World Cup 2018 & 2022 bids

Russia has to build stadiums, it has to build roads and has to build airports. Their footballing culture and current infrastructure is indifferent. Their visa restrictions and travel is indifferent, they have a terrible reputation for overpriced and inadequate hotel rooms, their police are far from welcoming, their civic rights leave much to be desired, they have a terrible tolerance problem and their cities apart from St Petersburg and parts of Moscow are second world.

Not a good bid as far as I'm concerned. The fact that two of the wealthiest men from the former USSR and the captain of the Russian national side are all intrinsically tied to football in London should say something.

And they will build them so what is the problem?

It is stupid to say that England is ready to host the World Cup today, because the WC is not today - it is 8 (and 12 years) away!
The reality is that England were ready for a WC in 2006 but they missed the boat and now others have moved ahead in their thinking.

Russia will waive all visa restrictions and they promise to offer FREE internal travel for all ticket holders - did you know that?
I think there are a lot of people commenting here who know very little of the bid details and just basing their view on ignorant stereotypes.

I went to Moscow for the CL Final and it was a great experience that was hosted very well - a great result as well but I suppose I dont have to remind you of that :D
 
WTF are you talking about?

Not sure what RAMS is talking about but their domestic league does not draw well (less than the U.S. league):

Team Total Average
1 Spartak Moscow 372,500 24,833
2 Zenit St Petersburg 306,100 20,406
3 Alania Vladikavkaz 244,500 16,300
4 PFK Samara Kryliya Sovetov 204,300 14,592
5 Lokomotiv Moscow 199,841 14,274
6 FK Rostov-Na-Donu 178,000 11,866
7 FK Tom' Tomsk 150,000 11,538
8 Spartak Nalchik 166,200 11,080
9 FK Rubin Kazan 165,000 11,000
10 CSKA Moscow 160,500 10,700
11 Anzhi Makhachkala 166,000 10,375
12 FK Amkar Perm' 153,000 10,200
13 Sibir Novosibirsk 127,000 9,769
14 Terek Grozny 121,800 8,120
15 Dinamo Moscow 106,624 7,108
16 Saturn Moscow 74,500 4,966


Not sure if that translates into an overall interest in the sport (I have never been to Russia).
 
I dont agree that the choice of Qatar proves what you think it proves.

The bit in bold is not true at all either. What do you even know about all the bids for the last 6 WCs? You are just making it up to suit your argument now.

2006 Germany
2014 Brazil
How can you argue that these are not worthy? And do you really think it was a bad decision to go with Japan/Korea and South Africa?

vuvuzela.jpg
 
Anyway, i've written an article on my thoughts, I'll post it tomorrow...Peas blud.

Fair enough - look forward to read it mate.

And I hope you do goto the Qatari World Cup - Im sure you will have a damn good time!
 
The tabloids are a joke. Instead of congratulating two nations who will be hosting the cup for the first time and who are more than able to put on a great show, The tabloids focus on nothing but cover ups and public rage to sell newspapers!!

And you expected what exactly? Good and fair journalism? These are tabloids we are talking about. If people wanted to read fair journalism they'd get a leading newspaper (times etc). Don't blame the tabloids for what they write. It's the public that are demanding that they write this toss.
 
BBC Sport - Football - England 2018 boss unhappy over World Cup voting process

England 2018 bid chief executive Andy Anson has criticised the Fifa World Cup bidding process after his team's failure to land the tournament.

The England bid went out at the first round, having earned just two votes, with Russia beating the Spain/Portugal and Holland/Belgium bids in round two.

"Running two World Cups together was clearly a mistake," he said.

"It inevitably led to people with votes in 2018 doing deals with people involved in 2022."

Anson said falling at the first hurdle was "pretty disheartening".

Russia's victory in the 2018 race was followed by the huge surprise of Qatar beating the United States in the fourth round of voting to win the right to host the 2022 event.

"If you look at the technical process, the people who got the best reviews went out earliest, while the people who get the toughest reviews seem to have won," said Anson.

He also expressed bitterness at the way the vote had turned out to be tactical.

"There were other votes we thought we were going to get that would have taken us way into the second round and beyond," he added.

"Some of those didn't materialise, I don't know which ones.

"When people look you in the eye and promise you something, you hope they live up to their word, but clearly that hasn't happened."


Prime Minister David Cameron, who was part of England's presentation team on the day, called the news "bitterly disappointing" and said it was hard to see what else could have been done.

"I think, according to Fifa we had the best technical bid. No-one could identify any risks of coming to England. I think we had the strongest commercial bid and the country is passionate about football. But it turns out that is not enough," he said.

"It is hard to see what more you can do, but in the end it turns out, having the best technical bid, commercial bid, the passion for football, that is not enough.

"It's desperately sad, there has not been a World Cup in my lifetime in England. I was hoping we could change that, but not this time."

England bid board member Lord Coe, who headed the successful London 2012 Olympic campaign, said he could not find fault with the bid and that Fifa needed to look at its voting procedure.

"Fifa will have to look at what they've presided over the last few weeks and month and decide if this is the way they want to continue in the bidding process," he said

"I think probably they're going to have to look at the framework.

"I'm only sorry that the bid team today weren't fully able to get the message across.

"I believe England was pre-eminently the best bid at the table. We will stage a fantastic Olympic Games in the same way we would have staged a fantastic World Cup."

Premier League chairman Richard Scudamore said the fact England have facilities already in place appeared to have counted against them.

"They have decided to take the World Cups to developing areas," he said. "What's gone against us is not having to build 20 new stadia. It almost feels as if we are on standby for when somebody can't host it.

"That's all very well - but on that basis we will never get it."

Former Football Association executive chairman David Davies said he was "desolate" at the news, and said the England bid team had been let down over promised votes.

"Clearly, the reason the team feel so let down is that they genuinely accepted the promises that they had received were going to get support in what we all knew was going to be the difficulty of the first stage and certain people did not deliver. Why did they not deliver?" he said.

"I heard one particular European voter who all the way through had seemed to be a certainty for England, let England down at the last minute. Now that was extraordinary."


He also said the role of the English media may have scared some people off backing the bid.

"The problem with the English press as it was put to me was 'do we want to live with the English press for the next seven-and-a-half years?' which is a big question," he said.

"Some of us who've been in this rough and tumble world of the British media just accept it as that and don't complain too much.

"There is no question that there is a different view abroad."


Former FA chief executive Mark Palios also thought press coverage may have played a factor.

"I think that may well be a feature. To see why we actually came nowhere near and underneath the Belgium/Holland bid, it sounds like it's almost payback time," he said.

"I've never heard a compelling explanation of the timing and the public interest [of this week's BBC's Panorama investigation into Fifa corruption allegations].

"It may well have an impact - that and the natural disposition towards the British media. I don't think that would have helped at all.

"I think looking at the extent we did lose, there might be a deeper seated problem than just the Panorama problem."


England 2018 ambassador David Beckham added: "I've heard the rumours that we lost due to the British press. I hope that isn't the reason. I believe in a free press and they are incredibly supportive of the game I love."

Former England manager Graham Taylor also dismissed criticism of the media and said nothing about Fifa surprised him any more.

"I'm just surprised that we're surprised," he said. "Fifa is an organisation that doesn't have to answer to anyone. What did we expect?

"Fifa for me is full of people who say 'yes' to your face and 'no' behind your back. Their reputation has not changed over many years.

"England have had little or no influence. We are considered to be arrogant and know-alls."

He also defended the English media, whose investigations into Fifa have been cited by some people as one of the reasons for the bid's failure.

"I'm not one of those blaming Panorama or the Sunday Times - this has been going on for years," he said.

"I just have a feeling that perhaps, just perhaps, 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."

Taylor also criticised the decision to give the 2022 World Cup to Qatar, adding on BBC Radio 4's PM programme: "It really is surprising. Where is the heart and soul of football in Qatar? And yet that decision has been made."
 
I think that deciding two at a time inevitably leads to under the table deals which isn't ideal.

England and Australia would have been great victory for football and really memorable footballing events but with the way these things are decided that isn't exactly at the top of the agenda sadly. Not that I think either of the other two will be disasters although Qatar will be a very odd event I'd guess.

If South Africa can pull it off, who were an accident looking for a place to happen, then Russia and Qatar should be fine.
 
Interesting to compare what Spain said before the vote to what they have said afterwards. Before the votes, they were very happy and trusting of FIFA, but now the bid members have ridiculed the decision.

All a part of playing the two votes off one another, I suppose. FIFA was absolutely stupid to have them both at the same time, which only encourages collusion. Perhaps that's the way Sepp wanted it though.

We are not corrupt, insists FIFA official - CNN.com
 
It's strange that it takes beckham to defend the freedom of the press. I really think he should be applauded for stating his belief in a free press and the praise he gives them - would have been awful had the bid team just laid the blame squarely with the british media. Thought beckhams sentiments were very good.
 
I think that deciding two at a time inevitably leads to under the table deals which isn't ideal.

England and Australia would have been great victory for football and really memorable footballing events but with the way these things are decided that isn't exactly at the top of the agenda sadly. Not that I think either of the other two will be disasters although Qatar will be a very odd event I'd guess.

If South Africa can pull it off, who were an accident looking for a place to happen, then Russia and Qatar should be fine.

I think both Russia and Qatar will hold good World Cups. The issue is how they got the decisions. Taylor and Becks are right to defend the press. The investigation needs to go much deeper into the obvious corruption of FIFA.
 
The English press is horrific, in my opinion. They just tear apart their own. It's quite amazing to watch.

I'm sure it had some sort of effect on some votes but this was just pure corruption, scratching of backs, etc. Maybe if the English press hadn't done what it had done, England would have picked up another 3 or 4 votes but this was always going to be Russia.

The time for the media to really investigate FIFA is now.
 
The English press is horrific, in my opinion. They just tear apart their own. It's quite amazing to watch.

I'm sure it had some sort of effect on some votes but this was just pure corruption, scratching of backs, etc. Maybe if the English press hadn't done what it had done, England would have picked up another 3 or 4 votes but this was always going to be Russia.

The time for the media to really investigate FIFA is now.

Generally the english press can be a nightmare - i cant feckin stand them. However, i dont think in this instance they were. Your post completely contradicts itself - if fifa are corrupt, or elements are dubious, then why should the english media wait until the decision was made before investigating it? That'd just be hypocritical and shallow.

It's odd that people who criticised the british media on this issue now think they should go after fifa.
 
Generally the english press can be a nightmare - i cant feckin stand them. However, i dont think in this instance they were. Your post completely contradicts itself - if fifa are corrupt, or elements are dubious, then why should the english media wait until the decision was made before investigating it? That'd just be hypocritical and shallow.

It's odd that people who criticised the british media on this issue now think they should go after fifa.

Well the press is terrible in the way they tried to entrap Tresiman or whatever his name is, with a chick.

Bunch of idiots.
 
Generally the english press can be a nightmare - i cant feckin stand them. However, i dont think in this instance they were. Your post completely contradicts itself - if fifa are corrupt, or elements are dubious, then why should the english media wait until the decision was made before investigating it? That'd just be hypocritical and shallow.

It's odd that people who criticised the british media on this issue now think they should go after fifa.
The thing is that the english media deliberately waited until the last moment just so there would be a bit more interest and they'd get a few more readers. If they held off that long, it's certainly no more hypocritical and shallow to wait a few more days so they don't torpedo their own countries bid. But of course they wouldn't do that just in case England won the bid, as that would mean their stories would get them less readers and hits.

Freedom of the press is one thing. But when the press is less interested in the truth and only cares about reporting things that will get them attention and at times that will give them the most attention, no matter what the cost, well that's an entirely different thing.
 
Its a shame and an indictment on FIFA itself that the voting pattern changed due to media revelations of corruption within itself. It was as if England were punished for its media having made the allegations.
 
Generally the english press can be a nightmare - i cant feckin stand them. However, i dont think in this instance they were. Your post completely contradicts itself - if fifa are corrupt, or elements are dubious, then why should the english media wait until the decision was made before investigating it? That'd just be hypocritical and shallow.

It's odd that people who criticised the british media on this issue now think they should go after fifa.

You misread my comment. The time to investigate FIFA is now, as in go after them completely, tear them apart, find out what went into these two decisions, the shady dealing, etc. They are at this very moment looking more corrupt and suspect than ever, so go get at them.

I never said the British media should wait. The media did it's job but if I was FIFA I would never award a WC to England because your media is terrible and will attack whatever it can. Why would anyone subject themselves to that, corrupt or not? If I was a top player i wouldn't go near England.
 
Its a shame and an indictment on FIFA itself that the voting pattern changed due to media revelations of corruption within itself. It was as if England were punished for its media having made the allegations.

What it really did was provide FIFA cover to award the cup to Russia.
 
The voting is both political and tactical so if there was a consensus that England shouldn't get it (a consensus that could well have been arrived at partly or wholly based on the press stuff) then getting England out in the first round is the best way to go because as bids are eliminated voters are usually less tied to their second or third choices and the technical strengths of each bid can become more important.

All speculation of course.

Yes it is and it's naive to think anything else.

To discuss who's bid is best or not it's pointless. According to analyses the bid from England was best. But FIFA is not an open democracy and every delegate have to consider the political and tactical issues before they vote.

This is how it works and until FIFA become more transparent (like IOC after Samaranch left the building) this system (and result) will continue.

Btw Regarding the English media. Good thinking to first accuse members of bride's and corruption and then get upset because you didn't win. Don't you watch Survivor/Robinson on the tele??? Even ignorant kids know this...
 
I don't get it. Why is this process more about lobbying than competence? The voting system makes no sense whatsoever. I don't know all that much about it but it seems to be more about lobbying and a popularity contest than anything else. In which case England will never win it. It just seems a rather corrupt system for something so high profile.
 
I don't get it. Why is this process more about lobbying than competence? The voting system makes no sense whatsoever. I don't know all that much about it but it seems to be more about lobbying and a popularity contest than anything else. In which case England will never win it. It just seems a rather corrupt system for something so high profile.

Welcome to the real world....
 
Would love to see an African country do well in Russia and for Israel to somehow qualify for Qatar just to see how the hosts handle it :lol:
 
What is pathetic is that an attempt to investigate these crooks by a government would lead to a claim of "political interference in football", and a ban from participation in the global sport.

Meanwhile, they engage in "political interference in football" with a jaw-droppingly corrupt gang of mini-mobsters running the place and stuffing their wallets at the cost of those who actually love the game.

This is part of why international football is increasingly losing its lustre. Everyone knows that the decisions made by those who run it are based around cash in suitcases.
 
Would love to see an African country do well in Russia and for Israel to somehow qualify for Qatar just to see how the hosts handle it :lol:

I'd laugh my arse off if someone like Ghana won the Russian WC, and if Israel somehow got there and knocked out Qatar.
 
I think it can safely be said with Fifas new agenda that the world won't be coming home in my lifetime.
 
What is pathetic is that an attempt to investigate these crooks by a government would lead to a claim of "political interference in football", and a ban from participation in the global sport.

Meanwhile, they engage in "political interference in football" with a jaw-droppingly corrupt gang of mini-mobsters running the place and stuffing their wallets at the cost of those who actually love the game.

This is part of why international football is increasingly losing its lustre. Everyone knows that the decisions made by those who run it are based around cash in suitcases.

The likes of England and USA should just boycott the world cup. Like it or not, England is a major money puller for FIFA, expose the greedy grubs that they really are.
 
I had found an interesting report on FIFA online a while back. I posted it in the newbies, I look it up again if anyone is interested in having a read. I thought it was quite good.
 
One thing is for sure. Now that the result is over, the British Press are going to be like wolves to a carcass of raw meat. There will be no holding back against Fifa and its members....rightly or wrongly, whatever your opinion of the British Press, this is what is going to happen.
 
I had found an interesting report on FIFA online a while back. I posted it in the newbies, I look it up again if anyone is interested in having a read. I thought it was quite good.

Please do.
 
I don't get it. Why is this process more about lobbying than competence? The voting system makes no sense whatsoever. I don't know all that much about it but it seems to be more about lobbying and a popularity contest than anything else. In which case England will never win it. It just seems a rather corrupt system for something so high profile.

Exactly.
 
It's not just FIFA that's true to form. James Lawton comes up with a piece so pompous and parochial it almost makes you pleased the Russkies won it:

James Lawton: A defeat, but one we can take pride in
Friday, 3 December 2010

Damn the World Cup, in Russia in 2018 and the one in the sand and cranked-up air-conditioning to follow four years later in Qatar.

There, in the desert by a boiling sea, they will now build a batch of stadiums that will be dismantled the moment the tournament is concluded in suffocating heat and Fifa president Sepp Blatter and his men head back to their counting house in Switzerland.


Damn it, because in Zurich the World Cup acquired a new official status, one that supplanted the old, romantic notion that it should be played in places that know and love the world's most popular game.

Damn it, because no sliver of doubt now attaches itself to the conclusion that to stage it you do not require the culture and passion which gave tournaments in places like Argentina, Spain, Mexico, Italy, France, Germany, England and South Africa vibrant and distinctive lives of their own.

You just need the money and the connections and we are not talking about prime ministers and royalty and celebrity players.

No, it is the men of the truly big money, Fifa announced in Zurich yesterday, who conquer all.

England may have lost the staging of the 2018 World Cup, but there are now compelling reasons to believe that a prize was rescued from defeat. It is called integrity and pride in what you are trying to do. It is to attempt to win, not subvert, in a cold, clean light.

This is a claim that those behind the England bid can make even if it cannot be said to be flawless.

Too many people in high places were too equivocal when it came to the principle that there is no reward that could justify suppressing the truth – whether it concerns human rights or corruption in high places in an organisation charged with running football decently.

That the BBC and a British newspaper were deemed to be threatening the national interest by investigating Fifa corruption is not a problem that will go away as easily. Certainly it was never going to be sluiced away in a tide of champagne or the prospect of following the London Olympics with more evidence that if we are seldom sure-fire winners we know how to put on a show.

There is, the belief has been harboured here, no sports circus that can compete with the World Cup.

The Olympics are thrilling and at the highest level of competition they are, as Usain Bolt reminded us in Beijing two years ago, the most riveting of spectacles.

But the World Cup touches something of the soul of a football nation and we have seen the wonder of it in so many places.

This once joyous reality should not colour the reaction to the news from Zurich.

The most important fact is that there was indeed another prize at stake and it was the one we have identified as integrity; a sense that if English football is capable of all kinds of bumbling, its heart, and morality, were in the right place when it made its case to Fifa. England's bidders did not pack for the journey to Zurich any sleight of hand and sweetheart deals with characters who see football and its spiralling revenues not as a cause but quick and delicious profit.

There was one uplifting certainty when Fifa came to announce the votes. It was that win or lose, the English bidders could go home without fears of knocks on the door and that when all the hype and the controversy was over they could begin with clean hands to help in a most necessary fight to put the greed and the cynicism of Fifa into the harshest possible light.

Staging the World Cup was a great and valuable challenge but not to be won at any price.

It wasn't to descend into the trough. It wasn't to play anyone's game but your own. The World Cup was a precious thing, before it was blown away on a desert wind.
 
feck me, if this is true, hows this guy not in jail?
Warner’s shameless exploitation of FIFA demolishes any possibility of himsucceeding to the presidency, but he compensates by chairing the FIFA committeesthat award and supervise the Under-17 and Under-20 World Championships.This brings him prizes like the milking of 2001, when he steered the Under-17 tournament to his homeland, Trinidad. He appointed himself chair of the local organising committee, created a budget which he approved when it came before FIFA’s finance committee, appointed a compliant CEO and set about distributing the contracts – mostly to himself and his sons’ businesses.

The fast food and beverage contract for all five stadiums went to the restaurant business run by Warner’s son, Daryan. FIFA’s travel office would normally have been expected to supply the tickets for the 500 or so players, officials and support staff for the 15 visiting teams. Not this time. A FIFA circular to all the teams stated: In accordance with the wishes of Jack Warner, and after agreement withthe FIFA president, the travel arrangements for the U17-Tour will be organised by a local organising committee travel agency called Simpaul’s Travel service (a family owned travel agency) The unnamed family is, of course, the Warners, with Daryan at the helm.

What of Warner’s other son, Daryll, who so cherished ‘FIFA’s golden values’? Warner senior launched an email war against FIFA in Zurich; ‘I have seen mortals of less loyalty and service as well as their off-spring enjoy benefits from FIFA,’ he complained. (Sadly, he did not name names) He rambled on, ‘The FIFA family can only survive and remain intact if its children genuinely believe that there is a place in the House of FIFA for them.’ As Daryll’s demands increased, his father emailed him, ‘Daryll pls advise me specifically what you wish of FIFA Marketing or any other agency or person and I shall use my office to assist.’ He did, it worked and Daryll got his $2 million contract for computer software.

The teams went home and Warner emailed Blatter: The accounts do show a deficit. On receipt of the same and, in view of the presently orchestrated antagonisms against me through the local and foreign media, including but not limited to Andrew Jennings, I trust that the accounts, when submitted, will remain the business of FIFA only. How much more money did Warner want? ‘I have since checked and rechecked my submission to FIFA and the (deficit) is US$1,529,723,’ he told Blatter. ‘I should therefore be grateful if the error could be corrected and we can bring some closure to this matter for which I do thank you in advance.’ FIFA’s finance committee (of which Warner himself was vice chairman) agreed and sent him more money.
 
One thing is for sure. Now that the result is over, the British Press are going to be like wolves to a carcass of raw meat. There will be no holding back against Fifa and its members....rightly or wrongly, whatever your opinion of the British Press, this is what is going to happen.

I am quite happy for them to go after FIFA now, I hope they manage to find some real evidence of corruption so FIFA is forced to change.
I just wish the fecking idiots had waited until after the vote instead of damaging our chances in the final run in - most probably it would have gone to Russia anyway but at least we would have had a fighting chance!
 
I don't get it. Why is this process more about lobbying than competence? The voting system makes no sense whatsoever. I don't know all that much about it but it seems to be more about lobbying and a popularity contest than anything else. In which case England will never win it. It just seems a rather corrupt system for something so high profile.

That's politics summed up.