Quicky said:

I think you hit on the most important thing. Respect is required. There's too little of it.

I sometimes catch myself reading posts from supporters of NPL teams and think the victim attitude is tedious. Then I think who the fuck am I to judge. They've been treated awfully and I can only really appreciate that in the most superficial kinda way. It's not helpful.

Respect needs to go both ways or it won't work. There's not enough of it.

Click to expand...

I’ll say Thanks right up on recognising how it feels from the other side Quicky.
From us supporters perspective we can’t change the big picture but we should be more understanding towards each other but we all have our ways and who and what influences you.
I’d like us to be more together but that wont be until there is a leadership above that takes the game by the horns and makes the moves that will rock many selfish members of the game they want to control their own patch.
This needs to be broken one day incl the APL but alas think this won’t happen till after 2034.

patjennings said:

We will get respect in the greater Australia sporting scene when, and only when, we either host the Mens World Cup or we go very deep into the tournament - top 4. Until then we will just be a minor sport at the top level but the largest sport at the grass roots.

I can't see the top 4 happening in my lifetime (but please surprise me Poppa) so I think we need to look at hosting again.

We have to target 2038. By 2042 a lot of confederations will be able to bid again. However in 2038 only CONCACAF and OFC can bid. We would need to have an exemption to bid. However, this could be forthcoming if it is packaged as a OFC led South Pacific bid aided by the AFC.

These 7 stadiums fit the existing criteria(or will), though I would be looking to upgrade the Auckland stadium to 60,000 people which has been done before.

Perth, MCG, Lang Park, Victoria Park, Allianz, Homebush & Auckland

8 --The remaining 7 - start with NZ. The new Christchurch stadium is upgradeable to 40,000. This ensures that NZ can host between 19 and 25 matches and ensures it is not just a token contribution as it would be with a joint US NZ bid.

The remaining upgrades and builds to be done after the Brisbane Olympic stadium builds and will only be made if the bid is successful.

9 - minor upgrade as per bid for 2022 bid add 6000 to Newcastle stadium (NRL would support)

10 - Take the opportunity to expand MRS stadium to 50,000 (NRL would support)

11- Robina to expand to 40,000 (NRL would support)

12 - Canberra (new build 40,000) on AIS campus, current stadium needs to be replaced. (NRL would support) Current plans are for a lesser stadium but a larger modern stadium can attract more events, concerts, conferences etc and make it a more viable proposition as a community asset.

13. Perry Park - needs to be added to the Olympic build as a 27,000 stadium expandable with 13,000 temp stands for the World Cup.

14. The missing piece. Adelaide. Coopers is too small, Adelaide Oval needs a lot of work to upgrade. Riverside West precinct is being earmarked as a urban redevelopment area. A new 40,000 stadium to be the centrepiece. Good for football but also good for NRL expansion,

So assume all of this could be done why would FIFA pick Aus/NZ over CONCACAF.
1) In the last 60 years only Brazil, Argentina and South Africa have hosted a World Cup in the southern hemisphere.
2) Oceania has never hosted a World Cup, this is their only chance to at least co-host one.
3) USA, if they host would have hosted 3 times in 42 years.
4) Visa issues will likely be problematic in 2026 - so will FIFA prefer to avoid that again.

Time zones form Auckland to Perth can cater for varying markets. Perth in Particular can cater for the growing middle class in the two most populous countries in the world as well as a football mad 4th largest in Indonesia. Large global FIFA sponsors will still be interested in these markets and Indian, Chinese, Japanese and Indonesian sponsors would also be interested with this time zone.

At the end of the day an Aus/NZ bid could win, but to give a greater chance then including Jakarta would increase the chances and maybe we could lose victory Park

Click to expand...

What would help seal the deal is installation of retractable-seating at the MCG for rectangular-configuration …instead of bloody Eddie McGuire’s harebrained idea about a roof

An old vid I found on YouTube years back depicting what a configuration of temporary additional-seating would look like:

BA81 said:

What would help seal the deal is installation of retractable-seating at the MCG for rectangular-configuration …instead of bloody Eddie McGuire’s harebrained idea about a roof

An old vid I found on YouTube years back depicting what a configuration of temporary additional-seating would look like:


View attachment 4456
View attachment 4457

Click to expand...

This goes back to another post I made. If federal money is being spent it must benefit all codes where possible and scheduling for major events becomes controlled by the Federal government. I.e. International tournaments that bring in heaps of tourists and money supersede what are basically glorified suburban comps. That applies to all large grounds receiving federal money.

New stadiums to cater for cricket and AFL as well if there is no suitable stadium for them but
changeovers to rectangular and back should be a simple, cheap and quick process. Federal money shouldn't be duplicating stadiums for different needs. It may cost more up front but saves on future builds.

This includes Macquarie Point and Olympic builds where the footprint allows.

grazorblade said:

I wonder if one piece of low hanging fruit is if football australia tries to monetize our youth teams, especially the olyroos.
They would have to reverse the trend of saying youth results don't matter and remarket it as a national team repping their country

Click to expand...

Tbh results at U17 and U20 probably shouldn't matter but by U23 they should be. The problem is that mistakes games are not on FIFA dates so our best often don't play.

patjennings said:

We will get respect in the greater Australia sporting scene when, and only when, we either host the Mens World Cup or we go very deep into the tournament - top 4. Until then we will just be a minor sport at the top level but the largest sport at the grass roots.

I can't see the top 4 happening in my lifetime (but please surprise me Poppa) so I think we need to look at hosting again.

We have to target 2038. By 2042 a lot of confederations will be able to bid again. However in 2038 only CONCACAF and OFC can bid. We would need to have an exemption to bid. However, this could be forthcoming if it is packaged as a OFC led South Pacific bid aided by the AFC.

These 7 stadiums fit the existing criteria(or will), though I would be looking to upgrade the Auckland stadium to 60,000 people which has been done before.

Perth, MCG, Lang Park, Victoria Park, Allianz, Homebush & Auckland

8 --The remaining 7 - start with NZ. The new Christchurch stadium is upgradeable to 40,000. This ensures that NZ can host between 19 and 25 matches and ensures it is not just a token contribution as it would be with a joint US NZ bid.

The remaining upgrades and builds to be done after the Brisbane Olympic stadium builds and will only be made if the bid is successful.

9 - minor upgrade as per bid for 2022 bid add 6000 to Newcastle stadium (NRL would support)

10 - Take the opportunity to expand MRS stadium to 50,000 (NRL would support)

11- Robina to expand to 40,000 (NRL would support)

12 - Canberra (new build 40,000) on AIS campus, current stadium needs to be replaced. (NRL would support) Current plans are for a lesser stadium but a larger modern stadium can attract more events, concerts, conferences etc and make it a more viable proposition as a community asset.

13. Perry Park - needs to be added to the Olympic build as a 27,000 stadium expandable with 13,000 temp stands for the World Cup.

14. The missing piece. Adelaide. Coopers is too small, Adelaide Oval needs a lot of work to upgrade. Riverside West precinct is being earmarked as a urban redevelopment area. A new 40,000 stadium to be the centrepiece. Good for football but also good for NRL expansion,

So assume all of this could be done why would FIFA pick Aus/NZ over CONCACAF.
1) In the last 60 years only Brazil, Argentina and South Africa have hosted a World Cup in the southern hemisphere.
2) Oceania has never hosted a World Cup, this is their only chance to at least co-host one.
3) USA, if they host would have hosted 3 times in 42 years.
4) Visa issues will likely be problematic in 2026 - so will FIFA prefer to avoid that again.

Time zones form Auckland to Perth can cater for varying markets. Perth in Particular can cater for the growing middle class in the two most populous countries in the world as well as a football mad 4th largest in Indonesia. Large global FIFA sponsors will still be interested in these markets and Indian, Chinese, Japanese and Indonesian sponsors would also be interested with this time zone.

At the end of the day an Aus/NZ bid could win, but to give a greater chance then including Jakarta would increase the chances and maybe we could lose victory Park

Click to expand...

I've been thinking about this a bit since the original post.

Imagine the following scenario because it is the 2026 organisers worst nightmare.

The potential for US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids is considered a top-tier threat, potentially more damaging to the World Cup's reputation and long-term financial success than an early USMNT exit. Human rights organizations argue that such events would tarnish the tournament, lead to significant global backlash, and result in boycotts of FIFA and its sponsors.

How ICE Raids Would Play Out

Immediate Fear and Reduced Attendance: Even the possibility of raids has created fear among immigrant communities and potential international visitors, leading to concerns that fans from Hispanic and Latin American countries might choose to watch games in Mexico or Canada instead of the U.S.. An actual high-profile arrest at a venue, similar to an incident at the 2025 Club World Cup where an asylum seeker was detained, would likely cause an immediate chilling effect on attendance and community safety.

Logistical Chaos and Security Risks: Critics warn that the presence of federal agents in an enforcement capacity would undermine the welcoming atmosphere and could lead to chaotic scenes, including protests, that disrupt the event's security framework.

Global Media Scandal: Images or reports of immigration arrests at a global celebration of unity would generate international condemnation, contrasting sharply with the positive image FIFA and the host cities want to project.

The Effect of Boycotts on FIFA Sponsors

A widespread global boycott of FIFA sponsors would be a major financial and reputational crisis, potentially making it a bigger issue than the USMNT's on-field performance.

Reputational Damage: Sponsors invest in the World Cup for positive association and global reach. Association with human rights controversies and "authoritarianism" would force them to publicly respond or withdraw their support to protect their brand image.

Financial Consequences: While an early USMNT exit impacts U.S.-specific ad revenue, a global boycott hits the core international sponsor revenue streams. The potential for a drop of up to $29 billion in international visitor spending related to U.S. travel has already been forecasted due to current immigration policies, illustrating the scale of the economic risk.

Loss of Credibility: Human rights groups argue that if FIFA fails to obtain binding guarantees from U.S. authorities to make venues safe spaces for all, it risks becoming a "public relations tool" for a political agenda, eroding the organization's stated commitment to human rights.

While a USMNT early exit would be a major disappointment for U.S. soccer development, a scenario involving highly publicized ICE raids at venues would be a global crisis for FIFA and its sponsors, generating a firestorm of controversy and potentially leading to long-term boycotts and an irreversible negative legacy for the tournament. This places the political issues and human rights concerns at the very top of the list of threats to a "successful" World Cup from a global and commercial perspective.

An event like widespread public controversy or boycotts over ICE raids at the 2026 World Cup would severely damage any potential U.S. bid for the 2038 World Cup (or any future major sporting event).

Here's how this would affect a 2038 bid:

Global Reputational Damage: The primary effect would be on the U.S.'s image as a reliable and welcoming host. The negative legacy of the 2026 event would be a significant point of contention for future voting delegates and international sports bodies like FIFA.

Sponsor Reluctance: The experience of navigating a sponsor boycott and a PR crisis would make major corporations hesitant to back a future U.S. bid, leading to a major funding challenge.

Political Risk: Other nations bidding for the 2038 World Cup would use the 2026 incidents as political leverage, highlighting the "human rights risks" of selecting the U.S. as a host nation.

FIFA Scrutiny: FIFA has strengthened its human rights policies in recent years. A 2026 incident would lead to intense scrutiny during the 2038 bid evaluation process, requiring the U.S. to provide ironclad, binding legal guarantees that similar events would not reoccur – guarantees that may be politically difficult to secure.

In short, such a scenario would be a major deterrent for the international football community to return to the U.S. so soon, making a 2038 bid highly unlikely to succeed.

But what fuels what. Even if we don't actually bid, or don't win because the US goes well. What is the harm in dangling the carrot. Start talking to NZ and Indonesia now. Get some sort of understanding going. If we start talking now football will be front and centre of politicians minds with the world cup coming up in June. Before that we will host the AFC Women's Asian Cup 2026 as well as part of the
FIFA Series 2026: Australia will host matches as part of the FIFA Series during the March international window to help the Socceroos prepare for the FIFA World Cup 2026™.

Successful hosting and big crowds will help in future potential bids.

Potential Bids

FIFA Club World Cup 2029: Football Australia is exploring the opportunity to host the revamped, 32-team tournament in 2029. FIFA has not yet opened the official bidding process for this event. Even though bidding hasn't started it is likely that substantial work has already gone into this bid as it will likely be decided in 2026. Importantly existing stadiums will be sufficient to host this.

AFC Asian Cup 2031: Football Australia has submitted an expression of interest to host the men's 2031 Asian Cup. The host for this tournament is also likely to be announced next year. Similarly no new builds would be needed to host this.

2032 Olympics- The Matildas and the Olyroos as hosts will compete in Brisbane.

Next year looks like being a pivotal year - both in hosting and winning bids. While the decision on the 2038 world cup may not happen until 2031 - the process may start next year. Show we are interested in major tournament hosting and do it well and then see where we stand in later in the decade. Even if we ultimately don't bid for the World Cup it would mean the media is talking about football in one form or another. If we win either of the 2029 or 2031 hosting then football becomes more prominent until at least 2032.

Keeping football front and centre by hosting and bidding is what will drive both public and private funding for football (both male and female). Saying it is too hard means we will continue to be underfunded.

The govt lost money. In reality it was about .02% of the budget.

The state of the game ?????
I was triggered by this article from yesterday involving some known bogans many people of the young gen don't respect at times.
Sure Bozza and more so Slater is polarising but deep down like us they have passion for the game and both over the years bring up exact same points many of us say as well.........
So many threads and so many opinions - state of the game - development - its going well from the top looking down - oh look at all our youth in AL right now - yaddayaddayadda......
The coaching experts carry on about how talented we are becoming/the level of our game - rightly so I suppose after 20+yrs having a Pro you bloody well should but its not enough to climb the bigger mountain.
Example not negative towards him - the fapping of Quintal - 19yrs ! say he was in europe and did perform as such there, he would have been snapped up long before 19yrs. By the time he does IF/When gets to europe its tooooo late most likely unless your a outlier.
LFC as mentioned have paid A$100M for a 20yr old who even might not work out but the fact is he was spotted and signed !

The experts rate and quote of the Big 5 as the leaders rightly so - many times France mentioned Clairefontaine - D and others say so and lets face it results count and look what developed.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
"There was not immediate success with France not making the 1990 and 1994 World Cups but they won in 1998.

Since then the country has been a powerhouse in football.

"The data says, in order to win a World Cup you almost have to have won a youth World Cup," Foster said.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

"It's a shit fight in this country, it has been for so long," he said.

"15 years ago he (Foster) said it, I've been saying it for two decades. For god's sake, what have we done? Over 100 years we celebrated last year in Australia football. We don't have a home. Where's our home?"

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Back in 2020, Viduka told ESPN "you have people running football in Australia that don't have a clue about football".

"And they don't want to get older players involved who actually have that experience ... people who have experience in the highest level of football, and they're not using them," he said.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Slater also explained how Australia has set its junior teams up differently to how it's done throughout the world.

"The trouble with development in this country is ... we are under 17s, under 20s and under 23s," he said.

"Now in south-east Asia, they have under 15s, 16s, 17s, 18s, 19s, 20s, 21s, 22s and 23s.

"They've been doing that in Europe, all those age groups, for about five or six years. Now south-east Asia are doing it, what do you think they're going to do?"

"... this is what Graham Arnold and the other coaches talk of, from the 17s, 20s to 23s is a black hole. This is where we lose players. So when you finish at Joeys (17s) and you've been successful, what do they do now? Where do they play? In the other countries they go to under 18s and play in Asian Cups, AFC championships.

"What do our young players do? They don't go straight into the 20s, they've got to bridge one or two years to possibly be ready for 20s."

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The article to some will be - oh typical these 2/3 carry on having their wobblies but fact of the matter is as quoted and backed by Foster quotes from way back in this article - GA when he banged on about our NT have NO home let alone for our budding selected elite to make use of.
The age group gaps again mentioned by GA sometime back.
Think about it fellas - it all makes sense and we still haven't dived in after all this time - lack of directives but all about the floundering APL and make sure our cash cows Roos/Tillys keep bringing in the bacon.


Whilst we welcome a new CEO and a new APL CEO all their efforts will be about "survival" and $$$$$$'s due to our fecked up limited entire top end system.
Sure bits and pieces are being done below and the Championship <<< mind you that is looked down on and be littled by many of the brain washed younger gen supporter base ignorantly.....
2/3 major points imo should be focussed on.

Solutions to close the divide is imperative ?! get over the politics and early collateral damage and look ahead for the bigger picture.
Get the Home base for elite training/development - a thought considering the $$ constraints for now - why not look into leasing Gosford yes CCM's ground as a Home Base for eg. got the training facilities close by also.

Open the pyrimid so many many potential budding Roos/Tillys have leagues that are synced and all on the same paths and directives.

We're doing the same thing year after year - pissing ourselves over making the WC and that APL avg 8/10 crowds to NPL less than half that.
Small mindedness/fear/grand standing has us sitting at the RED light.
Rant done