FIFA ban international matches at high altitude.

[Montry]

ZURICH, May 27 (Reuters) - No international soccer matches will be allowed to take place above an altitude of 2,500 metres in future, FIFA president Sepp Blatter said on Sunday.

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story?id=434219&cc=3888

[Dante79]

Too bad for Peru who wanted to play WCQ in Cuzco, wich is 2500m above sea level....Peru always played in Lima wich is not altitude and failed to qualify for the past 28 years and wanted to take advantage of Cuzco's altitude for this WCQ..... I bet the Argentinians and Brasilians are responsable for the FIFA'S decision

[Dante79]

Too bad for Peru who wanted to play WCQ in Cuzco, wich is 2500m above sea level....Peru always played in Lima wich is not altitude and failed to qualify for the past 28 years and wanted to take advantage of Cuzco's altitude for this WCQ..... I bet the Argentinians and Brasilians are responsable for the FIFA'S decision

[Desigol]

Ecuador are f**ked.

[Guest speedmonk42]

Too bad we couldn't lower it by another 250, and kick out Azteca

[River City]

For health reasons???? Next they're gonna go after places where it's too cold or too hot.

[Guest speedmonk42]

quote:Originally posted by River City

For health reasons???? Next they're gonna go after places where it's too cold or too hot.

It's not the same thing. Altitude sickness is a serious illness.

Also FIFA does have rules on the cold and standing water on a pitch.

So it is not their first weather/geographical addition to the rule book.

[amacpher]

quote:Originally posted by Desigol

Ecuador are f**ked.

IT'll affect Bolivia the most. Any shot they have at qualifying for a World Cup is extinguished if they have to play their home qualifiers in Santa Cruz.

Ecuador can beat good teams at any altitude right now as we saw in Germany.

[Dante79]

I heard that Peru will play in Arequipa wich doesnt have the altitude CUzco has and is not prohibit by the FIFA

[nolando]

quote:Originally posted by amacpher

IT'll affect Bolivia the most. Any shot they have at qualifying for a World Cup is extinguished if they have to play their home qualifiers in Santa Cruz.

Ecuador can beat good teams at any altitude right now as we saw in Germany.

I have a lot of love for Ecuador in my heart as a former resident and longtime supporter, but I honestly think that they wouldn't have been in Germany were it not for their points won in Quito. And they may not be in the WC again at this rate. In fact this could be it for all of the Andean teams - honestly.

Imagine telling Canada that they can't play any of their WCQ games in Toronto, in our biggest and most celebrated stadium, in our country's principal city, with the rowdiest supporters and one of our nation's longest histories of football. How then would Canadian's react? How about you Torontians? And this analogy has one percent of the truth infused in the Andean counterpart.

This while I can't honestly recall seeing, hearing, learning about a single athlete dying at altitude, while scores of professional athletes of many sports have been dying in recent years (including a bunch of North Americans playing sports at or near sea-level) due to heat/sunstroke and other extreme temperature-related conditions.

I'm telling you, at the risk of sounding like some of the loonier regular posters, you can think what you want but this announcement is the result of a strong lobby from Brasil and Argentina, those poor football giants who can't stand to even lose a few of their qualifying points, even though they both qualify (usually without even breaking a sweat) for every single tournament under the current, terribly "unfair" playing conditions.

[amacpher]

Yeah, it does seem a bit stupid. As if players can only suffer from altitude during international matches. Never in a club match. *eyeroll*

How many international soccer matches per year are played about 2500 metres anyway? 15? 25? But we'll still continue playing thousands of club football matches above 2500 metres.[8)]

[River City]

quote:Originally posted by speedmonk42

It's not the same thing. Altitude sickness is a serious illness.

Also FIFA does have rules on the cold and standing water on a pitch.

So it is not their first weather/geographical addition to the rule book.

If I thought this had anything to do with FIFA actually caring about player's health, I'd go along with it. But with FIFA's track record, 'health reasons' is only their excuse for cracking down on the handful of teams that have an altitude advantage and favouring those that have recently started to drop points in those countries.

Congested international fixtures, doping, and inadequate hydration (for matches played in the hottest times for the benefit of tv networks) rank as far bigger problems than 'altitude sickness'. Having had to rely on coca leaves to survive Day 2 of the Inka Trail, I can tell first hand that altitude sickness is not a laughing matter, but international players are conditioned athletes with teams of medical staff to help prepare for variances in altitude or weather.

[amacpher]

During the last qualifiers, Argentina would send their "B" team to La Paz while their "A" team went to Buenos Aires to play a qualifier. Four days after the match in B.A., the "B" team played a qualifying game against Bolivia. That seemed to work.

Does anybody know if this also includes Copa Libertadores matches?

The more I think about this, the dumber and more corrupt it sounds. I guess 2250 meters high and heavy Mexico City pollution is okay. But 2500 meters and clean air is not. [)]

[Excumbrian]

Nothing to stop countries playing in cities as follows:

Ecuador: Guiyaquil (sea level)

Bolivia: Santa Cruz (400m)

Colombia: Barranquilla, Cartagena (both sea level)

Peru: Lima (sea level)

The reason Peru chooses to play in cities such as Cuzco is obviously for the advantage of playing at high altitude...although I have a little more sympathy for those nations whose capitals are at altitude. Canada wouldn't be allowed to play internationals in Inuvik in winter...

Nevertheless I think they should have put the limit at 2000m or even lower. They didn't, no doubt, because of Mexico's political clout.

[amacpher]

quote:Originally posted by Excumbrian

Nothing to stop countries playing in cities as follows:

Ecuador: Guiyaquil (sea level)

Bolivia: Santa Cruz (400m)

Colombia: Barranquilla, Cartagena (both sea level)

Peru: Lima (sea level)

And nothing is stopping the USA from playing their home games against Mexico in Los Angeles or San Diego. But why should they have to?

[Excumbrian]

quote:Originally posted by amacpher

And nothing is stopping the USA from playing their home games against Mexico in Los Angeles or San Diego. But why should they have to?

Well I take your point. And I do think that FIFA needs to be consistent about this and look at issues like heat, humidity and pollution. But then it's FIFA right? and money talks. Still I do think it's pretty obvious in Peru's case (Cuzco is not the biggest or capital city).

In answer to another,earlier post:

"This while I can't honestly recall seeing, hearing, learning about a single athlete dying at altitude, while scores of professional athletes of many sports have been dying in recent years (including a bunch of North Americans playing sports at or near sea-level) due to heat/sunstroke and other extreme temperature-related conditions."

...I would say that I am old enough to remember the Mexico olympic s distance events, which resulted in people like Ron Clarke (the world record holder) collapsing on the track and requiring oxygen. Perhaps nowadays people acclimatise better -- I don't know. One could also bring up the pollution / heat inversion issues of the LA olympics...It's certainly an interesting debate.

[nolando]

quote:Originally posted by Excumbrian

Well I take your point. And I do think that FIFA needs to be consistent about this and look at issues like heat, humidity and pollution. But then it's FIFA right? and money talks. Still I do think it's pretty obvious in Peru's case (Cuzco is not the biggest or capital city).

In answer to another,earlier post:

"This while I can't honestly recall seeing, hearing, learning about a single athlete dying at altitude, while scores of professional athletes of many sports have been dying in recent years (including a bunch of North Americans playing sports at or near sea-level) due to heat/sunstroke and other extreme temperature-related conditions."

...I would say that I am old enough to remember the Mexico olympic s distance events, which resulted in people like Ron Clarke (the world record holder) collapsing on the track and requiring oxygen. Perhaps nowadays people acclimatise better -- I don't know. One could also bring up the pollution / heat inversion issues of the LA olympics...It's certainly an interesting debate.

He didn't die, while IIRC there were at least three high profile sports-related deaths due to heat and sun in the US alone last summer (pro football, I think)...my memory is sketchy and I am referring quite often to non-soccer heat-related deaths, but I think I could still stand by my earlier comment that FIFA knows damn well that heat and sun kills and have probably been crossing their fingers for years that it doesn't happen to some high-profile soccer player the media will notice.

Also, yes it is true that all of the countries mentioned have stadiums at much lower altitudes that could host WCQ games, but you are missing the point. Telling these countries that La Paz and Bogota and Quito are no longer eligible to host the only round of WCQ qualifying that takes place in South America is like telling Canadians (on the eve of planning for the playoffs) that Toronto and Vancouver and Montreal can no longer host Stanley Cup games (as in never, ever again) due to some suddenly introduced legislation by the IIHF. And then imagine people in non-affected places like Switzerland telling us Canadians to relax, since we still have lots of other cities where we can host the games, like why not have them in Ottawa or Victoria or Halifax? That's what you are asking people of these Andean nations to swallow, so I think you can at least pretend to understand the outrage.

Is it possible to (at the very least) "grandfather" in certain cities or at least stadiums? There is really a lot of public anger against the idea of a country being able to start playing football at a high altititude when they haven't been doing it at that particular level of football. I think this could rightfully be addressed so that, for example, FIFA would step in and tell Peru that they can't start playing national team games in Cuzco, since they haven't played there before (or at least not for ages) and they are clearly only doing it for the perceieved altitude advantage. This Cuzco situation doesn't sit well with me at all either, as it is clearly gamesmanship.

This would also mean, however, that Quito and Bogota and La Paz can still hold games, as games have been held there for every cycle of WCQ for modern history, and they haven't been "conceived" by a desperate federation hoping to qualify. Again, people, can't you see the logic in wanting to hold your WCQ games in your biggest/principal cities?

Make a rule for heat and pollution. Cities over a certain pollution index or a certain game-time average temperature could also be told in advance that they are unable to host key international games. At it happens, that could quite possibly mean a La Paz wouldn't be able to host a game due absurd levels of pollution, but at least in this instance the rule would be the kind of rule that would apply to a number of countries for two serious health issues (not that altitude is any laughing matter) and would not single out four or five poor Andean nations that dont have the clout or cash to fight back by themselves against the giants of FIFA.

[River City]

quote:Originally posted by Excumbrian

Well I take your point. And I do think that FIFA needs to be consistent about this and look at issues like heat, humidity and pollution. But then it's FIFA right? and money talks. Still I do think it's pretty obvious in Peru's case (Cuzco is not the biggest or capital city).

So people in Cusco are supposed to lose their local team - Cienciano because they live at high altitude? Cuzco is not the biggest city in Peru but it has been growing in importance lately, especially with the increased levels of Japanese investment - levels which are expected to climb even higher. Cuzco's airport will be designated an International airport and when that happens, Lima's air traffic will be substantially reduced.

On a side note, there are very few Peruvian players that are accustomed to or enjoy playing in Cusco. And while Cienciano has won the Copa Sudamericana, they have yet to win the domestic championship.

[Excumbrian]

quote:Originally posted by nolando

He didn't die, while IIRC there were at least three high profile sports-related deaths due to heat and sun in the US alone last summer (pro football, I think)...my memory is sketchy and I am referring quite often to non-soccer heat-related deaths, but I think I could still stand by my earlier comment that FIFA knows damn well that heat and sun kills and have probably been crossing their fingers for years that it doesn't happen to some high-profile soccer player the media will notice.

Also, yes it is true that all of the countries mentioned have stadiums at much lower altitudes that could host WCQ games, but you are missing the point. Telling these countries that La Paz and Bogota and Quito are no longer eligible to host the only round of WCQ qualifying that takes place in South America is like telling Canadians (on the eve of planning for the playoffs) that Toronto and Vancouver and Montreal can no longer host Stanley Cup games (as in never, ever again) due to some suddenly introduced legislation by the IIHF. And then imagine people in non-affected places like Switzerland telling us Canadians to relax, since we still have lots of other cities where we can host the games, like why not have them in Ottawa or Victoria or Halifax? That's what you are asking people of these Andean nations to swallow, so I think you can at least pretend to understand the outrage.

Is it possible to (at the very least) "grandfather" in certain cities or at least stadiums? There is really a lot of public anger against the idea of a country being able to start playing football at a high altititude when they haven't been doing it at that particular level of football. I think this could rightfully be addressed so that, for example, FIFA would step in and tell Peru that they can't start playing national team games in Cuzco, since they haven't played there before (or at least not for ages) and they are clearly only doing it for the perceieved altitude advantage. This Cuzco situation doesn't sit well with me at all either, as it is clearly gamesmanship.

This would also mean, however, that Quito and Bogota and La Paz can still hold games, as games have been held there for every cycle of WCQ for modern history, and they haven't been "conceived" by a desperate federation hoping to qualify. Again, people, can't you see the logic in wanting to hold your WCQ games in your biggest/principal cities?

Make a rule for heat and pollution. Cities over a certain pollution index or a certain game-time average temperature could also be told in advance that they are unable to host key international games. At it happens, that could quite possibly mean a La Paz wouldn't be able to host a game due absurd levels of pollution, but at least in this instance the rule would be the kind of rule that would apply to a number of countries for two serious health issues (not that altitude is any laughing matter) and would not single out four or five poor Andean nations that dont have the clout or cash to fight back by themselves against the giants of FIFA.

I agree with you whole-heartedly. I think consistency is of the essence.

[RJB]

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/05/31/frontpage/SOCCER.php

Soccer: Low politics cause high emotions

By Rob Hughes Published: May 31, 2007

While delegates from 206 countries or states banqueted in Zurich - feasting on the message that soccer promotes equality wherever the ball bounces - governments in Latin America organized mass street demonstrations for the right to play the game in their major stadiums.

At issue on the two sides of the globe Wednesday was the declaration by FIFA, the world governing body for soccer, to ban with immediate effect international matches above an altitude of 2,500 meters, or 8,200 feet.

In Zurich, Sepp Blatter, the FIFA president, said Sunday that this measure was taken to protect the health of the players, and to prevent the "distortion" of competition where high altitude favored the home side.

In La Paz, where the Bolivian government held an emergency Cabinet session at 3,600 meters on Monday, the head of state, Evo Morales, called the FIFA ban "not only a ruling against Bolivia, but against the universality of sport."

Down in the streets of the Bolivian capital, Ruben Cuenca, a pastry seller, spoke for the ordinary man.

"We didn't have the luck to be born anywhere else," Cuenca told the Associated Press. "We have to play sports wherever we can. If not, where would we go? To the beach? To play soccer with the crabs?"

As ever, with FIFA crunching the numbers and claiming that it has jurisdiction over 270 million people involved in the world game, it is the voice of one fan that moves us most.

Away from the committee rooms in Zurich and the politicking in South America, or for that matter FIFA members in Nepal and other high altitude places, the beauty of soccer is that it excludes no one.

Blatter left us disturbingly thin on the ground for factual reasoning when he announced Sunday that the 23-man executive committee had passed the rule that bars cities in Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, and some venues in Mexico from staging World Cup qualifying games where they have been played for some three quarters of a century.

The committee has South American representation, but from the bigger nations, the low-altitude soccer giants of Argentina and Brazil. None of the smaller, but stalwart, regional countries appears to have been consulted, forewarned, or invited to present their case.

Blatter said he knew there would be complaints, but based on advice from FIFA's own medical commission, the decision had to be taken. He does not spell out the dangers to players' health. He does not respond to the inevitable outcry that soccer's ever burgeoning program of matches put pressures on players and minimize the time those in most demand can afford to prepare for matches at extreme heat or cold.

To do so might, of course, compromise the FIFA calendar. No one knows when or where these days the temperatures might soar intolerably. In 2003, Lyon sweltered and Marc Vivien-Foe, an ostensibly fit young Cameroonian, collapsed and died during a FIFA match.

It was later suggested that Foe had a congenital heart condition, but how would we know whether any of the millions who play for profit or for fun are unsuited to certain circumstances thrown at us by nature?

The World Cup last year in Germany was as hot as Africa, the schedule as unforgiving as could be. The next two World Cups take us to South Africa, and probably Brazil.

Among the many voices coming down from on high after FIFA's sudden and seemingly arbitrary cut off point of 2,500 meters, the suspicion is aired that Brazil and Argentina, the big two of South America, have used their position on the executive to influence the decision.

It is a problem for Brazil, Argentina and Uruguay to obtain the release of their players from European clubs in time to acclimatize for crucial qualifying matches in the Andes.

The likes of Bolivia have used this to even up the odds against richer, more populous, more powerful neighbors. Yet there have been no fatalities, no lack of ingenuity on the side of the giants. Brazil recently prepared one squad for high altitude, leaving another to take care of the Bolivians at ground level.

The debate has many miles to go, and many strands of soccer politics to run.

The line that has been drawn, 2,500 meters, allows Mexico, the host to two of FIFA's most exciting World Cups, to continue hosting games in Mexico City. That is where one of the ruling body's most affluent television partners is based.

Mexico City is just beneath 2,500 meters, but its high temperatures and polluted air worried team physicians in 1970 and 1986.

[georg]

June 07, 2007

OUT OF THIN AIR

Andean States Protest Ban on High Altitude Soccer

Andean nations are furious about a FIFA ban on high-altitude soccer games and are meeting at a protest summit in Bolivia. FIFA says the high-altitude games give an unfair advantage to the home teams, but the Andean states say all they want is a level playing field.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,487228,00.html

AP

Bolivia's President Evo Morales heads the ball during a soccer match in La Paz to protest a FIFA ban on high-altitude games.

Soccer famously inspires strong emotions in South America, with crunch matches not uncommonly turning into riots and non-performing players occasionally being murdered, as was the tragic fate of Colombian player Andrés Escobar after he let in an own goal in the 1994 World Cup.

Now a new ruling by soccer's world governing organization FIFA has the Andean states gasping in indignation. Representatives from six Andean nations are meeting in the Bolivian administrative capital La Paz to protest a FIFA ban on high-altitude games.

FIFA last month placed a ban on international matches played above 2,500 meters (8,200 feet), citing concerns for players' health and worries over an unfair advantage that home teams have over their low-lying rivals.

Bolivian President Evo Morales opened a protest summit in La Paz Wednesday. Representatives from Peru, Ecuador, Venezuela, Colombia, Chile and the host Bolivia -- who are all affected by the high-altitude ban -- signed a declaration opposing the FIFA ruling. They will present the declaration to the South American Football Federation next week.

NEWSLETTER

Sign up for Spiegel Online's daily newsletter and get the best of Der Spiegel's and Spiegel Online's international coverage in your In- Box everyday.

The Andean nations deny that high-altitude games pose a health risk and claim that soccer giants Argentina and Brazil -- who have suffered during Andean games in the past -- have masterminded the ruling for their own advantage.

A Bolivian newspaper is trying to collect one million signatures for a petition to be sent to FIFA president Joseph Blatter, while Morales -- no stranger to accusations of populism (more...) -- last week put on his boots and played in a game in La Paz, which lies at a breathtaking 3,500 meters above sea level, to protest against the ban.

dgs/ap/reuters

[amacpher]

quote:Originally posted by georg

June 07, 2007

OUT OF THIN AIR

Andean States Protest Ban on High Altitude Soccer

Andean nations are furious about a FIFA ban on high-altitude soccer games and are meeting at a protest summit in Bolivia. FIFA says the high-altitude games give an unfair advantage to the home teams, but the Andean states say all they want is a level playing field.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,487228,00.html

AP

Bolivia's President Evo Morales heads the ball during a soccer match in La Paz to protest a FIFA ban on high-altitude games.

Soccer famously inspires strong emotions in South America, with crunch matches not uncommonly turning into riots and non-performing players occasionally being murdered, as was the tragic fate of Colombian player Andrés Escobar after he let in an own goal in the 1994 World Cup.

Too bad that good article had to be ruined by the implication in the second paragraph that Escobar's murder had something to do with the own-goal he conceeded. [)]

[georg]

Switzerland, Austria play high altitude 5-a-side match to mark one year to Euro 2008

http://www.therecord.com/sports/soccer/R060832AU.html

ON THE JUNGFRAUJOCH, Switzerland (AP) - Austria and Switzerland battled for bragging rights atop one of the Alps' highest glaciers Friday with a soccer ball rather than skis.

The five-a-side match between the traditional skiing powerhouses was played exactly one year before the start of their co-hosting of soccer's 2008 European Championship.

The 10-minute match ended in a 5-5 draw. It was played on a small field of artificial turf on top of a glacier at the Jungfraujoch, 3,545 metres above sea level.

"The good thing for both coaches is that we will both remain unbeaten at this height," Swiss coach Koebi Kuhn joked.

The match featured Switzerland internationals David Degen and Johan Djourou, and Austria's Christian Fuchs and Zlatko Junuzovic.

Former stars Michael Laudrup of Denmark and Paulo Sousa of Portugal also played as guests, as did Liverpool's Poland goalkeeper Jerzy Dudek.

Last month, world soccer's governing body banned official international matches at altitudes higher than 2,500 metres. The decision by Swiss-based FIFA sparked widespread protest from Latin American countries such as Boli EST

[georg]

Bolivian prez takes jab at FIFA, plays game at 19,700 feet

June 12, 2007

CBS SportsLine.com wire reports

http://www.sportsline.com/soccer/story/10223245

SAJAMA, Bolivia -- Weaving around icy boulders and scrambling to avoid sliding down the snow-covered mountainside, President Evo Morales and his staff played a soccer match on Bolivia's highest peak Tuesday, gleefully thumbing their noses at FIFA's ban on high-altitude games.

"Wherever you can make love, you can play sports," said Morales, who was winded but smiling after scoring the winning goal against a team of local mountaineers.

The match on the uneven field 19,700 feet high in the Andes lasted only about 15 minutes, including the time spent recovering the ball after it skittered away down the slope.

Citing concerns for players' health and an unfair home advantage for highland teams, FIFA decided last month to prohibit international tournaments and World Cup qualifying matches above 8,200 feet. That rules out the capitals of Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador and the stadiums of leading teams in Peru, Chile and Mexico.

The decision was seen as such an insult in Bolivia, it has temporarily united the public often bitterly divided over Morales' populist reforms.

It's also given Morales a chance to rally Bolivia around his twin passions of soccer and South American unity while showing his knack for political stagecraft.

After attending a llama sacrifice for good luck, Morales and the other players flew by helicopter up to a rocky saddle below the peak of Sajama, a dormant Andean volcano that rises to 21,463 feet above sea level.

Experts in high-altitude medicine acknowledge that highland teams have a distinct edge over visitors, but dismissed any serious health risks.

Travelers often feel dizzy and exhuasted on arrival in La Paz, the world's highest capital, and "the last think you think of is, 'Let's go sprint for 90 minutes,'" said Dr. Robert Roach, head of the Altitude Research Center at the University of Colorado. "You feel bad. But that's just because of the hard work, it's not because there's anything dangerous to it."

AP NEWS

The Associated Press News Service

[VPjr]

based on a news story on FSC this evening, it looks like this new regulation is going to be thrown out the window. The Bolivians et al did a good lobbying job and it looks like FIFA will reconsider.

I think the new rules had merit actually....altitude gives some countries (i.e Mexico) a huge advantage. Canada should start scheduling WCQ matches in Fort McMurray in November against Central American sides so we can have an advantage too.