FIFA World Cup UK World Cup Bid - Not a soccer fan but England shoulda got it.

whadabouchasir

CDfm wrote: »

Like it or not , you could stage the next world cup in England and it would accomodate it with great facilities.

England already have all the facilities,they could host it next week and do a great job.

CDfm wrote: »

There is something almost childlike in the English belief that they can win the World Cup and get robbed every time. The enthusiasm would be infectious and teams would love to play new Wembley or Old Trafford.

It would be a deadly buzz

I'd say almost every player would prefer to play in England for this reason.They have some world class stadia,a great history of football,passionate fans and arguabely the best league in the world.Oh and players wouldn't have to risk getting heatstroke every time they played.Awarding the 2022 world cup to Quatar is an absolute joke and just shows how corrupt FIFA really are.

Tchaikovsky

Raze_them_all wrote: »

4 out of 6 are world cup winners with a history of football

The game evolves. For most of the World Cups up until Italia 90, there were only 3 or 4 countries from outside South America or Europe.

Bottle_of_Smoke

So europe, the home of the beautiful game - to go at least 16years without a world cup. F*cking hell.

Pherekydes

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

So europe, the home of the beautiful game - to go at least 16years without a world cup. F*cking hell.

1. Russia is in Europe!
2. Jogo Bonito (the beautiful game) is only found in Brazil. The term has been hijacked by Eamonn Dunphy and others.

Bottle_of_Smoke

Pherekydes wrote: »

1. Russia is in Europe!

Is it fu<k. By that logic Mongolia is too.

[*]Jogo Bonito (the beautiful game) is only found in Brazil. The term has been hijacked by Eamonn Dunphy and others.

Fine. Organised Soccer then!

Pherekydes

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Is it fu<k. By that logic Mongolia is too.

Mongolia is in Asia. Russia straddles both Europe and Asia, with all bar one WC venue (Yekaterinburg), in Europe.

OS119

the intelligent anger about the awarding process is caused by England entering a tender that complied with the stated rules - the technical bid, the commercial bid etc... - and then finding that a) FIFA wasn't actually judging each bid on the criteria it said it was, rather something very different, and b) that FIFA members who had said 'you've got a got a good bid, we'll support it' turned out to be lying.

personally i'm very happy that England will not host a world cup - i don't like my government and tax authorities kissing the arse of an outside body, i don't think the UK can afford to both police a world cup and undertake everyday policing, and i don't want creeps being feted as if they are vital to UK interests.

England have been as corrupt as anyone else in this process - 'favour' friendly games to get votes, FIFA ExC members treated like a US presidents on 'fact-finding' missions, and offering freebee accomodation the the Dorchester Hotel to FIFA ExC members and their families for the whole of the Olympic Games in London - they just haven't been as good at it as the Russians and Quataries.

Raze_them_all

OS119 wrote: »

the intelligent anger about the awarding process is caused by England entering a tender that complied with the stated rules - the technical bid, the commercial bid etc... - and then finding that a) FIFA wasn't actually judging each bid on the criteria it said it was, rather something very different, and b) that FIFA members who had said 'you've got a got a good bid, we'll support it' turned out to be lying.

personally i'm very happy that England will not host a world cup - i don't like my government and tax authorities kissing the arse of an outside body, i don't think the UK can afford to both police a world cup and undertake everyday policing, and i don't want creeps being feted as if they are vital to UK interests.

England have been as corrupt as anyone else in this process - 'favour' friendly games to get votes, FIFA ExC members treated like a US presidents on 'fact-finding' missions, and offering freebee accomodation the the Dorchester Hotel to FIFA ExC members and their families for the whole of the Olympic Games in London - they just haven't been as good at it as the Russians and Quataries.

Do you honestly think qatar will be able to?? It has a pop of around 1.7 million people including immigrants, now I don't know how many people go to world cups but isn there usually 2million tickets or so sold for the games? That's more than the entire county doubled.

Pherekydes wrote: »

1. Russia is in Europe!
2. Jogo Bonito (the beautiful game) is only found in Brazil. The term has been hijacked by Eamonn Dunphy and others.

Russia is more in asia than europe iirc, that's like a third generation yank claiming to be irish.

Tchaikovsky wrote: »

The game evolves. For most of the World Cups up until Italia 90, there were only 3 or 4 countries from outside South America or Europe.

The game evolves, true, Name me one world class player from qatar.

CDfm

OS119 wrote: »

the intelligent anger about the awarding process is caused by England entering a tender that complied with the stated rules - the technical bid, the commercial bid etc... - and then finding that a) FIFA wasn't actually judging each bid on the criteria it said it was, rather something very different, and b) that FIFA members who had said 'you've got a got a good bid, we'll support it' turned out to be lying.

personally i'm very happy that England will not host a world cup - i don't like my government and tax authorities kissing the arse of an outside body, i don't think the UK can afford to both police a world cup and undertake everyday policing, and i don't want creeps being feted as if they are vital to UK interests.

On a serious note England after the Olympics for lots of reasons England would have been well able for it logistically. .

Money wise if the English game got a bit of a boost it would be a good thing. It gave us John Giles and Roy Keane -two major world class players as well as a host of others and we wouldnt have a national team without it.

parker kent

Raze_them_all wrote: »

No?? Me either so why the **** should quatar get it?

Maybe because Qatar will actually be able to build fantastic stadiums, fan zones, accommodation etc. Qatar have proven that they can build an air conditioned stadium. Then include air conditioned public transport, air conditioned fan zones and air conditioned hotels it is obvious that the heat in the desert is pretty irrelevant. Nobody is going to get heatstroke playing in an air conditioned stadium. The recent exhibition proved they can maintain a temperature around 20 degrees in a stadium. There is a lot of ignorant, ill informed opinions being spouted about the World Cup since last Thursday.

Other benefits include the the close proximity of venues (reduced travel times for teams and fans) and the relocation of the stadiums in Qatar to Third World countries after the tournament. Their bid is pretty impressive if people bothered to look into the specifics.

As for whether England should have got it, the fact that Western Europe has already held 10 World Cups should give you the answer why they should not host the WC. There has been 2 World Cups in the last 12 years in Western Europe, in France and Germany. It should be moved around the globe. Soccer is the global game, not the rich, Western European countries game.

England's bid was filled with the arrogant belief that they should host it purely because they are England and decided they wanted to host it. Forget the fact that Russia are equally capable and had not hosted a World Cup. Forget the fact that Spain/Portugal also had a great bid. Russia deserve a World Cup, as does that entire section of the world. The Russians will provide excellent facilities. Their incredible, vast landscape and heritage will provide an amazing backdrop to the World Cup. Like a good James Bond, a good World Cup has a great location.

Of course England could host a World Cup. But so could any number of countries. That is not the point. The tournament should not be hosted in the same country twice when other options are available. Australia are next in line to host a World Cup, so England should forget about 2026 as well. Even if they start with the hype about it being 60 years after 1966 and all that. The World Cup seems to bring out all the ill-informed, non-football fans who feel they can spout on about football.

Raze_them_all

parker kent wrote: »

Maybe because Qatar will actually be able to build fantastic stadiums, fan zones, accommodation etc. Qatar have proven that they can build an air conditioned stadium. Then include air conditioned public transport, air conditioned fan zones and air conditioned hotels it is obvious that the heat in the desert is pretty irrelevant. Nobody is going to get heatstroke playing in an air conditioned stadium. The recent exhibition proved they can maintain a temperature around 20 degrees in a stadium. There is a lot of ignorant, ill informed opinions being spouted about the World Cup since last Thursday.

Other benefits include the the close proximity of venues (reduced travel times for teams and fans) and the relocation of the stadiums in Qatar to Third World countries after the tournament. Their bid is pretty impressive if people bothered to look into the specifics.

As for whether England should have got it, the fact that Western Europe has already held 10 World Cups should give you the answer why they should not host the WC. There has been 2 World Cups in the last 12 years in Western Europe, in France and Germany. It should be moved around the globe. Soccer is the global game, not the rich, Western European countries game.

England's bid was filled with the arrogant belief that they should host it purely because they are England and decided they wanted to host it. Forget the fact that Russia are equally capable and had not hosted a World Cup. Forget the fact that Spain/Portugal also had a great bid. Russia deserve a World Cup, as does that entire section of the world. The Russians will provide excellent facilities. Their incredible, vast landscape and heritage will provide an amazing backdrop to the World Cup. Like a good James Bond, a good World Cup has a great location.

Of course England could host a World Cup. But so could any number of countries. That is not the point. The tournament should not be hosted in the same country twice when other options are available. Australia are next in line to host a World Cup, so England should forget about 2026 as well. Even if they start with the hype about it being 60 years after 1966 and all that. The World Cup seems to bring out all the ill-informed, non-football fans who feel they can spout on about football.

What makes you think I'm ill informed?

Do you think they'll be able to police and have decent public transport when the population of the country more than doubles, as it will?

CDfm

@parker kent - sport is entertainment and when it stops being entertaining it stops being fun -which with the off beat locations it has.

So what if it alternates between Europe and South America if they have the best teams.

Pherekydes

Raze_them_all wrote: »

Russia is more in asia than europe iirc, that's like a third generation yank claiming to be irish.

78% of the Russian population lives in the European part of Russia.

Pherekydes

CDfm wrote: »

So what if it alternates between Europe and South America if they have the best teams.

The next WC is in South America! And the one after that is in Europe!

the_syco

CDfm wrote: »

And the Russians don't

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dZzx80GT4o

This sort of carry on is very organised. They have often met up in forests, and kick the sh|t out of each other, following rules of attack. They attack one another, as opposed to english soccer hooligans who attack anyone it seems.

=-=

I have no interest, but I'm happy that Russia got it. It'll get the government to spend it's oil/gas money on something aside from military hardware :pac:

Raze_them_all

the_syco wrote: »

This sort of carry on is very organised. They have often met up in forests, and kick the sh|t out of each other, following rules of attack. They attack one another, as opposed to english soccer hooligans who attack anyone it seems.

=-=

I have no interest, but I'm happy that Russia got it. It'll get the government to spend it's oil/gas money on something aside from military hardware :pac:

Do you really think it'll be organised(ha) when they're squaring off to opposite countries firms?


Pherekydes: people yes, how about land mass? bout 25% in europe, 75% asia, yes?

CDfm

Pherekydes wrote: »

The next WC is in South America! And the one after that is in Europe!

I had forgotten what a smartass you are

What would be nice is to have is a world cup almost locally accessable in my lifetime.No maybe I am shallow and not into all this devopmental stuff but I cant see why it is not spread around where the best leagues are.My bias is that it would be accessable to me which in my mind is totally fair.

marienbad

CDfm wrote: »

I had forgotten what a smartass you are

What would be nice is to have is a world cup almost locally accessable in my lifetime.No maybe I am shallow and not into all this devopmental stuff but I cant see why it is not spread around where the best leagues are.My bias is that it would be accessable to me which in my mind is totally fair.

France 98, Germany 06, How old are you ?

and for those of you who require a geography lesson on Russia, Pushkin Tolstoy, Dostoesky, Tchaikovsky,Borodin, Shostakovich ,Malevich are central to European culture.

CDfm

marienbad wrote: »

France 98, Germany 06, How old are you ?

You would pick years when I couldnt afford to go and well -England is closer and I am being tribal and supporting our side.

1966 was a long time ago.

parker kent

Raze_them_all wrote: »

What makes you think I'm ill informed?

Do you think they'll be able to police and have decent public transport when the population of the country more than doubles, as it will?

You do realise that it is possible to hire people from outside Qatar to work at the World Cup? Like when English police travelled to Germany for the English games at the 2006 World Cup. That will likely happen in far higher quantities with people of various professions.

The ill informed line is a reference to the title of the thread. I had thought it was clear I had moved on from the opening paragraph which referenced your post.

parker kent

Raze_them_all wrote: »

Do you really think it'll be organised(ha) when they're squaring off to opposite countries firms?


Pherekydes: people yes, how about land mass? bout 25% in europe, 75% asia, yes?

In footballing terms Russia is classed as European since they are in UEFA.

Geographically, they may as well be classed as their own continent. Or as the bridge (albeit a massive bridge) between two continents. But as a poster said above, Russia has made massive contributions to European cultural history. Russia is a fantastic place for a World Cup. That it straddles two continents adds to the appeal. Between matches fans can visit some of the most amazing sights in the world.

CDfm wrote: »

@parker kent - sport is entertainment and when it stops being entertaining it stops being fun -which with the off beat locations it has.

So what if it alternates between Europe and South America if they have the best teams.

How exactly has it become less entertaining? It is still 32 teams playing in the World Cup. You either like football or you don't. The World Cup has virtually alternated between Europe and South America since 1930. The USA, Japan/Korea and South Africa are the only times it has been outside of these countries.

What exactly would you say to an African, an Asian etc if they said that they wanted to see a World Cup happen in their continent? "Sorry but I didn't get a chance to go those 10 other times it was in Western Europe?". They are members of FIFA, therefore they are eligible to host it once they prove they are capable of staging the tournament. The British Empire is dead, let colonial Europe die too. Actual football fans will go wherever the tournament is held. Man United and Chelsea played the Champions League final in Moscow. People managed to get over to see that. Once there exists a method of transport to a country, anybody that wants to go there will go there. If you don't want to make that effort, then you don't want to see it enough. You had 2 excellent chances to see it in Europe in the last 12 years. There will be one in Russia in 8 years time. It is not Mission Impossible to go to a World Cup.

CDfm

parker kent wrote: »

Geographically, they may as well be classes as their own continent. Or as the bridge (albeit a massive bridge) between two continents. But as a poster said above, Russia has made massive contributions to European cultural history. Russia is a fantastic place for a World Cup. Between matches fans can visit some of the most amazing sights in the world.

Its about football not really about culture

Pushkin Tolstoy, Dostoesky, Tchaikovsky,Borodin, Shostakovich ,Malevich are central

....midfielders for what team ??????????

Pherekydes

Raze_them_all wrote: »

Pherekydes: people yes, how about land mass? bout 25% in europe, 75% asia, yes?

Not sure. But a nation is surely comprised of its people. And most Russians are European.

I don't know why people are whining about Russia being so far away. How many Irish go to New York for shopping trips?

Mister men

I'm delighted England did'nt get the tournament. The arrogance of their media in thinking they had the winning bid is laughable. Fifa want to develop the game not host it in one of the three big football countries in Europe. Funny how if England got the tournament we would'nt be hearing squat about corruption. The World Cup in England 2018 stood to make Fifa more money in advertising revenue than any other World Cup ever so if Fifa are so corrupt why was'nt it held there?

Raze_them_all

Pherekydes wrote: »

Not sure. But a nation is surely comprised of its people. And most Russians are European.

I don't know why people are whining about Russia being so far away. How many Irish go to New York for shopping trips?

Eh aren there only around 1,000,000 or so national people from qatar? the rest being immigrants?
Kind of gets rid of your country being it's people point.

Raze_them_all

Mister men wrote: »

I'm delighted England did'nt get the tournament. The arrogance of their media in thinking they had the winning bid is laughable. Fifa want to develop the game not host it in one of the three big football countries in Europe. Funny how if England got the tournament we would'nt be hearing squat about corruption. The World Cup in England 2018 stood to make Fifa more money in advertising revenue than any other World Cup ever so if Fifa are so corrupt why was'nt it held there?

Well they had the best scores in every crieria that fifa claimed to be looking for, or are we ignoring that.

And the corruption thing was brought up months ago.

CDfm

Pherekydes wrote: »

I don't know why people are whining about Russia being so far away. How many Irish go to New York for shopping trips?

Who ever went on a shopping trip to Russia

Pherekydes

CDfm wrote: »

Who ever went on a shopping trip to Russia

Not sure if you're being serious, but NY is in the US. My point was that Russia isn't very far away. Not as far as the US. And the WC lasts for a month. Yet people can go to NY for a weekend shopping trip.

In these days of jet travel, nowhere is very far away.

Pherekydes

Raze_them_all wrote: »

Eh aren there only around 1,000,000 or so national people from qatar? the rest being immigrants?
Kind of gets rid of your country being it's people point.

What has the fact that Qatar having a lot of immigrants got to do with any other country in the world?

CDfm

Pherekydes wrote: »

Not sure if you're being serious, but NY is in the US. My point was that Russia isn't very far away. Not as far as the US. And the WC lasts for a month. Yet people can go to NY for a weekend shopping trip.

In these days of jet travel, nowhere is very far away.

Serious but flippant, and travelling to Russia leaves me cold- there is no reason I would want to go.

But people want to go to NYC for lots of reasons , Time Square, shopping etc. What would you want to do in Russia.

The point of the tournament is to have a good time too. So its not just about the football. What about guys who want to do a bit of a couple holiday ?

"Eh love, I am planning a trip to a very hot muslim country where you can sit in the hotel all day" or " Russia for the food and the shopping -weyhey-Naht" .

NYC would win hands down.