Australia eyes off 2018 Cup bid
Posted 5 hours 20 minutes ago
Updated 5 hours 16 minutes ago


The Socceroos could be looking to strut their stuff on home soil in 2018 (File Photo). (AFP: Pornchai Kittiwongsakul)
Football Federation Australia (FFA) says Australia is very serious about bidding for the 2018 football World Cup.

FIFA's executive committee has voted unanimously to end its policy of rotating the hosting of World Cups through its six continental confederations, allowing a host of nations to bid for the tournament.

FFA chief executive Ben Buckley says Australia's previous success in hosting major events will be a positive for the bid.

"The first thing is that you've got to be in it," he said.

"I don't know if you necessarily have to be in it, lose it once or twice, to be successful.

"You've got to be in the race and if you're in the race and you've got a great bid and the right sort of infrastructure to support it, there's no reason why you can't win it."

But Australia looks set for stiff competition with England also believed to be interested in hosting the 2018 tournament.

Under the current rotation system the World Cup went to Africa for 2010 (South Africa won the contest) and South America for 2014 (Brazil is set to be announced as the host).

If the rotation continued the bid would go to a country from north and central America or the Caribbean in 2018.

However FIFA president Sepp Blatter was concerned that only Brazil bid for 2014 and said last week that he favoured a change.

Mr Blatter said: "My thoughts are that we shall open the market and make the World Cup available for everybody apart from the last confederation which has just organised it, which means South America cannot bid for 2018."

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown has already made clear he would like to see a bid take place and has appointed former sports minister Richard Caborn as his World Cup ambassador.

Russia, China and Mexico are believed to be other nations which might consider a 2018 bid.

-ABC/Reuters
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/10/30/2075848.htm

if they make it open slather, theres only one place its going to go... Europe

save your money and go for 2022....perth might have a stadium by then.








ps...the 2018 is ours...

The way ol' Sepp has been banging on, that's a given...

An absolute waste of time and money Australia bidding for a World Cup. I reeaally hope that the FFA isn't spending money on the bid.

We are a decent shot at hosting the ASIAN CUP but never the big one.

and Brazil have been awarded the 2014 WC in the most low-key, uncompetitive bidding war for a tournament ever. Barely made the news.

World Cup bid gets serious for biggest show on planet

AUSTRALIA is serious about bidding for the 2018 World Cup following the decision by the world governing body, FIFA, to scrap its rotation policy but will have to embark on a massive stadium development program to meet the minimum requirements for the world's biggest sporting event.

Football Federation Australia chief executive Ben Buckley was quick to signal Australia's intentions after the FIFA executive, meeting in Zurich, dumped the short-lived rotation policy among its six confederations, which would have guaranteed the 2018 World Cup went to North/Central America.

Instead, the tournament has been thrown open to all interested bidders, and the early signs are up to a dozen countries may mount submissions.

Asked how serious Australia was about entering such a competitive race, Buckley replied: "We are very serious. We flagged our intention to bid for the World Cup at the earliest possible opportunity and we are delighted that FIFA has decided to abandon the rotation policy. That will give us the opportunity to bid for and hopefully be successful in securing the right to host in 2018 …

"I've no doubt that if the policy stayed in place the opportunity to host would have been at a later period. So whilst we will be competing with European-based nations and nations from all over the world, we think this will be a better system and a better opportunity for us."

FIFA president Sepp Blatter, who in the past 12 months has encouraged as many bids as possible, said a decision would probably be made in 2011, but bids would have to be submitted by 2009. "I think they should start their bidding tomorrow, " he said.

England, China, Russia, a joint Netherlands/Belgium bid, USA and Mexico are among the early rivals to Australia, with England already installed as favourites. According to some estimates, just to reach the pre-selection stage will cost about $30 million.

"If there will be 10 or 11 candidates we must obviously make a pre-selection, as they do in the Olympics," Blatter said.

FIFA's World Cup requirements demand between nine and 12 stadiums with a minimum of 40,000 seats for the group matches, and 60,000 seats for semi-finals, the opening game and the final. There is also a raft of other criteria, including "clean" advertising space, provision for a minimum of 600 press seats, and up to 30 camera platforms.


As it stands, only four stadiums meet the minimum standards - the MCG, Telstra Dome (Melbourne), Telstra Stadium (Sydney) and Suncorp Stadium (Brisbane). The FFA is sure to use its bid for leverage in pushing for redevelopments of Bruce Stadium (Canberra), EnergyAustralia Stadium (Newcastle) and perhaps Sydney Football Stadium, with new venues in Perth and Adelaide to be built from scratch. The construction program would dwarf the costs associated with the 2000 Olympic Games.

Buckley's predecessor, John O'Neill, had canvassed the possibility of taking some games to New Zealand - where stadiums are going to be refurbished for the 2011 rugby World Cup, but Buckley said: "This is going to be an Australia-only bid."

Asked if he felt it was important for football to receive a legacy from the stadium redevelopments - unlike at the Olympics where cricket, rugby, AFL and league all gained from improvements made for the football tournament but football missed out - Buckley replied: "One, we'd like to make sure we get the right stadia built, and secondly we want to leave a legacy behind for the game … [but] most venues are multi-purpose, and if they [other sports] benefit, that's not a bad thing."

And while Australia would be seen as a rank outsider by most international pundits, Buckley is optimistic. "The race has only just started, so I'm not sure anyone can be a shoo-in, and I think Australia's credentials stack up against anyone's," he said.

In my view we are a good chance for 2018 - The only serious bid coming from Europe is England's, and although they are probably the favourite - they do have a lot of enemies at FIFA. Also support for England's bid may decrease as FIFA might want to wait untill they've seen how the 2012 olympics goes before giving them a World Cup.

The other real chances are the USA, China and us. It hasn't been that long since it was in the USA, so that will work against them, China is a decent chance, but if their are any problems at the olympics next year it will reflect badly on them, while if their football team doesn't qualify for the world cup in 2010, FIFA may decide not to give it too them on the basis that their team is too weak - also they do have enemies at FIFA.

Our only real disadvantage is our geography and infrastrucutre. If we can put together a good bid which addresses these issues then we are a good chance. If the Socceroos qualify for the next world cup and prove that 2006 was no fluke it will help us as well. There is also a general feeling at FIFA that Australia should be hosting a world cup at some point - there is no doubt that we were in line as back up host for 2010, had South African failed to meet FIFA's criteria, and there was always a feeling, while we were in Oceania, that we would be given the tournament some day as 'the last confederation to host a world cup'.

If we don't get it in 2018, we will be an even better chance for 2022, the only wory is if China wins it in either of those years, because that would stop us from bidding (as a member of Asia) for the next couple of tournaments.

Gabba - Development done for Cricket and Australian Rules, it was effectively used because Suncorp was going through redevelopment at the time

SFS - No redevelopmnent that I can remember of

Hindmarsh - The most amount of money spent on it and that has only proven to be a legacy for football...Other then stands that where taken down

Bruce - Minor amounts paid, but Bruce Stadium at the time was also home of the Canberra representative in the national competition.

MCG - Enlighten me on what redevelopment was done for the Olympics?

Telstra Stadium - Used for big ties of the Socceroos as well...

That quote holds NO weight...

Suncorp
Gabba
ANZ (if you want to get technical)
Dairy Farmers (upgraded from 25)
Energy Australia (upgraded)
SFS
SCG
TS
MCG
TD
Bruce (upgraded to 40k with temp seating)
AAMI/new
Subi/WA

that theres the list of possible stadiums(13), although in reality ANZ has no chance, I doubt gabba+Suncorp will both be used. Same for SFS+SCG
down to 10 now, and bruce id imagine would be doubtful.
As for 60k stadiums for finals we only have a MCG, TS and a distant stadium WA.

Looks like a lot of upgrades




Whats wrong with Gabba, AAMI, Subi?? Aside from them being ovals? The SFS also, how come it got excluded?

I would be more embarassed if subiaco held any Football World Cup games, then Ian Ritchie would be about holding the Rugby World Cup at Eden Park.

I think there is some confusion of FIFA standards, britishspud has a different view on it then some others. I just got totally confused last time, because we had two groups of people telling us totally different things.

before we start wanking over stadium upgrades ask yourself do we have enough accomodation in at least 8 separate cities?

We are a country that has a major interest in travel as a form of income/employment. It is a multi billion dollar industry. What I am getting at is that yes we should survive, I know Brisbane could use more. But something like this is something that could provide a catalyst for more investment in accommodation. Stadiums will be the issue.

Australia would probably be aiming to use the minimum of 9 stadiums: So how would you split it. Even if you used 2 in both Sydney(Stad Australia and SFS) and Melbourne (MCG & Dome), that leaves 5 more.... Realistically 1 each for Perth (stadium wah), Adelaide (would probably need to be something new) and Brisbane (Suncorp - Even this could be a problem as it needs to be 60,000 for a Semi. Which Brisbane would want to host). That leaves two other centres. Which I guess from the article is hinted at as being Canberra and Newcastle. Does that seem like a logical split for Australia, I would like to see something up north in Townsville, however it has issues along with Canberra and Newcastle in that a 40k stadium will probably be a waste after this one off event. Even the Gold Coast has the right to claim for something on its own. 2 stadiums in the SEQld corner.

Out of the four regional centres you mentioned (Townsville, Canberra, Newcastle, GoldCoast) The two best locations IMO would be townsville and either Newcastle/Canberra.

Townsville would be the best due to its higher probability at filling the venue after the worldcup (cowboys)
Canberra (Brumbies, Raiders) and Newcastle (Knights, Jets) each have two tennants while the Goldcoast (Titans) only have one tennats (therfore putting them last.
Give it 5years and this could all have changed. Finding 9 venues isnt the problem. If accomodation needed to be built it would be. The problem is goin to be convincing FIFA that Australia is a better choice than Europe/China.

I think you underestimate the potential of the Brumbies to keep filling Canberra stadium after the world cup. But really in 2018 or 2022, the whole scene of Australian sport is likely to be very different. Super 14 may undergo major changes, new a-league teams. On the Gold Coast maybe there would be warrent for the GC AFL team to have a bigger stadium. Newcastle is probably a natural choice by the current A-league teams, with the area boasting both the NJ and CCM. And to be honest it may seem stupid to avoid the national capital.