Why Australia won’t host a men’s World Cup soon

In December of last year, Saudi Arabia was officially announced as the host nation for the 2034 FIFA World Cup.

This makes them the fourth country from the Asian Football Confederation (AFC) to host the tournament—following Japan and South Korea in 2002, and more recently, Qatar in 2022.

What stood out about Saudi Arabia’s selection, though, was the lack of competition—they ended up being the only country to submit a formal bid.

Australia, a fellow AFC member nation had initially expressed interest in hosting the 2034 World Cup, but with Saudi Arabia heavily investing in their bid and momentum clearly shifting in their favor, Australia chose to step back.

Instead, they redirected their focus toward hosting the 2026 AFC Women’s Asian Cup—an event they were awarded in 2024—and the 2029 Club World Cup.

This isn’t the first time Australia has tried to bring the World Cup Down Under. Back in 2010, they launched a bid to host the 2022 tournament.

However, it ended in disappointment—they received just one vote in the first round, while Qatar controversially secured hosting rights under what many described as “suspicious circumstances.”

Now, 15 years after that failed bid, and with Saudi Arabia next in line to host, it seems increasingly unlikely that Australia will get a World Cup anytime soon. And there are several reasons why that might be the case.

Cost Factor

One of the major reasons Australia may not host a men’s FIFA World Cup in the near future is due to the enormous cost involved in staging the tournament.

According to Statista, Qatar spent a staggering $220 billion USD ($342 billion AUD) to host the 2022 World Cup, making it the most expensive edition in the tournament’s history.

This was largely due to Qatar needing to build much of the necessary infrastructure from scratch.

Even so, previous World Cups have still come with hefty price tags.

Russia spent around $11.6 billion USD ($18 billion AUD) to host the 2018 tournament, while Brazil’s 2014 World Cup cost about $15 billion USD ($23 billion AUD).

In fact, the last men’s World Cup to cost under $1 billion USD ($1.56 billion AUD) was the 1994 tournament held in the United States.

In contrast, the 2023 FIFA Women’s World Cup—co-hosted by Australia and New Zealand—had a far more modest price tag.

According to FIFA’s bid evaluation report, the tournament was expected to cost around $150 million AUD, with just over $100 million AUD contributed by governments.

Not only does the Women’s World Cup cost significantly less to host, but many of the stadiums and infrastructure acceptable for the women’s tournament would fall short of FIFA’s stricter requirements for the men’s event.

To meet those higher standards, Australia would need to make substantial upgrades, adding further to the cost.

Beyond the economic risks, there’s also a broader question of national priorities.

Australia may ultimately decide that the billions required to secure and host a men’s World Cup could be better invested elsewhere—into areas that deliver more lasting and equitable benefits for the population.

For example, upgrading the nation’s public health system, affordable housing initiatives, education infrastructure, and climate resilience projects are all pressing needs that demand long-term funding and attention.

Investments in regional transport networks, Indigenous community support, and renewable energy development could arguably provide a stronger return on investment in terms of social and economic outcomes.

Given these competing priorities and the immense cost of hosting, Australia may find that the pursuit of a men’s FIFA World Cup is a luxury it simply can’t justify—at least not in the foreseeable future.

Rival Interest

Rival nations within the AFC (Asian Football Confederation) would play a major role in limiting Australia’s chances of hosting a Men’s FIFA World Cup.

The FIFA World Cup is the biggest sporting event in the world, and the competition to host it is incredibly fierce.

Countries go to great lengths to secure hosting rights, especially within the AFC, where Arab nations in particular have been extremely proactive.

One major factor is the concept of sportswashing—the practice of using sports to improve a country’s global image, often as a way to divert attention from human rights issues or political controversies.

This has become especially common in the Middle East over the past decade.

Between early 2021 and mid-2023, Saudi Arabia alone reportedly spent $6.3 billion on sportswashing efforts, including around 300 sponsorship deals.

Their investments span across numerous sports: boxing, motorsport, snooker, golf, ATP tennis, cricket, and even the America’s Cup sailing regatta.

However, football has been their biggest focus.

In recent years, Saudi Arabia’s top-tier football league—the Saudi Pro League (SPL)—has emerged as Asia’s most high-profile domestic competition.

This rise in prominence has largely been driven by the league signing world-famous players to extremely lucrative contracts.

The most notable example is Cristiano Ronaldo, arguably the most recognisable athlete on the planet, who joined Al Nassr on a deal reported to be worth around $207 million USD (approximately $322 million AUD) per season.

But Saudi influence in football isn’t limited to their domestic league. They’ve also hosted major international club competitions.

For instance, five of the last six editions of the Supercopa de España—a tournament featuring the top Spanish clubs—have been held in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia’s capital.

Now it’s not just the World Cup, looking at the AFC Asian Cup, the premier men’s international football tournament in Asia, three of the last four editions were hosted by Arab nations.

Qatar alone hosted it twice during that period and Saudi Arabia is also set to host the 2027 edition.

So, Australia faces stiff competition within the AFC for the rights to host a World Cup—particularly from wealthy and politically influential Arab nations that have a proven track record of securing major football events.

The previous FIFA World Cup was held in Qatar, and the next AFC host is Saudi Arabia and based on the current pattern, it wouldn’t be surprising if another Arab nation—such as the UAE—secured the next opportunity after that.

Location

One major factor that could affect Australia’s chances of hosting a men’s FIFA World Cup is its geographical location.

Because Australia is so far from Europe and the Americas—where most of the global football audience is—many matches would air at inconvenient times in those regions, potentially lowering TV viewership.

This issue was already evident during the 2023 FIFA Women’s World Cup, which was co-hosted by Australia and New Zealand.

According to FIFA, the final between Spain and England reached 222.02 million viewers.

That’s a noticeable drop compared to the 2019 final in France, where the USA faced the Netherlands and drew 263.62 million viewers.

A decline like this in viewership could make FIFA and its broadcasting partners think twice about holding a men’s World Cup in Australia.

Speaking of broadcasting, broadcast rights are another concern with time zone differences potentially reducing the value of international broadcast deals, since matches wouldn’t air during prime hours in key markets.

In fact, ahead of the 2023 Women’s World Cup, FIFA reportedly missed its target for selling broadcast rights by about $100 million USD ( $155 million AUD), according to the Wall Street Journal.

FIFA had hoped to bring in $300 million USD ($466 million AUD), but only managed around $200 million USD ($310 million AUD).

It even reached a point where FIFA president Gianni Infantino warned of a possible TV blackout across Europe unless broadcasters increased their offers.

All of this shows how Australia’s remote location could seriously impact global viewership and broadcasting revenue, making it a tougher sell as a host for a future men’s World Cup.

Conclusion

So, in light of these financial, geopolitical, and logistical challenges, it’s clear that the odds of Australia hosting a FIFA World Cup remain firmly stacked against them—making another failed bid not just possible, but increasingly probable.

Given the significant financial demands, complex geopolitical dynamics, and substantial logistical hurdles involved, it becomes increasingly evident that Australia faces an uphill battle in its pursuit of hosting a FIFA World Cup.

These compounding challenges not only diminish the likelihood of a successful bid in the near future, but also raise the probability that any renewed attempt could end in yet another disappointment.

Previous ArticleNext Article

The A-Leagues Final Series important status also a secret hinderance

The Isuzu A-League finals series is a huge event in the footballing calendar, though its contribution to stagnant attendance numbers in the league is something to be said.

If the 2025/26 finals series follows similar patterns to those before it, it will gather huge traction and strong ticket sales.

It is the largest event for the domestic league, bringing in massive amounts of viewership through media and gate receipts.

Finals series from years past have shown this, with the 2024/25 final, a Melbourne derby, being sold out within 48 hours and gathering significant viewership online.

The idea of a finals series lies within the Australian sporting ethos; the other sporting codes have had this tradition for most of their existence, especially in recent history.

Football, though, is different from the rest of the sporting codes in Australia, unique even. This has historically contributed to its inability to integrate into the same supported status as other codes.

Many in the Australian footballing community, supporter groups, players, coaches, and even the new Director of Football Australia, have voiced concerns over fan numbers in the league competition.

It wouldn’t be absurd to say that maybe, though profitable now, the finals series is actually taking away from the league itself.

Consider the media image: the league winner is called the “minor premiership,” and ticket sales and viewership figures reveal a huge disparity between the two parts of the A-League.

It must be said that an alternative that could work in unison with the league and possibly increase viewership of the league itself would be a great advantage.

It would allow the league to gain more jeopardy and drama, which could build greater interest in attending league games.

One alternative is already here.

No other sporting code in Australia has both a league competition and a cup competition. Football in Australia does.

The Hahn’s Australia Cup is our equivalent to the FA Cup in England or the Copa del Rey in Spain.

These are competitions that offer a finals option in a different competition entirely. They generate huge traction while never diminishing the importance of the league and, therefore, its popularity.

These cup competitions cannot be discussed without acknowledging some obvious differences.

They don’t face the same popularity issues that football does in Australia. It’s obvious the Hahn’s Australia Cup doesn’t yet gain the traction that the finals series does.

However, for a healthy footballing environment with increasing fan numbers, it should.

The idea of elevating the Hahn’s Australia Cup and scaling back the finals series is a complex question, one that is treated like a “no-go zone” by many in the Australian footballing community, and that is understandable.

Though big changes like this might, in the end, be credible options for the future of the sport in this country.

Larger plans must be set in motion, strategies that can be worked towards and refined along the way. It is the process by which all large organisations, business models and even national governments build their strategies.

Such a shift will be scrutinised and pushed back against.

Though with further fine-tuning and smart investment in development, not to mention the introduction of promotion and relegation and the possibility of changing the footballing calendar.

It could replicate the success that these two-competition models already enjoy in other leagues.

The added importance that the premiership would gain, the reality that every game matters, could alongside other strategies entice fans to more games, increase viewership and ticket sales, and create more dedicated fan bases. It works in other nations, very well in fact.

The possibility of two teams lifting a trophy, rather than one single event defining it all, sounds like a strategy that could deliver more engagement over longer periods of time.

Maybe Australian football doesn’t need to answer this question just yet. It is complex, difficult and it would require a great deal of work, including significant investment into the game, which is another issue entirely.

Yet as low attendance numbers persist in the A-League, even alongside increased media viewership, something needs to change for football in Australia.

The rise in popularity of this game and its dedicated community deserves bold ideas and forward thinking.

Ideas like this could eventually begin to change the landscape of the beautiful game in Australia for the better.

How Husqvarna Is Helping Stadiums Cut Costs Without Cutting Quality

At a time when operational costs are rising across global sport, stadiums and football clubs are being forced to rethink one of their most overlooked expenses: turf maintenance.

From diesel consumption to labour hours, maintaining elite playing surfaces has traditionally been both resource-intensive and environmentally taxing. But new data emerging from venues like CBUS Super Stadium suggests a smarter, more sustainable model is already taking hold.

Leading that shift is Husqvarna, whose autonomous turf technology is quietly reshaping how professional venues manage their playing surfaces. Their product delivers measurable cost savings without compromising quality.

Cutting fuel consumption costs

At CBUS Super Stadium, the introduction of Husqvarna’s CEORA™ robotic mowing system has reduced diesel usage by approximately 20–30 litres per week. Over the course of a season, those savings compound into a significant reduction in both fuel spend and carbon emissions. This is particularly efficient for stadiums hosting regular fixtures and large-scale events.

CBUS Super Stadium General Manager Kristian Blundell said the robotic mower was a game-changer for the venue:

“This technology is not replacing staff but rather giving our grounds team the ability to do what they do best by helping to improve turf management processes, better manage fatigue and decrease our environmental footprint”

But the impact goes beyond fuel.

 

Time efficiency

By automating routine mowing, Husqvarna’s technology enables grounds teams to focus on higher-value maintenance tasks, from pitch recovery to detailed surface management. The result is not only greater operational efficiency but also improved turf consistency, which is an increasingly critical factor in elite football performance.

The benefits are being mirrored beyond stadium environments. At Oatlands Golf Club, Husqvarna’s autonomous mowing has delivered savings of up to 60 litres of fuel per week while freeing up staff for precision work. Quiet, round-the-clock operation also ensures surfaces are maintained without disrupting play—an advantage that translates directly to multi-use stadium settings.

Image Credit: Husqvarna

Importantly, Husqvarna’s lightweight robotic systems reduce the wear and tear typically caused by traditional heavy machinery. This not only protects the integrity of the playing surface but also reduces the need for costly repairs over time.

Football clubs navigating tight budgets at grassroots and semi-professional levels could benefit from such cost savings.

With rising energy prices, increasing sustainability expectations, and limited staffing resources, the ability to cut costs while improving performance is no longer optional. Solutions like Husqvarna’s CEORA™ are positioning clubs to operate more efficiently today, while preparing for a more environmentally accountable future.

As the sports industry continues to evolve, one thing is becoming clear: the next competitive edge may not just come from what happens on the pitch—but how it’s maintained.

Most Popular Topics

Editor Picks

Send this to a friend