Better not give England a second one so.
How ridiculous is it that England hasn't hosted a major tournament since 1996?!
- Thread starter TheReligion
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Does england even bid everytime? You can't win something you dont bid.
I assume that hooliganism robbed you from one tournament during the 70s-80s.
Maybe it doesn't make much of a difference anyway but Colombia were due to host in 86 but pulled out after being awarded it. Canada, USA and Mexico offered to host and the Mexican's were picked. I would assume the main reason for that being that they had a track record of being successful hosts.
Had Colombia followed through with their bid it would have been a pretty fair mix (aside from the second German WC and corruption allegations)
Nope, seeing the list of WC host nations from 70's onward I can see Portugal and Netherlands both hosting the WC before England and would more than appreciate the tournament being somewhere in Central or Southeastern Europe.
Overdue it really. Grand football history and the only European country with a population above 20m not to have hosted a major tournament.
We had the Euros in 2004 and don't have the infrastructure for the WC. Only way we'll have a World Cup here is if we make a bid with Spain.
It's not ridiculous but England is certainly due one in the near-to-mid future. England, or the UK infact, is a brilliant example of how to run a large event. In terms of finance, infrastructure, transport, attendance, welcome and - in football's case - impact on the game, then there are few, if any, countries capable of hosting a football tournament as well as England. This isn't jingoism either, moreso the reality of how the UK could cope with the demands of these kinds of tournaments.
The anti-English sentiment on here isn't really a surprise; we do tend to delude ourselves as a footballing nation. Despite that, it does sort of make sense for it to go to England the next time it comes to Europe. Only Germany could rival us in terms of stadia, infrastructure and fan attendance for games; and they've had it more recently.
Even after Brexit?
I thought so too but a scandinavian WC could be nice. I really dont think FIFA give a rats ass about infrastructure or any other rational requirements of hosting a tournament like this though ... and i think you have to much self respect to bend over for them so it'll probably wind up elsewhere.
2066 is our year.
Yeah that would be pretty cool but surely an issue of having 3 teams automatically qualify?
Add to that the language and the fact the conditions, in terms of the weather might, actually result in seeing some good tempo games and I don't think there is a better nation to hold the competition. That said, I'm not really bothered if we don't host it.
Yup. At least one every 5 should be in England
Mexico replaced Colombia at the "last" minute, iirc they were the only none European country ready to host it. England could have hosted the 2006 WC but then a german poster would have been whining about not hosting a world cup in the last 40 years.
We don't have a god given right to host stuff. It's not ridiculous at all - the world is a big place.
As an Englishman, living in England, and as someone who has watched World Cups/Euros around the world, I would much rather the tournament was not held in England. It is far more enjoyable and interesting being in a foreign country and although I am not going to Russia I am excited about watching games from unfamiliar stadiums.
I also went to half a dozen games in Euro 96 and, apart from England and Scotland matches,the attendances were truly woeful. I was at a QF at Old Trafford, the attendance was 43412.
I also went to half a dozen games in Euro 96 and, apart from England and Scotland matches,the attendances were truly woeful. I was at a QF at Old Trafford, the attendance was 43412.
You can say that for any country. Instead of spending money on sports, they can feed the poor and build homes for homeless.
our best chance was WC 2006 - but we fecked that bid up so the Germans got it
Come on there are certain extremes, look at the protests in Brazil around a million protests against the world cup. Its not a matter of feeding or homing, they health care and education is atrocious yet they spend billion's on it. Most of the stadia they build are simply not being used for anything.
It's on the government to take risks and decide. Like some said you are assuming the money saved on this will be spent on poor and facilities rather than in the corrupt pockets.
FIFA have their process which is anyways corrupt. They shouldn't be deciding which country is eligible to bid and which isn't.
You do know England hosted the Euros not long ago? Also Russia has a far bigger problem with Ultras than England currently do so I don't see how you are "ok" with Russia hosting it, that's not to mention the other problems in Russia. All countries have the same problem.
Last edited:
Yep using hooligans as a reason for England not to host is laughable, and that's being kind.
It's political nonsense, that's why.
To be fair, aren't we getting quite a few important games for that weird Euros in 2020? That tournament is going to be odd.
It's political nonsense, that's why.
To be fair, aren't we getting quite a few important games for that weird Euros in 2020? That tournament is going to be odd.
Euro 96 was a resounding success in term of the way it was policed. What we see time and time again in other European countries, like France two years ago, is that their archaic approach to crowd and riot control helps fuels the violence.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/special_report/1998/hooligans/60451.stm
I can't embed media/links in this forum apparently, as I'm a "newbie". But just Google Russian football hooliganism; you won't struggle to find results. Only recently there was a bunch of Spartak Moscow fans that rioted in Spain after a Europa League fixture, ending with the death of a policeman.
Hooliganism doesn't seem to be very high up on Fifa's list of priorities.
Then again, I suppose we don't bribe like Russia does.
Harsh, but sadly fair.
I agree there is also a difference between a fan having to much to drink and being a dick to an actual football hooligan. Of course I condone neither, but there is a difference.
I'd like England to host more often big tournaments.
Guys I wasn't actually being serious. You English have a worse sense of humour than the Qataris and Russians.
I personally think England should host a tournament simply so that other countries don't spend outrageous amounts of money building stadiums they'll never use again. England already have the infrastructure to host a world cup, it'd be the easiest tournament to organise since Germany in 06. Same goes for Spain IMO.
Very ridiculous!