Stifling World Cup Debate

There has been much vigorous debate across a range of sporting forums about the merit or otherwise of Australia's bid to host the World Cup in 2022.

It would be an understatement to declare that it has been quite a divisive issue, with the majority of soccer fans (and others keen on hosting the World Cup) demanding that the AFL give in to every request from the FFA, regardless of the practicalities of such requests, while a significant proportion of AFL fans are quite supportive of the AFL's priority in looking after its competition and its stakeholders first and foremost.

So passionate have many soccer fans become about the issue, in a range of forums that I have frequented, that anyone daring to defend the AFL's approach has been subject to charges of treason and much worse, including no end of personal vilification.

On top of that, the logic from the soccer side is completely lacking, especially the widespread view that a commercial organisation should give up its assets, with zero compensation, to a rival business.
Some of this irrationality can be excused by the lack of understanding from our Northern friends about the very long-term leases the AFL has entered into in relation to its two primary stadiums in Melbourne; arrangements, it has to be said, that are to the mutual benefit of the AFL, the Victorian Government, the MCG Trust, the MCC and the sporting public generally.

But I have to say, the vindictiveness with which many soccer fans have responded to being advised of this state of play suggests that many do not really want to know the reality, but would rather dream the impossible dream (hoping that a military junta might take over all levels of Government and forcibly appropriate the said stadiums).

Another peculiar pattern I've come across is the ease with which those supporting the AFL (who have the law and commercial reality on their side) are cast as the bad guys amongst both soccer fans and the moderators of forums who are ostensibly are arbitrating as neutrals.

For instance, the Roar sports opinion site has effectively barred all five or six regular AFL posters from its site, when a casual inspection would indicate that it is generally they who are the subject of personal abuse, and there is no end of denigration of our national game to be found either.

I keep in touch with few and we honestly can't fathom it, giving each other virtual looks of puzzlement over the web.

Now I half expect that from a Sydney-centric site, whose business model probably allows for followers of the other three sports to come on board and express their collective envy at the success of our national game, but what of Big Footy?

Shouldn't an AFL fan on Big Footy expect to be able to put forward an opinion defending the AFL's stance, and also expect that they would not have to put up with personal abuse in the process?

Not one bit!!

Even on there, I too have been barred from entering the World Cup board. The reason provided was that I was a "disruption" and that since the thread is about soccer, someone with alternative views is not welcome.

There are a few odd aspects about this:
1. I re-entered this thread following Frank Lowy's recent lambasting of the AFL and its tough negotiation on the MCG. Many from both sides would agree that it was odd timing by Lowy, something worthy of debate by anyone with an interest in the subject.
2. Intended or not, once again there was great misunderstanding from soccer fans about the long term leases on both the MCG and Etihad - surely some clarification from someone who knows would be in order?
3. I was quite civil with my comments, and received a good deal of personal abuse in return. Yet it was I who was barred!
4. Eight of the recent threads on the board sounded like PR pieces about how wonderful the bid is, how good the chances are of Australia winning, etc.

Promotion or discussion?
On the last point, if a board exists purely to promote something, and allow only positive, supportive posts at whatever is being promoted, then it ceases to be a true discussion board, and that is the real issue with the decision of the moderator to bar me from that board just because I have an alternative opinion to offer.

Surprisingly, the soccer forum on FourFourTwo has allowed me to offer alternative views, much to the chagrin of all those behind the WC bid (all credit to the moderators who have been quite fair).

Very strange happenings all round.