Want to know why the sport struggles..?
Forget turf wars - everyone will gain from Cup
Clearly, it's going to get ugly before Australia's World Cup bid gets over its first significant hurdle. Commitments about infrastructure spending have to be made within the next couple of months, and the scaremongering is as premeditated as it is predictable.
The fact that all the football codes, plus cricket, will ultimately benefit from the facilities bonanza seems to be lost on those, including my colleague Richard Hinds, who seem interested only in fertilising their own turf.
Australian Rugby Union chief executive John O'Neill, who has a unique perspective, rightly describes the World Cup as ''nation building'' and has no doubt rugby union stands to gain more than it may lose.
For the benefit of Hinds, a few facts are worth noting. Since Frank Lowy took over in 2003, football has received about $77 million from the Federal government, of which $45m has been allocated to fund a World Cup bid which ultimately benefits all.
In roughly the same time, AFL has received about $453m from the three tiers of government - almost six times that received by football.
From the $77m it has received from Canberra for redevelopment work at the MCG, to the $28m it received for Skilled Stadium in Geelong, to a $5m grant to the South Australian AFL to develop community facilities, to $250,000 for developing AFL in the Kimberley, the sport has gained in every state, at every level. AFL remains, by a considerable distance, the most generously taxpayer-supported sport in the country.
Next best is cricket, which has received about $141m - still close to double that received by football during the same time. The money spent on new facilities at the SCG and Adelaide Oval also suits the AFL. Strange that. Behind football comes rugby league (about $45.5m), tennis (about $14.5m) and rugby union (about $9m).....Rest
Forget the cup, what the hell is with that sort of funding discrepancy and what is the ARU doing about it?
