Women’s Cricket World Cup was great, but Matildas home World Cup will be greater

Last Sunday’s T20 Women’s World Cup final between Australia and India was a fantastic sporting spectacle.

The crowd of over 86,000 at the MCG, the highest attendance for a standalone women’s sporting event in Australia, saw the Aussie side win their fifth T20 World Cup.

The local TV ratings were also impressive, with an average audience of 1.231 million Australians tuning into the match.

While the tournament final was a huge success, it is up for debate whether the previous stages lived up to expectations.

Crowds were small for most of the other games throughout the competition, including only 6,161 showing up to the SCG for a rain affected Australia vs South Africa semi-final.

Australia’s opening match of the tournament against India had 13,432 fans in attendance at the Sydney Showground Stadium, the biggest outside of the final.

In comparison, The Matildas drew a crowd of 14,014 in Newcastle last Friday for an Olympic qualifier against Vietnam.

If Australia and New Zealand do win the right to host the 2023 FIFA Women’s World Cup, it’s safe to say crowd figures will be much more impressive than the T20 Women’s World Cup.

Initial projections in Australia and New Zealand’s joint bid book, claim that over 1.5 million will attend the 2023 tournament with an average crowd of 24,000 per match.

Australia will host 24 games throughout the group stages of the tournament and 11 in the knockout stage, with the final to be held at Stadium Australia in Sydney.

The other stadiums that will be used for the tournament in Australia are: the Melbourne Rectangular Stadium, Brisbane Stadium, Newcastle Stadium, York Park, Perth Oval, the re-developed Sydney Football Stadium and Hindmarsh Stadium.

If the tournament is priced correctly, it’s hard to see Australia’s bid not being extremely successful for women’s sport.

Crowds for Matildas games in a home World Cup will be huge, but there will also be significant interest in other teams competing in the tournament due to our diverse population.

TV ratings will be big in Australia and around the world, although Australia’s time-zone is not exactly favourable for a major event.

Speaking to SBS TWG, Off The Pitch reporter and experienced FIFA and UEFA watcher James Corbett, believes Australia is the favourite.

“If we look at it as a rational open tender process, you’d like to think [that Australia are in front],” Corbett said.

“The Matildas are arguably Australia’s most popular national team and in a competitive domestic sporting culture have brilliantly carved out a place for ’soccer’ in Australia and the country has, in Sam Kerr, one of the best players on the planet.

“The country has the infrastructure to host it; it’s an event that’s far less dependent on TV revenues as a measure of success, so its distance is less of a factor. It is politically and economically stable.”

Corbett believes FFA’s appointment of James Johnson as new CEO will change the perception of Australia’s governing body and their previous administration faults.

“If you look at the political side, where Australia has faltered in the past is a distance between its administrators from the ‘heart and soul’ of the game.

“Previous FFA CEOs and other leading executives have come from other sports and have been considered aloof from their peers in the global game, who ultimately decide these matters.

“The men’s 2022 World Cup bid – which was arrogant and sulphurous – was a case study in how not to bid for a major competition.

“There’s been a realignment with the true values of football in recent years, and the FFA’s new CEO, James Johnston, has worked for both FIFA and the AFC and knows which buttons to push, as well as being tremendously engaging and good at his job.

“Former Matilda, Moya Dodd, is arguably one of the most powerful people in women’s football worldwide and will know how to navigate the committee rooms.”

This past week the FFA announced that there was an 11% increase in participation in 2019 for women and girls playing the sport of Football in Australia.

These are important figures to show FIFA there is an appetite for women’s football in Australia and a World Cup on home soil will reap huge long-term benefits.

The overall total of close to 2 million people playing football in Australia is also a good indicator that there is a considerable market who will attend a world class footballing event in our backyard.

The Matildas qualified for the Olympics in Japan on Wednesday, a country who is expected to be Australia and New Zealand’s number one rival to host the 2023 Women’s World Cup.

The ball is now in FIFA’s court, with a host announcement to be made in June.

Previous ArticleNext Article

Football must set financial rules of engagement following FIFA Forward Enterprise crisis

Never before has football had such deep access to capital, or faced such complex questions about what that means for the future of the sport.

Private equity firms are investing in clubs, institutional investors are moving into stadiums and sports infrastructure, and clubs are looking beyond broadcasting and matchday revenue towards property, hospitality, entertainment and technology.

The question is no longer whether football needs investments. It’s what happens when investment starts influencing the way the game is run.

The issue came sharply into focus this year when FIFA proposed creating FIFA Forward Enterprise, a new FIFA-owned subsidiary that would bring together its commercial and event operations. The concept would effectively place the World Cup, the crown jewel of global football and FIFA’s blue chip stock, inside an investable structure. 

The proposal envisaged raising up to $6 billion by selling minority, non-controlling stakes in the subsidiary to external investors, based on an initial valuation of $29 billion. FIFA said the additional capital would help increase development funding for its 211 member associations.

The proposal triggered a governance crisis, while major questions about Gianni Infantino’s tenure as FIFA President continue.

UEFA, CONCACAF and (to a lesser-extent) the AFC were among the confederations to object, variously stating they had learned about the proposal through media reports rather than through FIFA’s own consultation process.

Amid a firestorm of criticism, the proposal was ultimately abandoned.

Now, Gianni Infantino has proposed an independent review of the organisation’s governance framework for major strategic initiatives, including how responsibility is divided between the president, Bureau, Council and Congress.

That makes this bigger than one investment proposal.

It’s a debate about who should control football’s commercial future.

Capital isn’t the enemy

There is an obvious argument in favour of private investment.

Football is an expensive business.

At club level, the relationship between capital and football is becoming increasingly sophisticated and complex.

RC Lens recently brought infrastructure investor Entrepreneur Equity Partners into its ownership structure, with the club saying the investment will fund development around the Stade Bollaert-Delelis and help create new revenue opportunities beyond matchdays.

Alas, there is a cost that comes with the capital. 

Investors ultimately expect a financial return. This won’t always conflict with supporters’ interests, but it can create different priorities.

Whereas a supporter might value affordability, identity and competitive success, an investor might instead look at property development, hospitality, commercial growth and the long-term value of an asset.

Neither perspective is inherently wrong.

But problems begin when financial objectives and football objectives stop overlapping and start pointing in different directions.

The ownership question

Chelsea provides a useful example of how quickly football ownership can change.

Clearlake Capital has now taken full control of the London club after acquiring the stakes previously held by Todd Boehly and Mark Walter, in a transaction that values the club at around $9.5 billion including debt. Todd Boehly only invested in the club four years ago.

That does not mean Chelsea’s new ownership structure is better or worse than before.

It demonstrates something important about modern football.

Football is becoming an asset class

That is perhaps the biggest change.

Football is no longer simply something wealthy individuals buy because they love the sport.

It is increasingly being viewed by institutional investors as an asset class with multiple potential revenue streams.

That means the investment opportunity can extend beyond owning a club.

There is private capital in stadiums, infrastructure, media rights, technology, sponsorship businesses and surrounding property.

It also explains why the FIFA proposal was so significant.

FIFA was effectively exploring whether the enormous commercial value of its competitions could be packaged into an investable structure.

FIFA argued investors would hold minority positions and would not receive control over sporting decisions or governance. It also argued the additional commercial value could increase funding available to football associations around the world.

That is a legitimate commercial proposition.

But once an asset is valued in the billions and external investors are being invited to participate, questions about control inevitably follow.

Who decides which commercial opportunities are pursued?

What happens when investors want one thing and football stakeholders want another?

And perhaps most importantly, who ultimately gets the benefit from football becoming more valuable?

The danger isn’t investment. It’s misalignment.

Football should not pretend it can grow without capital.

Football today requires enormous amounts of it.

The challenge is ensuring investment strengthens the sport rather than gradually redefining what the sport means to fans.

There are good reasons for clubs to develop their stadiums, diversify revenue and attract institutional capital.

There are also good reasons for supporters, players, federations and communities to ask what they receive in return.

FIFA’s recent episode demonstrates how quickly these questions can become political as well as financial.

The fact FIFA is now considering an independent governance review following such backlash shows the debate is not simply about whether the investment proposal was commercially sensible, but also about how decisions of that scale should be made.

That may be the most important question for football’s next financial era.

Private capital is here to stay. The tap isn’t turning off.

So, it’s critical football determines its rules of engagement before the next billion-dollar proposal lands on the table.

One Football: Why This Australia Cup Final Means More Than a Trophy

South Melbourne versus Melbourne Victory is more than a long-awaited rivalry. It is an opportunity to unite Australian football around its history – and its future.

On 10 October, South Melbourne FC and Melbourne Victory will walk onto AAMI Park for an Australia Cup Final that represents far more than a trophy.

It brings together two proud clubs from different chapters of Australian football’s history.

One is among the most successful clubs of the former National Soccer League era. The other has become one of the defining clubs of the A-League era.

The atmosphere will be extraordinary. The rivalry will be genuine. The football will be fiercely contested.

Such is the anticipation surrounding the match that it also has genuine potential to break the modern Australia Cup Final attendance record of 18,751, set at the same venue in 2016.

That would represent much more than a number on a crowd sheet. A record attendance would send a powerful message about the public appetite for meaningful fixtures, authentic rivalries and competitions that connect every level of Australian football.

But this final can – and should – mean even more.

It presents Australian football with an opportunity to bring its past, present and future together.

It is an opportunity to dismantle the tired and damaging distinction between “old soccer” and “new football”.

Most importantly, it can demonstrate what becomes possible when the entire game is connected.

We Cannot Build the Future by Discarding the Past

Australian football needed reform at the beginning of this century.

The game required stronger governance, greater professionalism, better commercial structures and a national competition capable of reaching new audiences.

The establishment of the A-League in 2005 opened an important new chapter. It created clubs, rivalries and major occasions that have contributed enormously to the development of the professional game.

But somewhere during that transformation, the idea took hold that Australian football could only move forward by separating itself from much of what had come before it.

The labels “old soccer” and “new football” became a fault line.

Too many clubs, supporters, volunteers and communities that had carried the game for decades were made to feel that their history was no longer welcome at the top table.

In creating something new, the game sometimes appeared determined to dispense with everything associated with its past.

That included the clubs and development pathways that identified, nurtured and produced many members of Australia’s Golden Generation.

Australian football should never be embarrassed by that history.

It is one of our game’s greatest competitive advantages.

Traditional clubs were built by migrant communities that brought their passion, culture and football knowledge to Australia.

They established clubs, built grounds, developed players, created lifelong supporters and sustained the game when it received little mainstream attention or investment.

These communities did not merely support Australian football.

They built it.

Recognising that contribution does not require us to reject the progress made during the A-League era. Both can be true.

The game needed to evolve, but it did not need to marginalise its foundations to do so.

This Is Not “Old” Against “New”

It would be easy to promote South Melbourne against Melbourne Victory as “old soccer” meeting “new football”.

It might create a convenient headline, but it would miss the greater significance of the occasion – and perpetuate a division the game must leave behind.

South Melbourne is not a relic from Australian football’s past.

It is a living and ambitious club with generations of supporters, a distinguished record of national success and an enduring role in developing players and representing its community.

Melbourne Victory is not separate from Australian football’s history.

It is another important chapter in it – a club that has built an enormous following, delivered some of the country’s most memorable sporting occasions and demonstrated the scale that professional football can achieve in Australia.

These clubs were created in different eras, but they belong to the same game.

The future of Australian football is neither “old” nor “new”.

It is one football.

Supporters Want a Connected Game

This final arrives at a time when the appetite for a properly connected football pyramid is becoming impossible to ignore.

Supporters want clubs to have something meaningful to aspire to.

They want success on the field to create opportunity.

They want to see a genuine connection between grassroots football, state competitions, traditional clubs, national competitions and the professional game.

A connected pyramid is about more than promotion and relegation.

It is about unlocking aspiration, investment, relevance and growth throughout the sport.

When clubs can see a pathway forward, they invest in facilities, coaching, academies, commercial capability and community engagement.

When supporters believe their club’s journey can lead somewhere, they become more deeply invested.

When local rivalries carry national consequences, new audiences, media attention and commercial partners follow.

That energy already exists throughout Australian football.

Our opportunity is to harness it.

The Platforms Are Demonstrating What Is Possible

The Australia Cup has repeatedly shown what can happen when clubs from every level are given the opportunity to compete on a national stage.

It connects the grassroots and professional game. It creates genuine jeopardy. It brings national attention to clubs, grounds and communities that rarely receive that level of exposure.

It also produces compelling stories that cannot be manufactured through marketing alone.

The Australian Championship represents another important step. It gives some of the country’s most historic and ambitious clubs a new national platform and creates a stronger bridge between state-based football and the professional game.

Neither competition should be viewed in isolation.

Together, the Australia Cup and Australian Championship can help reconnect the game, restore national relevance to important clubs and build momentum towards a more integrated competition structure.

They also demonstrate something commercially significant.

These communities are not simply part of football’s history. They are active audiences with passion, identity, purchasing power and an enduring commitment to their clubs.

When those communities are respected and properly engaged, they respond.

That creates value for broadcasters, commercial partners, governments and the wider professional game.

A Perspective Spanning Different Eras

My perspective has been shaped by experiencing Australian football across different clubs, competitions and eras.

I served as CEO of South Melbourne Soccer Club during one of the most successful periods in its history.

After leaving in 1997, I returned 12 months later for the 1998/99 season, when South secured its second consecutive national championship under Ange Postecoglou.

Nearly two decades later, in 2015, I returned to the professional game as CEO of Perth Glory in the A-League.

I subsequently joined Football Australia as a senior executive, where I played a key role in strengthening the Australia Cup as a national platform and developing the Australian Championship.

That journey has reinforced my belief that Australian football’s future will not be secured by choosing one part of its history over another. It will be secured by bringing the best of every era together.

The game will fulfil its potential when it connects its professional clubs, traditional clubs, grassroots participants, diverse communities and national teams within a coherent and ambitious system.

This is not about returning to the past.

It is about carrying the best of our history into a stronger future.A newsletter titled 'Blues News' from August 1997, featuring a farewell message from the CEO of the South Melbourne Soccer Club and details about membership campaigns, upcoming soccer season preparations, and calls for community support.

A page from a newsletter discussing upcoming events for the 1997/98 Ericsson Cup season, including a farewell message from Peter Filipoulos, the Chief Executive Officer, and details about support for the team at Bob Jane Stadium.
South Melbourne Soccer Club newsletter, 1997. After stepping down as CEO, Peter Filopoulos returned 12 months later for the club’s 1998/99 national championship season.

More Than a Final

On 10 October, AAMI Park – the spiritual home of football in Melbourne—should become the stage for more than an Australia Cup Final.

It should be a celebration of the people and communities that built the game, the progress achieved during the professional era and the possibilities presented by a connected future.

South Melbourne supporters should be proud of what their club has contributed to Australian football and excited about what may lie ahead.

Melbourne Victory supporters should celebrate what their club has built and the role it continues to play in growing the professional game.

Every Australian football supporter should be able to look at this occasion and see something bigger than a contest between two clubs or two eras.

This final is not “old soccer” against “new football”.

It is Australian football – proud of its entire history, united around its future and ready to unlock its true potential.

One game. One history. One future.

One football.

Most Popular Topics

Editor Picks

Send this to a friend