Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Sir Rols

Wc 2014

Recommended Posts

I think USA 94 did help to raise the profile of football over there. Look at the number of American players now playing in the top European leagues, as well as their intermittent World Cup success.

If Baron wanted to make a decent case for another American World Cup instead of just claiming it's "their turn" which I don't think washes with the majority of us, he could argue that another tournament would help the sport kick on again. I certainly don't think we can rule the US out, but they do actually need to put a case forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Brazil can't host... well, there is Argentina-Chile or Colombia. The Colombian gov. is very interested in the idea besides the problems of the guerrilla and the lack of infraestructure. About the possibility of a binational bid... the recent problems between both countries will be an important obstacle, especially because of the lack of credibility of Argentineans towards Chileans, but I think that could result. And yesterday, Chile was chosen as host of the 2008 Youth Women's World Cup and that could be a great opportunity.

If no South American could be... the rest of the world could bid and obviously Europe is the front-runner after the amazing World Cups of 1998 and 2006.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think USA 94 did help to raise the profile of football over there. Look at the number of American players now playing in the top European leagues, as well as their intermittent World Cup success.

If Baron wanted to make a decent case for another American World Cup instead of just claiming it's "their turn" which I don't think washes with the majority of us, he could argue that another tournament would help the sport kick on again. I certainly don't think we can rule the US out, but they do actually need to put a case forward.

It certainly has been reported that they were in 'low-profile' talks with FIFA in Germany. Except that these weren't highly publicized because (i) FIFA has their initial selections; and (ii) to prevent any embarrassment to RSA and Brazil.

Michelle is kinda loca , what can I say?

If Brazil can't host... well, there is Argentina-Chile or Colombia.

Like the IOC, FIFA is not thrilled with another bi-national hosting, especially if there are 1 host countries. Colombia? Don't make me laugh. They couldn't host it 20 years ago in 1986; and now they can host it? Look; there's a rabbit!! They're not much better than they were 20 years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Baron

Can you please give us some links to where the USA has stated that they will be bidding for the FIFA World Cup football. Credible links please.

the reason why I ask is that Brazil, Australia, England have all been quoted in papers (Australia with full Government backing) yet I have never heard a 'peep' out of the USA except for all the stuff that comes from your postings.

Me thinks that you like to "stir the pot" just to get an on-line reaction from different people. Is like really that sad for you? :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Baron

Can you please give us some links to where the USA has stated that they will be bidding for the FIFA World Cup football. Credible links please.

the reason why I ask is that Brazil, Australia, England have all been quoted in papers (Australia with full Government backing) yet I have never heard a 'peep' out of the USA except for all the stuff that comes from your postings.

Me thinks that you like to "stir the pot" just to get an on-line reaction from different people. Is like really that sad for you? :P

Baloney. I don't have time to make up stuff. If you don;t hear anything it's because SoccerUSA is just moving very discreetly. Right after Germany 2006 wrapped up, there was a report about SoccerUSA and FIFA having spoken; but details were not made public. You could read into that or not -- it's up to you.

P.S. I don't bother to save dates or links of articles I've read. If u don't believe me; that's not my problem. Sad? No; I live a rather full life. I have many interests and activities. I wish I had 48 hours in a day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Like the IOC, FIFA is not thrilled with another bi-national hosting, especially if there are 1 host countries. Colombia? Don't make me laugh. They couldn't host it 20 years ago in 1986; and now they can host it? Look; there's a rabbit!! They're not much better than they were 20 years ago.

Like I said, Colombia has the problems of the guerrilla and the infraestructura. So, it's very unlike that they will host, if it isn't impossible.

Blatter said that FIFA will approve a binational hosting only there isn't a single country that fulfill the requirements. And one of the requirements is to be a member of CONMEBOL (2014 will be the last year with continental rotation). Of course, if there isn't any country or any partnership at CONMEBOL that can't host, other countries could bid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Baron

Can you please give us some links to where the USA has stated that they will be bidding for the FIFA World Cup football. Credible links please.

To correct a few more points. Since FIFA has not officialy announced any "bidding of any sort" for 2014, and it is a known fact within FIFA circles that 2014 is "almost" being handed to Brazil on a silver platter, WITH conditions -- so why should the US, or any other country for that matter, "bid" if FIFA will hold no bidding? It would be kinda foolish, don't you think? Almost as foolish as your insinuations.

Like what the USOC is doing with the IOC and 2016, the US is patiently biding (THAT's biDing, not BIDding) its time and staying within the game's parameters -- knowing how protocol-conscious these self-appointed int'l federations are. When a "bidding' period will be announced and commence, then everyone's intentions will become clearer. And the wiser countries keep a low profile until the opportune moment.

But there have been off-the-record talks. Obviously, NOC, they are "off-the-record", so aside from what I replied to you in the previous post, there is nothing more I can add. Capisce? B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2018 can be North America's turn, but that doesn't mean USA'S TURN...

Europe can host so soon because:

i) We're are more countries capable of hosting that the rest of the world together.

ii) We play football every year, and the best football league of the world, the Champions League, is played here.

iii) The best players of the world play here, and some of the best players are European

iv) The success of a European WC is guaranteed

v) The football stadiums here are the most famous in the world (with permission of Maracaná and La Bombonera)

So what's the problem of Europe hosting again in 2018? Germany won't host it, it will be another country that, hello!, hasn't hosted since 1966!!

The USA won't host because:

i) They're only ONE country

ii) 2014 is the last rotational year, so 2018 won't be in North America and less in the USA

iii) They don't have players in the top teams of the world such as FC Barcelona, Chelsea FC, Arsenal or Real Madrid.

iv) The only go to see football matches during a WC.

v) Their football league is nearly pathetic

END: Europe will host 2018

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2018 can be North America's turn, but that doesn't mean USA'S TURN.. -- well, what's the other country? If you say the US has lousy soccer, then what more Canada. So how stupid can your argument be? WHy should they spend billions on stadia that doesn't stir up their passion like ice hockey does?

Why should it be Mexico? They've had it 2x. Besides, after the PanAms in 2011, they'll be bankrupt again.

You're really pretty stupid and short-sighted, mikel. Haven't you heard of the term "WORLD", tonto!! It's NOT European; duh! It's WORLD - Universal. If you can't understand that simple term, then you are more of an idiot than I took you for. You're really quite retarded, mikel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a bit rich for you to brand others short-sighted. You're the one who is whining about it being a global tournament while wanting more than is a fair share for the USA.

I know I've said this before, but it doesn't look as though it has registered. Any fair rotation system should take account of ability to host in the respective confederations. The one that you are advocating does not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's a bit rich for you to brand others short-sighted. You're the one who is whining about it being a global tournament while wanting more than is a fair share for the USA.

I know I've said this before, but it doesn't look as though it has registered. Any fair rotation system should take account of ability to host in the respective confederations. The one that you are advocating does not.

Because it has to be our turn -- I know you don't like that, but tough; that is my stronger argument -- soon. The event has to rotate.

Realistically, w/o going into deep debt, how many countries can easily and quickly host this? Do you really think that FIFA enjoys awarding this giant extravaganza of theirs to countries that will go into deep hock just to stage it. France - OK; Korea/Japan - OK; Germany - OK. RSA - because Africa hasn't had it or the Olympics (so, the World Cup went to Africa first over the Olympics; take that, IOC.) Brazil - if they are ready. Hello?

And yes, another WC in the US will certainly give the men's game another boost. I mean, that's such an obvious advantage which is why I barely even mention it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That claim has more holes in it than a Swiss cheese. Pathetic. Come back when you've got something new to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I presume that means you will not be putting a case forward, because you don't have one.

uhmm, who the **** cares? Why should I even prove anything to you? R u pivotal in FIFA or IOC circles? :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you? You've been repeating the same mantra over and over again which does not wash. I'd be interested to hear a real argument and not the same whining drivel.

I'd have thought anyone who claims to be privy to as much as you do would have the intelligence to actually put forward a decent argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are you? You've been repeating the same mantra over and over again which does not wash. I'd be interested to hear a real argument and not the same whining drivel.

I'd have thought anyone who claims to be privy to as much as you do would have the intelligence to actually put forward a decent argument.

There are a few things I do know; but you know what? I'm not even going to bother to share them here.

What about you and mikel :blink: -- it's the same old drivel too that you've been putting forward -- nothing new; so it's the pot calling the kettle black. It's just that there are a few more of you. But that doesn't make you right. What? 85 million+ Gemans and Austrians believed in Hitler?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not going to speak for Mikel, as I think he is perfectly capable of doing that himself.

But, you read the England bid Rob and I put forward for the 2018 competition, didn't you? In that, I wanted to emphasise what we have in England. We have some of the finest football stadia in the world and more to come in the years ahead. We have some of the most passionate supporters in the world. We are the nation that gave the game of football to the world.

The United States, with all due respect, simply does not have the same tradition and heritage for football that England or Europe as a whole does. In that context, why should North America host at the same frequency as the sport's main heartland? It doesn't add up and you have said nothing to even get close to convincing anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not going to speak for Mikel, as I think he is perfectly capable of doing that himself.

But, you read the England bid Rob and I put forward for the 2018 competition, didn't you? In that, I wanted to emphasise what we have in England. We have some of the finest football stadia in the world and more to come in the years ahead. We have some of the most passionate supporters in the world. We are the nation that gave the game of football to the world.

The United States, with all due respect, simply does not have the same tradition and heritage for football that England or Europe as a whole does. In that context, why should North America host at the same frequency as the sport's main heartland? It doesn't add up and you have said nothing to even get close to convincing anyone.

I realize that and have I denied that? But we've also heard the scuttlebutt from some FIFA quarters that your venues are a little cramped. But be that as it may, you look at it on a per country-worthy basis. I look at it as FIFA opening up the world to the sport; and certainly why shouldn't the rotation continue. Before the jet-age and television, yes; the WC used to alternate between Europe and the Latin countries. But the world has since changed; and with it, the scope of soccer. Now, not unless you Europeans feel threatened and just want to keep your superiority in the sport -- then fine; keep it if it makes you feel superior.

You keep talking about the good of the sport. Then why shouldn't they continue to rotate it? What better way to keep it fresh and gain new support for the sport as well than to rotate it? All the die-hard fans are in Europe, you say -- so how is the sport going to grow if you keep it there? And maybe moving the Cup around and having the hard-core fans travel wouldn't be a bad thing at all. What do they say? Travel broadens the mind. Couldn't hurt little minds, like those of hooligan English fans and mikel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't talked about the good of the game yet, but since you mention it, I will.

I really don't know where this so-called FIFA person is coming from wittering about cramped stadia. He can't have been to places like Old Trafford, Elland Road, Hillsborough, Anfield and others recently. It's not as if every single English ground is surrounded on all sides by housing for goodness' sake.

And I am not talking about ending rotation at all. What I am talking about is a rotation system similar to what we have with the Olympics, which seems to me like a sensible compromise.

If you accept that Europe is football's heartland, then it surely makes sense that the tournament should come back to Europe more often than anywhere else. Historically, Europe has hosted every second tournament, but I see no reason why this couldn't go to every third tournament. Around that, the other confederations get their turn. Say, for example:

2002 - Asia

2006 - Europe

2010 - Africa

2014 - South America

2018 - Europe

2022 - North America

2026 - Oceania/Asia

2030 - Europe

2034 - Africa

2038 - South America

2042 - Europe

2046 - North America, etc, etc.

The system could be reviewed over time. But, at this stage, I see nothing wrong with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I haven't talked about the good of the game yet, but since you mention it, I will.

I really don't know where this so-called FIFA person is coming from wittering about cramped stadia. He can't have been to places like Old Trafford, Elland Road, Hillsborough, Anfield and others recently. It's not as if every single English ground is surrounded on all sides by housing for goodness' sake.

And I am not talking about ending rotation at all. What I am talking about is a rotation system similar to what we have with the Olympics, which seems to me like a sensible compromise.

If you accept that Europe is football's heartland, then it surely makes sense that the tournament should come back to Europe more often than anywhere else. Historically, Europe has hosted every second tournament, but I see no reason why this couldn't go to every third tournament. Around that, the other confederations get their turn. Say, for example:

2002 - Asia

2006 - Europe

2010 - Africa

2014 - South America

2018 - Europe

2022 - North America

2026 - Oceania/Asia

2030 - Europe

2034 - Africa

2038 - South America

2042 - Europe

2046 - North America, etc, etc.

The system could be reviewed over time. But, at this stage, I see nothing wrong with that.

I could go with every 3rd to Europe since indeed the passion is strongest there.

Having thought more about the subject since I signed off some minutes ago to do some kitty litter cleaning duties -- notice I think of soccer while I am cleaning the kitties' litter :D -- yeah, if they are going thru all the trouble and expense (and I think probably costing more than staging a single Summer Games) of hosting a World Cup, it might as well bring in intangible benefits and more than just the bricks and mortar and the headbutts or is it buttheads (if they bump their tushies rather than head to chest?). I mean it draws most of mankind together for some hours, so might as well bring something that will have improved our lot and our relations to each other -- or I would hope that would result. So this cannot be achieved if you and that other bratty Spaniard keep saying, it must return to Europe because we are the best here!!

Like fertilizer and manure, you have to spread it out. Now I have a problem with your 2010-2022 spread. It's too long before it returns to the US. I might lose my interest in the game. I mean, yes, this is entirely personal, FIFA has to strike while the iron is hot, so they better bring it here by 2018 or otherwise, I will have lost interest in it. The reasons are entirely personal.

And I still say, we'll see it return to the US in either 2014 or 2018. After that, I don't care.

Now back to the cleaning chores...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I could go with every 3rd to Europe since indeed the passion is strongest there.

Having thought more about the subject since I signed off some minutes ago to do some kitty litter cleaning duties -- notice I think of soccer while I am cleaning the kitties' litter :D -- yeah, if they are going thru all the trouble and expense (and I think probably costing more than staging a single Summer Games) of hosting a World Cup, it might as well bring in intangible benefits and more than just the bricks and mortar and the headbutts or is it buttheads (if they bump their tushies rather than head to chest?). I mean it draws most of mankind together for some hours, so might as well bring something that will have improved our lot and our relations to each other -- or I would hope that would result. So this cannot be achieved if you and that other bratty Spaniard keep saying, it must return to Europe because we are the best here!!

Like fertilizer and manure, you have to spread it out. Now I have a problem with your 2010-2022 spread. It's too long before it returns to the US. I might lose my interest in the game. I mean, yes, this is entirely personal, FIFA has to strike while the iron is hot, so they better bring it here by 2018 or otherwise, I will have lost interest in it. The reasons are entirely personal.

And I still say, we'll see it return to the US in either 2014 or 2018. After that, I don't care.

Litter,Fertilizer,Manure!!! If those are the things that come to your mind when thinking about football,then you've no chance of persuading FIFA to give you another World Cup anytime soon!

FIFA is a notoriously humourless organisation,almost as humourless as the IOC.Haven't you realised that yet?? B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

:)

Anyway, the the zones rotational plan makes sense to me. I'd even refine it to: Europe/Americas/other.

And to back up NOC a bit, yes, it's true, soccer is making some quite extraordinary strides domestically in Australia at the moment, more so than even the most ardent soccer fan would have dared hoped just a year ago. I do think Australia will be in a strong position to claim a hosting in the near future/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.......

I already posted this. Are you senile or something?

"To correct a few more points. Since FIFA has not officialy announced any "bidding of any sort" for 2014, and it is a known fact within FIFA circles that 2014 is "almost" being handed to Brazil on a silver platter, WITH conditions -- so why should the US, or any other country for that matter, "bid" if FIFA will hold no bidding? It would be kinda foolish, don't you think? Almost as foolish as your insinuations.

Like what the USOC is doing with the IOC and 2016, the US is patiently biding (THAT's biDing, not BIDding) its time and staying within the game's parameters -- knowing how protocol-conscious these self-appointed int'l federations are. When a "bidding' period will be announced and commence, then everyone's intentions will become clearer. And the wiser countries keep a low profile until the opportune moment.

But there have been off-the-record talks. Obviously, NOC, they are "off-the-record", so aside from what I replied to you in the previous post, there is nothing more I can add. Capisce?"

I know that won't satisfy you, but too bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...