[sidspaceman]

SYDNEY, Australia (AP) -- Australia plans to bid to host the 2014 World Cup of soccer, two state leaders said Saturday.

The bid is being led by the state governments of New South Wales and Victoria, whose respective premiers, Bob Carr and Steve Bracks, are expected to announce Australia's candidacy to host the Cup on Sunday.

FIFA president Sepp Blatter, who is in Australia on a brief stopover in Australia following an Oceania Football Confederation meeting in New Zealand, is scheduled to join Carr for the formal announcement of the bid at the Sydney Opera House.

Carr said Sydney's performance as host of the Sydney Olympic Games in 2000 showed Australia's capacity to host international sporting events.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/soc...ralia_2014_ap/

[Maczebus]

Never thought I'd feel this animated about who hosts the WC. I've never known a country be so hell bent on automatic qualification.

We should all take a leaf out of the Grange Hill anti-drugs song, and just say no!

[olafgb]

I'm saying for quite a while that Australia is one of the next countries that should host a WC. At the 2000 Olympics they proved to be great hosts, the country is perfect - now they just got to prove to have/build 10 to 12 WC-capable stadiums. I think that they'll get it if they apply.

[sidspaceman]

I don't know I realy hope that the 2014 cup is in South America.

[Maczebus]

Originally posted by sidspaceman
I don't know I realy hope that the 2014 cup is in South America.

So do I my friend however unless the economic situation down there improves a lot (and of course its 12 years away), I can't see any country hosting it.
Resulting in what I fear might happen. A world cup in the arse end of nowhere, given to a country with very very little history (football).
I've ranted about this before on other threads (I do feel damn strongly about this!), so I won't repeat myself too much.
Just to say that just because the Olympics was a success there doesn't mean the WC would necessarily be (note I am not saying it would be a complete and utter disaster). Australia's representation at the Olympics was and is strong, the Oz public's love affair with football is tiny.
It's always bad when the host nation goes out, the thing is I really can't see them progressing (and I'm confident of that even 12 years previous).

It's just a bad idea for the World Cup, and now I've got myself all wound up so I'm going to have a little lie down.

[MassachusettsRef]

Originally posted by maczebus
Never thought I'd feel this animated about who hosts the WC. I've never known a country be so hell bent on automatic qualification.

Meet Canada.

However, if you think about it, was the USA cast in the same light for 1994? If Australia has qualified for 2002 or even 1998, these comments may not be apt. Australia is really not that bad of a team. The Round of 16 or the QFs is not out of their realm.

[sammydog]

Originally posted by maczebus


So do I my friend however unless the economic situation down there improves a lot (and of course its 12 years away), I can't see any country hosting it.
Resulting in what I fear might happen. A world cup in the arse end of nowhere, given to a country with very very little history (football).
I've ranted about this before on other threads (I do feel damn strongly about this!), so I won't repeat myself too much.
Just to say that just because the Olympics was a success there doesn't mean the WC would necessarily be (note I am not saying it would be a complete and utter disaster). Australia's representation at the Olympics was and is strong, the Oz public's love affair with football is tiny.
It's always bad when the host nation goes out, the thing is I really can't see them progressing (and I'm confident of that even 12 years previous).

It's just a bad idea for the World Cup, and now I've got myself all wound up so I'm going to have a little lie down.

The national team down here is actually very well supported when they play. I have no reason to beleive that a world cup here wouldn't be a great success. Australia weren't in the world cup this time (Ok not since 1974) and the TV ratings were very high.

As for your comments on the world cup not being given to a country with a hisory in the game, would you prefer to exclude all nations from playing the game who don't currently have a history as you put it.

[Dandal]

As I've stated before in another thread, I think Australia is a good choice of exactly the same reasons that USA was a good choice for 1994. I don't say it would be the best choice for 2014 (personally I prefere South America), but it wouldn't be unreasonable. So, go for it, Aussies!

[vico]

Originally posted by Dandal
personally I prefere South America

Helt klart. Det är Sydamerikas tur efter Afrika! (funny to see a swede on the board! )

If Africa gets the WC in 2010 (which I don't mind) then South America must be given the WC in 2014. South America holds 9 WC titles (one more than Europe) but hasn't arranged a WC since 1978. In fact South America has only arranged 4 WC:s in total. Brazil should be a good candidate since have the necessary stadiums.

[Maczebus]

Originally posted by sammydog


The national team down here is actually very well supported when they play. I have no reason to beleive that a world cup here wouldn't be a great success. Australia weren't in the world cup this time (Ok not since 1974) and the TV ratings were very high.

As for your comments on the world cup not being given to a country with a hisory in the game, would you prefer to exclude all nations from playing the game who don't currently have a history as you put it.

I'm not against any nation playing the sport, I'm just against any nation hosting it's premier event.
And particularly using that in order to obtain a valuable WC spot.

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure the WC if hosted in Australia would be a success in TV terms. After all with the sheer amount of hype and marketing surrounding the event now, no location would be a total failure in that respect. The largest TV market for football is Europe, matches will be in the truly anti-social hours of the day. Is that a good financial consideration?
I find it quite sorry when there's a WC match not filled with supporters. I appreciate that there will be more popular teams than others, but I fear that this will exacerbated by the sheer distance from the majority of the footballing world. Japan and Korea (if there) would probably well represented but its a huge way to go for the majority of the world. It might result in a WC with even less soul than this last one.