2026 WC Bid?

[matty]

1 minute ago, jpg75 said:

Delusions of Nobel prizes aside, i don't see how pulling the WC from Qatar achieves peace? I'd argue it probably adds fuel to the fire and the Qataris would seek revenge against the we-cooperate-with-Israel-now Saudis.

FIFA aren't dumb, there are 4 years to go and they realize a lot can happen between now and then to resolve itself. In fact it might give them an opportunity for Football diplomacy to bring the rivals together and look like the good guys, thus earning Nobel points.

The Qatar thing as a whole damages that already but going in when NO ONE in the region wants anything to do with Qatar really damages a lot of FIFA's goals with this World Cup. Now like you said a lot can happen. I don't see them not going forward with this but I think if a dozen countries threatened a boycott and were serious about it (including banning the event from TV), FIFA would be concerned especially after everything that's happened with this bid.

[jpg75]

1 hour ago, matty said:

The Qatar thing as a whole damages that already but going in when NO ONE in the region wants anything to do with Qatar really damages a lot of FIFA's goals with this World Cup. Now like you said a lot can happen. I don't see them not going forward with this but I think if a dozen countries threatened a boycott and were serious about it (including banning the event from TV), FIFA would be concerned especially after everything that's happened with this bid.

It's not a dozen countries though, it's only 4 (Saudi, UAE, Egypt and Bahrain) and with a very limited economic impact to a WC.

edit: I assume your dozen countries includes those who have recalled their ambassadors. I seriously doubt all of these countries would boycott the WC, especially if they qualify.

[matty]

1 hour ago, jpg75 said:

It's not a dozen countries though, it's only 4 (Saudi, UAE, Egypt and Bahrain) and with a very limited economic impact to a WC.

edit: I assume your dozen countries includes those who have recalled their ambassadors. I seriously doubt all of these countries would boycott the WC, especially if they qualify.

Saudi, UAE and Egypt all pay big bucks for TV and yes I am including the expanded list that have severed or limited diplomatic ties to Qatar and like I said if they staged a serious boycott including barring the World Cup from their airwaves, refusing qualifiers, ect. that would cause FIFA concern. It's unlikely, like I said, but if it happened it would concern FIFA.

[Grizzly]

None of these countries are going to boycott the World Cup and not enter qualifying or give up their qualification if they do qualify. Equally it is highly unlikely any of these countries would boycott the tv broadcasts. All these countries are repressive dictatorships with a lot of unrest and social problems. Their leaders would be absolutely crazy to anger their population by not putting their team in qualification or denying their citizens the chance to watch the World Cup. Saudi Arabia could try to influence FIFA in other ways but threatening to withdraw their team or not purchase the tv is a  hollow threat that FIFA is not going to fall for.

[Unnamed Trialist]

14 hours ago, jpg75 said:

It's not a dozen countries though, it's only 4 (Saudi, UAE, Egypt and Bahrain) and with a very limited economic impact to a WC.

edit: I assume your dozen countries includes those who have recalled their ambassadors. I seriously doubt all of these countries would boycott the WC, especially if they qualify.

Of course. I mean, even Israel will go if they qualify, and if they are drawn Iran they'll play. And I bet Iran would end up playing too (though they have prohibited athletes from competiting vs. Israelis in the past).

All this is being overstated for reasons we all know, and for the whining from the Anglo-press especially about being hard done by, which I find so ridiculously slanted and a sign for poor sportsmanship as well. An Arab nation deserves the WC, it solves a major diplomatic question for FIFA for the next 30-40 years, and even with internal conflicts the WC is not going to be moved, under any circumstances. Moving it would be a message to any future bidders that small pressure groups and lobbies can make a huge investment unstable. No emerging nation would want to risk it, and the same old boys network would continue to use the same pressure tactics to serve their greed, which we have seen with England most recently (proven to be just as corrupt in these questions, and more blatantly racist, as the rivals they bitch about).

[matty]

5 hours ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

Of course. I mean, even Israel will go if they qualify, and if they are drawn Iran they'll play. And I bet Iran would end up playing too (though they have prohibited athletes from competiting vs. Israelis in the past).

FIFA would likely fix the draw to avoid that happening.

5 hours ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

All this is being overstated for reasons we all know, and for the whining from the Anglo-press especially about being hard done by, which I find so ridiculously slanted and a sign for poor sportsmanship as well. An Arab nation deserves the WC, it solves a major diplomatic question for FIFA for the next 30-40 years, and even with internal conflicts the WC is not going to be moved, under any circumstances. Moving it would be a message to any future bidders that small pressure groups and lobbies can make a huge investment unstable. No emerging nation would want to risk it, and the same old boys network would continue to use the same pressure tactics to serve their greed, which we have seen with England most recently (proven to be just as corrupt in these questions, and more blatantly racist, as the rivals they bitch about).

People have been critical with reason and it hasn't just been the Anglo-press. The said doing the World Cup in an Arab nation would look good but if political issues for the nation do not die down a lot of those political gains for FIFA could be lost. I don't think they'll move it unless there is a fucking war or global blockade but it could be a big pain for them.

[Unnamed Trialist]

42 minutes ago, matty said:

FIFA would likely fix the draw to avoid that happening.

I think in the last Olympics in one of the martial arts competitions an Israeli ended up vs. an Iranian in a knock-out round, quarterr finals or something, and the Iranian refused to fight, being eliminated from the tournament. I believe she was also sanctioned. 

So I would expect FIFA to do the same, do clean draws, and if someone did not want to play a rival, then simply eliminate them. I mean, Iran has played the US in hot moments in the WC, and it was fine, there have been other cases of nations at war or with high tension who have played qualifiers and other matches, last year N and S Korea played in the East Asian championship. 

I think that FIFA fixes things enough with Israel in UEFA, which I accept as a fair decision, otherwise they would be boycotted by up to 6-8 nations for all qualifying tournaments. Let everyone deal with the consequences of playing the game after that.

[matty]

4 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

I think in the last Olympics in one of the martial arts competitions an Israeli ended up vs. an Iranian in a knock-out round, quarterr finals or something, and the Iranian refused to fight, being eliminated from the tournament. I believe she was also sanctioned. 

So I would expect FIFA to do the same, do clean draws, and if someone did not want to play a rival, then simply eliminate them. I mean, Iran has played the US in hot moments in the WC, and it was fine, there have been other cases of nations at war or with high tension who have played qualifiers and other matches, last year N and S Korea played in the East Asian championship. 

I think that FIFA fixes things enough with Israel in UEFA, which I accept as a fair decision, otherwise they would be boycotted by up to 6-8 nations for all qualifying tournaments. Let everyone deal with the consequences of playing the game after that.

I think FIFA made sure North and South Korea didn't play in 2010 at work so can't check. Stuff may have changed if they did

[Kent]

45 minutes ago, matty said:

I think FIFA made sure North and South Korea didn't play in 2010 at work so can't check. Stuff may have changed if they did

I don't see any mention of that in here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_FIFA_World_Cup_seeding

It would seem unlikely too, because they would already be avoiding each other in the group stage since they are from the same continental federation. So the best you could do is put them in groups that won't play the first couple knockout rounds against each other.

I believe there have been cases where match ups involving countries that are hostile towards each other have been avoided in soccer tournaments before, but I can't remember when. I think the Champions League has done it (Russia vs Ukraine for example) but I'm not certain.

[matty]

3 minutes ago, Kent said:

I don't see any mention of that in here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_FIFA_World_Cup_seeding

It would seem unlikely too, because they would already be avoiding each other in the group stage since they are from the same continental federation. So the best you could do is put them in groups that won't play the first couple knockout rounds against each other.

I believe there have been cases where match ups involving countries that are hostile towards each other have been avoided in soccer tournaments before, but I can't remember when. I think the Champions League has done it (Russia vs Ukraine for example) but I'm not certain.

Yea that's what I was referring to, they we place i a way that they only way to meet would be deep in the cup. It's been years and it might have just been internet chatter since there's no mention of it. 

[Unnamed Trialist]

They played in the East Asian Cup just a few years ago, as I said. The women played an Asia Cup qualifier a few months ago too, and I think could have met in that recent u-17 tournament in Jordan, if I am not mistaken. I am going on what I remember from that, why bother looking it up. 

Obviously if you do not want to play against a rival in a competition that allows that rival in, then you forfeit, easy as that.

BTW the rabid anti-Qatar rhetoric in the English press is unmatched elsewhere, it is a specifically Anglo thing in general terms. And we know where it comes from, the country that sits on the International Board and supposedly has to set the example for the rest of the world to defend the game's integrity. The only complaints in Spain have been about heat and then scheduling, plus abuses against workers doing the building. But not against Qatar per se. 

[matty]

29 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

They played in the East Asian Cup just a few years ago, as I said. The women played an Asia Cup qualifier a few months ago too, and I think could have met in that recent u-17 tournament in Jordan, if I am not mistaken. I am going on what I remember from that, why bother looking it up. 

Obviously if you do not want to play against a rival in a competition that allows that rival in, then you forfeit, easy as that.

Yea we've kind of settled that issue

29 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

BTW the rabid anti-Qatar rhetoric in the English press is unmatched elsewhere, it is a specifically Anglo thing in general terms. And we know where it comes from, the country that sits on the International Board and supposedly has to set the example for the rest of the world to defend the game's integrity. The only complaints in Spain have been about heat and then scheduling, plus abuses against workers doing the building. But not against Qatar per se. 

Yes western English media is critical but it's not exclusive to English, Canadian and American outlets in the English world (I think you'll find RT and CGTN have also covered it). On top of that there's been a strong amount of reporting from non-English outlets including Spain (where my partner is from) over Qatar's handling of the worker situation and exploring alleged corruption.

Adding to that a number of non-English organizations (including Arabic ones) have been critical of the event.

Anyways I think our argument is dumb because we both pretty much agree these games are happening in Qatar regardless of everything.

[dyslexic nam]

I'm just glad it took us a full page to get there.

[CanadianSoccerFan]

The truly horrible Cathal Kelly is at it again.   

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opin...ticle35833861/

[Bison44]

Yipes, what an ass clown.  This is the same guy that bitched about TO not getting the first game in the womens WC a few years ago??  He sure slams hosting the WC but doesnt seem to remember we already held the womens and it wasnt some sort of shameful black mark on the country.  He writes alot about TFC but is he for real or just one of this new breed of attention seeking pseudo intelligent sports journalists that is looking to get a talk show on ESPN or TSN by being outrageous and controversial??  "Soccer is bad, the world cup is bad, we cant do it, all we should care about is a potential Calgary bid for the winter olympics".  I dont read his other sports coverage but I hope its better than this steaming pile of garbage.  

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

He is best ignored. His all time low was an article in which he mused over whether TFC should sign the star player of the Brazilian women`s national team when he must of been fully aware that there was zero chance of something like that ever happening. Think he bashes soccer and its supporters to try to ingratiate himself with the old guard sports journalists that still view it as an unwelcome intruder, so he didn`t get sidelined as the recent newcomer multicultural dude latter day Norm Da Costa because of his unusual (in Canadian terms anyway) first name.

[DannyFromToronto23]

2022 should be in Australia or England 

[CanadianSoccerFan]

10 hours ago, BringBackTheBlizzard said:

He is best ignored. His all time low was an article in which he mused over whether TFC should sign the star player of the Brazilian women`s national team when he must of been fully aware that there was zero chance of something like that ever happening. Think he bashes soccer and its supporters to try to ingratiate himself with the old guard sports journalists that still view it as an unwelcome intruder, so he didn`t get sidelined as the recent newcomer multicultural dude latter day Norm Da Costa because of his unusual (in Canadian terms anyway) first name.

I remember that Marta article.  Another gem was the transparently fake interaction he claimed to have with Brazilian children during the last World Cup.  

 

 

[Kadenge]

17 hours ago, CanadianSoccerFan said:

The truly horrible Cathal Kelly is at it again.   

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opin...ticle35833861/

wanker

[dyslexic nam]

Glad I didn't click on the link to give him the traffic.

[Rheo]

Washington Post reporting US fears the bid isn't quite the shoe in they thought it might be

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/soccer-insider/wp/2017/12/17/north-americas-bid-to-host-2026-world-cup-jeopardized-by-falling-u-s-popularity/?utm_term=.736ffbad431b

[harrycoyster]

31 minutes ago, Rheo said:

Washington Post reporting US fears the bid isn't quite the shoe in they thought it might be

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/soccer-insider/wp/2017/12/17/north-americas-bid-to-host-2026-world-cup-jeopardized-by-falling-u-s-popularity/?utm_term=.736ffbad431b

"The current US administration's falling international popularity and political unrest could cause hesitation in awarding the bid to North America."

 

Does the Washington Post know the two next World Cups are in Russia and Qatar?

[Rheo]

2 minutes ago, harrycoyster said:

Is the Washington Post the two next World Cups are in Russia and Qatar?

Big difference in changing course ahead of giving the bid and either 6 months out or 4 years out but yeah it is ironic (like rain on your wedding day)

[CanadianSoccerFan]

8 hours ago, harrycoyster said:

"The current US administration's falling international popularity and political unrest could cause hesitation in awarding the bid to North America."

 

Does the Washington Post know the two next World Cups are in Russia and Qatar?

It's not the opinion of the writer, it's the sentiment from the North American bid team.  The more I think about it there are legitimate reasons not to get too overconfident.

1) Morocco was caught paying bribes for the 2010 World Cup in spite of losing the vote.  They were double crossed by Blazer and Warner among others.  They are capable of corruption.

2) The new voting system changes the landscape.  Instead of 22 guys with their hands out, it's 211 countries voting.  Think of all the FA presidents and/or countries who may have an axe to grind with the US over Trump and/or the FBI probe into FIFA.  Part of the reason the US added Canada and Mexico to the bid was to launder their reputation.  They're asking people to vote for a continental bid born out of international cooperation and goodwill rather than asking people to vote for the US.  

3) Morocco's proximity to Europe could entice UEFA voters.  Geographically, It's the closest thing to a World Cup in Europe without playing in a UEFA member nation.  In fact it's closer to a lot of European nations than Russia with zero time difference for European television.

4) If CAF and the rest of the Muslim world vote as blocs for Morocco then they'd have in the region of 85 votes out of a necessary 106.  Throw in votes from UEFA for geographic proximity and/or a full bloc vote from the AFC and they have it won.  The AFC voted as a bloc for their president Sheikh Khalifa of Bahrain for the FIFA presidency against Infantino so there is precedent there.      

 

I still think North America wins but I'm not going to be as naive as I was last time around.

[Moldy9]

3 hours ago, CanadianSoccerFan said:

It's not the opinion of the writer, it's the sentiment from the North American bid team.  The more I think about it there are legitimate reasons not to get too overconfident.

1) Morocco was caught paying bribes for the 2010 World Cup in spite of losing the vote.  They were double crossed by Blazer and Warner among others.  They are capable of corruption.

2) The new voting system changes the landscape.  Instead of 22 guys with their hands out, it's 211 countries voting.  Think of all the FA presidents and/or countries who may have an axe to grind with the US over Trump and/or the FBI probe into FIFA.  Part of the reason the US added Canada and Mexico to the bid was to launder their reputation.  They're asking people to vote for a continental bid born out of international cooperation and goodwill rather than asking people to vote for the US.  

3) Morocco's proximity to Europe could entice UEFA voters.  Geographically, It's the closest thing to a World Cup in Europe without playing in a UEFA member nation.  In fact it's closer to a lot of European nations than Russia with zero time difference for European television.

4) If CAF and the rest of the Muslim world vote as blocs for Morocco then they'd have in the region of 85 votes out of a necessary 106.  Throw in votes from UEFA for geographic proximity and/or a full bloc vote from the AFC and they have it won.  The AFC voted as a bloc for their president Sheikh Khalifa of Bahrain for the FIFA presidency against Infantino so there is precedent there.      

 

I still think North America wins but I'm not going to be as naive as I was last time around.

You make some interesting points. Everyone knows this is a US World Cup and Canada and Mexico are their just to add a pretty face to it. Anyone wanting to stick it to Uncle Sam can do this. My only question is can Morroco host a 48 team World Cup on their own?