This is exactly what I think FIFA is planning on doing. Double speak, out of one side of the mouth say how they are committed to hosting the World Cup in Qatar while putting up road blocks (like insisting that it can't be held in the summer when kickoff temps would be high 80's low 90's, warm but no worse than USA 94 or dozens of other locations that host official FIFA matches). Blatter's hope is to develop such a strong world consensus that FIFA has "no choice" but to pull the tournament. That way he gets the tournament in a better venue, and doesn't get the blame for being the one who pulled it.
If you have money it will be a great world cup to travel to. If you're trying to do it on a budget..... ummmmm good luck
Pretty much this, although remember that the temperatures will be lower than the US. USA 94 had heat problems because FIFA insisted that the matches be played midday-afternoon for European television viewing audiences. Had the games been played in the evening/night (As they should have) much of the heat problems of the US would be mitigated.
yeh I know, they did the same thing in Mexico in'86. Insisting day matches in Azteca in July, freakin brilliant. So I not trying to insinuate that Dallas is as hot as Doha. Just pointing out that the temps the games would be played at aren't that out of the norm. I think if FIFA really wanted the WC in Doha they could do it in June. (if nothing else couldn't they just build domes?)
speaking in circles on an internet message board NEVER! But seriously it does hammer home the point that if the only issue was player safety during matches there are ways to insure it without moving the tournament to a time that totally destroys the world calendar. Me thinks there is a different motive a foot.
The thread that never dies! But in all seriousness with everything that happened earlier today I would be shocked if 2022 is not being hosted elsewhere. So glad someone (In this case FBI) finally was able to hit FIFA where it hurts!
We have some momentum now. The USSF needs to band together with whoever else wants to jump on board--I assume that would mean most of Europe except Russia, Mexico, Japan, South Korea, and Australia, the real wild cards will be the South Americans and China*, no idea which way they will go--and start going on the offense. Demand all stadium construction in Qatar cease immediately for humanitarian reasons, and give FIFA a 2-week deadline to announce that Blatter is stepping down and that the 2022 WC will not be held in Qatar and will be re-opened for bidding. If our demands are not met we will pressure our sponsors and TV partners to cancel any contracts they may have with FIFA or the 2022 WC, end all contracts our FAs have with firms that refuse to do so, organize a competing tournament to be held in summer 2022 in either Australia, Japan, or South Korea (US should recuse itself from hosting so as to remove any appearance of conflict of interest), and our domestic leagues will continue play during the 2022 FIFA World Cup and will not release players to take part. * - The South American countries, mainly Brazil and Argentina but also the others, are important for obvious soccer reasons, and if the big UEFA countries withdraw losing Brazil and Argentina as well would cripple FIFA. China is important for TV eyeballs and money, and will only be more so 7 years from now. I have no idea which way any of those FAs would go, the South Americans would probably prefer to stick with the UEFA giants and with us/Mexico for soccer reasons but at the same time most of those countries are corrupt as hell and could potentially be swayed by Russian/Arab petrodollars--that said, the part about not releasing players from the big European leagues for FIFA's tournament would potentially be pretty convincing to the South Americans if they're sitting on the fence. As for the Chinese, they've got close ties with Russia and their national foreign policy is generally one of non-intervention in other countries' domestic affairs which would make one think they'd be inclined to stick with FIFA, however they also want to be seen as a world power which would mean going with the US, Japan, and Europe, and from a sporting perspective they're trying to ramp up their soccer program. If the breakaway FAs really wanted to play hardball they could refuse to sell broadcast rights for the new tournament in countries that stick with FIFA, but that would probably be counterproductive not to mention pointless in the internet age.
To look at this from another angle, if a new federation is formed, who would stay and who would go? Looking at the ELO top 60, here's my best guess: BOLT - Germany, Netherlands, Spain, France, England, Belgium, Mexico, Portugal, Italy, Croatia, USA, Ukraine, Sweden, Switzerland, Japan, Romania, Czech Republic, Denmark, Slovakia, South Korea, Australia, Poland, Ireland, Scotland, Austria, Bosnia, Iceland, Wales, Hungary, Slovenia, Israel, Norway, Bulgaria STICK WITH FIFA - Russia, Iran, Algeria, Venezuela, UAE, Uzbekistan I HAVE NO IDEA - Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Chile, Uruguay, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Panama, Serbia, Peru, Turkey, Paraguay, Senegal, Greece, Nigeria, Ghana, Egypt, Cameroon, Bolivia, China Really it boils down to the South American teams (other than Venezuela who I assume would stick with their Russian benefactors in the name of Bolivarian revolution/the chance to actually play in a WC if everyone else from CONMEBOL withdraws).
I just spent some time re-reading the first half of this thread. What a hoot. There were actually some posters defending the Qatar selection. Some people will believe anything. Hilarious.
Well we all knew how Quatar received the vote, no surprise to me. No way Blatter will be re-elected tomorrow. He is the biggest crook of them all: http://www.cnn.com/ What I can't understand is how does the FBI and US Justice Department are involved in all of this. The individuals indicted are not US Citizens, so their prosecution is out of the jurisdiction of the USA. The money laundering and bribes must be prosecuted by their respective countries of citizenship of these individuals. The only way I can think that the US Justice Department prosecutes, is if these individuals received income in the USA and did not file IRS forms for payment of the taxes from income earned in the USA. However, if these individuals can prove that they paid taxes from the income earned in the USA, to their respective country, then they are not liable for US taxes. So this is one issue puzzling to me.
I thought those officials laundered money via US banks, which is well within the FBI and DOJ's jurisdiction.
No. Instead of these being financial crimes, think of the case of theft, murder etc. If a crime is committed in the United States, the United States (like every other country in the world, will prosecute regardless of where the person happens to be from. no. see above. this is silly
It's a Muslim country, and soccer fans in the US lean left. If the World Cup had been awarded to, say, Singapore, no one at all on this board would have defended the selection. (I picked Singapore as an example because like Qatar it's a tiny, very wealthy city state that has zero soccer history, a summer climate that would make playing soccer outdoors exceedingly dangerous, and is not nearly big enough either geographically or in terms of population to support a World Cup. Unlike Qatar, of course, Singapore's government is authoritarian but scrupulously honest; does not ban alcohol consumption, premarital sex, or homosexuality; does not use slave labor from other countries to build its infrastructure to the tune of an estimated death every other day from one outside country alone; and does not bankroll terror groups that burn people alive and massacre women and children, so it's not a perfect comparison).
Thanks, and this just came to me which explains it very well: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...a-officials-in-switzerland-explained/?hpid=z1
I mean Qatar funds ISIS. Between that and the slavery they legitimately might be the most evil country on earth. It's between them, Saudi Arabia, and North Korea. Anyway: 73 votes against, secret ballot. There's talk of a breakaway organization. Let's try and figure out who those 73 were. According to this the following 19 countries announced ahead of time they would vote against Blatter: Austria, Australia, Belgium, Canada, Costa Rica, Croatia, England, Finland, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Netherlands, Norway, Romania, Scotland, Sweden, United States, Uruguay, and Wales. 19 down, 54 to go. UEFA was very outspoken against Blatter and it's safe to say most of their member nations voted for Prince Ali. Russia, Belarus, and Kazakhstan almost certainly voted for Blatter; Turkey, Greece, and Serbia each have close ties to either Russia or Qatar and each would actually have a pretty solid shot at winning a highly-watered-down WC, but each also has ties to the West and would have incentives to join the break. Can't count them in though. So take UEFA's 54, subtract those 6 and the 14 already confirmed, and that's 30 more anti-Blatter votes. Up to 49. CONMEBOL.....Uruguay is confirmed and I think most of the rest were in Ali's camp. Brazil apparently wasn't able to take part in the vote, due to one of their reps being arrested and the other fleeing. Tough to say how they'd go but my guess is they and Argentina would throw their lot in with the soccer powers, especially given the threat of European clubs not releasing players for FIFA's winter World Cup. Who I'm not so sure of is Venezuela and Bolivia, who have close political ties to Russia, hate the US, and could actually compete in a watered-down World Cup. So let's say 8 anti-Blatter, minus Uruguay already counted and minus Brazil not being able to take part, 49+6 is 55. CAF - Haha nobody, most likely. AFC - Not many. Australia is already counted, and I can't imagine the Japanese and Koreans are much more thrilled about getting screwed out of a fair shot at the World Cup than we and the Aussies are. The Arab and Muslim countries would have had a weird conflict of interest, on one side is Prince Ali, on the other side is Qatar. Can't safely count them in either camp, so let's leave them out for now. Likewise the Chinese are tough to put a finger on. On one hand they like Russia and don't like the US intervening in other countries' affairs and would like to compete in the World Cup, on the other hand they want to be considered a first world country and culturally don't want to be seen as backing down from a challenge on the field. They're important because their TV deals will bring a lot of money to the table. Decent chance they'd break off but can't safely count them, so we won't. Taiwan, Singapore, Philippines? Serious question, can the USSF tell the Guamanian FA how to vote, the British FA to the Bermudian likewise, etc.? Either way, 2 so-far uncounted makes 57. OFC - New Zealand almost certainly voted for Ali, safe to say no one else did unless the USSF and European FAs can influence their countries' respective territories, as per my earlier question. For now we'll say no. 58. CONCACAF - US, Canada, and Costa Rica already counted. Very safe to say Mexico was on Team Ali. 4 reliable. Is Costa Rica a reliable bellwether for the other Central American nations?? I legitimately have no idea. If they are that's 6 more but can't count on it. Barring US influence on Puerto Rico and USVI and English/French/Dutch influence on their various possessions safe to say none of the Caribbean FAs are in our camp either. So adding Mexico makes 59. Still leaves 14 votes for Ali unaccounted for, assuming all the ones I've deduced are accurate. Any ideas?
"FIFA President Sepp Blatter says he plans to step down, only days after winning re-election amid a corruption scandal." -- CNN www.cnn.com
Not surprising at all. The dominoes continue to fall. I just hope the donations to the Clinton foundation from Qatar don't damn us.
In case you were wondering today will be 106 and sunny with 60% humidity in Qatar. Enjoy your 2015. Love freisland
Thank you for the weather report. For comparison purposes. Which city would that heat/humidity be more comparable to? Phoenix, Tupelo, MS, or Orlando?