| Mr Mercury 02.12.2010 09:39 |
Nevermind England. Try again sometime :) link |
| Serry... 02.12.2010 09:59 |
Damn! |
| Sebastian 02.12.2010 10:31 |
Great. I want to be there. Also Qatar! |
| JoxerTheDeityPirate 02.12.2010 10:32 |
it didnt take long for the Scottish mocking did it? lol however,i had a nice little bet on the Russia bid the other day so i am happy. and who says money doesnt talk,how the hell did Qatar win 2022? a country that has alcohol bans/imprisonment and 40 degree tempetures in July and who's team has never played in a world cup,FIFA more corrupt than X-factor! thankfully this wont be an issue to any skirt wearers north of Hadrians Wall as the Scots wont even make it there :-D |
| YourValentine 02.12.2010 10:48 |
I am sorry for England but Russia is a good choice imo. Why did they have to pick two hosts in one procedure? England could have hosted 2022. Quatar is a joke. What has Quatar to do with football? They never even played the world cup. Last week it was still the worst presentation and all of a sudden they won. |
| Sebastian 02.12.2010 11:03 |
While they may be a joke for some extent, that whole bidding process was absurd IMO: the States ... they haven't got enough football tradition to host two cups in a 30-year period IMO, and it's nice for once to have a global sport that's not dominated by them; Australia? They're probably not a much more logical choice than Qatar, are they?. Japan or South Korea... see my US point. It's nice to give other nations a chance... after two cups in Germany, two in France, two in Brazil, two in Mexico, two in Italy... it's nice to have one in Russia, after all, they DO have a football tradition (well, the Soviet Union did). I'd love to live enough to attend a world cup in Serbia or Czech Republic, or maybe Hungary if they're ever as good as in the good old days. So, no offence to Yanks or people from the Far East, but I'd rather have a world cup in Qatar, Cyprus or Papua New Guinea than another one in the States, Korea or Japan. |
| JoxerTheDeityPirate 02.12.2010 11:17 |
^at least in Australia you wouldnt get jail for drinking a beer! |
| Sebastian 02.12.2010 11:29 |
AFAIK, the no drinking thing is only during Ramadan and only if done in public. I love the fact Muslim nations are finally, slowly, getting more accepted. They're humans, just like us, and they deserve to be respected, admired and given opportunities. Plus, from what I've seen, the National Stadium in Doha is gorgeous, and Al Rayyan is a great city. Not everybody's got to be in love with London or New York. |
| Bo Rhap 02.12.2010 15:10 |
Qatar has more insects than England. Well.....maybe not. |
| greaserkat 02.12.2010 16:18 |
Sebastian wrote: While they may be a joke for some extent, that whole bidding process was absurd IMO: the States ... they haven't got enough football tradition to host two cups in a 30-year period IMO, and it's nice for once to have a global sport that's not dominated by them; Australia? They're probably not a much more logical choice than Qatar, are they?. Japan or South Korea... see my US point. It's nice to give other nations a chance... after two cups in Germany, two in France, two in Brazil, two in Mexico, two in Italy... it's nice to have one in Russia, after all, they DO have a football tradition (well, the Soviet Union did). I'd love to live enough to attend a world cup in Serbia or Czech Republic, or maybe Hungary if they're ever as good as in the good old days. So, no offence to Yanks or people from the Far East, but I'd rather have a world cup in Qatar, Cyprus or Papua New Guinea than another one in the States, Korea or Japan. France has only hosted the World Cup once. I understand your point about the States not having enough football tradition to host the World Cup twice in a 30 year period; however, when it was hosted here in '94 it created record crowds to stadiums that have not been broken since. And even though "Americans" might not love football as the rest of the world, there is a huge football fan base here in the States that would have flocked to the stadiums and fill them up just as they did in 1994. |
| Sebastian 02.12.2010 21:46 |
> France has only hosted the World Cup once. 1938 and 1998. That's twice. > however, when it was hosted here in '94 it created record crowds to stadiums that have not been broken since. Yes. And it was a beautiful cup (regardless of the whole Maradona incident), and the big Yank productions were great for the whole show, even the colours worn by the referees, etc... but still, I think other nations should be given the chance before having it again dominated by the States (as it tends to happen with nearly every other major sport). Otherwise we should simply have all world cups in Hollywood and get Morgan Freeman to be the referee, with Tracy Jordan handing the trophy and Diana Ross lip-synching. > And even though "Americans" might not love football as the rest of the world, there is a huge football fan base here in the States that would have flocked to the stadiums and fill them up just as they did in 1994. No argument there. However, there are other countries in the world, also with a huge football fan base, and also with enough motivation (even if with more limited resources) . Before giving the States another World Cup (or before giving another one to Spain, Mexico, Italy, Japan, South Korea or even Argentina), I think they should give a chance to those who haven't been able to host it ever. Countries like Netherlands (three times runners-up), Belgium (once in the semis, loads of good teams for decades), Denmark, Norway, Bulgaria, Ireland, Hungary, Portugal, Turkey... sure, they're not Italy or Brazil, but football's much more than just Italy and Brazil. |
| greaserkat 03.12.2010 10:10 |
Sebastian wrote: > France has only hosted the World Cup once. 1938 and 1998. That's twice. > however, when it was hosted here in '94 it created record crowds to stadiums that have not been broken since. Yes. And it was a beautiful cup (regardless of the whole Maradona incident), and the big Yank productions were great for the whole show, even the colours worn by the referees, etc... but still, I think other nations should be given the chance before having it again dominated by the States (as it tends to happen with nearly every other major sport). Otherwise we should simply have all world cups in Hollywood and get Morgan Freeman to be the referee, with Tracy Jordan handing the trophy and Diana Ross lip-synching. > And even though "Americans" might not love football as the rest of the world, there is a huge football fan base here in the States that would have flocked to the stadiums and fill them up just as they did in 1994. No argument there. However, there are other countries in the world, also with a huge football fan base, and also with enough motivation (even if with more limited resources) . Before giving the States another World Cup (or before giving another one to Spain, Mexico, Italy, Japan, South Korea or even Argentina), I think they should give a chance to those who haven't been able to host it ever. Countries like Netherlands (three times runners-up), Belgium (once in the semis, loads of good teams for decades), Denmark, Norway, Bulgaria, Ireland, Hungary, Portugal, Turkey... sure, they're not Italy or Brazil, but football's much more than just Italy and Brazil. My mistake, for some reason I thought it was Italy, which they actually hosted the one before in '34. I agree with you; however; from the actual countries that had a bid for the 2022 World Cup the U.S. was clearly the best candidate. Other countries that have never had a World Cup should host a world cup if they have the opportunity to but Quatar has not even played in a world cup. |
| Sebastian 03.12.2010 13:54 |
They've still got the chance to qualify for 2014 and/or 2018, so they wouldn't be first timers at their own tournament. For all we know, maybe they can win on 2018 and be both reigning champions and hosts :) Now, seriously, I wanted Germany to win 2002 because they'd be hosting and being reigning champions in '06. What a shame Oliver (one of the very best ever) chose to mess up precisely on that occasion. For me, the World Cup (and other events such as the Olympics) has several benefits for the economy and the way the world sees a country (or city), so it's a great way to encourage people being aware of each other, etc. Loads of people didn't know or didn't care about South Africa until some months ago. Loads of people (me included, up until a couple of years ago) only knew Hungary existed thanks to their football. When I went to Yokohama (oh, those good old days), there were people from all over the world visiting just to see the stadium where the final was played. So, choosing a host works, IMO, for two very noble causes: have a place where people can go and play the beautiful game, and at the same time turn the eyes of the world on it, lessen racism and ignorance. Thousands of people worldwide have just (in the last twenty-four hours or so) learnt the name of a country they didn't know about before. That's a big triumph IMO. The States were a great host and would certainly be again: they've got the chops, the technology, the money, the people... but it's great to give other people a chance to show they can do it too. And hopefully, Qatar will not disappoint. Neither will Russia, of course. |
| spandan 04.12.2010 10:16 |
If Israel qualifies for World Cup 2022 in Qatar, the Qatar sheikh says that as per the FIFA rules and regulations, they can play. Oh, how generous! Let's hope Israel qualifies for 2022! |
| Sebastian 04.12.2010 12:48 |
And wins! |
| spandan 04.12.2010 21:49 |
Yeah, that would be like, so awesome! :D |
| *goodco* 05.12.2010 17:46 |
greaserkat wrote: "Yes. And it was a beautiful cup (regardless of the whole Maradona incident), and the big Yank productions were great for the whole show, even the colours worn by the referees, etc... but still, I think other nations should be given the chance before having it again dominated by the States (as it tends to happen with nearly every other major sport). Otherwise we should simply have all world cups in Hollywood and get Morgan Freeman to be the referee, with Tracy Jordan handing the trophy and Diana Ross lip-synching. " What an absolutely stupid and ignorant response. From a personal perspective, I'd have loved to have seen a group match 20 miles from my home in Baltimore in 2022. Would have made a trip to see another indoor game in Pontiac as I did in '94. Best attended WC ever, existing facilities, 'melting pot' Americans who are nuts over the sport.......... The best thing for the WC, would have been a 'Euro' bid for 2018. Group matches in the UK, Germany, Spain, Italy, et al....round of 16 and quarters at four sites, semis in .....oh, let's say Madrid and London, finals in Berlin. And then the US for 2022. I just don't get the decision. How many people are going to drive through Saudi Arabia to get to Qatar..........oops, wait a second.........moving on......how many are going to fly within a stone's throw of Iran.....oops, wait a second,..........does your passport say you visited Israel...............are you Jewish...................?????????????????? 2026....Antartica fits perfectly into the mold of 'lands to extend the popularity' of the sport. Money can buy happiness. How Qatar will transcend the sport to the masses blows my mind. |
| its_a_hard_life 26994 06.12.2010 12:16 |
England is blaming the British media. Something like that anyway. |
| Sebastian 06.12.2010 15:32 |
> What an absolutely stupid and ignorant response. No, it wasn't. > From a personal perspective, I'd have loved to have seen a group match 20 miles from my home in Baltimore in 2022. Wonderful. But other people also have the right to see group matches 20 miles from their home, not only Yanks. > Would have made a trip to see another indoor game in Pontiac as I did in '94. So... you already enjoyed it. Let's give other people a chance. > Best attended WC ever, existing facilities, 'melting pot' Americans who are nuts over the sport.... It was a great WC. So, now give other countries a chance to host a great one too, rather than giving US (or Spain, or Japan, or Korea) another one. > I just don't get the decision. The world's not just the States, South America, Mexico and Western Europe. It's great that other territories also get a chance. > How many people are going to drive through Saudi Arabia to get to Qatar.... Probably many. Things change a lot in 12 years. > how many are going to fly within a stone's throw of Iran.....oops Probably many. Things change a lot in 12 years. > does your passport say you visited Israel...............are you Jewish...................? The world's not just the States, South America, Mexico and Western Europe. It's great that other territories also get a chance. > 2026....Antartica fits perfectly into the mold of 'lands to extend the popularity' of the sport. Maybe it does. Things change a lot in 16 years. It's nice to give other nations a chance. The world's not just the States, South America, Mexico and Western Europe. > Money can buy happiness. No, it can't. But the world's not just the States, South America, Mexico and Western Europe. It's great that other territories also get a chance. > How Qatar will transcend the sport to the masses blows my mind. Maybe it won't, but still, the world's not just the States, South America, Mexico and Western Europe. It's great that other territories also get a chance. |
| The Real Wizard 07.12.2010 10:54 |
Haha, best response ever. |
| *goodco* 07.12.2010 15:41 |
>> What an absolutely stupid and ignorant response. >No, it wasn't. Sure it was. A very anti-American bias. Expected more out of the two of you. Many could name three B-celebrities, a glitz capital, a pun for any country, and slam or ridicule. Will not choose to in this post. >> From a personal perspective, I'd have loved to have seen a group match 20 miles from my home in Baltimore in 2022. >Wonderful. But other people also have the right to see group matches 20 miles from their home, not only Yanks. >> Would have made a trip to see another indoor game in Pontiac as I did in '94. >So... you already enjoyed it. Let's give other people a chance. Yes......as I pointed out, it was a personal perspective. And very biased. I wanted the WC here again. The USA has the stadiums, hotels, a proven record of great attendance. 70K in B'more last year for a 'friendly'. Qualified for past Cups. I now also understand that it might be another thirty years to host. The UK lost out again, and has not hosted since '66. wtf? A pity that Belgium/Netherlands did not get the 2018 games. We would have loved to go to London / Amsterdam. And as pointed out, a 'Euro' bid would be cool....and damn logical. If any of you are reading this.................. >> Best attended WC ever, existing facilities, 'melting pot' Americans who are nuts over the sport.... >It was a great WC. So, now give other countries a chance to host a great one too, rather than giving US (or Spain, or Japan, or Korea) another one. Agreed. >> I just don't get the decision. >The world's not just the States, South America, Mexico and Western Europe. It's great that other territories also get a chance. Agreed. >> How many people are going to drive through Saudi Arabia to get to Qatar.... >Probably many. Things change a lot in 12 years. >> how many are going to fly within a stone's throw of Iran.....oops >Probably many. Things change a lot in 12 years. Agreed. Who'd a thunk in the 80's that South Africa would ever host a cup? moving on.... >> How Qatar will transcend the sport to the masses blows my mind. >Maybe it won't, but still, the world's not just the States, South America, Mexico and Western Europe. It's great that other territories also get a chance. My wife went to Russia on a cruise during the summer. Who knows.....we might go for a WC vacation. Qatar? Nope. I have been reading up on the various events Qatar has hosted over the past decade. It might work. So I stand corrected in regards to that. For the drinking hooligans and hotsie totsie females who want to show any skin............beware. For those that can't handle 120F temps.....stay home. We were so looking forward to seeing group matches in our back yard. Or, save money for travel and go to the UK or Europe. Those dreams are gone. One thing that cannot be ignored....Qatar has never qualified for the WC. They bought their way in. No arguing that. |
| Sebastian 08.12.2010 05:19 |
Neither my point is more valid than yours, nor yours is more valid than mine. I suppose we agree to disagree here. I'm not anti-US BTW, and I loved the '94 WC. I'm pro-give-other-nations-a-chance though, and that's my point. I love it that, after all that happened in the 20th century, Russia's given a well-deserved opportunity. As for Qatar, of course money was a factor, but the point still is they're a perfect candidate for what world cups are nowadays: they've got the venues, the hotels, the uniqueness, and they'll surely put a lot of effort in making it as wonderful as possible in terms of coverage, etc. Which of course the States also did and could repeat any time (hell, if Russia or Qatar cancelled two weeks before the opening ceremony, the Yanks would probably be the only ones who could organise and pull off everything in such short notice), but then again, it's nice to give other people a chance. As for Qatar not qualifying so far... well, you've got to consider two aspects: * They could still enter the '14 and '18 tournaments and, for all we know, they could perform well in both. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. * The way preliminary stages are arranged benefits some nations way too much and others way too little. What's the last time a WC was held without having Mexico or the States (at least one of them)? Sure, but in order to qualify, all Mexico and America have to do is beating the likes of Trinidad & Tobago or Guatemala. When Bolivia qualified (other than simply having an invitation, IIRC), they had to beat Brazil (for the first time ever) and knock out Uruguay. Talk about a tough campaign. If the AFC qualification was also divided by zones and all Qatar had to do to earn a place was beating Jordan or Yemen, and if there were Panamerican qualification matches rather than CONMEBOL and CONCACAF and USA had to face Brazil and Argentina, we'd have both more WC's attended by Qatar (and other nations such as Bahrain) and less WC's with Mexico or the States. Again, I'm not denying the fact that both Mexico and the States have deserved to be there, and they're great teams and all, but they've had it way easier than others. Ever wondered why Turkey wasn't on the last one? They were on the same group with the eventual champions. Ireland were on the same group as then reigning champions and had to face then runners-up for play-offs. Meanwhile, the States struggled to barely get a draw on the 88th minute against... El Salvador. |
| *goodco* 08.12.2010 11:25 |
Sebastian, you've forced me to learn more in the past week about soccer and the WC history. Not sure if a 'thank you' is in order............but , well, 'thank you' (gnaws teeth). Agreed, the 'regional' concept helps some and hurts others. A team/country could be the 5th best in the world, but if only four teams from a region can make it to the WC, it is eliminated, and the 100th best team from a weak 'regional' advances (North Korea, anyone?). I still do prefer the 'best of region' concept in all sports, otherwise it comes down to popularity polls. In which case, it would probably just be Europe and South American countries battling it out. After all, let's just have the champion from Europe play the winner of Brazil/Argentina. That's what the world wants to see (regardless of qualifications). I still don't like the choice. Personal bias. I also feel for some of my co-horts who are devastated because they expected a trip to the UK or Europe or hosting friends here. We will just have to gather with 3000+ fans from various countries to watch the games on a big screen behind the county courthouse.......and have a ton of fun. No vuvuzelas allowed. One thing that is not indisputable.............worst soccer goal attempt ever?;-))) link |
| *goodco* 15.12.2010 17:41 |
link take your pick on what's wrong with this............. |
| Mr Mercury 15.12.2010 19:14 |
^ I particularly liked the sound of silence that came after Sepp Bloaters gay "joke"........... |
| ole-the-first 16.12.2010 06:56 |
it's just a disaster for Russia. Russian officials will stole most of appropriated funds and simple people still will live in poverty and devastation, robbed by these officials and businessmen. |