World Cup Vote

Amid major corruption allegations that have already resulted in 2 of the 24 voters banned from the event, FIFA votes tomorrow on who will host the next two world cups.

2018

Belgium/Holland. Probably won’t win because they won’t submit to FIFA’s tax demands.
Portugal/Spain.
Russia.
England. Probably won’t get it because FIFA hates England and the British press has embarrassed FIFA with repeated corruption allegations.

2022
Qatar
Australia
USA
Japan
South Korea

Fairness, tells me new countries should host the tournament, so Russia for 2018 and Australia/Qatar for 2022. But I’ve never seen FIFA as being fair. And if recent allegations have any truth to them, the tournament will go to whoever stuffed the most notes in the most pockets.

Russia and Qatar?

I see Russia as the odds-on favorite in 2018 with the USA hosting the cup in 2022.

2018
England (which hasn’t hosted a WC since 1966) probably deserves it. But they’ve made too many enemies and Russia has the money to host it. The Spain/Portugal financial situation isn’t certain and Belgium’s bid is as good as dead. As such, the Russian bid looks pretty secure here.

2022
Neither Qatar nor Australia has hosted a WC before. But I think the problems in the Middle East, the dangerous heat and the country size will hurt Qatar. Also, this is a team that has never qualified for the World Cup and are currently ranked #113 and that’s going to hurt its chances. Giving a free pass (the host country always gets in) to a really bad team isn’t going to sit well with a lot of people.

Australia is a decent bet, but they have some serious challenges in that the time zone differential between the Aussies and the US and Western European creates major TV problems. They successfully hosted the Olympics and that helps. Probably the strongest challenge to the US bid with a squad ranked #20 in the world.

The US hosted the most attended and watched WC in history. And it’ll be 30 years since it was last hosted in the USA. If it’s hosted in the States, everyone makes huge money and the USA team is a likely qualifier anyway. As such, the US is the front-runner for 2022.

Japan and South Korea hosted a WC after the US hosted theirs and so I think their bids are real long shots. I don’t see either hosting the cup in 2022.

The real trick here is that there are two WC tourneys to be hosted being given out at once. That leaves a helluva lot of room for backroom dealings. It’s conceivable to see a large Asian contingent throw their support behind England to host in 2018 so long as it gets the western Europeans to support one of the 3 Asian/South Pacific bids in 2022.

I’d like it to go to Russia because they’ve never hosted one before, but I think technically England’s is the strongest bid. As a fan I’d be wary of travelling to Russia for the games, and I’d be surprised if they can offer the sort of accommodation necessary for thousands of fans outside of St. Petersberg and Moscow. Infrastructure is also poor, with great distances between stadiums and only dodgy local airlines and ancient trains to carry you there. But South Africa managed to get themselves ready enough, so I guess Russia might be able to pull it off also.

2022

The US hosted the most attended and watched WC in history. And it’ll be 30 years since it was last hosted in the USA. If it’s hosted in the States, everyone makes huge money and the USA team is a likely qualifier anyway. As such, the US is the front-runner for 2022.

I think USA will win because FIFA wants to grow its support there. The most watched world cup wasn’t USA, though, it was the 2002 world cup in South Korea/Japan. That’s because the biggest watching group is now in Asia, primarily China. The World Cup in 2002 was in the same time zone roughly as Australia, so that won’t be a problem for them. The US time zone sucks for the biggest two markets: Europe and Asia.

FWIW, Australia is pessimistic about it’s own bid after it came out that FIFA ranked it the least financially viable of the 2022 bids. So there is that.

I’m hoping for England to win in a corruptly-organised “we’re not corrupt!” fashion, because I think their bid is the strongest and it’s somewhat overdue. If they don’t get it, there’ll be a lot of unanswered questions, but if they do get it people will probably assume what I just said, so the whole thing is tarnished either way.

Otherwise, I’d like to see it go to Russia. As for 2022, Australia sounds good to me. I’d generally like to see these events go to places that haven’t recently hosted them.

My bad…I meant to say the most attended WC. The US put more butts in the seats than in any WC before or after.

I think Qatar is a dark horse. Their bid is amazing. They are offering climatically controlled open air stadiums (open air is a FIFA requirement). And when the tournament is over these stadiums will be flatpacked and delivered to poor nations across the region. One of FIFA’s primary goals is developing the game in poorer regions, so this is a major vote winner for them. They look technically and financially capable of running a blinding show.

I don’t think a low rank is a major obstacle, if it is one at all. Checking FIFA rankings Qatar were just 10 places behind South Africa before World Cup 2010. And back in 1994 many people grumbled that the US were too weak to host the tournament, being as they got roundly thrashed in 1990, the first World Cup the US had qualified for in 40 years. And the US put up a good fight in 1994!

^Cupvote

In some respects far more interested in this than the Olympics despite my general apathy to (english) international football, but it’s FIFA the one organisation that hates us more than UEFA. Plus someone threw a flare onto a pitch in a cup match tonight so no-doubt we’re all hooligans again.

Apart from Spain, and ignoring anything else I’d have put England as a shoe in. It’s got the stadiums already built, I can think of 5 with a capacity of 50k+ without trying. Infrastructure wise it doesn’t have to do anything. if you really wanted to (and of course that’s not going to happen) you could ignore London completely and still have access to 4-5 international class stadiums all within a couple of hours drive from each other.

There was a degree of crowing this evening about Putin’s decision not to attend which was taken as basically Russia throwing in the towel and the belief that it’s now basically between Spain/Portugal and England as host choices. In which case Spain/Portugal remains my bet as hosts.

So it was Russia and my dark horse Qatar. Glad the new countries got it, though disappointed for England yet again (though not surprised).

waddayamean!!
We loved it!! ;)

Isn’t Australia is about as far away from Europe/US as what South Africa is?
Didn’t FIFA say they were concerned that there wouldn’t be enough people getting to the games to support it.

I’d go:
2018: Portugal/Spain

and

2022: USA - barring compulsory full strip searches at airports by then. It would be nice is Australia got it though.

It was announced 2 hours ago, Rward. :)

Whatever, dude, they don’t even play soccer in England.

Thankfully it wasn’t awarded to us+Spain. No need to spend silly money trying to look good to outsiders when we actually have none to spend.

I’m not fussed either. It’d choke the country for a month and is just a way for FIFA to earn a disgusting amount of money.

Anytime you get a chance to watch football in 115 F heat with major booze restrictions, you have to take it right?

Another key question is will South American female supporters even be allowed to disembark from the planes given the clothing regulations?

Thankfully FIFA laid to rest any concerns about bribery by awarding the games to the richest countries who were also viewed as some of the least qualified contenders by the own FIFA hired evaluators! Kudos all around.

Great result for Russia and Qatar. I’m a Russophile, and am happy to see them get it. Qatar will be technically stunning no doubt and I’m sure certain aspects of sharia law will be ignored for a few weeks, the Sheikhs hold the power, not the clerics. Of course, both on book and offbook, FIFA will benefit financially from both of these choices over their opponents.

Qatar’s bid was technically brilliant. They have tons of money, already some great stadiums, and a small country with billions spent on modern transport infrastructure. Their stadiums will be cooled to 20 degrees - cooler than your typical northern European summer’s day. Certainly a lot cooler than some of the games in the US in 1994!

They will also allow fans to drink during the tournament, and there are no clothing laws that I’m aware of, although the locals are quite conservative. I think that might be the biggest problem: How the locals and the masses mix together. But Arabs are famous for their welcoming of strangers, so they’ll probably tolerate it for the glory of hosting the World Cup.

They even said they will let Israel play even though they are still technically at war with them… so I really hope Israel qualify in 2022.

If I was going to travel to see a World Cup, Qatar would be pretty appealing. All the games will be played in a relatively small area, meaning a person could see matches in all the stadiums while staying in a central location. As long as they upgrade their infrastructure, anyway. Some of the places they are planning to have stadiums have populations lower then the planned capacity of the stadiums!