World Cup 2018 & 2022 bids

[Team Brian GB]

The BBC:

Anson leads calls for Fifa reform
England 2018 bid chief executive Andy Anson has warned his country against bidding for the World Cup again until Fifa reforms its voting process.

Fifa's 22-man executive committee - each with one vote in a secret ballot - picked Russia to host the event as England collected just two votes.

"I would say right now don't bother (bidding) unless you know the process is going to change," said Anson.

"When there are only 22 guys that gives them too much influence."

England, who have not staged the World Cup since 1966 and also failed to land the 2006 event, were knocked out in the first round of voting.

The England 2018 team believe African confederation president Issa Hayatou voted for them, along with bid chairman Geoff Thompson.

A senior government source has told the BBC that at least five executive committee members "personally assured" Prince William and David Beckham they would vote for the England bid, only to back other contenders in the first round.

The source said Concacaf president Jack Warner and general secretary Chuck Blazer were among the executives who had given the assurances.

Russia (nine votes), Spain-Portugal (seven votes) and Netherlands-Belgium (four votes) went through to a second round of voting.

Russia then earned an absolute majority of 13 votes, with Spain-Portugal on seven and Netherlands-Belgium picking up two.

and their final presentation on Thursday was described by Fifa president Sepp Blatter as "excellent and remarkable".

And despite suffering a number of setbacks during the bidding campaign, there was a feeling that England had made great strides in the build-up to the vote.

Prince William, Prime Minister David Cameron and Beckham lobbied hard for support, but Anson suggested executive committee members went back on their word by backing for England's rivals.

"I still find it hard to understand what happened," he told a media conference in Zurich on Friday morning.

"When you have the best technical bid, fantastic inspection visits, the best economic report, and, from what people told us, the best presentation, it's quite hard to stomach that all that seemed to count for absolutely nothing.

"I'm not going to beat around the bush - individual members promised to vote for us and didn't clearly.

but I don't believe that for one minute, but that's what we are being told.
"Russia did a lot of last-minute lobbying and votes appeared to switch at the last minute - we know some switched in the early hours of the morning."

Anson was repeatedly pressed on who did not deliver on their promise of voting for England, but he refused to reveal any names.

But he was furious with the voting process and called for extensive changes to be implemented.

Only 22 of Fifa's 208 national football associations were included in the ballot, and the voting pattern of individual delegates was kept secret.

"You have got to open it up to all the member associations. You've got to widen the electorate," stated Anson.

"For me, you should have transparency and open voting so that everyone knows who voted for whom, because I don't believe that the secret ballot actually helps transparency at all.

"It leads to the situation we had on Thursday where people promise you something and don't deliver."

Anson added that the England 2018 team went to bed on Wednesday feeling the bid had "room to manoeuvre" in terms of votes, and confident they would get through the first round.

"To then find you only get two votes is tough and I'm still finding that hard to believe," he said.

While Russia were awarded the 2018 competition, there was a huge shock in the 2022 ballot when Qatar prevailed with an absolute majority of 14 votes.

Australia received the best Fifa evaluation report but were eliminated in the first round with only one vote as Qatar picked up 11, Korea four, the United States three and Japan three.

Japan fell in the second round with two votes after Qatar picked up 10, Korea five and the US five.

In round three, Korea went out with six votes as Qatar (11 votes) and the US (six vote) went on to the final stage.


collected 14 votes, while 1994 hosts the US earned just eight to send the World Cup to the Middle East for the first time.
"Running two bids together was clearly a huge mistake," insisted Anson. "Everyone who had a vote and a bid clearly wanted to trade that vote for something that helped them get over the line in that campaign.

"Australia had a very good bid and they got one vote, we had a very good bid and we got two, the USA had an unbelievably strong technical bid and got three.

"Six votes in the first round between those three, there's something not quite right."

Former England manager Graham Taylor suggested it was about time the organisation of Fifa was investigated.

"You have got in Fifa an organisation that doesn't have to answer to anyone, even governments," he told BBC Radio 5 live. "If governments get involved, Fifa suspend the national team.

"It might now be time they really need looking into. They should really be investigated, and of course our journalists are very good at that.

"This has been going on for years. We have been watching it and been aware a lot of it is going on behind people's backs."

Former Football Association chief executive Mark Palios urged Fifa to replicate the structure of the International Olympic Committee, with a wider electorate.

"There is a very simple way to change it and that is to expand the size of the constituency that votes from 22 - or 24 - people to roughly the size of the Olympics situation where it is over 100," Palios explained.

"If you wanted to go for real democracy, why can't everybody within Fifa to have a vote. That would then make it easier for genuinely the best bid to be voted on by the football family."

Former sports minister Richard Caborn questioned whether Fifa was fit for purpose, adding: "I think there has got to be more transparency, there has got to be more democratic accountability.

"All that needs to be looked at because it only brings itself into disrepute if it does not do that.

"It is the biggest game in the world, and they have got to say, 'Are we fit for purpose for the 20th century?' I think the answer to that is no."

 

[Spoony]

We never metnioned football coming home in the bid and we even stopped calling it our game, instead calling it Fifas game. There was nothing smug in the bid what so ever. We were even selling it on the idea of how unifying the world wide charity work of the English game and Fifas.

The English didn't just write the rules down, they created the rules. The Chinese played a game where they kicked something around, the didn't invent a association soccer. The Aztecs played a game where they kicked a ball into goals, yet it still wasn't soccer. So they didn't invent it either. The French Sailors played a game where they took penalties with barrels long before the FA book of rules were published. They didn't invent soccer. The FA took all these various games and created a game and set of rules which they published. The game of Soccer and it's rules were invented in England. Somebody kicking some object with their feet didn't invent Soccer.

You'd have to an agenda to deny England invented the game. I suspect people have kicked spherical objects since well....humans evolved into homoerectus. Clearly the game that is being played now...was an invention of the English....and it was spread to all parts of the globe by the English. But if I'm allowed to be parochial the NW is the home of the game.

 

[noodlehair]

Who cares who invented it?

I agree with most of Spin's post but I reckon it's naive to think a bunch of pretty much openly corrupt blokes in suits, sat around in a room honestly discussing the merits of where best to host a multi billion pound event, based purely on which location would most benefit football and the world and it's populous as a whole...as opposed to just deciding what would be the best way to line their own pockets.

Fifa can't do even the most simplist and mundane of things without corrupting it up to feck, so the idea they might do something majorly important with huge financial implications any differently doesn't really register.

I just don't get why people were so surprised by England's failure when it was obvious who the best suiters to Fifa were.

 

[Bread]

Let's be honest, England IS the home of football, mentioning it wouldnt be arrogant even if it did come across that way. It's our national sport here and by a country mile that with it has bought a lot of history that im sure fans would want to be part of in the same way as id some to see a match in milan or barcelona. The whole wembley magic is not a myth, fans from all over the world sing about it and i know would want to see thier team there, Old trafford, Stamford Bridge, Anfield...I could go on. That for me is a huge part of a world cup, going on basically a football sightseeing tour. No world cup since germany has anywhere near been able to offer that, They have and will give the chance to see a country that otherwise football fans may not attend and that is comendable but just not every sick and single one of them should be in that mould!!

England United was a good bid and i didnt feel was smug at all, If anything it was very humbling and basically pointed out that fans of the world could enjoy being part of our already fantastic footballing history, Also the fans over here have generally been fantastic for years, our laws are cosmopolitan enough to not particually effect other other peoples cultures or enjoyment and obviously there is a strong multi-cultural feeling over here. Russia I really don't feel can offer most of these things in the same way, and obviously thats before we get into the obvious racism that the fans over there decide to spew.

For England to have not hosted it in 64 years by the time they even have a chance to bid is ridiculous and frankly an insult to the fantastic footballing history and fans here, as well as how the game has been developed over here to stop the hooligan and racism issues that gave us such a poor image. Holland to have never hosted it is even more ridiculous and just shows how fifa have nothing to do with the fans or give a toss about them.

 

[spinoza]

We never metnioned football coming home in the bid and we even stopped calling it our game, instead calling it Fifas game. There was nothing smug in the bid what so ever. We were even selling it on the idea of how unifying the world wide charity work of the English game and Fifas.

Doesn't stop everyone here from thinking it though. Just look at all the headlines this morning. Just look at all the crap on here, on how England's bid was the best. I'm not even sure we can afford to hold the World Cup.

The English didn't just write the rules down, they created the rules. The Chinese played a game where they kicked something around, the didn't invent a association soccer. The Aztecs played a game where they kicked a ball into goals, yet it still wasn't soccer. So they didn't invent it either. The French Sailors played a game where they took penalties with barrels long before the FA book of rules were published. They didn't invent soccer. The FA took all these various games and created a game and set of rules which they published. The game of Soccer and it's rules were invented in England. Somebody kicking some object with their feet didn't invent Soccer.

They wrote the rules down of something that eventually evolved into the game today. The genesis of the game was much earlier. This type of reaction is pretty much why people think the English are arses when it comes to football.

 

[Team Brian GB]

They wrote the rules down of something that eventually evolved into the game today. The genesis of the game was much earlier. This type of reaction is pretty much why people think the English are arses when it comes to football.

Who cares what vaguely reminiscient game was played in Ancient China, when we created and codified the game and sent it around the world in the 19th Century we had no idea what was played by the Chinese or the Aztecs or anybody else, the game that exists today was devised from the ground up by us.

 

[spinoza]

Let's be honest, England IS the home of football,

It isn't.

mentioning it wouldnt be arrogant even if it did come across that way.

I'm probably smarter than you. That's not arrogant, it just comes across that way.

It's our national sport here and by a country mile that with it has bought a lot of history

It's the national sport in loads of countries, and some other people would probably also like the chance to create a bit of history.

that im sure fans would want to be part of in the same way as id some to see a match in milan or barcelona. The whole wembley magic is not a myth, fans from all over the world sing about it and i know would want to see thier team there, Old trafford, Stamford Bridge, Anfield...I could go on. That for me is a huge part of a world cup, going on basically a football sightseeing tour. No world cup since germany has anywhere near been able to offer that, They have and will give the chance to see a country that otherwise football fans may not attend and that is comendable but just not every sick and single one of them should be in that mould!!

True

England United was a good bid and i didnt feel was smug at all, If anything it was very humbling and basically pointed out that fans of the world could enjoy being part of our already fantastic footballing history,

That's not humble.

Also the fans over here have generally been fantastic for years, our laws are cosmopolitan enough to not particually effect other other peoples cultures or enjoyment and obviously there is a strong multi-cultural feeling over here. Russia I really don't feel can offer most of these things in the same way, and obviously thats before we get into the obvious racism that the fans over there decide to spew.

Probably mostly true

For England to have not hosted it in 64 years by the time they even have a chance to bid is ridiculous and frankly an insult to the fantastic footballing history and fans here, as well as how the game has been developed over here to stop the hooligan and racism issues that gave us such a poor image. Holland to have never hosted it is even more ridiculous and just shows how fifa have nothing to do with the fans or give a toss about them.

There's that fake humility again.

 

[Mockney]

I disagree. It's a big prize, a successful World Cup. Make the problem immediate, and people will do something about it. Whether Russia will be successful or not I can't say, but they now have an incredible incentive to fix the problems.

As did South Africa, as do Brazil, as do Qatar, as do etc etc etc. Since when did the World Cup become a Jim'll fix it for lesser countries?...it's a fecking football tournament, not pimp my country. The idea is a just one, but now that it seems to be the only prevailing criteria to host any World Cup these days I think it's a bit of a skewed one.

English fans, and European players, would be happier in Spain / England / Holland.

And English fans and European players always bring by far the highest numbers to these tournaments. I'm not against bringing the WC to deserving places (which is why I don't begrudge Russia and was 100% behind South Africa ...Qatar is another matter though) but the fact that it's now become ENTIRELY a political kick ball is getting ludicrous...Are you in favour of game 39? How about moving the Ashes to Dubai every 4 years? But everyone deserves it. Regardless of whether it's practical for the core or majority or those involved. Someone somewhere is always deserving.

There should be some kind of balance between worthy venture seeking and holding the best tournaments for the core support. Even Brazil - which I think everyone agrees deserves the World Cup on historical merit alone - is fraught with infrastructure, planning, technical and safety issues and may be a headache for fans and players...So it's even more ridiculous that World Cups are being pushed away from the best and most suitable places to hold them, for quarter of a century, so FIFA can feel smug and self satisfied with it's equal opportunities program.

This is nothing to do with England.

If I were sitting in Asia or Africa, and I could afford to go see a World Cup, Russia could, in fact, be slightly cheaper, and easier to get into than England during the World Cup.

But when Africa and Asia start bringing as many fans and teams as Europe, then we can talk about the merit of such things. Call it elitist if you want, but I think that's a cop out. The fact is it should be being held in the best place to stage the best football, and the best place for those who are likely to be actually going. Giving tournaments to places who deserve to experience them is fantastic...but not 4 or 5 times out of 6. That's courting your mistress while neglecting your wife.

 

[spinoza]

Who cares what vaguely reminiscient game was played in Ancient China, when we created and codified the game and sent it around the world in the 19th Century we had no idea what was played by the Chinese or the Aztecs or anybody else, the game that exists today was devised from the ground up by us.

The English wrote the rules down, spread it around a bit, as they did the English language, opium and free trade. The rules then changed over time to what we've got today.

Believe what you like, it's a myth that the English created the game, and it's an even more spurious myth that England is the home of football.

 

[Team Brian GB]

The English wrote the rules down, spread it around a bit, as they did the English language, opium and free trade. The rules then changed over time to what we've got today.

Believe what you like, it's a myth that the English created the game, and it's an even more spurious myth that England is the home of football.

If England didn't codify football and spread it when we did then it wouldn't exist then what would it be today? That is before you mention the direct British involvement in getting the game off the ground in Spain, Italy, France, Germany, Argentina and Brazil. We created it in this country and it was our immigrants that planted the seeds everywhere else.

 

[Spoony]

The fact is it should be being held in the best place to stage the best football, and the best place for those who are likely to be actually going. Giving tournaments to places who deserve to experience them is fantastic...but not 4 or 5 times out of 6. That's courting your mistress while neglecting your wife.

That's not fact. Fact is, FIFA want to spread the game to all parts of the globe. And I have no doubts Qatar will put on a good show, Christ they've got enough money haven't they. I'm actually looking forward to seeing how their stadia'll shape up...and gimpy stuff like water taxis and cameldroids. What I do worry about is that there could be a lack of interest in Qatar. By this I don't mean people'll shun the WC but the majority of Qatar's population's made up of guest workers - and I doubt they'll be able to afford tickets.

 

[spinoza]

As did South Africa, as do Brazil, as do Qatar, as do etc etc etc. Since when did the World Cup become a Jim'll fix it for lesser countries?...it's a fecking football tournament, not pimp my country. The idea is a just one, but now that it seems to be the only prevailing criteria to host any World Cup these days I think it's a bit of a skewed one.

Wasn't for Germany, or Brazil, so it's a reasonable mix in my view.

And English fans and European players always bring by far the highest numbers to these tournaments. I'm not against bringing the WC to deserving places (which is why I don't begrudge Russia and was 100% behind South Africa ...Qatar is another matter though) but the fact that it's now become ENTIRELY a political kick ball is getting ludicrous...Are you in favour of game 39? How about moving the Ashes to Dubai every 4 years? But everyone deserves it. Regardless of whether it's practical for the core or majority or those involved. Someone somewhere is always deserving.

I'm not in favour of either game 39 or the Ashes in Dubai. But this is the World Cup, emphasis on the World. Same reason why the Olympics moves around.

There should be some kind of balance between worthy venture seeking and holding the best tournaments for the core support. Even Brazil - which I think everyone agrees deserves the World Cup on historical merit alone - is fraught with infrastructure, planning, technical and safety issues and may be a headache for fans and players...So it's even more ridiculous that World Cups are being pushed away from the best and most suitable places to hold them, for quarter of a century, so FIFA can feel smug and self satisfied with it's equal opportunities program.

Agree, mostly. But these things are always fraught with infrastructure, risk and planning issues. You think England doesn't have them? The London Olympics will be a shambles.

But when Africa and Asia start bringing as many fans and teams as Europe, then we can talk about the merit of such things. Call it elitist if you want, but I think that's a cop out. The fact is it should be being held in the best place to stage the best football, and the best place for those who are likely to be actually going. Giving tournaments to places who deserve to experience them is fantastic...but not 4 or 5 times out of 6. That's courting your mistress while neglecting your wife.

Best football depends largely on the players, and they're so coddled that they'll be more comfortable than 99% of fans anywhere. Best venue, well, you never know. Qatar will likely be shit because of the heat, but Russia will probably be good. Best place for fans, well now, Qatar will be a fantastic place for fans from the Arab world, which is why Blatter said it went to them.

 

[spinoza]

If England didn't codify football and spread it when we did then it wouldn't exist then what would it be today? That is before you mention the direct British involvement in getting the game off the ground in Spain, Italy, France, Argentina and Brazil. We created it in this country and it was our immigrants that planted the seeds everywhere else.

We'd probably be playing something else similar.

 

[Zen86]

That's not fact. Fact is, FIFA want to spread the game to all parts of the globe. And I have no doubts Qatar will put on a good show, Christ they've got enough money haven't they. I'm actually looking forward to seeing how their stadia'll shape up...and gimpy stuff like water taxis and cameldroids. What I do worry about is that there could be a lack of interest in Qatar. By this I don't mean people'll shun the WC but the majority of Qatar's population's made up of guest workers - and I doubt they'll be able to afford tickets.

It'll hardly leave a lasting impression in Qatar if they're shipping out all the stadia straight after the world cup. I don't see how FIFA's obsession with sticking it in new, obscure places can overrule a country's obvious problems with human rights/racism etc.

 

[Spoony]

The English wrote the rules down, spread it around a bit, as they did the English language, opium and free trade. The rules then changed over time to what we've got today.

Believe what you like, it's a myth that the English created the game, and it's an even more spurious myth that England is the home of football.

Nah, the game evolved from a type of football that was played by the masses in England which may or may not have been brought over by the Normans. Keepy-upy in China wasn't exactly football nor did it have any bearing on how football evolved.

 

[Spoony]

It'll hardly leave a lasting impression in Qatar if they're shipping out all the stadia straight after the world cup. I don't see how FIFA's obsession with sticking it in new, obscure places can overrule a country's obvious problems with human rights/racism etc.

Which is why they'll dismantle the stadia and reconstruct them in impoverished areas. And that's the point really. Legacy. On paper it sounds good but who knows how it'll work in reality.

 

[spinoza]

Nah, the game evolved from a type of football that was played by the masses in England which may or may not have been brought over by the Normans. Keepy-upy in China wasn't exactly football nor did it have any bearing on how football evolved.

It wasn't exactly keepy uppy, but you're right that there's no real evidence it influenced the development of football directly.

Regardless though, whoever invented (i.e. first played) the game, it wasn't the English, because it was invented much earlier.

 

[Red Defence]

It wasn't exactly keepy uppy, but you're right that there's no real evidence it influenced the development of football directly.

Regardless though, whoever invented (i.e. first played) the game, it wasn't the English, because it was invented much earlier.

Who invented it?

 

[Nick 0208 Ldn]

 

[spinoza]

Who invented it?

Same bloke who invented bread probably.

 

[Mockney]

That's not fact. Fact is, FIFA want to spread the game to all parts of the globe. And I have no doubts Qatar will put on a good show, Christ they've got enough money haven't they. I'm actually looking forward to seeing how their stadia'll shape up...and gimpy stuff like water taxis and cameldroids. What I do worry about is that there could be a lack of interest in Qatar. By this I don't mean people'll shun the WC but the majority of Qatar's population's made up of guest workers - and I doubt they'll be able to afford tickets.

It is fact. it SHOULD be. It's not though. But that doesn't detract from the fact it should be. In fact to be clearer, it should be trying to strike a balance between spreading the game and staging the best tournaments.I just feel it's now moved towards a sort of crusading agenda that we all know isn't nearly as purely motivated as it's idealism projects...

Qatar will definitely host a fantastic tournament, as long as no one dies from heat exhaustion. But the fact remains they are a country with no footballing history, no infrastructure and inapropriate weather and for them to be given the bid is farcical...regardless of whether they can pull it off or not (which I'm sure they can)....

I sort of agree with the idea you have to have qualified for at least one world cup, or be above, say, 50 in the rankings to host one. That a staggeringly wealthy country the size of Yorkshire with no history in the game or competition can just buy its way into the biggest tournament in sport in it's first bid is ludicrous...Even South Africa had to bid twice before they got 2010..Morroco have bid 3 times in the last 5 and never got it, Eygpt twice...Oh but Qatar? Yeah, bangerang...Come on Spoons it's nonsense.

 

[Cal?]

Which is why they'll dismantle the stadia and construct them in impoverished areas. And that's the point really. Legacy. On paper it sounds good but who knows how it'll work in reality.

I'm sure whoever is struggling with food and clean water will be delighted to have a massive stadium close to them.

 

[Spoony]

It wasn't exactly keepy uppy, but you're right that there's no real evidence it influenced the development of football directly.

Regardless though, whoever invented (i.e. first played) the game, it wasn't the English, because it was invented much earlier.

Yes, but modern football was invented by the English and that's the point, Spin. But anyway it's not really important....and I do agree the 'we invented the game' line is nauseating and won't help England win the WC(hosting rights).

 

[Red Defence]

Same bloke who invented bread probably.

You mean you don't know.

 

[spinoza]

You mean you don't know.

Did you read the last 3 pages of this thread? And the game is almost as old as mankind.

 

[Spoony]

Oh but Qatar? Yeah, bangerang...Come on Spoons it's nonsense.

I don't disagree actually. I would've preferred to see a combined Gulf bid(UAE, Qatar and Bahrain). But they've got the money to stage the event...unlike say Egypt. And I thought Morocco were a bit unlucky actually, no nation's done more than Morocco to put African football on the map - except for maybe Cameroon, which is why I thought they should've staged the event ahead of South Africa. But heh, that's FIFA eh.

 

[Bread]

It isn't.

Sorry I'd have to say it is. By saying that im not saying all other footballing countries should bow down to england fantasticness, I'm just saying that i see its cultural homebase as in england and the popularity of the league worldwide id say backs this up.

I'm probably smarter than you. That's not arrogant, it just comes across that way.

You may well be, Meaning your better suited to some jobs than me, Should i get given a job because i should be pretty good at it in 12 years time?

It's the national sport in loads of countries, and some other people would probably also like the chance to create a bit of history.

Again, I'm not denying that. But most of those countries have hosted it at least once since England last hosted, With Brazil, Germany, Italy, France, Mexico hosting it twice since then. England and Holland should have hosted by now or both be hosting one before 2030 and I think it's ridiculous that both aren't or haven't.

That's not humble.

It doesnt need to be, But I don't feel England rammed it down people's throats. But England does have a better football history than a lot of countries, I see that as a fact. Doesnt mean England is better or as good as most countries but I'd say it can't be rivaled by many in that aspect.

Probably mostly true

Thank you.

There's that fake humility again.

Why does it have to be humble? England and Holland have far better footballing histories than most countries involved in the game. For the support English clubs and the national team recieve I would say that it is is definitely an insult to those fans that they havent had a chance to see a world cup on thier shores in so long, same for Holland. I completely understand trying to bring the game to new boundaries but every so often I think the fans who follow football all year evry year deserve some reward for that.

 

[Spoony]

I'm sure whoever is struggling with food and clean water will be delighted to have a massive stadium close to them.

What on earth are you on about?

 

[Red Defence]

I'm sure whoever is struggling with food and clean water will be delighted to have a massive stadium close to them.

yes, such a pity that the wealth of these oil nations couldn't have been used to help the poor, under developed countries in a more useful way.

First things first though for the bubble inhabitants over at FIFA.

 

[Red Defence]

Did you read the last 3 pages of this thread? And the game is almost as old as mankind.

Yes I did and none of it has told me where the game of football (as we know it today) actually originated.....other than England, which you dispute.

 

[Gambit]

It wasn't exactly keepy uppy, but you're right that there's no real evidence it influenced the development of football directly.

Regardless though, whoever invented (i.e. first played) the game, it wasn't the English, because it was invented much earlier.

The English invented the game and rules of soccer, why is this some point that needs debating, it isn't, soccer was invented in England as a competitive game. Yes it was an evolution of previous things, that we brought together and coded into a game.

 

[Cal?]

What on earth are you on about?

The idea is supposedly moving these stadiums to impoverished nations, but I fails to see what these nations who struggle with basic things like food & water will do with a 50,000 all seater stadium complete with state of the art air conditioning.

 

[Zen86]

I'm sure whoever is struggling with food and clean water will be delighted to have a massive stadium close to them.

They'll probably build it on top of a load of shanty towns and other impoverished settlements.

 

[noodlehair]

You're all being very selective.

Just because you think up a bunch of rules for something doesn't mean you invented it.

 

[spinoza]

Sorry I'd have to say it is. By saying that im not saying all other footballing countries should bow down to england fantasticness, I'm just saying that i see its cultural homebase as in england and the popularity of the league worldwide id say backs this up.

Yeah, and that's why the English keep complaining about Latin diving. Football's cultural homebase, i.e. how people actually play the game, is influenced more by Latin America, and the Mediterranean countries.

You may well be, Meaning your better suited to some jobs than me, Should i get given a job because i should be pretty good at it in 12 years time?

I see you missed my point. And with regards to what you're trying to say, I would answer, yes, if you're only going to be doing the job in 12 years time.

Again, I'm not denying that. But most of those countries have hosted it at least once since England last hosted, With Brazil, Germany, Italy, France, Mexico hosting it twice since then. England and Holland should have hosted by now or both be hosting one before 2030 and I think it's ridiculous that both aren't or haven't.

The World Cup only comes by once every 4 years, so some people will miss out. There were 5 bids for each tournament, that means in 8 countries some football fans are having the mother of all whinges. Doesn't mean it's ridiculous they missed out.

It doesnt need to be, But I don't feel England rammed it down people's throats. But England does have a better football history than a lot of countries, I see that as a fact. Doesnt mean England is better or as good as most countries but I'd say it can't be rivaled by many in that aspect.

Football coming home is almost a World Cup slogan here. It's terrible.

Why does it have to be humble? England and Holland have far better footballing histories than most countries involved in the game. For the support English clubs and the national team recieve I would say that it is is definitely an insult to those fans that they havent had a chance to see a world cup on thier shores in so long, same for Holland. I completely understand trying to bring the game to new boundaries but every so often I think the fans who follow football all year evry year deserve some reward for that.

What about fans in the Middle East who follow football all year every year?

 

[Cal?]

They'll probably build it on top of a load of shanty towns and other impoverished settlements.

So there's why the Scousers are getting their new stadium from.

 

[Spoony]

The idea is supposedly moving these stadiums to impoverished nations, but I fails to see what these nations who struggle with basic things like food & water will do with a 50,000 all seater stadium complete with state of the art air conditioning.

I'm not sure how's going to work, to be honest. But it clearly ticked boxes. And I suspect we're not talking about areas that are suffering from drought and famine.

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

this is probably the saddest thread of the year.

 

[Cal?]

I'm not sure how's going to work, to be honest. But it clearly ticked boxes. And I suspect we're not talking about areas that are suffering from drought and famine.

You really think that those Fifa execs honestly voted for Qatar based solely on the merits of their bid?

 

[Plechazunga]

Spin rules.

Mind you, it's also nice to see that unlike the journos, the magnificent Geoff Pullum at language log has the guts to openly describe FIFA as 'corrupt' with nothing more than a wiki link between him and the lawyers.