baron-pierreIV Posted September 10, 2014 Report Share Posted September 10, 2014 Why can't Qatar buy the weather? They seem to be able to buy everything else??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quaker2001 Posted September 10, 2014 Report Share Posted September 10, 2014 Why can't Qatar buy the weather? They seem to be able to buy everything else??? Well, they kinda thought they could when they offered up to magically air condition Qatar for the World Cup and then decided not to bother. So who knows what they're actually capable of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob2012 Posted September 22, 2014 Report Share Posted September 22, 2014 Woooah! The 2022 World Cup will not be held in Qatar because of the scorching temperatures in the Middle East country, FIFA Executive Committee member Theo Zwanziger said on Monday. "I personally think that in the end the 2022 World Cup will not take place in Qatar," the German told Sport Bild on Monday. "Medics say that they cannot accept responsibility with a World Cup taking place under these conditions," the former German football (DFB) chief, who is now a member of the world soccer's governing body FIFA that awarded the tournament to Qatar in 2010. Although Qatar has insisted that a summer World Cup is viable thanks to cooling technologies it is developing for stadiums, training areas and fan zones, there is still widespread concern over the health of the players and visiting supporters. "They may be able to cool the stadiums but a World Cup does not take place only there," Zwanziger said. "Fans from around the world will be coming and traveling in this heat and the first life-threatening case will trigger an investigation by a state prosecutor. "That is not something that FIFA Exco members want to answer for." FIFA are looking to shift the tournament to a European winter date to avoid the scorching summer where temperatures routinely rise over 40 Celsius. However, talk of a potential change away from the usual June-July dates has resulted in plenty of opposition from domestic leagues around the world, worried the schedule switch would severely disrupt them. Both FIFA and Qatar World Cup organizers have also been fending off questions of corruption ever since they were awarded the tournament back in 2010, while Qatar has also been criticized for the conditions provided for migrant workers' in the tiny but wealthy Gulf state. https://en-maktoob.news.yahoo.com/qatar-not-host-2022-world-cup-says-fifas-101050431--sow.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted September 22, 2014 Report Share Posted September 22, 2014 (edited) Not to mention the threat of ISIS and supposed bankrollers from Qatar. That would be a good excuse to make a preemptory strike to remove 2022 from there once and for all!! MOVE THEM ALREADY!! Edited September 22, 2014 by baron-pierreIV 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony E Loves Architecture Posted September 22, 2014 Report Share Posted September 22, 2014 Good. The right thing happened at last. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quaker2001 Posted September 22, 2014 Report Share Posted September 22, 2014 Okay, 2 things to keep in mind from that article.. 1) That's just 1 person talking. It hardly constitutes an official decision. Let's not forget, this is still FIFA we're talking about here. 2) His quote is The 2022 World Cup will not be held in Qatar because of the scorching temperatures in the Middle East country, FIFA Executive Committee member Theo Zwanziger said on Monday.. Right.. THAT is the primary issue here. If that's the excuse they're hiding behind, I'm skeptical over taking this seriously, unless that is that FIFA thinks their calendar is more important than all the political issues involved here. I'll believe this when I see Sepp Blatter make the announcement. Good that someone is speaking out, but let's see more action before this becomes a reality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted September 22, 2014 Report Share Posted September 22, 2014 (edited) True. But maybe the other old fogeys of FIFA are already tired of De Lider biding his time and decided to pre-empt him. What can they do to another old fogey? Fire him? Then they won't have enough old fogeys left to parrot Blather. Just love the firestorm this will create!! he...he!! Edited September 22, 2014 by baron-pierreIV Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quaker2001 Posted September 22, 2014 Report Share Posted September 22, 2014 True. But maybe the other old fogeys of FIFA are already tired of De Lider biding his time and decided to pre-empt him. What can they do to another old fogey? Fire him? Then they won't have enough old fogeys left to parrot Blather. Just love the firestorm this will create!! he...he!! It's nice to see someone on the ExCo speak out against Qatar, but again, let's not act as if this is the declaration that Qatar has been stripped of the World Cup. Far from it. And it concerns me that he's citing the weather as the primary concern. I'd rather hear him say it's because of the human rights issues in Qatar and the hundreds (if not thousands) of people who will die to build these stadiums. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanMUC Posted September 22, 2014 Report Share Posted September 22, 2014 Good. The right thing happened at last. Nothing has happened. Zwanziger has mumbled something without any value, e.g. which "state prosecutor" would investigate a "life-threatening case"? A Qatari one? Give me a break! Ever since he moved from DFB President to FIFA ExCo member, he's been pretty much sidelined in Germany and has - to put it diplomatically - not been seen to make too smart comments over time. Blatter probably is just using him to issue a smokescreen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George_D Posted September 23, 2014 Report Share Posted September 23, 2014 i think a joint USA-Canada bid should host 2022 world cup. 8 stadiums in USA and final, 4 stadiums in Canada and opening game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted September 23, 2014 Report Share Posted September 23, 2014 (edited) i think a joint USA-Canada bid should host 2022 world cup. 8 stadiums in USA and final, 4 stadiums in Canada and opening game. They're NOT doing joint bids. Korea-Japan 2002 was the last one. Edited September 23, 2014 by baron-pierreIV Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quaker2001 Posted September 23, 2014 Report Share Posted September 23, 2014 i think a joint USA-Canada bid should host 2022 world cup. 8 stadiums in USA and final, 4 stadiums in Canada and opening game. No Ironic request coming from you.. aren't you the poster who complains the United States hosts too much? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony E Loves Architecture Posted September 23, 2014 Report Share Posted September 23, 2014 i think a joint USA-Canada bid should host 2022 world cup. 8 stadiums in USA and final, 4 stadiums in Canada and opening game. I still say England should Host, partly because I'm English and partly because: - England (The Home of Football, hasn't Hosted the Fifa World Cup in 48 Years, 52 Years by 2018 and 56 Years by 2022). - Top of the Range Modern Stadiums and Infrastructure (Some Stadiums need Renovations). - United States Of America Hosted in 1994, let another Country Host, who hasn't Hosted fairly recently. - Canada should Host the 2026 Fifa World Cup by themselves IMO. - England has proven it can Host successful Tournaments. (2012 Summer Olympics and Paralympics etc). - An England Fifa World Cup would be spectacular. - Support for Hosting a Fifa World Cup is high, because we are a Football crazy Country, we invented the Sport. - Wembley Stadium, Emirates Stadium and Old Trafford wouldn't need any works done. I don't want People having a go at Me, it's just what I feel. United States Of America has Hosted more recently then England has. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted September 23, 2014 Report Share Posted September 23, 2014 Tony, say again??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quaker2001 Posted September 23, 2014 Report Share Posted September 23, 2014 I still say England should Host, partly because I'm English and partly because: You've also said you think they should host 2018. I know you're not asking for England to get both, but pick one rather than look for any excuse to say that England should be the host and not the country that was actually selected. Oh yea, and if you have to write "I don't want People having a go at Me," you're probably saying something that will encourage people to have a go at you. We know how you feel about England. No need to keep reminding us at every available opportunity and then tell us how you're not being nationalistic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post zekekelso Posted September 23, 2014 Popular Post Report Share Posted September 23, 2014 . United States Of America has Hosted more recently then England has. We've also made it out of the knock-out round more recently. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony E Loves Architecture Posted September 23, 2014 Report Share Posted September 23, 2014 We've also made it out of the knock-out round more recently. And? South Africa didn't have a brilliant record at the Fifa World Cup before they Hosted in 2010. South Korea and Japan didn't have a brilliant record at the Fifa World Cup before they Co-Hosted in 2002. United States Of America didn't have a brilliant record at the Fifa World Cup before they Hosted in 1994. At least England has actually Won a Fifa World Cup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zekekelso Posted September 23, 2014 Report Share Posted September 23, 2014 And? Oh, this has nothing to do with hosting. Just if you are going to continually tout how great England is, we might as well point out that when it comes to football: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKRiIgEn2w0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quaker2001 Posted September 23, 2014 Report Share Posted September 23, 2014 Oh, this has nothing to do with hosting. Just if you are going to continually tout how great England is, we might as well point out that when it comes to football: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKRiIgEn2w0 Now zeke, no need to be rude. Unless that's your goal, to bait Tony into using up his limited number of posts for the day on something frivolous. In which case.. uhhh, thanks? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted September 23, 2014 Report Share Posted September 23, 2014 Tony, that's why they gave you Euro 2020. That's as much as the UK is going to get for the next 30 years. Get the hint, Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zekekelso Posted September 23, 2014 Report Share Posted September 23, 2014 Tony, that's why they gave you Euro 2020. That's as much as the UK is going to get for the next 30 years. Get the hint, Tony. Pffft, of the 13 countries hosting, Enlgand has the fewest games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony E Loves Architecture Posted September 23, 2014 Report Share Posted September 23, 2014 Oh, this has nothing to do with hosting. Just if you are going to continually tout how great England is, we might as well point out that when it comes to football: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKRiIgEn2w0 Don't get personal. Tony, that's why they gave you Euro 2020. That's as much as the UK is going to get for the next 30 years. Get the hint, Tony. I doubt it. England will get a Fifa World Cup. Pffft, of the 13 countries hosting, Enlgand has the fewest games. The most important Games. England deserves a Fifa World Cup whether You like it or not. Now zeke, no need to be rude. Unless that's your goal, to bait Tony into using up his limited number of posts for the day on something frivolous. In which case.. uhhh, thanks? Ok. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob2012 Posted September 23, 2014 Report Share Posted September 23, 2014 England does deserve to host when Europe's turn comes again, and Tony's reasons in his last post were pretty sound actually. And I'd agree (and did agree during the 2018/22 process) with the basic point that the USA shouldn't expect to host World Cups as often as it may expect to host other sporting events for the very simply reason that the sport is only really on the national radar every four years. But this conversation isn't about normal bids, it's about stand-in hosts. England won't go for a World Cup as a stand=in or otherwise while FIFA is in the state it's in and while there's an anti-English vibe within the sport's governing body. As a replacement host for Qatar, the US would be ideal really. If 2022 is to be moved, the US would undoubtedly be a safe and profitable pair of hands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quaker2001 Posted September 23, 2014 Report Share Posted September 23, 2014 England does deserve to host when Europe's turn comes again, and Tony's reasons in his last post were pretty sound actually. And I'd agree (and did agree during the 2018/22 process) with the basic point that the USA shouldn't expect to host World Cups as often as it may expect to host other sporting events for the very simply reason that the sport is only really on the national radar every four years. But this conversation isn't about normal bids, it's about stand-in hosts. England won't go for a World Cup as a stand=in or otherwise while FIFA is in the state it's in and while there's an anti-English vibe within the sport's governing body. As a replacement host for Qatar, the US would be ideal really. If 2022 is to be moved, the US would undoubtedly be a safe and profitable pair of hands. Again, it's what I've said before.. does the USSF want FIFA's sloppy seconds? If this is going to be their World Cup to last through the next generation, is this how they want it? And I don't like the whole "shouldn't expect to host as often" argument here anymore than it applies to the Olympics. No, the United States shouldn't expect it. But they bid for 2022, given the other options, would it have been unreasonable for the United States to have won? Of course not. We know it shouldn't have been Qatar. South Korea and Japan had theirs more recently than the United States. I would have had no problem whatsoever with Australia, but that bid isn't without issues. So it's a weird argument to make that the United States shouldn't except to host often, but here, take 2022 and solve our problems because you're safe. If it does come to pass (and hopefully it does) that Qatar is stripped of their hosting duties for 2022, I don't know how to solve that dilemma, but if it's going to be the United States, better that it happen sooner rather than later. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faster Posted September 25, 2014 Report Share Posted September 25, 2014 I still maintain that if 2022 is going to be moved the most logical choice is Korea. You keep the tournament in the same confederation, give it to a country that is more than likely going to qualify anyways and you keep the rotation order going. The Americans will likely get 2026 without the need for sloppy seconds and it would be politically troubling to move it to a Western nation from a Arab-Muslim nation. Korea would be a relatively safe pair of hands and one where there would be a lot less fallout compared to going to Western Europe or the USA. I highly doubt that Russia will be stripped, even if it is revealed there was bribery afoot. And I mean its Russia, backhanders are the name of the game over there. Picking a probable replacement even as a hypothetical exercise is difficult. Germany and England are not the most liked in FIFA right now and I am not sure England would actually want it, and DOSB won't be too happy to sacrifice Olympic aspirations for another World Cup. Italy and Spain don't have the stadium quality, especially in stadiums 6 to 10. I doubt France would want to spend the money only 2 years after the European Championships. Brazil and South Africa won't do it again so soon and it really leaves the Americans. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.