Jump to content
Kenadian

FIFA World Cup 2026

Recommended Posts

If Qatar can host a World Cup by themselves, than Uruguay can surely share a World Cup 50/50.

GDP of Qatar is just under 200 billion. Uruguay's GDP is a little under 50 million. And if we're talking per capita GDP, Qatar is the number 1 ranked country in the world by a wide margin. Uruguay is 61st

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GDP of Qatar is just under 200 billion. Uruguay's GDP is a little under 50 million. And if we're talking per capita GDP, Qatar is the number 1 ranked country in the world by a wide margin. Uruguay is 61st

50 million sounds about right ;):P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

50 million sounds about right ;):P

Probably goes without saying, but that should have been billion, not million. If their GDP was only 50 million, they have issues

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While Uruguay is one of South America's more successful countries, it is just too small to be a 50/50 equal partner in such a bid. Argentina's population and economy are both roughly 10 times larger than Uruguay's. The population and economy of the city of Buenos Aires alone is larger than the entire country of Uruguay. And again, Uruguay has only one large city. Montevideo. All the others are under 100,000 people. Punta del Este is primarily a resort town with only a few thousand permanent residents. These are not the ingredients for a a 50/50 co-host situation.

I think at best, Uruguay could get 3 maybe 4 sites. Two in Montevideo. Possibly one in a city like Salto or maybe another in a city like Colonia, Rivera, or somewhere else. But they would have to constructed in a sustainable way.

Most of the matches would likely end up in the more numerous larger cities of Argentina, many of which already have existing stadiums of adequate size.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well here is what I've always wondered....why the heck does FIFA need so many stadiums for the World Cup, because in reality, they don't.

In Brasil, they have double that in 12 stadiums, but why? It's true, people in those 12 cities "love" (I don't know what to say with the protests) to see soccer so close to their homes, but why 12 stadiums. Each one has like 3 to 5 matches total over the course of 2 to 3 weeks, when you could just as easily double that number to 6 to 8 matches over 2 to 3 weeks (14-21 days) with half the stadiums and so forth. This is really ridiculous in a place like Qatar where billions upon billions are being blown on 12 stadiums that post-cup will get very little use, all within very little distance of each other. Less stadiums equals less money and for goodness sake, in the case of Brasil, less travel for sure. That is why the venture turns into such an expensive one, and the reason I brought this up was because you guys are arguing over the distribution between joint nations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While Uruguay is one of South America's more successful countries, it is just too small to be a 50/50 equal partner in such a bid. Argentina's population and economy are both roughly 10 times larger than Uruguay's. The population and economy of the city of Buenos Aires alone is larger than the entire country of Uruguay. And again, Uruguay has only one large city. Montevideo. All the others are under 100,000 people. Punta del Este is primarily a resort town with only a few thousand permanent residents. These are not the ingredients for a a 50/50 co-host situation.

I think at best, Uruguay could get 3 maybe 4 sites. Two in Montevideo. Possibly one in a city like Salto or maybe another in a city like Colonia, Rivera, or somewhere else. But they would have to constructed in a sustainable way.

Most of the matches would likely end up in the more numerous larger cities of Argentina, many of which already have existing stadiums of adequate size.

So you give them 5 venues whilst Argentina gets 7 or 8. It's the Centennial. Uruguay deserves more than just getting the final.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you give them 5 venues whilst Argentina gets 7 or 8. It's the Centennial. Uruguay deserves more than just getting the final.

Why? If the only reason Uruguay is going to be a part is because of the centennial and not because FIFA wants the World Cup there otherwise, why shouldn't Argentina get more of the benefit of hosting the event? As Kenedian pointed out, the 2nd largest city in Uruguay is only home to about 100,000 people. Argentina has about 3 dozen cities larger than that. Basically, the 2nd largest city in Uruguay is about as big as the 40th largest in Argentina. That's the type of population disparity we're talking about here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well aside from Qatar blowing population numbers out the window, the general idea is to have Uruguay benefit more from the co-hosting of the World Cup than Argentina.

You revive the national airline carrier, you promote investment in smaller Uruguayan cities, you build downsizable stadiums for Uruguay, whilst expanding some of the ones built for the Copa America for Argentina. It could work, otherwise just have Argentina host it alone. Just give Uruguay a bigger chunk of the pie because it's the Centennial that's all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do they need 12 venues. 10 is good enough.

Well 12 venues is perfect for Canada should they want to bid.

6 or 7 venues is too small, especially when you want the idea of having a World Cup further promote football throughout the host country and get the local population excited and involved. Not much of that would happen if say half the nation in perfectly good populated cities are denied hosting in such a major event. Leave the 6 venue number for lesser football tournaments, where less participation is required.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well aside from Qatar blowing population numbers out the window, the general idea is to have Uruguay benefit more from the co-hosting of the World Cup than Argentina.

You revive the national airline carrier, you promote investment in smaller Uruguayan cities, you build downsizable stadiums for Uruguay, whilst expanding some of the ones built for the Copa America for Argentina. It could work, otherwise just have Argentina host it alone. Just give Uruguay a bigger chunk of the pie because it's the Centennial that's all.

Again.. why? If 2030 is indeed in Argentina/Uruguay, it's obviously not because it's the FIFA most desires to put the World Cup. So because Uruguay hosted in 2030, they're going to give them more of a tournament than they would otherwise deserve? Like you said, if Argentina can host it alone, then why do they even need Uruguay in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 is the minimum set by FIFA iirc. 12 is for countries which ask FIFA for approval (ie countries which can like Germany, Brazil and Russia)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again.. why? If 2030 is indeed in Argentina/Uruguay, it's obviously not because it's the FIFA most desires to put the World Cup. So because Uruguay hosted in 2030, they're going to give them more of a tournament than they would otherwise deserve? Like you said, if Argentina can host it alone, then why do they even need Uruguay in the first place.

Cause it's the Uruguayans who initiated the whole thing and is something that the Argentinians have agreed upon because Uruguay cannot host it alone. I just don't want to see another Portugal/Spain bid. That was definitely lopsided.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Germany only chose 10 though, if I remember well.

As for Uruguay, what's so hard to understand that a country with the size and structure of population just cannot sustain a full-scale WC? They could build all kinds of downsizeable venues and invest in provincial towns, but it would still need people to fill even the downsized venues and populate those inflated towns in the middle of nowhere. You basically used the same argumentation about Östersund and how great it would be to expand the town to make it suitable for hosting WOG.

That's IMHO out of touch with reality and the needs of Uruguay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I'm not implying that Uruguay should get a huge chunk of the pie, but it should get a decent share, considering that it would be its Centennial. Argentina is brought along because they know that they can't host it alone.

I mentioned Qatar because if such a ridiculous small nation can bid and win, then surely Uruguay can do half or just about half of what Qatar is proposing to do alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I'm not implying that Uruguay should get a huge chunk of the pie, but it should get a decent share, considering that it would be its Centennial. Argentina is brought along because they know that they can't host it alone.

I mentioned Qatar because if such a ridiculous small nation can bid and win, then surely Uruguay can do half or just about half of what Qatar is proposing to do alone.

I agree. I made that point earlier, that if Qatar can bribe their way to hosting a whole World Cup by themselves, then surely Uruguay can host half. And also, if the format stays at 32 Countries, then they can do what Qatar done and downscale Stadium numbers to 8, meaning that 4 in Uruguay and 4 in Argentina, with Montevideo having 2 Stadiums, Salto with 1 and Ciudad de la Costa with 1. For Argentina, Buenos Aires with 1, Cordoba with 1, Rosario with 1 and Mendoza with 1.

Montevideo = 80,000 Seater (Renovated and Expanded) (Final, Quarter-Final, Round of 16 and Group Matches).

Montevideo = 50,000 Seater (Brand New) (Round of 16 and Group Matches).

Salto = 65,000 Seater (Brand New) (Semi-Final, Quarter Final, Round of 16 and Group Matches).

Ciudad de la Costa = 46,000 Seater (Brand New) (Round of 16 and Group Matches).

Buenos Aires = 70,000 Seater (Renovated and Expanded) (Semi-Final, Quarter-Final, Round of 16 and Group Matches (Opening Match)).

Cordoba = 50,000 Seater (Brand New) (3/4 Place Play-Off, Quarter Final, Round of 16 and Group Matches).

Rosario = 48,000 Seater (Brand New) (Quarter-Final, Round of 16 and Group Matches).

Mendoza = 46,000 Seater (Renovated and Expanded) (Round of 16 and Group Matches).

I agree. I made that point earlier, that if Qatar can bribe their way to hosting a whole World Cup by themselves, then surely Uruguay can host half. And also, if the format stays at 32 Countries, then they can do what Qatar done and downscale Stadium numbers to 8, meaning that 4 in Uruguay and 4 in Argentina, with Montevideo having 2 Stadiums, Salto with 1 and Ciudad de la Costa with 1. For Argentina, Buenos Aires with 1, Cordoba with 1, Rosario with 1 and Mendoza with 1.

Montevideo = 80,000 Seater (Renovated and Expanded) (Final, Quarter-Final, Round of 16 and Group Matches).

Montevideo = 50,000 Seater (Brand New) (Round of 16 and Group Matches).

Salto = 65,000 Seater (Brand New) (Semi-Final, Quarter Final, Round of 16 and Group Matches).

Ciudad de la Costa = 46,000 Seater (Brand New) (Round of 16 and Group Matches).

Buenos Aires = 70,000 Seater (Renovated and Expanded) (Semi-Final, Quarter-Final, Round of 16 and Group Matches (Opening Match)).

Cordoba = 50,000 Seater (Brand New) (3/4 Place Play-Off, Quarter Final, Round of 16 and Group Matches).

Rosario = 48,000 Seater (Brand New) (Quarter-Final, Round of 16 and Group Matches).

Mendoza = 46,000 Seater (Renovated and Expanded) (Round of 16 and Group Matches).

Woops. Forget Quarter-Final for Rosario. Too many Quarter-Finals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't go that far as to having it split 50/50 between Uruguay and Argentina.

Have it Montevideo, Salto, Ciudad de la Costa, Paysandú and Rivera.

As for Argentina, some of the venues built for 2011 Copa America can be expanded. Buenos Aires, Mar del Plata, Córdoba, Mendoza, La Plata, Salta, San Juan, Santa Fe.

If need be you axe one venue each from Uruguay and Argentina.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't go that far as to having it split 50/50 between Uruguay and Argentina.

Have it Montevideo, Salto, Ciudad de la Costa, Paysandú and Rivera.

As for Argentina, some of the venues built for 2011 Copa America can be expanded. Buenos Aires, Mar del Plata, Córdoba, Mendoza, La Plata, Salta, San Juan, Santa Fe.

If need be you axe one venue each from Uruguay and Argentina.

I still say Urugay is capable of 50/50. Even if you add 1 venue to each country so its 5 and 5, South Africa had 10 venues for 2010, so that would be 10 with 5 in each country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a little too far, even for me. The population difference is clearly there and having half the burden to Uruguay might be a tad too much. I'm just saying that Uruguay should get a bigger piece of the pie because of it being the Centennial and all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Germany only chose 10 though, if I remember well.

No, there were 12. South Africa had 10 in nine cities. The minimum amount I believe is 9 stadiums. For Uruguay it would be decent to ask for three stadiums, with two of them in Montevideo. Anything above it is in my opinion quite irresponsible for such a small country. While Argentina could host alone, they need Uruguay because of the Centennial theme. It was Uruguay after all who hosted the 1930 World Cup. With the Centennial theme Argentina alone can't take advantage of something their neighbours did, simple as that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, there were 12. South Africa had 10 in nine cities. The minimum amount I believe is 9 stadiums. For Uruguay it would be decent to ask for three stadiums, with two of them in Montevideo. Anything above it is in my opinion quite irresponsible for such a small country. While Argentina could host alone, they need Uruguay because of the Centennial theme. It was Uruguay after all who hosted the 1930 World Cup. With the Centennial theme Argentina alone can't take advantage of something their neighbours did, simple as that.

Thanks for the correction! Three seems indeed the maximum number for Uruguay, a 50/50 or even sole bid by them would be complete madness (and besides, probably also sold very difficult to the Argentinian public, I'd reckon).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well here is what I've always wondered....why the heck does FIFA need so many stadiums for the World Cup, because in reality, they don't.

In Brasil, they have double that in 12 stadiums, but why? It's true, people in those 12 cities "love" (I don't know what to say with the protests) to see soccer so close to their homes, but why 12 stadiums. Each one has like 3 to 5 matches total over the course of 2 to 3 weeks, when you could just as easily double that number to 6 to 8 matches over 2 to 3 weeks (14-21 days) with half the stadiums and so forth. This is really ridiculous in a place like Qatar where billions upon billions are being blown on 12 stadiums that post-cup will get very little use, all within very little distance of each other. Less stadiums equals less money and for goodness sake, in the case of Brasil, less travel for sure. That is why the venture turns into such an expensive one, and the reason I brought this up was because you guys are arguing over the distribution between joint nations.

AGREED. Why even have the World Cup at all?? I mean a digital, online sweepstakes should do it. I'd even participate in that one. B)

I still say Urugay is capable of 50/50. Even if you add 1 venue to each country so its 5 and 5, South Africa had 10 venues for 2010, so that would be 10 with 5 in each country.

And your 16 years of existence on this planet tells you this?? Wow. And did u even bother to ask the Uruguayans how they want their $$ spent -- or you've decided that for them?? :blink:

Edited by baron-pierreIV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...