It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


What is wrong with Australia

page: 1

log in


posted on Dec, 2 2010 @ 11:38 AM
Australia lost it's World Cup bid to Qatar. Is this because of the civil unrest of the liberal party of the IR reform? Or is it because the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has told their government to discard the NBN Co Plan to build interconnections in five capital cities.

Seems to a lot going on there to keep a huge even like the World Cup away. Have any other thoughts?

posted on Dec, 2 2010 @ 11:41 AM
reply to post by amc621

Maybe they didn't bride the FIFA officials well enough.

That seems to be how it works now

posted on Dec, 2 2010 @ 11:41 AM
No it was probably due to the lack of current facilities we have and the poor presentation we put forward. Qatar has the facilites, and no other competition from other sports, meaning they are guaranteed to get the results FIFA want.

posted on Dec, 2 2010 @ 11:45 AM
Um we have a billion dollar white elephant left over from the 2000 Olympics in Sydney that they could've used at a bargain price. Or is that not appropriate for the cup?

posted on Dec, 2 2010 @ 11:47 AM
Maybe it's because Qatar had the better bid ?

It's going to be fun for fans in 2022 going to have a pre-match pint or two...

posted on Dec, 2 2010 @ 11:54 AM
Who cares anyway? Its kicking a ball around ffs. I think it's disgusting the way our Prime Minister etc prostituted themselves in front of the jumped up FIFA nobodies.
Any result has to be in doubt anyway because, as my gran used to say, the whole thing seems as crooked as a 9 bob note.
Allegedly of course

edit on 2-12-2010 by starchild10 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 2 2010 @ 12:23 PM
Geographically we are a hard place to run international events,tho we do have great infrastructure to host events.
My mates son races superbikes,so i get to see the logistics involved.
Altho Aussies will embrace nearly anything under the label of 'sport' soccer is very small here as compared to Europe, sure its here but nothing like overseas.
So it comes back to cash,expensive to get here,and maybe not the number of people needed to project revenue.
If they try and host it thru our football/league season it wont get the attention.
I say great,Aussies will save a fortune on security because no doubt terror alerts will be high around such an event,cant let you have too much fun,gotta keep the fear installed!

posted on Dec, 2 2010 @ 12:26 PM

Originally posted by starchild10
Who cares anyway? Its kicking a ball around ffs.

It's so much more than that.

As the late Bill Shankly once observed: “Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.”

posted on Dec, 2 2010 @ 12:27 PM
Put simply, FIFA is one of the most corrupt organisations on the face of the planet.

Money, that's all it was, well a lack of money.
Seriously to only get one vote and go out in the first round is terrible, we realistically the best option as where England for 2018.
I hope FIFA get a right treatment and be exposed fully and then disbanded.

posted on Dec, 2 2010 @ 12:35 PM
reply to post by pazcat

From reading the post, does this mean that Australia didn't REALLY want it? I can understand that. The point was made about security. I would imagine that if South Africa can pull it of just about anyone can, and the economic boost should be significant.

Still it looks like it boiled down to money and nothing else.

posted on Dec, 2 2010 @ 12:46 PM
reply to post by amc621

I was wondering if anyone was going to get on here and give a reason that the reptile people wanted in Qatar or some other alien or divine intervention was the reason.

Interesting that a post can go on without some sensationalistic comments.

posted on Dec, 2 2010 @ 12:48 PM
reply to post by pazcat

People tend to automatically assume that their own country has the best bid, largely due to the fact that that is the only bid that they have any extensive knowledge of. Here in England, it was assumed that England had the best bid, whereas in Russia, they thought that they had the best bid.

Australia was also fighting it out with the USA, Japan and South Korea, as well, who have all hosted the World Cup recently and have similar infrastructure to Australia.

I agree that FIFA is as bent as a nine-bob note, but I think that members voting for Russia and Qatar were largely influenced by the idea of bringing the World Cup to parts of the world that have never hosted it; if the tournament hadn't gone to Qatar, then Australia may well have got it, due to this factor.

If we're honest about it, most bids are all a much of a muchness, so it's always going to be a close run thing.

Personally speaking, I think that Qatar was a good choice, and it will be an interesting experience watching them host it, albeit booze free...

edit on 2-12-2010 by Sherlock Holmes because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 2 2010 @ 12:50 PM
reply to post by amc621

It probably means more that Australia are just a bit to naive in their dealings with FIFA, and lets face it if it was down to money there is not a thing you could do if Qatar are in the game. But FIFA have been shown that some members of the executive commitee have been caught out recieving money, and old allegiances die hard.

This was shown in the UK 3 days before the vote.

Part 1 of part 2.

@ SherlockHolmes, I get what you are saying but I'm not actually in Australia so I have had a chance to check out all the bids fairly well. Australia would of been the common sense choice, ruling Japan, Korea and the U.S out because of their recent hosting and then there was Qatar. But the votes showed that Australia was never going to win it anyway. You are right though it's all much of a muchness, but I feel that both bids where bought with bribes.
I think in the near future the UK press will expose it too.

Not to mention England were robbed too.

avidBondBBC Before today's WC vote, Blatter reminded Fifa executive comm members about "certain media" and "recent media coverage".

edit on 2-12-2010 by pazcat because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 2 2010 @ 12:53 PM
reply to post by Sherlock Holmes

Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't the US and UK up for a closer year than the Australian bid?

posted on Dec, 2 2010 @ 12:56 PM

Originally posted by amc621
Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't the US and UK up for a closer year than the Australian bid?

England were competing for 2018, but the USA was bidding for 2022 along with Australia, Qatar, Japan and South Korea.

posted on Dec, 2 2010 @ 01:04 PM
I think the U.S initially were bidding on 2018 and 2022 but struck a deal to change to 2022.

U.S. Soccer first said in February 2007 that it would put forth a bid for the 2018 World Cup.[79] On 28 January 2009, U.S. Soccer announced that it would submit bids for both the 2018 and 2022 Cups.[80] David Downs, president of Univision Sports, is executive director of the bid. Other committee members include president of U.S. Soccer Sunil Gulati, U.S. Soccer chief executive officer Dan Flynn, Major League Soccer Commissioner Don Garber, and Phil Murphy, the former national finance chair for the Democratic National Committee.[81] The vice president of FIFA, Jack Warner, who is also the president of CONCACAF, originally said he would try to bring the World Cup back to the CONCACAF region.[82] However, Warner also stated that he would prefer if the USSF changed their plans to make a bid for the 2022 FIFA World Cup.[83] In April 2009, U.S. President Barack Obama wrote a letter to FIFA President Sepp Blatter in support of the U.S. bid, and then met with him in July 2009

posted on Dec, 2 2010 @ 01:18 PM
Football didn't come home to England either and we invented the bloody game!

Methinks its because we did not grease the right hands with enough money..

FIFA is corrupt to the very core.

Maybe as we invented the game we should set up our own world cup.. Oh yeah.. We did already.. Its called the Premiership.


At least us English can comfort ourselves with the Ashes comming home

posted on Dec, 2 2010 @ 01:29 PM
reply to post by Yissachar1

Looking at it from as objective a standpoint as possible, I wasn't overly impressed with England's bid and presentation.

They seemed to favour emotionally-driven style, rather than substance. I think that Russia were worthy winners; plus, they had Yelena Isinbayeva in their delegation, which swung it for me.

Personally speaking, in a way I'm glad that England didn't win it, as it means that my team won't have to move out of our historic ground, and move into some characterless bowl, that would no doubt be tackily named after some sponsor.

posted on Dec, 2 2010 @ 02:57 PM
reply to post by Sherlock Holmes

It is a shame that England has not won it lately. I started this thread because I found it curious that Australia did not win. I'm no expert, but maybe they did not have what it takes to host a Cup. (other than money that is)


log in