Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
stoke canary

2022 world cup

Recommended Posts

not going to be held in the close season,going to be held between Nov and Jan .Looks like a mid season break so all the players not involved can go on tours abroad so they can get some rest !!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What on earth will that do to the leagues? You wait, too much beurocracy and compromise and they will mess the scheduling up. Really, they need a month before the tournament starts and a couple of weeks after too, so if the tournament is a month, that leaves us breaking at the start of November and breaking mid January.

Would they hold it over Christmas?

I suspect the dates will be 15th Nov-15th Dec and the league will break between Nov and Jan 1st.

We''ll see! Hopefully it affects us by then!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Jimmy Smith"]What on earth will that do to the leagues? You wait, too much beurocracy and compromise and they will mess the scheduling up. Really, they need a month before the tournament starts and a couple of weeks after too, so if the tournament is a month, that leaves us breaking at the start of November and breaking mid January. Would they hold it over Christmas? I suspect the dates will be 15th Nov-15th Dec and the league will break between Nov and Jan 1st. We''ll see! Hopefully it affects us by then![/quote]

 

Why? MLS, South American, Scandic, Russia and Asia leagues have all coped with having the World Cup mid-season without significant problems. A week or two before the tournament and a week break after. World Cup final on a Saturday, league restarts the following Saturday - it''ll be tough for some players but it''s not like everyone in the tournament will be playing right up until the final.

 

I''m sure the FA and other countries will bleat on about it, but its a one off tournament, they will get over it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]

[quote user="Jimmy Smith"]What on earth will that do to the leagues? You wait, too much beurocracy and compromise and they will mess the scheduling up. Really, they need a month before the tournament starts and a couple of weeks after too, so if the tournament is a month, that leaves us breaking at the start of November and breaking mid January. Would they hold it over Christmas? I suspect the dates will be 15th Nov-15th Dec and the league will break between Nov and Jan 1st. We''ll see! Hopefully it affects us by then![/quote]

 

Why? MLS, South American, Scandic, Russia and Asia leagues have all coped with having the World Cup mid-season without significant problems. A week or two before the tournament and a week break after. World Cup final on a Saturday, league restarts the following Saturday - it''ll be tough for some players but it''s not like everyone in the tournament will be playing right up until the final.

 

I''m sure the FA and other countries will bleat on about it, but its a one off tournament, they will get over it.

[/quote]Is it as simple as that, Bethnal? The way it has been painted is that an enforced break to the major European leagues in that season will have a knock-on effect on at least the following season (which would include qualifying games for Euro 2024) and possibly others. In any event, if L''Equipe is right, and the terms of the bidding process specified a summer tournament, then there could well be a legal challenge to any Fifa decision on this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]

[quote user="Jimmy Smith"]What on earth will that do to the leagues? You wait, too much beurocracy and compromise and they will mess the scheduling up. Really, they need a month before the tournament starts and a couple of weeks after too, so if the tournament is a month, that leaves us breaking at the start of November and breaking mid January. Would they hold it over Christmas? I suspect the dates will be 15th Nov-15th Dec and the league will break between Nov and Jan 1st. We''ll see! Hopefully it affects us by then![/quote]

 

Why? MLS, South American, Scandic, Russia and Asia leagues have all coped with having the World Cup mid-season without significant problems. A week or two before the tournament and a week break after. World Cup final on a Saturday, league restarts the following Saturday - it''ll be tough for some players but it''s not like everyone in the tournament will be playing right up until the final.

 

I''m sure the FA and other countries will bleat on about it, but its a one off tournament, they will get over it.

[/quote]This.While I have objections on Qatar being given the world cup for many reasons, moving the World Cup should not be the big deal it''s being painted as. As stated above, other leagues have been dealing with this for years.It''s only now it''s an issue because it now effects Europe, and Europe thinks it has some ownership over world football.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]

[quote user="Jimmy Smith"]What on earth will that do to the leagues? You wait, too much beurocracy and compromise and they will mess the scheduling up. Really, they need a month before the tournament starts and a couple of weeks after too, so if the tournament is a month, that leaves us breaking at the start of November and breaking mid January. Would they hold it over Christmas? I suspect the dates will be 15th Nov-15th Dec and the league will break between Nov and Jan 1st. We''ll see! Hopefully it affects us by then![/quote]

 

Why? MLS, South American, Scandic, Russia and Asia leagues have all coped with having the World Cup mid-season without significant problems. A week or two before the tournament and a week break after. World Cup final on a Saturday, league restarts the following Saturday - it''ll be tough for some players but it''s not like everyone in the tournament will be playing right up until the final.

 

I''m sure the FA and other countries will bleat on about it, but its a one off tournament, they will get over it.

[/quote]

Is it as simple as that, Bethnal? The way it has been painted is that an enforced break to the major European leagues in that season will have a knock-on effect on at least the following season (which would include qualifying games for Euro 2024) and possibly others. In any event, if L''Equipe is right, and the terms of the bidding process specified a summer tournament, then there could well be a legal challenge to any Fifa decision on this.

[/quote]

 

There could be, would take a very brave FA to take on Qatar and FIFA''s many, many lawyers. I suspect the decision has taken this long to announce to make sure their legal position is secure. The best the other competing FAs would probably expect to get is their costs back, and while astronomical for some it wouldn''t be beyond FIFA''s ability to just pay them off.

 

It''s not like any of the other countries that went against Qatar actually want a World Cup now, most of them had changed their minds during the bidding process and let the FIFA members know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

of course, European Nations can simply refuse to take part in the qualifiers should they choose?

I am sure there would be some kind of court battle, but Fifa against Lawyers from the 42 European Nations???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]

[quote user="Jimmy Smith"]What on earth will that do to the leagues? You wait, too much beurocracy and compromise and they will mess the scheduling up. Really, they need a month before the tournament starts and a couple of weeks after too, so if the tournament is a month, that leaves us breaking at the start of November and breaking mid January. Would they hold it over Christmas? I suspect the dates will be 15th Nov-15th Dec and the league will break between Nov and Jan 1st. We''ll see! Hopefully it affects us by then![/quote]

 

Why? MLS, South American, Scandic, Russia and Asia leagues have all coped with having the World Cup mid-season without significant problems. A week or two before the tournament and a week break after. World Cup final on a Saturday, league restarts the following Saturday - it''ll be tough for some players but it''s not like everyone in the tournament will be playing right up until the final.

 

I''m sure the FA and other countries will bleat on about it, but its a one off tournament, they will get over it.

[/quote]

Is it as simple as that, Bethnal? The way it has been painted is that an enforced break to the major European leagues in that season will have a knock-on effect on at least the following season (which would include qualifying games for Euro 2024) and possibly others. In any event, if L''Equipe is right, and the terms of the bidding process specified a summer tournament, then there could well be a legal challenge to any Fifa decision on this.

[/quote]

 

There could be, would take a very brave FA to take on Qatar and FIFA''s many, many lawyers. I suspect the decision has taken this long to announce to make sure their legal position is secure. The best the other competing FAs would probably expect to get is their costs back, and while astronomical for some it wouldn''t be beyond FIFA''s ability to just pay them off.

 

It''s not like any of the other countries that went against Qatar actually want a World Cup now, most of them had changed their minds during the bidding process and let the FIFA members know.

[/quote]

I thought the Aussies lost out and were very upset.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]

[quote user="Jimmy Smith"]What on earth will that do to the leagues? You wait, too much beurocracy and compromise and they will mess the scheduling up. Really, they need a month before the tournament starts and a couple of weeks after too, so if the tournament is a month, that leaves us breaking at the start of November and breaking mid January. Would they hold it over Christmas? I suspect the dates will be 15th Nov-15th Dec and the league will break between Nov and Jan 1st. We''ll see! Hopefully it affects us by then![/quote]

 

Why? MLS, South American, Scandic, Russia and Asia leagues have all coped with having the World Cup mid-season without significant problems. A week or two before the tournament and a week break after. World Cup final on a Saturday, league restarts the following Saturday - it''ll be tough for some players but it''s not like everyone in the tournament will be playing right up until the final.

 

I''m sure the FA and other countries will bleat on about it, but its a one off tournament, they will get over it.

[/quote]Is it as simple as that, Bethnal? The way it has been painted is that an enforced break to the major European leagues in that season will have a knock-on effect on at least the following season (which would include qualifying games for Euro 2024) and possibly others. In any event, if L''Equipe is right, and the terms of the bidding process specified a summer tournament, then there could well be a legal challenge to any Fifa decision on this.[/quote]

 

There could be, would take a very brave FA to take on Qatar and FIFA''s many, many lawyers. I suspect the decision has taken this long to announce to make sure their legal position is secure. The best the other competing FAs would probably expect to get is their costs back, and while astronomical for some it wouldn''t be beyond FIFA''s ability to just pay them off.

 

It''s not like any of the other countries that went against Qatar actually want a World Cup now, most of them had changed their minds during the bidding process and let the FIFA members know.

[/quote]But as I understand it a major problem with Australia''s bid was the availability of some of the stadiums in June and July, when they would be used for winter sports. If Australia had known they could argue for a tournament in their early summer, with these stadiums being free, might they have tried more strongly to stay in the race?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="TCCANARY"][quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]

[quote user="Jimmy Smith"]What on earth will that do to the leagues? You wait, too much beurocracy and compromise and they will mess the scheduling up. Really, they need a month before the tournament starts and a couple of weeks after too, so if the tournament is a month, that leaves us breaking at the start of November and breaking mid January. Would they hold it over Christmas? I suspect the dates will be 15th Nov-15th Dec and the league will break between Nov and Jan 1st. We''ll see! Hopefully it affects us by then![/quote]

 

Why? MLS, South American, Scandic, Russia and Asia leagues have all coped with having the World Cup mid-season without significant problems. A week or two before the tournament and a week break after. World Cup final on a Saturday, league restarts the following Saturday - it''ll be tough for some players but it''s not like everyone in the tournament will be playing right up until the final.

 

I''m sure the FA and other countries will bleat on about it, but its a one off tournament, they will get over it.

[/quote]

Is it as simple as that, Bethnal? The way it has been painted is that an enforced break to the major European leagues in that season will have a knock-on effect on at least the following season (which would include qualifying games for Euro 2024) and possibly others. In any event, if L''Equipe is right, and the terms of the bidding process specified a summer tournament, then there could well be a legal challenge to any Fifa decision on this.

[/quote]

 

There could be, would take a very brave FA to take on Qatar and FIFA''s many, many lawyers. I suspect the decision has taken this long to announce to make sure their legal position is secure. The best the other competing FAs would probably expect to get is their costs back, and while astronomical for some it wouldn''t be beyond FIFA''s ability to just pay them off.

 

It''s not like any of the other countries that went against Qatar actually want a World Cup now, most of them had changed their minds during the bidding process and let the FIFA members know.

[/quote] I thought the Aussies lost out and were very upset.[/quote]

 

I think a few memebers of the Australian FA and Parliment breathed a massive sign of relief when they lost - they of course said how upset they were but Australia couldn''t afford anything like the cost of the World Cup. The inital plan was to not build many new stadiums and use exisiting Aussie Rules Football ones - however during the bidding process the Aussie Rules Association told them they wouldn''t be able to use their stadiums - this meant brand new stadiums would need to be built. It killed the bid dead.

 

Qatar won partly due to its massive spending (some of which was probably illegal) but pretty much every other bid for 2022 was rubbish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"] 

 

I think a few memebers of the Australian FA and Parliment breathed a massive sign of relief when they lost - they of course said how upset they were but Australia couldn''t afford anything like the cost of the World Cup. The inital plan was to not build many new stadiums and use exisiting Aussie Rules Football ones - however during the bidding process the Aussie Rules Association told them they wouldn''t be able to use their stadiums - this meant brand new stadiums would need to be built. It killed the bid dead.

 

Qatar won partly due to its massive spending (some of which was probably illegal) but pretty much every other bid for 2022 was rubbish.

[/quote]That is rather my point from above. The Oz bid failed largely once they realised they would have to spend a vast amount building new stadiums, because they were going on the basis of a June-July tournament. If they had known they could have the tournament outside the Aussie Rules season, and so use existing stadiums, they might have carried on being keen on the idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"] 

 

I think a few memebers of the Australian FA and Parliment breathed a massive sign of relief when they lost - they of course said how upset they were but Australia couldn''t afford anything like the cost of the World Cup. The inital plan was to not build many new stadiums and use exisiting Aussie Rules Football ones - however during the bidding process the Aussie Rules Association told them they wouldn''t be able to use their stadiums - this meant brand new stadiums would need to be built. It killed the bid dead.

 

Qatar won partly due to its massive spending (some of which was probably illegal) but pretty much every other bid for 2022 was rubbish.

[/quote]

That is rather my point from above. The Oz bid failed largely once they realised they would have to spend a vast amount building new stadiums, because they were going on the basis of a June-July tournament. If they had known they could have the tournament outside the Aussie Rules season, and so use existing stadiums, they might have carried on being keen on the idea.

[/quote]

True, and I think everyone else who bid certainly has a case to get their costs back plus compensation. But if FIFA were to offer Australia the 2022 World Cup, even in the winter now, they would back away slowly. It is going to be interesting just how many countries put themselves forward for 2026 when it comes around - as most are showing less and less interest in hosting a ''mega-event''. The recent Olympics shows that with only Japan and Turkey taking it seriously and UEFA are having the 2018 Euros across several countries as no one was particulary interested in hosting it alone.

 

It now seems FIFA are backing away from Valcke''s statement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
During the bidding process Qatar were asked about the summer heat, their reply was that it would not be a problem as players and fans would move from air conditioned hotels into a/c cars and coaches and onto the Air Conditioned stadiums. If this is true the tournament should remain in the summer months, if it was untrue Qatar should loose the right to hold it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The uncomfortable truth is that events like the Olympics, World Cup (and even the Euros and Commonwealth Games) have become so bloated and unwieldy, that it''s only going to be the big economy countries that will be able to afford to do it from now on.Like many, I winced when Qatar''s name wazs announced, but, they are the guys with the dosh these days.I too cannot really see what the problem would be with holding it mid season. As someone has already said, European football is stuck up its own @rse, and needs to get into the wider world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"] 

 

I think a few memebers of the Australian FA and Parliment breathed a massive sign of relief when they lost - they of course said how upset they were but Australia couldn''t afford anything like the cost of the World Cup. The inital plan was to not build many new stadiums and use exisiting Aussie Rules Football ones - however during the bidding process the Aussie Rules Association told them they wouldn''t be able to use their stadiums - this meant brand new stadiums would need to be built. It killed the bid dead.

 

Qatar won partly due to its massive spending (some of which was probably illegal) but pretty much every other bid for 2022 was rubbish.

[/quote]That is rather my point from above. The Oz bid failed largely once they realised they would have to spend a vast amount building new stadiums, because they were going on the basis of a June-July tournament. If they had known they could have the tournament outside the Aussie Rules season, and so use existing stadiums, they might have carried on being keen on the idea.[/quote]That''s half-correct.That Australian bid only proposed the building of 3 new stadia in Perth, Canberra & in the outer suburbs of Sydney. Originally, they wanted to use 2 venues in Melbourne, the MCG, and Etihad Stadium (or known as the Docklands), but the AFL (Aussie Rules) said they couldn''t give up both midway through their season. (both venues will sometimes host more than one Aussie Rules game on a weekend). As a result, they proposed refurbishing and using Kardinia Park in Geelong - about 90 mins west of Melbourne.However you''re 100% correct in that the AFL, and to a lesser extent the NRL (rugby league) we''re not very helpful to the World Cup bid process. They would have been pleased when Australia was not successful.However Football Australia chairmen Frank Lowy has indicated he would sue if the cup was moved. We may now see if his money is where his mouth in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"] 

 

I think a few memebers of the Australian FA and Parliment breathed a massive sign of relief when they lost - they of course said how upset they were but Australia couldn''t afford anything like the cost of the World Cup. The inital plan was to not build many new stadiums and use exisiting Aussie Rules Football ones - however during the bidding process the Aussie Rules Association told them they wouldn''t be able to use their stadiums - this meant brand new stadiums would need to be built. It killed the bid dead.

 

Qatar won partly due to its massive spending (some of which was probably illegal) but pretty much every other bid for 2022 was rubbish.

[/quote]That is rather my point from above. The Oz bid failed largely once they realised they would have to spend a vast amount building new stadiums, because they were going on the basis of a June-July tournament. If they had known they could have the tournament outside the Aussie Rules season, and so use existing stadiums, they might have carried on being keen on the idea.[/quote]

True, and I think everyone else who bid certainly has a case to get their costs back plus compensation. But if FIFA were to offer Australia the 2022 World Cup, even in the winter now, they would back away slowly. It is going to be interesting just how many countries put themselves forward for 2026 when it comes around - as most are showing less and less interest in hosting a ''mega-event''. The recent Olympics shows that with only Japan and Turkey taking it seriously and UEFA are having the 2018 Euros across several countries as no one was particulary interested in hosting it alone.

 It now seems FIFA are backing away from Valcke''s statement.

[/quote]I disagree.When Frank Lowy took over Football Australia (Frank is the CEO of Westfield, he''s worth about the same as Malcolm Glazier) he had 3 main objectives. The first was to set up a national league, with no clubs based on race or religion (as was previously the case in Australia with most clubs). We now have the A League, which is growing. The second was to have Australia qualify regularly for the world cup. He worked hard and lobbied to get Australia moved to the Asian confederation, and now this is a reality.The third was to have Australia host a world cup. He still wants to achieve this, and recieved federal government funding and backing for it too. There has since been a change of government, but I 100% believe that if there was a new bidding process for 2022 (hypothetically of course, we all know that won''t happen) Frank will be there front and centre.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, France and Germany have a month break anyway, Spain has a couple of weeks off over Christmas and New Year. The Russian league currently runs from August to May with a three month break over the really harsh winter months, and a couple of other European countries have a mid season break anyway.

Start the season a bit earlier, take a couple of months off over December and January, finish the season a couple of weeks later than normal. Those players who aren''t going to the world cup get a nice relaxing period. Those who are going are both fresher for the world cup (rather than having just played a full season of football), and then come back to their clubs. Yes, the players may then be shattered for the last few weeks of the season, but clubs nowadays have good enough squads to deal with that and keep players fresh.

Mountain out of a mole hill in my opinion.

Although the point Purple makes about Australia is an interesting one. I don''t know the details of their bid or why they withdrew it, but I would imagine quite a few countries may have in the past put more effort into a bid if they could hold the tournament at whatever time of the year they fancied.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="The ghost of Michael Theoklitos"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"] 

 

I think a few memebers of the Australian FA and Parliment breathed a massive sign of relief when they lost - they of course said how upset they were but Australia couldn''t afford anything like the cost of the World Cup. The inital plan was to not build many new stadiums and use exisiting Aussie Rules Football ones - however during the bidding process the Aussie Rules Association told them they wouldn''t be able to use their stadiums - this meant brand new stadiums would need to be built. It killed the bid dead.

 

Qatar won partly due to its massive spending (some of which was probably illegal) but pretty much every other bid for 2022 was rubbish.

[/quote]That is rather my point from above. The Oz bid failed largely once they realised they would have to spend a vast amount building new stadiums, because they were going on the basis of a June-July tournament. If they had known they could have the tournament outside the Aussie Rules season, and so use existing stadiums, they might have carried on being keen on the idea.[/quote]That''s half-correct.That Australian bid only proposed the building of 3 new stadia in Perth, Canberra & in the outer suburbs of Sydney. Originally, they wanted to use 2 venues in Melbourne, the MCG, and Etihad Stadium (or known as the Docklands), but the AFL (Aussie Rules) said they couldn''t give up both midway through their season. (both venues will sometimes host more than one Aussie Rules game on a weekend). As a result, they proposed refurbishing and using Kardinia Park in Geelong - about 90 mins west of Melbourne.However you''re 100% correct in that the AFL, and to a lesser extent the NRL (rugby league) we''re not very helpful to the World Cup bid process. They would have been pleased when Australia was not successful.However Football Australia chairmen Frank Lowy has indicated he would sue if the cup was moved. We may now see if his money is where his mouth in.[/quote]I know full well where Geelong is, having tried very hard to bypass it on my way to the Great Ocean Road! More seriously, I did know the plans included some new stadiums.The general point, based on what Bethnal has said, is that there wasn''t one viable bid for the World Cup. The Qatari bid wasn''t viable. It only became so if the tournamant was moved from the time of the year for which everyone was bidding. And that might have made the Oz bid viable as well. I very much doubt anyone would disagree with the idea that a World Cup in Oz, where there is a background of football, would make more sense in pretty much every way than one in Qatar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="The ghost of Michael Theoklitos"]I disagree.When Frank Lowy took over Football Australia (Frank is the CEO of Westfield, he''s worth about the same as Malcolm Glazier) he had 3 main objectives. The first was to set up a national league, with no clubs based on race or religion (as was previously the case in Australia with most clubs). We now have the A League, which is growing. The second was to have Australia qualify regularly for the world cup. He worked hard and lobbied to get Australia moved to the Asian confederation, and now this is a reality.The third was to have Australia host a world cup. He still wants to achieve this, and recieved federal government funding and backing for it too. There has since been a change of government, but I 100% believe that if there was a new bidding process for 2022 (hypothetically of course, we all know that won''t happen) Frank will be there front and centre.[/quote]

Thanks for the Aussie perspective on this MT. Very interestingOne lighthearted observation is that if Frank achieved objective 3, then qed he''s achieve objective 2, as hosts automatically qualify !But it opens up a very fundamental flaw. If huge economies like Australia are now gibbing at hosting events, then it does not augur well for the future. Because the usual suspects (UK, France, Germany, Italy, USA) will soon lose interest too.  Countries like Spain used to be shoo ins for these sort of bunfights, but I bet they''d not be so keen these days ?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="The ghost of Michael Theoklitos"][quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"] 

 

I think a few memebers of the Australian FA and Parliment breathed a massive sign of relief when they lost - they of course said how upset they were but Australia couldn''t afford anything like the cost of the World Cup. The inital plan was to not build many new stadiums and use exisiting Aussie Rules Football ones - however during the bidding process the Aussie Rules Association told them they wouldn''t be able to use their stadiums - this meant brand new stadiums would need to be built. It killed the bid dead.

 

Qatar won partly due to its massive spending (some of which was probably illegal) but pretty much every other bid for 2022 was rubbish.

[/quote]

That is rather my point from above. The Oz bid failed largely once they realised they would have to spend a vast amount building new stadiums, because they were going on the basis of a June-July tournament. If they had known they could have the tournament outside the Aussie Rules season, and so use existing stadiums, they might have carried on being keen on the idea.

[/quote]

True, and I think everyone else who bid certainly has a case to get their costs back plus compensation. But if FIFA were to offer Australia the 2022 World Cup, even in the winter now, they would back away slowly. It is going to be interesting just how many countries put themselves forward for 2026 when it comes around - as most are showing less and less interest in hosting a ''mega-event''. The recent Olympics shows that with only Japan and Turkey taking it seriously and UEFA are having the 2018 Euros across several countries as no one was particulary interested in hosting it alone.

 It now seems FIFA are backing away from Valcke''s statement.

[/quote]

I disagree.

When Frank Lowy took over Football Australia (Frank is the CEO of Westfield, he''s worth about the same as Malcolm Glazier) he had 3 main objectives.

The first was to set up a national league, with no clubs based on race or religion (as was previously the case in Australia with most clubs). We now have the A League, which is growing.

The second was to have Australia qualify regularly for the world cup. He worked hard and lobbied to get Australia moved to the Asian confederation, and now this is a reality.

The third was to have Australia host a world cup. He still wants to achieve this, and recieved federal government funding and backing for it too. There has since been a change of government, but I 100% believe that if there was a new bidding process for 2022 (hypothetically of course, we all know that won''t happen) Frank will be there front and centre.
[/quote]

I''m sure he would - he is certainly a man on a mission.

 

Unfortunately I don''t think he would find many backers in the Australia Government and no bid will ever succeed with FIFA unless they truely believe the nation''s government is fully behind the bid. I fear for Frank that he won''t ever get to see his dream as after all the problems related to S. Africa, Brazil and Qatar that FIFA will be playing it very safe for the next couple of World Cups - if England ever want to host a World Cup 2026 and 2030 will be their moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Aggy"]

Although the point Purple makes about Australia is an interesting one. I don''t know the details of their bid or why they withdrew it, but I would imagine quite a few countries may have in the past put more effort into a bid if they could hold the tournament at whatever time of the year they fancied.[/quote]Australia didn''t withdraw. It just didn''t win.It got 1 vote, and was eliminated in the first round of voting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for clearing up the Aussie bid question I posed earlier. I''ve got another one, there seems to be enough time and (presumably as Qatar are supposedly rich) money for the all the stadiums to be indoor arenas with climate control, if it is possible why hasn''t it been put forward, wouldn''t it mean that the season would be irrelevant?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Reggie Strayshun"][quote user="The ghost of Michael Theoklitos"]
I disagree.

When Frank Lowy took over Football Australia (Frank is the CEO of Westfield, he''s worth about the same as Malcolm Glazier) he had 3 main objectives.

The first was to set up a national league, with no clubs based on race or religion (as was previously the case in Australia with most clubs). We now have the A League, which is growing.

The second was to have Australia qualify regularly for the world cup. He worked hard and lobbied to get Australia moved to the Asian confederation, and now this is a reality.

The third was to have Australia host a world cup. He still wants to achieve this, and recieved federal government funding and backing for it too. There has since been a change of government, but I 100% believe that if there was a new bidding process for 2022 (hypothetically of course, we all know that won''t happen) Frank will be there front and centre.
[/quote]


Thanks for the Aussie perspective on this MT. Very interesting

One lighthearted observation is that if Frank achieved objective 3, then qed he''s achieve objective 2, as hosts automatically qualify !

But it opens up a very fundamental flaw. If huge economies like Australia are now gibbing at hosting events, then it does not augur well for the future. Because the usual suspects (UK, France, Germany, Italy, USA) will soon lose interest too.  Countries like Spain used to be shoo ins for these sort of bunfights, but I bet they''d not be so keen these days ?!
[/quote]

 

Mega-events is my pet-project at the moment as I''m in the middle of writing a book about them and how no one really wants them anymore. The future will be fights between countries such as England, France, Germany etc who can host the event without providing new stadiums as they are already there and crazy, oil/resource rich countries who have to cash to build everything but can''t provide the ''soft'' infrastructure such as tradition and sporting culture.

 

I expect to see countries such as Turkey, Indonesia, Maylasia and Nigeria getting involved soon and it is only a matter of time until China decide they want a World Cup (they are currently waiting until they have a decent football team). I also wouldn''t be surprised to see Azerbaijan and Uzbekistan get involved also. However, whether FIFA or the Olympics will touch such risky options is another matter. FIFA especially have had a recent history of becoming bored of the same old countries hosting the World Cup and have tried to branch out, this is very much driven by Sepp who loved the adulation he recieved in Africa. I suspect whoever replaces him will want to get back to having relatively ''boring'' location which cause no problems and bring in more money than trying to spread the football to every corner of the planet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"][quote user="The ghost of Michael Theoklitos"][quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"] 

 

I think a few memebers of the Australian FA and Parliment breathed a massive sign of relief when they lost - they of course said how upset they were but Australia couldn''t afford anything like the cost of the World Cup. The inital plan was to not build many new stadiums and use exisiting Aussie Rules Football ones - however during the bidding process the Aussie Rules Association told them they wouldn''t be able to use their stadiums - this meant brand new stadiums would need to be built. It killed the bid dead.

 

Qatar won partly due to its massive spending (some of which was probably illegal) but pretty much every other bid for 2022 was rubbish.

[/quote]That is rather my point from above. The Oz bid failed largely once they realised they would have to spend a vast amount building new stadiums, because they were going on the basis of a June-July tournament. If they had known they could have the tournament outside the Aussie Rules season, and so use existing stadiums, they might have carried on being keen on the idea.[/quote]

True, and I think everyone else who bid certainly has a case to get their costs back plus compensation. But if FIFA were to offer Australia the 2022 World Cup, even in the winter now, they would back away slowly. It is going to be interesting just how many countries put themselves forward for 2026 when it comes around - as most are showing less and less interest in hosting a ''mega-event''. The recent Olympics shows that with only Japan and Turkey taking it seriously and UEFA are having the 2018 Euros across several countries as no one was particulary interested in hosting it alone.

 It now seems FIFA are backing away from Valcke''s statement.

[/quote]I disagree.When Frank Lowy took over Football Australia (Frank is the CEO of Westfield, he''s worth about the same as Malcolm Glazier) he had 3 main objectives. The first was to set up a national league, with no clubs based on race or religion (as was previously the case in Australia with most clubs). We now have the A League, which is growing. The second was to have Australia qualify regularly for the world cup. He worked hard and lobbied to get Australia moved to the Asian confederation, and now this is a reality.The third was to have Australia host a world cup. He still wants to achieve this, and recieved federal government funding and backing for it too. There has since been a change of government, but I 100% believe that if there was a new bidding process for 2022 (hypothetically of course, we all know that won''t happen) Frank will be there front and centre.[/quote]

I''m sure he would - he is certainly a man on a mission.

 

Unfortunately I don''t think he would find many backers in the Australia Government and no bid will ever succeed with FIFA unless they truely believe the nation''s government is fully behind the bid. I fear for Frank that he won''t ever get to see his dream as after all the problems related to S. Africa, Brazil and Qatar that FIFA will be playing it very safe for the next couple of World Cups - if England ever want to host a World Cup 2026 and 2030 will be their moment.

[/quote]You might be right, but you don''t get to be where he is without having a few friends on both sides of politics.Personally, I don''t think the main objections would the the cost. The main issue a country like Australia would have would the the (probably accurate) perseption that in order to win, we''d need to grease the right hands. FIFA have lost a lot of credability in the bidding process. I see that more as more of an issue than the costs or logistics of hosting the event.However, I doubt we''ll ever know the true answer. With FIFA basically saying they will rotate the hosting around the confederations, the next world cup Asia could realistically bid for will be 2034. I doubt Frank will be around by then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="TCCANARY"]Thanks for clearing up the Aussie bid question I posed earlier. I''ve got another one, there seems to be enough time and (presumably as Qatar are supposedly rich) money for the all the stadiums to be indoor arenas with climate control, if it is possible why hasn''t it been put forward, wouldn''t it mean that the season would be irrelevant?[/quote]Good question.I''d say it would have been proposed. The only thing I''ll say is this. While there is plenty of oil money int he Middle East, that doesn''t mean that they''re not frugal with their money and try to get the most out of their investment. I do most of my work for middle-eastern clients (work I should be doing now, but this thread is interesting!), and while there is plenty of money, don''t think for a second that effort isn''t spent to use money wisely. I''m constantly chasing unpaid invoices from my middle-eastern clients. It''s not that they don''t have the money to pay. It''s just that they want to pay when it works bets for them, be that once they''ve collected interest on it, or worked their cash flow in a way beneficial to them.So getting back to your question. It''s so much cheaper to move an event than it is to build enclosed stadia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]

[quote user="Reggie Strayshun"][quote user="The ghost of Michael Theoklitos"]I disagree.When Frank Lowy took over Football Australia (Frank is the CEO of Westfield, he''s worth about the same as Malcolm Glazier) he had 3 main objectives. The first was to set up a national league, with no clubs based on race or religion (as was previously the case in Australia with most clubs). We now have the A League, which is growing. The second was to have Australia qualify regularly for the world cup. He worked hard and lobbied to get Australia moved to the Asian confederation, and now this is a reality.The third was to have Australia host a world cup. He still wants to achieve this, and recieved federal government funding and backing for it too. There has since been a change of government, but I 100% believe that if there was a new bidding process for 2022 (hypothetically of course, we all know that won''t happen) Frank will be there front and centre.[/quote]

Thanks for the Aussie perspective on this MT. Very interestingOne lighthearted observation is that if Frank achieved objective 3, then qed he''s achieve objective 2, as hosts automatically qualify !But it opens up a very fundamental flaw. If huge economies like Australia are now gibbing at hosting events, then it does not augur well for the future. Because the usual suspects (UK, France, Germany, Italy, USA) will soon lose interest too.  Countries like Spain used to be shoo ins for these sort of bunfights, but I bet they''d not be so keen these days ?![/quote]

 

Mega-events is my pet-project at the moment as I''m in the middle of writing a book about them and how no one really wants them anymore. The future will be fights between countries such as England, France, Germany etc who can host the event without providing new stadiums as they are already there and crazy, oil/resource rich countries who have to cash to build everything but can''t provide the ''soft'' infrastructure such as tradition and sporting culture.

 

I expect to see countries such as Turkey, Indonesia, Maylasia and Nigeria getting involved soon and it is only a matter of time until China decide they want a World Cup (they are currently waiting until they have a decent football team). I also wouldn''t be surprised to see Azerbaijan and Uzbekistan get involved also. However, whether FIFA or the Olympics will touch such risky options is another matter. FIFA especially have had a recent history of becoming bored of the same old countries hosting the World Cup and have tried to branch out, this is very much driven by Sepp who loved the adulation he recieved in Africa. I suspect whoever replaces him will want to get back to having relatively ''boring'' location which cause no problems and bring in more money than trying to spread the football to every corner of the planet.

[/quote]I''d be very interested to read said book once completed. Sounds very interesting to a sports geek such as myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"] 

Mega-events is my pet-project at the moment as I''m in the middle of writing a book about them and how no one really wants them anymore. The future will be fights between countries such as England, France, Germany etc who can host the event without providing new stadiums as they are already there and crazy, oil/resource rich countries who have to cash to build everything but can''t provide the ''soft'' infrastructure such as tradition and sporting culture.

 

I expect to see countries such as Turkey, Indonesia, Maylasia and Nigeria getting involved soon and it is only a matter of time until China decide they want a World Cup (they are currently waiting until they have a decent football team). I also wouldn''t be surprised to see Azerbaijan and Uzbekistan get involved also. However, whether FIFA or the Olympics will touch such risky options is another matter. FIFA especially have had a recent history of becoming bored of the same old countries hosting the World Cup and have tried to branch out, this is very much driven by Sepp who loved the adulation he recieved in Africa. I suspect whoever replaces him will want to get back to having relatively ''boring'' location which cause no problems and bring in more money than trying to spread the football to every corner of the planet.

[/quote]Interesting, Bethnal. I assume one problem is that because bidding is done so far in advance countries have to take a gamble on how their economy is going to look in several years'' time. And you potentially have one governing party taking a decision the consequences of which will fall on the current opposition. Is one likelihood an increase in joint bids, to try to spread the financial load across two countries?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="PurpleCanary"]Interesting, Bethnal. I assume one problem is that because bidding is done so far in advance countries have to take a gamble on how their economy is going to look in several years'' time. And you potentially have one governing party taking a decision the consequences of which will fall on the current opposition. Is one likelihood an increase in joint bids, to try to spread the financial load across two countries?[/quote]Well, presumably the powers that be at FIFA were gambling on the Taliban , Muslim Brotherhood, or similarly crackpot group taking control of Qatar before 2022, Purple. It''s not that long ago that people were seriously touting Egypt as potential hosts for something quite big, in the same way that MT is predicting that Malaysia, Nigeria etc might do !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...