A Fifa delegation will arrive in Australia and New Zealand next week to begin inspecting stadia, hotels and other facilities for the 2023 Women's World Cup bid but the real lobbying will likely take place half a world away, in Europe and Africa.

A report from next week's inspection will be submitted to the Fifa Council before the vote in early June, rating the strength of the bid compared to others from Japan, Colombia and Brazil.

"Fifa will have specific areas they will want to see on the ground," FFA chief James Johnson said on Tuesday. "They will have an objective report, a scorecard, if you like, that they will develop and that scorecard will then be used by the Fifa council as a guiding tool to decide in June."

The realpolitik, however, is that Fifa's report will be nothing more than a recommendation to the council, which will decide the winning bid for the next women's World Cup.

READ MORE

* US superstar welcomes Kiwi's arrival

* Moore returns from ruptured Achilles

* Marinovic flying high for Phoenix

As the votes for past tournaments have suggested, the best bids don't always win with Fifa. The politics of a bid are much more complex than presenting a strong case to host a major tournament.

Officials of the Australia and New Zealand bid will build their case to Fifa's delegation next week before immediately turning towards the crucial battlefield for votes in Africa and Europe. Seventeen members from the two confederations are represented on the Fifa council, accounting for half the eligible voters. With no bids from either Africa or Europe, they're considered swing votes.

GETTY IMAGES Stephanie Catley of Australia and Rebekah Stott of New Zealand.

That is where the Tasman bid will focus its lobbying. Officials from Australia and New Zealand have identified UEFA as their primary target for winning support with 10 representatives on the Fifa council and will then turn their attention towards CAF, the African confederation. With Japan bidding for the tournament, allegiances in Asia will be difficult to be guaranteed as the Tasman bid will be split across confederations, involving Oceania as well. While it might not lead to votes from Asia, FFA believe that shared involvement has other strengths.

"I don't see logistical challenges, I see it as a strength," Johnson said. "if you look at the history of Australia and New Zealand sport, we have lots of examples where we have to work closely and collaboratively with New Zealand so I don't see that as a challenge whatsoever."

In joining forces with New Zealand, Australia gained significant political strength. Australia has no representatives on the Fifa Council but has sealed support form the confederation of Oceania and its two eligible voters on the council. More importantly, they open doors to other council members and foundations for support. Sources involved in the bid suggest they are confident of winning votes from two CONCACAF (North America and Central America) members who have already flagging their desire to see a major tournament hosted in the uncharted territory of the Pacific region for the first time.

"I think if you look at Fifa 2.0's new philosophy, it's about spreading football to all parts of the world and ensuring that football is more inclusive than what it was in the past," Johnson said.

In the early stages of the campaign, one of Australia and New Zealand's rival bids appears to have suffered a setback, with female players in Colombia threatening to go on strike over work conditions. The 2020 Colombian women's professional league, Liga Águila Femenina, still has no start date, with the players' dispute with the national football federation a potential problem for Colombia's hopes of hosting the tournament.

The South American nation is considered a frontrunner in the eyes of many, having the capacity to grow women's football in the region and being in the lucrative American time zone for broadcast.