World Cup Bids (Announced: 2018-RUSSIA, 2022-QATAR)

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Matty81

I would think that if that were the case the US never would have hosted it, their host cities were way further apart than ours could ever be. Size is a factor as to why we have no domestic league but I wouldn't think it would stop us from making a great bid if the money and desire was there unless there are logistical factors I'm not thinking of that you think would be shop stoppers.

The US transportation network is way ahead of that in Canada. From the number of airports able to handle the demands of hosting an event like this to the local transport systems it's not even close.

[SOMBRI2]

Originally Posted by Coys1882

You never know - it's a fataing disgrace they have to qualify out of UEFA anyway. If there were in the ASIA group they would qualify for every major tournament.

so much like the Flames are in the western conference?

as MLS expands to Canada and the CSL died years ago. the chance of having Canada itself to win a WC bid is getting more remote. there is no competitive local leagues and literally you have to build / reno 10 stadiums to make it work. the only possibility to get it is to become a co-host with the US.

if you look closely, sans the corruption speculation, 'legacy' is major part to be considered. 1994 WC legacy is MLS, 2002 legacy is first WC in Asia, 2006 is first in Africa. England has its EPL for 17 years, they have the best facilities in the world, that could also be a disadvantage in the bidding process.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Locke

Actually, I think it has a lot to do with huge landmass and cities that are spread too far apart. So, we might learn a thing or two from Russia on how to make this work.

For one thing, Russia isn't having venues spread across its full width, which will help them to some degree.

Right now, the plan is for 16 stadiums in 13 cities, none further east than the Urals: http://www.russia2018-2022.com/en/th...st-cities.aspx

That number will probably come down once the plans become more concrete.

South Africa had 10 stadiums, and Brasil will have 12 in 2014. I wouldn't be surprised if some of the more far-flung cities eventually get dropped from the Russian plan. Their stadiums likely won't be any more spread out than Brasil, and much less so than when the US hosted (one semi-final was held at the Meadowlands, with the final happening 4 days later at the Rose Bowl).

Canada would be a travel nightmare if they tried to use venues from coast to coast, which they would have to do if they had any hope of gaining the political support that would be needed.

[Matty81]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Just going by memory there wasn't much of an FA or a national team in the US in the early 80s. I don't think they even played an international match for 2 or 3 years. Canada was miles ahead of them. We made the World Cup, we had players in Europe. USA had nothing but winning the bid for 1994 changed everything and gave them the money and structure they needed.

As for Qatari players abroad, why would a Qatari leave one of the richest countries in the world to go play elsewhere.

I would argue it's harder to get out of AFC than CONCACAF. They have Australia, Japan, North and South Korea, Saudi Arabia, Iran... China and even India are emerging.

CONCACAF have Mexico and USA only. The rest is a crapshoot.

I think the rationale for AFC/OFC having 5 spots vs. CONCACAF having 3 and a playoff against a SA team is sound and forward looking, it's going to grow into a better and better confed. Right now though, I think Canada would switch places with Australia pretty quickly if they could. Subjective opinion for sure though I've heard it voiced by alot of people who follow the nats in the last cycle.

I'm sure the lifestyle is lucrative in Qatar and desert living is actually sounding good to me today as I'm looking outside at frozen mountains. I just don't see them being competitive right now. Maybe they have loose citizenship laws and they can make a team of Brazilian ringers .

[Locke]

Originally Posted by getbak

For one thing, Russia isn't having venues spread across its full width, which will help them to some degree.

Right now, the plan is for 16 stadiums in 13 cities, none further east than the Urals: http://www.russia2018-2022.com/en/th...st-cities.aspx

That number will probably come down once the plans become more concrete.

South Africa had 10 stadiums, and Brasil will have 12 in 2014. I wouldn't be surprised if some of the more far-flung cities eventually get dropped from the Russian plan. Their stadiums likely won't be any more spread out than Brasil, and much less so than when the US hosted (one semi-final was held at the Meadowlands, with the final happening 4 days later at the Rose Bowl).

Canada would be a travel nightmare if they tried to use venues from coast to coast, which they would have to do if they had any hope of gaining the political support that would be needed.

Thats pretty much it, Vancouver to Halifax just aint gonna work.

[SuperMatt18]

The best chance Canada has of hosting a World Cup in the near future would be if FIFA forced the USA to host the World Cup on either the East or West coast to minimize travel across time zones for the teams.

Then if that happened maybe Canada could have one/two venues to host some games.

West Coast (13 Venues):

L.A.
San Francisco
San Jose
Seattle
Portland
Colorado
Dallas
Houston
Phoenix
Denver
Salt Lake City

Vancouver
Calgary/Edmonton

East Coast (13 venues)

New York x 2
Washington
Boston
Chicago
Philly
Pittsburgh
Columbus
Detroit
Miami
Orlando

Toronto
Montreal

Of course this is just a hypothetical situation I feel could work but I doubt the US would ever be willing to do this, as they would want the whole tournament to themselves and they would never want to have to isolate half of the population by hosting it in one coast only.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Locke

Thats pretty much it, Vancouver to Halifax just aint gonna work.

Although I don't completely disagree, Brazil is pretty big too.

Porto Alegre -> Manaus 3122 km
Vancouver -> Halifax 4443 km

But we're operating on the assumption that FIFA will be logical, so who knows, maybe Canada would win!

Originally Posted by diane_phaneuf

Canada won't have a world cup in our life times, no oil money and or willingness to bribe with the money the country does have

LOL, you need to get out of Vancouver more.

Originally Posted by GirlySports

McMahon

I'd be embarassed to hold a World Cup match at McMahon. It's not even a complete stadium, it's missing two sides! 3 if you count the roof.

Originally Posted by mmanzz

Hmm, to me what was successful about Vancouver 2010 was we won it! Hosting a World Cup and sucking at it is not really something that will add value to the Canada brand, let alone make people feel good about it. After all third world countries have hosted many times before, its nothing new.

So the '88 games were a failure?

[ipuckedyourmom]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

Canada should put in a bid for 2026, it'll almost certainly go to North America, or Austrailia.

I would much rather have Canada spend that time/money on development of players and actually qualifying.

As for Qatar, I'm fully aware they are planning on spending a lot of money on new stadiums which includes them being fully Air conditioned but where are the teams going to train. 32 teams won't all be able to train in those stadiums with AC so the majority will have to put up with that intense heat during practice sessions. I could see a lot of teams prior to the World Cup deciding to train in extreme heat much like this previous year when teams went and trained in the mountains to prepare for the altitude in South Africa.

[_Q_]

I have been to Qatar several times, so here is my $0.02.

First time I went there was in 1994 and it was truly a barren desert. The population of the entire country was around 700,000. There was one land mark (a pyramid shaped Sheraton hotel), no malls and pretty much nothing to do.

I went almost every summer after that and I truly hated life there. So when I learned that I didn't have to go after 1998, I was thrilled.

Fast forward to the winter of 2005, I decided to go again. I heard that I would not recognize the place this time, but I didn't believe a place could have changed that much in less than a decade. Man was I wrong.

What used to be a little backwater of Middle East culture and history had transformed into this vibrant and rich country with architecture and arts that you can only dream of in North America. The amount of money that the government is spending on the infrastructure in that country is remarkable.

For those that are bashing Qatar, I understand your concerns, although your arguments are flawed. People hear Middle East or Muslim country and instantly they have images of Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran dancing in their heads. Qatar is does not force all females to wear hijab like the above mentioned countries. There has never been a terrorist attack in Qatar. There is no war or threat of war there.

Alcohol is permitted in any hotel/pub/nightclub or home. They are also planning on relaxing their alcohol laws for the world cup, so I'm sure restaurants and fan areas will allow alcohol for the World Cup.

I would not call them the most liberal country in the Middle East (I would give that title to Lebanon or Egypt), but they are pretty close to being on par with Canada/US.

Sure it's hot there in the summer, but Canada is cold in the winter, that didn't stop us hosting 2 great winter olympics. If it's any country that could make the air cooling technology work it would be these guys. They have enough money to fix any problem.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by ipuckedyourmom

I would much rather have Canada spend that time/money on development of players and actually qualifying.

As for Qatar, I'm fully aware they are planning on spending a lot of money on new stadiums which includes them being fully Air conditioned but where are the teams going to train. 32 teams won't all be able to train in those stadiums with AC so the majority will have to put up with that intense heat during practice sessions. I could see a lot of teams prior to the World Cup deciding to train in extreme heat much like this previous year when teams went and trained in the mountains to prepare for the altitude in South Africa.

Yup but that's what makes the World Cup great, to be World Champions, a team has to prepare and win under all sorts of conditions. Who would have thought that Spain would win at altitude and in freezing temperatures?

[valo403]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Yup but that's what makes the World Cup great, to be World Champions, a team has to prepare and win under all sorts of conditions. Who would have thought that Spain would win at altitude and in freezing temperatures?

The difference being that multiple athletes haven't died from competing at altitude in temperatures near freezing.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by valo403

The difference being that multiple athletes haven't died from competing at altitude in temperatures near freezing.

or listening to vuvuaelas

Altitude can be a problem, I wonder if players have died in Peruvian or Bolivan leagues. I don't know.

I still believe the majority of matches will be at night. They might even build air-conditioned practice facilities. They have 12 years!

-----

I was mistaken earlier, Qatar is hosting the 2011 Asian Cup but it is next month not in the summer. We'll get a sneak peak and some of the existing stadium but not how a tournament in July would be like.

Also you called me annoyingly optimistic, which is true, but I'm not optimistic about Russia. I don't think they will get stuff in time, not many people will attend, there still the problem of racist chants, I think that one will be a disaster.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

or listening to vuvuaelas

Altitude can be a problem, I wonder if players have died in Peruvian or Bolivan leagues. I don't know.

I still believe the majority of matches will be at night. They might even build air-conditioned practice facilities. They have 12 years!

Except the WC wasn't awarded top Peru or Bolivia, it was awrded to South Africa, where the altitudes are not of the type to cause a safety concern.

FIFA essentially took the money over any concerns of player and spectator safety here. The whole bid is premised on unseen and unproven air conditioned stadium concepts, and even if those work there's still the fact that the rest of the counrty will be at least 40 frickin degrees. We aren't going to see 32 air conditioned practice facilities, that's unrealistic even for a place that throws money around like it's a monopoly game. The fan experience will be dreadful, even if they do allow alcohol in more public settings and reduce restrictions it's still going to be a sauna. Add on the fact that a WC was just awarded to a country that gets a thumbs up from the UN for outlawing amputation as a form of punishment (baby steps I guess), has severely restricted womens rights, rights of association, workers rights, lacks anything resembling a democratic process and considers the majority of it's population to be second class citizens and the whole thing just gets more and more disturbing.

I'm sure things will run efficiently and enough money will be thrown at any issues to make them go away, I guess I just want a little bit more from the worlds biggest sporting event. At least nobody will have a hand chopped off.

[GirlySports]

Russia might hang someone at halftime.

I wish politics here were corrupt. HARD POO MAN comes to my door.. vote for me!
My response: How much money you got?

----

I still give Qatar a chance and hope that it will advance the region. As others have said, Qatar is advance for the area. Maybe not as advance to our Western standards but events like this can help alot. As you said, baby steps!

[valo403]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Russia might hang someone at halftime.

I wish politics here were corrupt. HARD POO MAN comes to my door.. vote for me!
My response: How much money you got?

----

I still give Qatar a chance and hope that it will advance the region. As others have said, Qatar is advance for the area. Maybe not as advance to our Western standards but events like this can help alot. As you said, baby steps!

If you want to use it as a means to advance the area grant the WC with conditions attached, and not just 'build some giant f'in stadiums and then ship the scraps around the world afterwards'. Require that everyone in the country be granted basic rights, especially the 85% of the country who are foreign workers.

My biggest issue is just how blatant the say one thing do another is with this. FIFA goes on and on about their contributions to the world etc. and then they grant the gmaes to a place thats greatest positive in the realm of human rights is that it's surrounded by places worse than it. That's not an accomplishment. Allies with Iran? Check. Don't recognize Israel and heavily discrimanatory against Jews and non-Muslims? Check (and being less discriminatory than their neighbors doesn't get them off the hook, a light pink shirt is still pink). The list goes on and on.

[GirlySports]

You're digging too deep. It's FIFA. It's about who is the biggest dick-swinger.

[Locke]

Well, the British media is tearing the crap out of each other.

Apparently, their use of the Prince, and Beckham and other celebrities smacked too much of arrogance and thats perceived to be the reason they didnt get any votes.

"It wasnt us, it was the media!"

[GirlySports]

England perceived as arrogent? NO WAY!

[Mazrim]

FIFA has a sense of humour. They didn't vote for England because they wanted to watch the spectacle that the media starts afterwards!

[valo403]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

You're digging too deep. It's FIFA. It's about who is the biggest dick-swinger.

Which is my point, they go on and on about improving the world and so on when the reality is that all that matters is who brings the biggest suitcase full of cash. This just took what was already apparent and slapped you in the face with it.