I guess I'm the only one that thinks Qatar will be excellent hosts.
Oh they'll be fantastic. Without a doubt. They'll throw so much money at it it'll be like Disneyland meets Vegas meets Dubai with football..and I'll more than likely go (Ifs permitting) but that isn't the point..
Here's the point (IMO)..
Firstly the notion that FIFA is a hugely corrupt and agenda driven organisation (but that's really a given) but mainly the overbearing feeling that the actual base aspects of football and World Cups (the quality of football, the teams actually in it, the fans actually going, the players actually playing etc) are no longer taken into consideration when deciding the who hosts the football World Cup. Which is silly. All those saying "yeah but it's nice they're given a chance' probably aren't fecking going..and certainly aren't fecking playing in it. The World Cup isn't a charity drive, it's a football tournament but Blatter (at face value at least) seems to be trying deliberately to give it to countries who don't seem suitable as a sort of incentive to get football really big there...
And I've got no problem with that philosophy. In essence it's great and I love the fact the WC went to Africa last time, and I think it should definitely go to countries who wouldn't normally see top class football...but in moderation. Not every year. It's disregarding the core of football and the core of the fanbases to be political. And that's without even touching on the idea that a country shouldn't use the WC as an incentive to clean up/modernise their act once they've got it. They should do that AS an incentive to get the WC.
Lets look at the last 4 decided hosts and see what their merits have been..
South Africa - First WC in Africa. Little WC history in the country itself (comparatively) but a deserving one for the continent as a whole. Practically it didn't initially meet criteria though. Little infrastrucure to begin with and concerns over safety, weather, altitude, travel etc. It ended up not being a great WC but it was worthy and in the end a success for the country itself.
Brazil - Deserving on historical merit. Easily. Same concerns over safety, travel etc though, but because of it's long and rich history with football deserves its chance.
Russia - Again, deserving on history, concerns over it's readiness, once again an infrastructure to be build from scratch and travel headache's for fans.
Qatar - First WC in the ME. History wise non-existent. Weather and accomodation demands, and AGAIN has to build everything from scratch.
So in the last 4 WCs, none have gone to a country with
both deserving history and suitable infrastructure.. They haven't given much consideration to the base swell of support (and talent) from the main countries likely to be competing in it. and not to the country best suited to do it. They've all been political in one way or another and this is the problem.I'm fine with 2, even 3 of these. but 4? No. Not as a fan who will try and go to all of them, and not as a football fan who wants to see the best tournament possible.
I'm all for the idea, but slip in a country with an already concrete infrastructure in between why don't you. Japan was a good idea, and it followed France and preceeded Germany. Even just one of those now would be a God send. Instead we have 4 consecutive WCs that will likely provide some headache's in some aspects. This is the problem.
Qatar is not a footballing nation by any stretch of the imagination, nor is it really a "developing nation"..It's the 2nd wealthest place on earth per capita FFS! If you wanted to give a World Cup to a nation that's never had it try Holland, a country who's players fans and people have contributed to it richly for decades and never hosted it..If you wanted to give it to the ME, why not wait until one of the more prominent Arab states with a proper footballing history came up with a bid? Sammskys melodramatic attempts to paint Qatar as a sort of Billy Elliot/Oliver Twist figure are laughable, a bit misguided and missing the point. They have done little to deserve the most prestigious tournament in the world....Apparently now the world's biggest football tournament deserves to be hosted by anyone who can afford to do it, or hasn't done it before, rather than the places best suited for the best football, best experience for the fans and best conditions for the players, or by those who would do all this AND have a rich history with the sport and competition.....It's not a travelling circus, it's a football tournament.
Russia, whilst deserving in through it's history has also sort of won it not by virtue of being the best place to have it, but by virtue of it being "deserving" sort of forgetting that the reason Eastern Europe hasn't hosted one before isn't because of some darstadly Western conspiracy, but because it's infrastructure and racial tollerance has been well below the standards required for years...It should have to sort these out and deserve it on merit
before it's given it surely? Instead of some kind of fast track...
Again, sorry to sound a bit like a top white, but are you going to try and go to all these? Is sammsky? Probably not. I am, and while I love the travelling and the new horizon broadening that goes with it (and I take deep offence at anyone trying to pain me or anyone else as jingoistic for this) I'd like the best place for a good WC somewhere in there as well ...especially since they only roll round every 4 years.
/rant....Off to put the kettle on.
