arwebb Posted September 18, 2006 Report Share Posted September 18, 2006 This is not a criticism Arwebb, I tend to agre with you on this, but it's interesting the note how home town hopes can affect opinions here. Compare your attitudes on tradition and passion versus new frontiers and developing the game when it comes to the 2014-2018 FIFA WC races and the 2011 Rugby WC race. Perhaps partially, but I think you also have to accept the fact that rugby union has yet to go beyond its traditional boundaries, which football has done and is increasingly doing so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Rols Posted September 18, 2006 Author Report Share Posted September 18, 2006 Perhaps partially, but I think you also have to accept the fact that rugby union has yet to go beyond its traditional boundaries, which football has done and is increasingly doing so. Fair enough, as I said, I tend to agree with you on both issues (FIFA WC and Rugby WC) anyway. How long before the tournament does FIFA usually name its hosts, anyway. I've seen 2008 mentioned for the 2014 tournament, but that would only leave six years for preparations. Is that the same lead time the Germans and South Africans got? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arwebb Posted September 18, 2006 Report Share Posted September 18, 2006 That seems to be the standard time. Germany was named in July 2000, with South Africa getting the nod in May 2004. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted September 18, 2006 Report Share Posted September 18, 2006 Fair enough, as I said, I tend to agree with you on both issues (FIFA WC and Rugby WC) anyway.How long before the tournament does FIFA usually name its hosts, anyway. I've seen 2008 mentioned for the 2014 tournament, but that would only leave six years for preparations. Is that the same lead time the Germans and South Africans got? It fluctuates between 6 and 7 years. I know USA 1994 was signed, sealed and delivered in May 1987. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Rols Posted September 19, 2006 Author Report Share Posted September 19, 2006 It looks like Argentina could be in the frame after all: Written by: Michiel van BlommesteinBRASILIA, BUENOS AIRES, Sep 16 (SW) - President Ignacio Lula Da Silva admitted yesterday that his country Brazil is not ready to host the 2014 World Cup. According to Argentine media, the Fifa has subsequently contacted the Argentine federation (AFA). Brazil were hands-on favourites to organise the event in 2014 in South America, especially because the Brazilian Soccer association CBF will celebrate its centennial anniversary. According to Argentine media, the AFA president Julio Grondona was contacted by the FIFA, and responded that hosting the event would be an honour for his country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted September 19, 2006 Report Share Posted September 19, 2006 It looks like Argentina could be in the frame after all: Oh God, FIFA's found another sucker. I mean Argentina's barely emerging from its financial woes when its currency was like 10,000 pesos to US$1 (or something like that) 2-3 years ago, and most of their professionals were leaving their silver shores to earn a better living elsewhere, and now comes this irresponsible entity dangling short-lived glories of a football circus. God, how gullible can they get? I think the World Bank would have something to say on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Rols Posted September 19, 2006 Author Report Share Posted September 19, 2006 Oh God, FIFA's found another sucker. I mean Argentina's barely emerging from its financial woes when its currency was like 10,000 pesos to US$1 (or something like that) 2-3 years ago, and most of their professionals were leaving their silver shores to earn a better living elsewhere, and now comes this irresponsible entity dangling short-lived glories of a football circus. God, how gullible can they get? I think the World Bank would have something to say on this. Yeah, I wondered that myself. If Brazil can't do it, just how equipped is Argentina? Does anyone know? Mo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted September 19, 2006 Report Share Posted September 19, 2006 Yeah, I wondered that myself. If Brazil can't do it, just how equipped is Argentina? Does anyone know? Mo? KRATK will be beside himself on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRATK Posted September 20, 2006 Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 I read, but I'm not so sure, that Argentinean stadiums are better than the Brazilians. I guess that the stadiums that hosted the 1978 WC are much better than the ones of 1950. And Argentina also hosted in 2001 the Youth World Cup. Oh God, FIFA's found another sucker. I mean Argentina's barely emerging from its financial woes when its currency was like 10,000 pesos to US$1 (or something like that) 2-3 years ago, and most of their professionals were leaving their silver shores to earn a better living elsewhere, and now comes this irresponsible entity dangling short-lived glories of a football circus. God, how gullible can they get? I think the World Bank would have something to say on this. The peso was in parity... an stupid idea of Menem when Argentina was rich but made the country to fall in the worst crisis in its history. I still remember when Argentina had six presidents while I was in vacations at the south of Chile. A very sad history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arwebb Posted September 20, 2006 Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 Brazil may not be ready to host at this moment, but does that mean the President's pulling out? And besides, Argentina hosted South America's last tournament. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olympian2004 Posted September 20, 2006 Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 Well, it sounds pretty serious when even the top "advertiser" of a country, the president, admits that his country is not ready for staging the World Cup. I guess that increases the possibility that the 2014 World Cup won't go to South America at all -- FIFA would probably want to avoid additional trouble after all the hiccups with the 2010 World Cup. And Argentina with its financial problems would certainly not be a very safe bet. I think that Australia and England should already put out feelers to FIFA and emphasise their interest in a 2014 bid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arwebb Posted September 20, 2006 Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 Difficult position for those who have expressed an interest in the 2018 finals. If it becomes clear that, if Brazil are pulling out of hosting 2014, there will a fresh and completely open bidding process, then I would want England to bid. But, if it seems Blatter wants to maintain a commitment to rotating the tournament to either South America or perhaps a new frontier, then England would be better off waiting for 2018, as we've originally planned to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted September 20, 2006 Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 Brazil may not be ready to host at this moment, but does that mean the President's pulling out? And besides, Argentina hosted South America's last tournament. I guess the head of state is telling FIFA that they ain't gonna do it. I mean 'nip it in the bid' and have FIFA find someone else. That's how I read it. And I guess FIFA wants to keep it in So. America, if they can, so they have moved on to the 2nd largest country there. Which means Brazil has other priorities. Baron - Behind closed doors?Yeah - USA is bidding for 2014 / 2018 / 2022 because you say so. I think your dribble is part of your own imagination and there is NO LINK or artcile you can back up your claim. Australia - we have full government backing and..... 1) A strong organisation who STRATEGICALLY moved into the Asian Conferderation in order to gain a higher status 2) Recreated our domestic competition for a one city ont team exclusivity deal for a 5 year period 3) Expansition of the league from 8 to 12 teams from 2008 in order to gain a stronger competition, and in line with the expansion of the Asian Confederations Cup, which will allow two of our teams through 4) Signed a massive $120Million deal (for our 20 nmillion nationality) with Fox Sports to broadcast all games live 5) Signed new partners for sponsorship opportunity 6) Highest ranked team in Asia 7) Played the political game in Germany 2006 by doing and saying everything right with the "FIFA Powers that be" 8) Announce the bid with Full Government backing And We will win the rights to host a World Cup in 2014 / 2018 / 2022 Please show me what the USA have done or are doing (apart from what is in your imaginative mind) to bid for one of these events. Your Audience awaits....... Uhmmm, you asked me for it ...here's one I found for you: US intends to bid for 2014 World Cup Now, whether that will be squelched by other developments -- like FIFA approaching Argentina, then I don't know. But what I have been saying all along isn't something I've just made up -- contrary to your suspicious mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arwebb Posted September 20, 2006 Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 Any change in the last four years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted September 20, 2006 Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 Any change in the last four years? I didn't realize after I posted that that was from 4 years ago. But if FIFA is throwing the bidding process open, then the US will definitely bid. But if not, then it won't. It looks like they (FIFA) would rather handpick and negotiate, rather than do the open bidding process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arwebb Posted September 20, 2006 Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 I'd rather have a open bidding contest if Brazil aren't going to host 2014. It would be 2018 four years early. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olympian2004 Posted September 20, 2006 Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 Uhmmm, you asked me for it ...here's one I found for you:US intends to bid for 2014 World Cup Now, whether that will be squelched by other developments -- like FIFA approaching Argentina, then I don't know. But what I have been saying all along isn't something I've just made up -- contrary to your suspicious mind. Baron, Baron -- how deep did you have to dig in the archives to find that article? Maybe it's interesting for you that once there must have been a certain interest in the States to host the World Cup again -- but in fact, an article from 2002 is just as relevant as the fact that the road gets wet when it rains. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted September 20, 2006 Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 Baron, Baron -- how deep did you have to dig in the archives to find that article? Maybe it's interesting for you that once there must have been a certain interest in the States to host the World Cup again -- but in fact, an article from 2002 is just as relevant as the fact that the road gets wet when it rains. uhmmm...will you read the in-between posts...before you get all sarcastic and I flame you back? Also, it wasn't that hard to find. I just Googled "World CUp 2014," and it was like the 3rd or 4th choice that came up -- AND I wasn't particularly looking for that. I was looking for other reports on the withdrawal of Brazil when I came across that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olympian2004 Posted September 20, 2006 Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 Oops, sorry -- I hadn't seen that you had already replied meanwhile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted September 20, 2006 Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 I'd rather have a open bidding contest if Brazil aren't going to host 2014. It would be 2018 four years early. Me too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mainad Posted September 20, 2006 Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 I guess the head of state is telling FIFA that they ain't gonna do it. I mean 'nip it in the bid' and have FIFA find someone else. That's how I read it. And I guess FIFA wants to keep it in So. America, if they can, so they have moved on to the 2nd largest country there. Which means Brazil has other priorities. It doesn't surprise me.As I've said elsewhere,I always had serious doubts that Brazil would be able to pull off both a World Cup and an Olympics in short order.I always felt one of these ambitions would have to give,but I had assumed they would concentrate on the World Cup and put the Olympic ambitions on hold.It looks as if it may be working out the other way round and the country has decided to concentrate on supporting a Rio bid for 2016 instead! So Argentina then,or if they can't do it..how about Chile (presuming FIFA are aiming to keep it in South America if they can)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted September 20, 2006 Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 It doesn't surprise me.As I've said elsewhere,I always had serious doubts that Brazil would be able to pull off both a World Cup and an Olympics in short order.I always felt one of these ambitions would have to give,but I had assumed they would concentrate on the World Cup and put the Olympic ambitions on hold.It looks as if it may be working out the other way round and the country has decided to concentrate on supporting a Rio bid for 2016 instead!So Argentina then,or if they can't do it..how about Chile (presuming FIFA are aiming to keep it in South America if they can)? It is cheaper - maybe on the order of $2-3.5 billion in 2016 $$ since they will have new venues from Pan Am 2007. A 2016 World Cup with at least 9 state-of-the-art stadia would cost Brazil at least $12 billion to host -- which if their economy were going great guns, should be nothing. But apparently, their economic picture isn't rosy enough to afford such extravagance. Good for them to be more prudent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOC Posted September 20, 2006 Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 The link you gave is a bit of a joke Baron. Still think you are making this all up about a USA bid - you have proven nothing and I dont think the USA is a factor at all! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mainad Posted September 20, 2006 Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 It is cheaper - maybe on the order of $2-3.5 billion in 2016 $$ since they will have new venues from Pan Am 2007. A 2016 World Cup with at least 9 state-of-the-art stadia would cost Brazil at least $12 billion to host -- which if their economy were going great guns, should be nothing. But apparently, their economic picture isn't rosy enough to afford such extravagance. Good for them to be more prudent. Relevant points.I guess I always think of Brazil as the footballing nation "par excellence" and that if there was any one international sports festival that it would want to host,it would be the World Cup in which the country has a record second to none and has won more times than anybody else! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted September 20, 2006 Report Share Posted September 20, 2006 The link you gave is a bit of a joke Baron.Still think you are making this all up about a USA bid - you have proven nothing and I dont think the USA is a factor at all! You're a bit slow, aren't you? Are you on Dramamine or something? If you can't make sense of the various posts - then I'm sorry for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.