Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Who's Afraid? - update #20
The code wars surrounding the 2018/2022 bid seem to be gently simmering down, now that Andrew Demetriou's politicking over the use of Etihad stadium has been revealed as an ambit claim of sorts. But the Murdoch football refusers, true to form, have fanned the flames with dire predictions about the effects of hosting the event on Sydney (and Melbourne).
The whole litany of doom-laden dot points is hilarious, but a special prize goes to the following:
* Give special treatment to preferred commercial partners, potentially cutting locals out of work...
Because, of course, a World Cup in Australia would provide no employment opportunities whatever.
Sydneysiders who remember the (relatively minor) disruptions caused during the Olympics in 2000 should recognise that none of FIFA's supposed stipulations would be anything out of the ordinary. Somehow, at that time, such "onerous conditions" were perfectly acceptable.
The ramping up of the scaremongering from the Murdoch press and others is probably due to the fact that Australia's bid is starting to look a serious chance. The nominal "favourites" for 2018/2022, England, have stumbled from one embarrassment to another, and Australia's candidature has received a significant blessing from a very influential fellow, whose comments appear to go beyond basic tokenism.
The whole litany of doom-laden dot points is hilarious, but a special prize goes to the following:
* Give special treatment to preferred commercial partners, potentially cutting locals out of work...
Because, of course, a World Cup in Australia would provide no employment opportunities whatever.
Sydneysiders who remember the (relatively minor) disruptions caused during the Olympics in 2000 should recognise that none of FIFA's supposed stipulations would be anything out of the ordinary. Somehow, at that time, such "onerous conditions" were perfectly acceptable.
The ramping up of the scaremongering from the Murdoch press and others is probably due to the fact that Australia's bid is starting to look a serious chance. The nominal "favourites" for 2018/2022, England, have stumbled from one embarrassment to another, and Australia's candidature has received a significant blessing from a very influential fellow, whose comments appear to go beyond basic tokenism.
Comments:
<< Home
They can't win Tony. More than ever before I hear it as the sound of a frail, sick, threatened creature, and I am someone who supports the local codes.
What I don't understand is why the AFL and NRL don't go for a 'Demonstration Game' of their codes (in Melbourne and Sydney respectively) to show off the local codes to a huge, international sports-mad audience. Surely a single game would be negotiable, as part of a deal. Everyone would win.
What I don't understand is why the AFL and NRL don't go for a 'Demonstration Game' of their codes (in Melbourne and Sydney respectively) to show off the local codes to a huge, international sports-mad audience. Surely a single game would be negotiable, as part of a deal. Everyone would win.
Guido - that is truly scary! In Adelaide the dosage of soccerphobia administered by the likes of [url=http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,26475159-12428,00.html]Graham Cornes[/url] and Geoff Roach has increased steadily. It's like the old days again, only this time it's driven by fear rather than just ignorance.
Wat a load of rubbish from the rival codes. Can they be asked where they were when we had that interruption at the Olympics in 2000. Dont' remember too may compaliants then>>>
# posted by 
: December 15, 2009 at 10:17 PM
: December 15, 2009 at 10:17 PM
did you guys ever question why the FFA went so hard for Etihad? Even though they knew from right back in 2008 that the AFL intended NOT to release it. Even though the Vic premier promoted Geelong as an alternative, or as well, a bit of negotiation surely could've seen AAMI Park upgraded to min 40K and leave a 'legacy'.
As yourselves why the FFA went so hard for a 'turf war' in Melbourne against the AFL. The answer might have something to do with the mumblings at the time about the Fed Govt stepping in to legislate a bulldozers through the AFL stance. The FFA was seeking a major blow against a hated enemy. They got stared down. Demetriou did a mighty job - most of all, because he had to and because of the nature of the AFL stadium agreements/funding/ownership etc - he also had a firm position to start with - which seemed misunderstood by many soccer zealots.
btw - AFL started early in 2000 for Olympics, and accessed MCG late for 2006 C'wealth games. The FIFA WC ask was far more vague and also far more intrusive. However, on many of the shared AFL - Cricket venues - the AFL themselves only have a marginal amount of flex.
Post a Comment
As yourselves why the FFA went so hard for a 'turf war' in Melbourne against the AFL. The answer might have something to do with the mumblings at the time about the Fed Govt stepping in to legislate a bulldozers through the AFL stance. The FFA was seeking a major blow against a hated enemy. They got stared down. Demetriou did a mighty job - most of all, because he had to and because of the nature of the AFL stadium agreements/funding/ownership etc - he also had a firm position to start with - which seemed misunderstood by many soccer zealots.
btw - AFL started early in 2000 for Olympics, and accessed MCG late for 2006 C'wealth games. The FIFA WC ask was far more vague and also far more intrusive. However, on many of the shared AFL - Cricket venues - the AFL themselves only have a marginal amount of flex.
# posted by : October 28, 2011 at 1:11 PM
: October 28, 2011 at 1:11 PM << Home
