*Spanish accent*

such passion!

This is the article that indicates 3 venues per city. There was another article that I am sure attributed the source as Jerome Valcke the FIFA General Secretary but I can't find it at the moment.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2009/feb/20/football-2018-world-cup-twickenham

I understand that England may actually submit 4 venues for London that FIFA can pick 3 from.

I don't rely on the record attendance when determining a stadiums desired capacity but it does provide a quick indicator of whether there is a demand that is greater than current capacity. In the FIFA "Football Stadiums - Technical Recommendations and Requirements version 4 - 2007" the writers note that it is "not unusual for clubs to find that the provision of a bright, new, clean and comfortable stadium brings with it a dramatic increase in attendance levels". They suggest that a club might need to think of doubling its capacity rather than only increasing it by 50%. This may seem excessive but the writers are drawing on vast international investigation and design experience. They further recommend that any stadium that is intended to hold "major international football events" should not have a capacity less than 30,000. In preparing the "Northern Ireland Stadium Report" the Belfast City Council's consultants recommended a "build it to fill it" approach where the stadium capacity is sized so that it is full as often as possible. These two positions are the extremes in my view. Generally people don't feel comfortable in any venue that feels "empty" but they also don't feel comfortable in a venue where they feel "crowded". Putting rule of thumb figures on this they feel most comfortable in a space that is somewhere between 60-80% full. In order to allow for the growth that comes with a new venue I think sizing the stadium so that the current average attendance is at 60% capacity is close to the mark but should always be confirmed by detailed market research. The capacity calculated using that figure is what I put in my investigation and design brief. For Canberra, using that figure the calculated capacity is approximately 30,000. For Dairy Farmer's using that figure the calculated capacity is approximately 32,000. This is based on Union average attendances for Canberra and League average attendances for Dairy Farmer's over the last 5 years. I am beastly careless whether 30,000 or 35,000 is adopted post Cup for them but I do know that their current venues are undersized.

MRS was always undersized for Victory which is why they have retained a contract with Etihad Stadium to hold 5 games a year there.

The provision of new and upgraded stadiums for an event like the World Cup is unlike any other circumstance. Normally a stadium has to be paid for over its design life by the receipts from gate takings, pourage, catering, naming rights, advertising etc. The slug on a stadium hirer can be enormous. In the case of the Confederaions/World Cup the income generated by Government over an 18 month period, almost exclusively from international tourists, through taxes and other revenues normally recoups the entire cost of the provision of venues. For this reason venue hire costs for these stadiums should only be set at a level where operating, maintenance and depreciation costs are recovered not the capital cost as well. This is one of the positive legacies of holding such an event.

On the issue of whether we will win the right to host the World Cup I am not confident but my lack of confidence has nothing to do with our population, we are the 52nd largest population in the world, or our wealth, we are the 14th richest country in the world, but on the fact that FIFA will have had 2 relatively small income generating World Cup's in a row, South Africa and Brazil and will be looking to pocket a bonanza from a European Cup and the biggest money generator they have, a USA Cup. Depending on how the GFC has affected their finances we might be lucky and get 2022 between Europe 2018 and USA 2026.

I've just been reminded that The Age ran this story about six weeks ago:

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2009/09/16/1252780357089.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1

it pretty much predicts where we are now, insufficient stadiums, and no state government wants to spend a cent on them.

Edited by pippinu: 28/10/2009 05:55:05 PM

As I said at the start of my post on the 1st page, Andrew Barr could just be playing politics and IMO, think he is. I think this is just a ploy to try and get some funding from the Federal government. But either way, this still infuriates me that he has brought this up.

Anyway, I'd be very surprised if Canberra wasn't a host city for the World Cup, whenever we host it. I think we will expand or build a new stadium to meet the requirements.

I'd like to see this set-up:

ANZ Stadium
Etihad Stadium/SFS
MCG- even though it is oval shaped, it looks as though this is a certainty to play host. Read it somewhere.
Suncorp Stadium
Canberra Stadium
Energy Australia Stadium
Skilled Park
Dairy Farmers Stadium
New Perth Stadium
New Adelaide Stadium
Bluetongue Stadium
New Stadium somewhere- Tasmania?

... Were never going to host a world cup if AFL/NRL get in our way but the problem is that where getting into our own way... The FFA should play more Socceroos matches in Adelaide, Perth and Canberra... No fucking wonder they dont want to spend money on stadiums...

My understanding is that one city can have two stadiums, and the remainder of the ten stadiums must be spread out across 10 cities.

Once viewed like that, you start to see that we can't even get past first base.

Canberra is pretty much out.

The Gold Coast can't be upgraded to the minimum of 43,000.

So we are only just able to make up 8 host cities (and some of these are an absolute stretch):

1. Sydney (2 stadiums)
2. Brisbane
3. Melbourne
4. Adelaide
5. Perth
6. Newcastle
7. Townsville
8. Wollongong

As I said a stretch!!

Then we need to find 3 more cities to have a stadium with 43,000 capacity.

But where??!!

Folks - forget about it -it's already looking impossible - and it has nothing to do with the NRL/AFL/Korfball, and everything to do with FFA incompetence and bungling.

Edited by pippinu: 28/10/2009 04:30:15 PM

Fair enough. But just replace "50,000+" with "44,000+" in my post above and my point remains unchanged.



Agreed, but that's not enough.



Is it definite that there can be 3 stadia per city? I had heard 2. Source appreciated if you have one. The reality is 3 in one city becomes extremely difficult from a logistical point of view anyway, and highly unlikely to be seen in a positive light when compared to other countries who will propose 10-12 distinct host cities.



And just how big an area is that 620,000 spread over?



Clearly we differ in our definitions of "credible". Each to their own.




Do you honestly think it makes sense to use the all time record attendances as a benchmark? The rugby union record (28,753) was set for the 2004 Super 14 final. Hardly representative. By the same logic, you could say the 31,000 capacity at MRS is under what Victory require given that their record attendance is over 55,000. The reality is 31,000 will be more than enough for Victory 99% of the time, and 25,000 is more than enough for Canberra 99% of the time. For the other 1% of the time, you just accept there will be a sell out and some people miss out. Or alternatively you build more huge stadia that won't even be half full most of the time, and see clubs get hammered on overpriced stadium deals for decades to come. Not to mention the detrimental impact it has on atmosphere at games (one of the big problems in the A League).

Anyway, my point here was simply that whether Canberra is involved or not, it won't affect our chances of getting the WC.

On the wider issue of whether we will be awarded the WC - if you choose to believe we will, that's fine by me, I guess only time will tell. I would genuinely love to be wrong about this - and that's not something I say lightly! Unfortunately though, all of the people talking up our bid are completely lacking in objectivity IMO. Remember it's not just a case of meeting minimum criteria set by FIFA, it's a case of convincing them that Australia would be a better host than all of the other countries bidding. And remember too that FIFA politics will come into it, and that's not something that is likely to help us much. We're not one of Blatter's pet projects like USA or S Africa.

How stupid are they? NRL/AFL over the biggest sporting competition in the world?
Why are the other codes scared or do they just hate us?

First point. Stadiums don't have to be 50,000+. FIFA require stadiums to have a minimum capacity of 40,000 after the FIFA allocation of seats. In South Africa that makes the minimum capacity 42,000. My understanding is that for 2018/22 the minimum is 44,000.

Second point. The 5 mainland capital cities are certainly credible World Cup venues. The smallest of them, Adelaide is the 400th largest city in the world. With FIFA allowing up to 3 stadium per venue city in the bid we have 8 stadiums/potential stadiums that are credible World Cup stadiums. Suncorp Stadium (52,500), Sydney Football Stadium (46,000), ANZ Stadium (83,500), Proposed Western Sydney Stadium (45,000), Etihad Stadium (56,000), MCG (95,000), Proposed Adelaide Stadium (55,000) and Proposed Stadium WA (65,000). Add to these cities Townsville which is in the centre of a regional population of 620,000 in Northern Queensland that includes 2 international airports and arguably the biggest tourist attraction in Australia, the Great Barrier Reef. Add Gold Coast/Tweed with a population of 580,000 and tourist accommodation way in excess of requirements. Add Newcastle with a regional population of 530,000. Thats 8 credible venue cities without including Canberra/Queenbeyan which of course would be on the list because it is the capital of the country and has a regional population of 400,000. Between these 9 credible cities we have 12 credible stadiums which I understand is the minimum that FIFA require in the bid.

Third point. All of the venues are well justified although you might call into question Canberra and Townsville. Canberra Stadium's record crowds of 29,000 for Union, 25,000 for League and 20,000 for Football show that the 25,000 capacity is under what is required. A 45,000 seat stadium with 10,000 removable seating is a sensible solution for a World Cup venue there and the final 35,000 seat venue would be well used by the Brumbies (10 games a year), the Raiders (15), Canberra A-League W-League and Y-League (25), the Wallabies (1), the Kangaroos (1) and the Socceroos (1). Those games alone would result in excess of 500,000 spectators per annum attending the venue without including any finals games. Dairy Farmer's Stadium in Townsville originally had a capacity of 31,000 and with a record attendance of over 30,000 a venue larger than its current capacity of 26,500 is also well justified. Again a 45,000 seat capacity stadium with 10,000 removable seating would be appropriate. The resulting 35,000 seat stadium would continue to host the Cowboys (15 home games a year) and the Fury A-League and eventually W-League and Y-League (25) and result in 400,000 spectators attending the ground annually.

Jackk
some good posts.

I think your on the money.

When you take the emotion and personal hopes out of it - our ability to host a World Cup looks flimsy at best.

I don't think you got what I'm saying. I don't doubt the fans would travel to Canberra for WC games. My point is that Canberra has no use whatsoever for a 50k stadium after the WC. They currently have a 25k stadium that more or less never gets filled. I think your definition of wider catchment area is pretty loose as well. Compare Canberra to similar sized European cities where there are often 5-10 other towns within 20km or so.



USA - population 300 million
Korea - population 50 million, football is the number one sport, and they still only hosted half a WC
Japan - population 120 million, football is one of the top two sports, and they still only hosted half a WC
South Africa - population 50 million, football is the number one sport, and they still only got awarded the WC because Blatter was desperate to have it hosted in Africa.

Australia is simply not in the same position as any of those countries.



The fact that you even mentioned the Olympics shows that you really don't appreciate the scale of the WC. You only need one big city to host the Olympics, not 8-10.

The 400k is just the immediate urban area - the wider catchment area is more like 700k, including the Riverina etc... Where Canberra is certainly the closest capital city, in relative terms.

Also, once again (As I've mentioned elsewhere), strategically, Canberra, like Wollongong and Gold Coast is not too far from a major capital city, Sydney ofcourse. Even the other Eastern States capitals are not too far, by plane.

So these places can and will certainly draw fans coming from Sydney, Brisbane or wherever, aswell as the overseas visitors.

And, this may not be by 2020 (Not at this rate), but surely by the middle of this century, the proposed 'Very Fast Rail' line from Sydney to Canberra and eventually Melbourne, will be established. That would essentially turn Canberra into another suburb of Sydney, as good and bad as that is.

BTW The minimum required capacity is 40k (60k is only required for Post-Group Match fixtures), which is suddenly a reasonable ask for Canberra's region and obviously one the Govt. was prepared to back. Also the Brumbies and even Raiders would benefit from such an expansion, upgrading of facilities too. So it's in their agenda to support such a stadium upgrade - especially the ARU, as they could host more Wallabies matches there and the Brumbies could fit some of their larger drawing Super 14 fixtures in there.

We're also sports freaks in this country and little old Townsville's (180k people) stadium is already 25k capacity and they may look to expand that too, if they use the city for the WC - Which has been mooted! :o Townsville is another kettle of fish, more of a concern IMHO, especially distance wise. But I think even there such a WC proposal is credible, with the area's very rapid growth rate and the crowds the Cowboys already draw.


I know we might be slightly stretched for 9-10 Host Cities, but I think it's more than possible for us to do this (The likes of Canberra and Wollongong ARE large enough and are well situated to larger Capitals) and the bid actually allows for the growth for the game, establishing a much needed legacy in areas like Canberra, Perth, Adelaide, maybe Wollongong etc...

TBH With USA, Korea/Japan etc... now South Africa hosting in recent couple decades, given our strong context, we're actually quite late on the scene - If we had the set up we had now, back in the 80s or 90s, we may've been bidding for 2002, even 1994! So it's not like we are only JUST ready to do so now, not in wider terms, just more ready in terms of administratively, which has resulted in the move to Asia and successful establishment of the A-League. It's kind of well past our due to be involved in this process, and arguably it's due for the Oceania region, symbolically through Australia, to be hosting it, in a way. Even if we're considered smaller fry, in some ways, the world knows what Australia can offer, including Sydney 2000.

Edited by GloryPerth: 27/10/2009 11:12:32 PM

Oh cmon Jackk doesn't Canberra have that huge fountain thing:lol: :lol: :lol:

While I see your point, this just highlights one of the major problems with the Australian bid. We need to use at least 8 different cities, and we simply don't have 8 cities that are credible world cup venues, in which building a new stadium of 50,000+ can be justified. While 400k sounds like a reasonably big population, that's for the entire catchment area of Canberra. It's not like a typical city in other countries that might only have a population of 400k, but have numerous other reasonably sized towns within a short drive on top of that. The Raiders & Brumbies can't even fill the existing stadium there.

My comment earlier about Canberra was meant to be a joke (although clearly not taken that way by some), but there is some truth behind my point. Canberra is not a huge tourist attraction at the best of times, and certainly not in June/July. I just don't think the absence of Canberra from the bid will make any difference to those making the decision. There really are much bigger negatives than that - e.g. distance between venues, distance from rest of world, time difference from Europe, availability of sufficient accommodation in Melbourne & Sydney, getting AFL/NRL agreement to free up stadia ....

:lol: Nice pick-up, but is it any real surprise? :lol:

Edit - posted in FFT's thread about this instead.

Edited by GloryPerth: 27/10/2009 07:58:58 PM

:( :( :(

copy from andrew barr face book

Interests:Politics, Music, Cooking, Cycling, Movies, Reading, Food, Wine, Tourism, Art, Theatre, most sports especially AFL, Rugby Union, Rugby League, Cricket, Basketball, Tennis, Netball and Golf.


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Guys, while sentimentally, yeah, the whole 'Our nations capital being involved' thing IS important, especially in regards to internal perceptions, pride, national scope etc... but you lot are generally missing the point -

The Canberra/Queanbeyan urban region is Australia's 8th largest city, at 400k+ plus people. By 2018 or so, you can make that 450k. Just forget that it's the Nation's Capital for a sec and recognise that like the Gold Coast (6th largest City/Region) and Newcastle (7th) being involved, it's VERY important for the Canberra region to be involved as a Host City, with a Host Stadium, for the strength of our World Cup bid!



Indeed and this is 'hopefully' just another ploy to pressure the FFA over the next A-League expansion and even pressure the Federal Govt. to help fund that $200M expansion.

BTW With that $200M expansion the NRL and especially the Brumbies/ARU would benefit greatly too. Canberra would then become a stadium more than fit for Wallabies Tests and for the Super 14/15 it would become more than suitable, giving the increasing demands that comp brings.

As Riv and others have suggested, alot of this tra-ra now could've been avoided, if Canberra were given a 'provisional/exclusive licence' similar to what Heart and later West Sydney achieved, except for the following 2011/12 season.

Edited by GloryPerth: 27/10/2009 07:25:33 PM

:lol:

Lighten up FFS!

AND JACKK YOU CAN GO FUCKYOURSELF ALSO

POSTED THIS ON ANOTHER THREAD ASWELL.

Andrew Barr, GO FUCK YOURSELF, this bloke is a total wanker and no self respecting football FAN will listen to his utter BULLSHIT. Fancy saying that crap, " we'll support the nrl afl aru during the world cup if Australia get it. Your a FUCKEN IDIOT Barr, did you get a bar while makeing that speech you fukwit.

CALLING ALL CANBERRANS, GET TO THE GAME ON SATURDAY NIGHT PROTEST BY BEING THERE RATHER THAN NOT, THIS IS THE ONLY WAY FFA WILL SEE THAT WE DO DESERVE A TEAM. TAKE BANNERS PROTESTING THE FACT WE DID NOT GET A TEAM. I TOTALLY AGREE THAT THAT OUR BID WAS SHAFTED BUT THE WAY FORWARD IS WITH NUMBERS ON SEATS. LETS SHOW FFA THAT WE ARE SERIOUS ABOUT A TEAM HERE. FORGET ABOUT THIS PISSY ATTITUDE TOWARDS WEST SYDNEY EVEN THOUGH WE KNEW WE HAD THE BETTER BID. WE HAVE TO GET AROUND THE 10,000 MARK TO MAKE A STAEMENT SO C'MON LETS GET OUT THERE ON SATURDAY NIGHT AND SREAM OUR BALLS OFF FOR OUR OWN TEAM EVEN THOUGH THE TEAMS PLAYIN WILL BEFROM OUT OF TOWN. PLEASE LETS DO IT FOR THE FUTURE OF THE YOUNG KIDS IN THE ACT THAT ASPIRE TO PLAY AT A HIGH LEVEL IM BEGGING PLEASE LETS SHOVE BARRS COCK UP HIS ARSE

Correction, Pretoria is a venue, it's just referred to as Tshwane on the website. Anyway, the point remains, it's not compuslory to use your capital city, especially when your capital city is a glorifed business park built in the middle of nowhere (which has freezing cold weather when the WC will be on!) :d

Edited by Jackk: 27/10/2009 03:59:39 PM

Edited by Jackk: 27/10/2009 04:00:04 PM

I also posted this in another thread:

I hope he is just playing politics. Because if not then I am absolutely furious at the ACT Government. "Oh hey, instead of hosting the World's biggest sporting event in Canberra, why don't we just settle for the Swans vs the Demons instead". Yea I think that is a much better alternative. Luring a seperate "sporting bonanza". What the hell is he talking about? The World Cup is the biggest sporting bonanza in the world. I'm sure it is more of a bonzanza thatn seeing Swans-Demons play.

What is this gonna achieve? Yes, we didn't get an A-League team this time around but we were never going to get it, yes the FFA screwed us over but by continuing to support football in Australia will help our push towards a Canberra A-League team. We cannot continue to sook over the decision, we just have to move on and do the best moves for football in Canberra and Australia. The FFA made a big mistake in not accepting us or giving us a provisional licence but this is just going to hurt our Canberra A-league bid. This is a bloody disgrace.

Who cares? Most people outside of OZ have never heard of Canberra, and even most Aussies have never been there!

It's not without precedent anyway. Pretoria is not a venue for next year's finals in S Africa, and Tokyo wasn't a venue in 2002 (although you could argue Yokohama is effectively part of Tokyo).

I don't think there is much chance of us being chosen for numerous reasons, but the involvement of Canberra isn't one of them.

When it comes down to it the Federal Government won't let a bid go in without Canberra being in it. They own the land that the ACT was going to use for the new stadium anyway so they will just build a stadium themselves.

And so they should. If the nation's capital prefers to host AFL and NRL which are at best only regional codes and turn it's back on one of the greatest sporting events in the world then Australia has no hope of hosting the WC finals for at least 25 years. Sad to see such provincial thinking.

I'm not too worried about Barr's stance. Based on the quotes, he seem to be trying to bargain for more Socceroo games than anything else. Ben Buckly has already been on record saying the Canberra bid is a priority for the 13th team, write a letter of intent outlining plans for several friendlies to be played at Canberra and I can see the problem with Barr going away. The question is how Lowy would react to being blackmailed. Barr is playing with fire here and things could potentially blow up in his face if he doesn't step carefully.

It'd be a blow, though Im sure a bid without Canberra could still work, most importantly Perth and Adelaide need to get on board...