Kevin Rudd has given the FFA the money it needs to make a play for the 2018 FIFA World Cup, but there are still those who doubt if we can even get close to hosting the world’s biggest sporting event.
There are the obvious drawbacks, most notably the notion that 2018 is destined for Europe. Or that China is lurking around the corner ready to dash our hopes.
However, as yet China isn’t pushing the envelope and whilst Europe is certainly of concern, it will take more than one continent to bring down the bid.
Another concern you hear raised a lot locally is that Australia does not have the stadiums to host the tournament.
FIFA reportedly requires between nine and twelve venues, although they’ve recently showed flexibility in this area by pressing the 2014 World Cup hosts, Brazil, to use between eight and ten. Another part of this requirement is that only one city may have two venues.
The other major sticking point is that a World Cup stadium must have a capacity of at least 40,000, with at least 60,000 needed for semi final and final venues.
As it stands, the FFA can barely bring itself to letting the Socceroos play in a city that doesn’t reside along the east coast.
But it must be said, the status quo in Perth and Adelaide is not going to last until 2018, with or without a World Cup. A successful bid will ensure these changes won’t be AFL-centric and stadiums of World Cup quality will be ready.
So with that in mind, and a quick stroll around the other major cities, the stadium glass begins to look half-full, not half-empty.
Going by order of capacity, the MCG tops the list. Although some may criticize the ground for its oval shape, it is worth remembering that at the 2006 Commonwealth Games, several rows of seating had to be removed to accommodate the running track.
At the final of the 2006 World Cup, Berlin’s stadium had a running track around it.
Next up is Sydney’s ANZ Stadium. It's proven itself as a world-class venue and will fit in well at a World Cup.
Following closely behind is Brisbane’s Suncorp Stadium. With a minor upgrade to nudge the capacity over 60,000, it would be perfect for a semi final.
To complement the Melbourne and Sydney venues, either one of the Sydney Football Stadium and an upgraded Melbourne “bubble” stadium would work nicely. (As a preference, however, bending FIFA’s rules so both can be used would be ideal.)
So to get to FIFA’s Brazil target of eight, it would take just one or two regional centres to jump on board. If nine is the preferred number, at most it would be three.
That’s not to say work doesn’t still need to be done. But you only have to look as far as the next two host nations of the event – South Africa and Brazil – to realize just how good we’ve got it.
The 2010 World Cup in South Africa will feature five venues built completely from scratch, one with a major overhaul and four that have undergone renovation work.
No current venue in Brazil in its present state is ready for the 2014 edition of the tournament.
Alexandre Massura, a special project manager for the bid, told USA Today last year: “The last venue built was 50 years ago, and by 2014 we have to give the world 12 new facilities.”
Australia has four venues either ready to go or just in need of a minor face-lift. In that regard, we’re on par, if not slightly ahead, with South Africa.
Australia will in all likeliness only need two new venues, the rest will be upgrades of existing stadia. In that regard, we’re well ahead of both South Africa and Brazil.
And in terms of the number of stadiums over 40,000, we're easily comparable to one of our biggest rivals for 2018, Spain.
Governments at both a state and federal level have shown their support, and will no doubt be aware of what they’re getting themselves in to.
We’re no England. We're no USA.
But in the bigger scheme of things, we’re really not that far off.
Also published on The Roar.
0 comments:
Post a Comment