By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - FIFA World Cup 2018 & 2022 host nations announced.

Siko1989 on 07 December 2010

i'm obviously going to Qatar just to see the world cup.. i always go over sea's just to see it (if i'm alive in 2022)

 

oh and the heat better not kill me while i'm over there lol




Around the Network
Siko1989 on 07 December 2010

Qatar are Hosting the Asian Cup in January so this will tell ya if they can host an event...

 

looking forward to the Asian Cup, Australia's gonna dominate lol




Cross-X on 07 December 2010
Kasz216 said:
outlawauron said:
Ajax said:
Soonerman said:

Qatar?!?!?!?!?!?! LOL

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=5887300&categoryid=2731137


I agree with some of the video, but no one really cares whether the Americans like football or not.

Eh, the World Cup was advertised like crazy here. The US is easily the largest market for growth, and they've had a pretty blatant effort by FIFA to popularize the sport here.

That actually is a fair point.  As for exapnding the soccer Audience, USA would of been huge.  Espeically with baseball seeming incredibly boring,and the Premier league getting better then expected ratings on ESPN.

Also I believe Europe can't get anothe rworldcup bid till 2030.  Isn't it that you can't host a world cup if your confederation held one of the last two?


So Conmebol, UEFA, AFC... so bids for 2026 will be probably USA, then... Argentina?  Australia and probably like... Ghana?

I think that Australia can't bid again until 2030.



binary solo on 07 December 2010
MDMAniac said:
binary solo said:

So I reckon the top 5 bidders on the objective assessment criteria should all just go into a hat and the one drawn from the hat gets to host.

None of this voting bullshit. Don't people already know that campaign style democracy is eminently corruptable?


Strictly speaking, democracy itself isn't very consistent, see for example Arrow's theorem and other paradoxes of the voting systems :)

Yes, but campaing style democracy is worse than pure democracy.



“The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."

Jimi Hendrix

 

Kasz216 on 07 December 2010
Laurel Aitken said:
Kasz216 said:
outlawauron said:
Ajax said:
Soonerman said:

Qatar?!?!?!?!?!?! LOL

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=5887300&categoryid=2731137


I agree with some of the video, but no one really cares whether the Americans like football or not.

Eh, the World Cup was advertised like crazy here. The US is easily the largest market for growth, and they've had a pretty blatant effort by FIFA to popularize the sport here.

That actually is a fair point.  As for exapnding the soccer Audience, USA would of been huge.  Espeically with baseball seeming incredibly boring,and the Premier league getting better then expected ratings on ESPN.

Also I believe Europe can't get anothe rworldcup bid till 2030.  Isn't it that you can't host a world cup if your confederation held one of the last two?


So Conmebol, UEFA, AFC... so bids for 2026 will be probably USA, then... Argentina?  Australia and probably like... Ghana?

For 2026 is Conmebol, Concacaf or CAF, I think the bids could be Argentina-Chile, USA, Mexico and an African Nation, taking into account that Australia is AFC, they couldn't host it until 2034... I would love it to be Mexico 2026, England 2030 (and going back to south America in 2034)


OOOh yeah that's right.  I forgot Australia switched to the AFC.



Around the Network
pizzahut451 on 07 December 2010
Kasz216 said:

Except... all the stats seem to show it hasn't... it doesn't help the countries economically and "smaller market" teams seem to shrink from the pressure rather then improve.

Heck, look at South Africa.  Anywhere else in the world... I think they preform better then they did.


Africa as a whole underperformed.  Everyone thought Africa would get a boost like Europeon and South American teams get, but in the end they cracked under the pressure and if anything played worse.

Having home field advantage in the cup only helps a team if the team has the swagger and belief they deserve to be there in the first place.  Otherwise they're just worried about surviving long enough to not embaress themselves.

You gotta be in it to win it.

1930 Uruguay host = Uruguay wom

1934 Italy host = Italy won

1966 England host = England won

1974 Germany host = Germany won

1978 Argentina host=Argentina won

1998 France host = France won

2002 South Korea host= South Korea 4th (their best achivment yet, i believe)

Theres your stats...



Kasz216 on 07 December 2010
pizzahut451 said:
Kasz216 said:

Except... all the stats seem to show it hasn't... it doesn't help the countries economically and "smaller market" teams seem to shrink from the pressure rather then improve.

Heck, look at South Africa.  Anywhere else in the world... I think they preform better then they did.


Africa as a whole underperformed.  Everyone thought Africa would get a boost like Europeon and South American teams get, but in the end they cracked under the pressure and if anything played worse.

Having home field advantage in the cup only helps a team if the team has the swagger and belief they deserve to be there in the first place.  Otherwise they're just worried about surviving long enough to not embaress themselves.

You gotta be in it to win it.

1930 Uruguay host = Uruguay wom

1934 Italy host = Italy won

1966 England host = England won

1974 Germany host = Germany won

1978 Argentina host=Argentina won

1998 France host = France won

2002 South Korea host= South Korea 4th (their best achivment yet, i believe)

Theres your stats...

Yes, outside of South Korea... a bunch of top rate teams won, when they had the World Cup at home.

How does this change the fact that most of the other "weak hosts" greatly floundered?

South Africa should of made it out of the first round for sure.


Though granted, Qatar will have the best outcome ever in a world cup, simply because they wouldn't of ever made the world cup without ever hosting it.



JazzyJeez on 07 December 2010
pizzahut451 said:
Kasz216 said:

Except... all the stats seem to show it hasn't... it doesn't help the countries economically and "smaller market" teams seem to shrink from the pressure rather then improve.

Heck, look at South Africa.  Anywhere else in the world... I think they preform better then they did.


Africa as a whole underperformed.  Everyone thought Africa would get a boost like Europeon and South American teams get, but in the end they cracked under the pressure and if anything played worse.

Having home field advantage in the cup only helps a team if the team has the swagger and belief they deserve to be there in the first place.  Otherwise they're just worried about surviving long enough to not embaress themselves.

You gotta be in it to win it.

1930 Uruguay host = Uruguay wom

1934 Italy host = Italy won

1966 England host = England won

1974 Germany host = Germany won

1978 Argentina host=Argentina won

1998 France host = France won

2002 South Korea host= South Korea 4th (their best achivment yet, i believe)

Theres your stats...

Them 'Stats' show nothing, Uruguay boycotted the 1934 WC, in 1938 France held the WC, holders Italy retained it.

After '66 England got knocked out in the quarters in '70 by W.germany who then went onto host it and win the next WC.

I could go in more detail about past WC results and winners, but if anything all your stats show is you've got to be good enough to win it in the first place. 

Other than that abnormal S.korea result who by the way Spain were completely robbed when they played S.korea, all winners tend to be good enough to win regardless of who hosted it.



http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/invest/index.html

PS3beats360 on 08 December 2010

Corrupt FIFA officials cost both England and the right to host World Cups. Bidding process was corrupted by FIFA officials being paid huge bribes by Russia and Qatar for votes. 

England and USA have world class facilities. England invented the modern game of football and deserve to host another World Cup. Another World Cup in USA would further increase the popularity of football in a growing market. 

Both Russia and Qatar have never hosted a World Cup. Russia seems like a reasonable nation to host a World Cup event. Qatar in the Middle East with temperatures varying between 30 to 45 degrees Celsius will be an extremely challenging place to host a World Cup with small stadiums. 



PS3beats360 on 08 December 2010
pizzahut451 said:
Kasz216 said:

Except... all the stats seem to show it hasn't... it doesn't help the countries economically and "smaller market" teams seem to shrink from the pressure rather then improve.

Heck, look at South Africa.  Anywhere else in the world... I think they preform better then they did.


Africa as a whole underperformed.  Everyone thought Africa would get a boost like Europeon and South American teams get, but in the end they cracked under the pressure and if anything played worse.

Having home field advantage in the cup only helps a team if the team has the swagger and belief they deserve to be there in the first place.  Otherwise they're just worried about surviving long enough to not embaress themselves.

You gotta be in it to win it.

1930 Uruguay host = Uruguay wom

1934 Italy host = Italy won

1966 England host = England won

1974 Germany host = Germany won

1978 Argentina host=Argentina won

1998 France host = France won

2002 South Korea host= South Korea 4th (their best achivment yet, i believe)

Theres your stats...

6 times the host nations have won the World Cup out of 18 World Cup events is a brilliant 33% winning percentage for the host nation. 

2  times the host nation has finished runner up at the World Cup they hosted. Quite a few times the host nation has finished third or fourth. 

There is a good chance the host nation will make it to a World Cup Semi-Final.