove would be off to EPL or Serie A before you could blink. So long as AFL continues to attract elite footballing athletes in Australia it will be the superior game regardless of unresolvable arguments about the respective beauties of the various games.

Edited December 14, 2009 by old55

[beelzebub 23,382]

beware the coming soccer circus

our cost...2.9 Billion

like....wtf !!!!!

Good article... highlights some of the 'inadequacies" regarding what FIFA will tell you.. as well as the inequalites of comparing a like-like scenario with other past venues etc.

IMHO...the whole World Cup is a pack of lies wrapped in a coat worn by egotistical self interested parties who are only too happy to spend the public purse on whatever junket they can get out of it.

Why not throw 2.9 Billion at all Aussie sports.. not just a minority one ??

[beelzebub 23,382]

Fifa plan to take control of Melbourne...

just gets better doesnt it just how much arent we allowed to know ?? I could have sworn this was OUR country !! no ??

yes there will be beat ups in the media etc..but if only a fraction of what is coming to light now bears thruth then I for one dont want any part of it..

Jeff Kennett concerned by World Cup bid : Kennett concerned

This is proving to be the work of myopic dreamists who really are letting their own misproportioned sense of importance ( the game of soccer to this country ) get in the way of any realistic ability to 1) do it..and 2) any benefit in having done it.

Edited December 14, 2009 by belzebub59

[45HG 1,559]

Whilst I don't agree with many of your statements in this thread, I am starting to think that this is all sounding a little bit ridiculous. I think there's a case that the FFA are keeping many things under wraps until they figure out a plan

[beelzebub 23,382]

I dont think FFA HAVE a plan...just a dream.. and the bill ...everyones!!

[45HG 1,559]

Hence why I said until they figure out a plan.

I'd be very proud and excited if Australia was to host the world cup. But some of these measures sound rather Draconian and followed through to the letter would not reflect the sporting society we as Australians embrace. We hosted the best Olympics ever and did not need these types of measures implemented. We are probably one of the few nations (that aren't predominately soccer-focussed) with the major sport being played through the March-September period. The other aspect I've been pondering is how much do we deserve it. Before 4 years ago, many Australians laughed at soccer as a joke sport, I'm not convinced we've moved far enough to host an event that many other nations would metaphorically die for.

[Sir Why You Little 37,120]

I am proud of the socceroos, and what they have achieved over the last 3 -4 years. But i would rather watch it on TV in a local pub Midweek than have the whole of melbourne locked down for a month.

Lock downs are the pits of the earth, i was in sydney when George W was in town and it was just RANK

I like the EPL (Arsenal) and watch it when i can But soccer is not worth a 4 week lock down, to say nothing of the cost.

Why do politicians get Stiffy's over big events, when we the Public Pay for it for years. The Formula one is Pocket money compared to this.

I love Sport but i do not want my city locked down for a month (bet its longer)

The Commonwealth Games [censored] me off enough.

Go Demons is what i want

Soccer can stay on TV......

Edited December 14, 2009 by why you little

[grazman 7,451]

I'm sure I heard on ABC radio one of the major sticking points will be FIFAs insistence (as per previous contracts) stating that no rival codes are allowed to conduct their competitions in any of the participating cities and they need at least 12 stadiums of 50K capacity. I have no interest in any other rival code, but my level of antipathy will rise to new heights if this goes ahead.

Edited December 14, 2009 by grazman

[Jurrah Coffee 0]

Why can't the ****heads decide to play the WC during the summer.

Jan-Mar perhaps?

Especially myself doesnt care if it interrups their soccer seasons, they basically play throughout the year anyway, and wouldnt the WC next year interrup numerous soccer leagues?

[H_T 3,049]

Before 4 years ago, many Australians laughed at soccer as a joke sport, I'm not convinced we've moved far enough to host an event that many other nations would metaphorically die for.

Well said. I'm not convinced either.

[Keyser Söze 0]

Well said. I'm not convinced either.

AFL going to West Sydney..?

Its not so much about established markets...

[Tatu 416]

Fifa plan to take control of Melbourne...

just gets better doesnt it just how much arent we allowed to know ?? I could have sworn this was OUR country !! no ??

yes there will be beat ups in the media etc..but if only a fraction of what is coming to light now bears thruth then I for one dont want any part of it..

Jeff Kennett concerned by World Cup bid : Kennett concerned

This is proving to be the work of myopic dreamists who really are letting their own misproportioned sense of importance ( the game of soccer to this country ) get in the way of any realistic ability to 1) do it..and 2) any benefit in having done it.

we need to fuel the world riot... whoops.......i ment game

[H_T 3,049]

AFL going to West Sydney..?

Its not so much about established markets...

Fair point. There would be some incentive in improving est. market (A-League) ie. stronger foothold domestically. It's interesting. I'd support our country hosting the World Cup and I would look forward to going to a match or two, however I would want to make sure the AFL could negotiate in some way to protect AFL and more importantly all our 18 sides; our game, come 2022 ?

I mirror 45HG16's assessment re: the guidelines / criteria set by FIFA. We did host the best Olympic Games ever without such measures. Much negotiation is to be done.

Edited December 14, 2009 by High Tower