Hmm...a mature discussion? That's sort of laughable, what the thread-starter really wants is a threat to accept and embrace the Qatar bid without pointing out all the obvious holes in it. One thing that I haven't heard mentioned, unbelievably, is the number of hotel rooms. Currently, the country has less than 10,000 hotel rooms. They plan to have 50,000 by 2016. Great...so that gives them at best 20% of the rooms they will need. How many people came to South Africa, 300,000? Are people going to stay 6 to a room? And will 2022 be as sparsely visited by traveling fans as South Africa 2010 was? Even if they double the number of rooms over the 6 years from 2016 to 2022, will it be enough? My guess is it won't be. And even with the lure of World Cup tourism, will it really be financially viable to open 100 hotels for one event that is 12 years off? Sure, they can build Lego stadiums that will be torn down as soon as the lights go out, pump in air conditioning that flies in the face of any hopes at a "green" World Cup, and expect that the bid which was lowest-rated by the FIFA inspectors to suddenly come good, but the simple truth is that Qatar doesn't have the infrastructure to accommodate an event of this magnitude. The country will essentially gain 30-40% of its population in visitors. And consider their needs. The number of restaurants, laundromats, public restrooms, public transit systems, and other amenities that are taken for granted in larger countries. Imagine if the town you live in suddenly had a population boom of 33%. How many places can handle that? Not very many. What's the alternative, to request additional housing from neighboring countries? To build temporary housing in Qatar? To ship in additional laborers to work the mass number of cafeteria tents that will likely need to be built (again with more air conditioning)? There are so many more questions that aren't being asked, it borders on silly. But the Qatari bigwigs had deeper pockets and were more willing to shill out their oil money to woo FIFA. I look forward to more transparency in FIFA and a new regime that isn't so marred by the stink of corruption that has tainted this one's legacy since even before Blatter took office.
I was leading up to this. Everything else that goes with hosting. I looked up to see how many tourists attended SA2010. According to the South African Department of Home Affairs, 1.4 mil tourist were registered, ~300K solely for the beautiful game but YMMV (http://www.afrol.com/articles/36514). So, Qatar could see an influx of 300K. So Qatar will ship off the stadiums but what about the modular hotels? The stadiums are something to behold but as I stated earlier, the solar stadiums energy consumption is being generated on solar power and yet-to-be-tested environmentally friendly energy. Relying on wind and solar power alone, would require investments beyond the scope of Qatar's bid promise. I won't bring water power since wave energy technology is not economically or practically feasible at this juncture. And these renewable energies can only take you so far, esp for running a stadium. With 60-70 k capacity. And air-conditioning the entire thing. And before you ask, I took a sustainable energy course in Grad School. The technology isn't quite there yet, but is making strides and we will see in a decade or my name isn't Marc Vivien Foe. Color me skeptical but I don't see hotels, restaurants and bars being reassembled in Niger or Nicaragua. This influx of 300K need to eat, do laundry and do other things while the games are not on. I plan on swimming in Jack Daniels in a confederate tank top while partying with half naked Swedish and Israeli women, but I'm sure other people will want less "family-oriented" entertainment. Whatever that means. I was writing a paragraph re: the consistent human right stories mentioned about Qatar (esp. conditions of construction laborers) until sidefootsitter pointed out Russia's 1980 Olympics. That blows Qatar right out of the water, plus the fact my tomatoes are probably picked by exploited undocumented labor reeked of hypocrisy. And I am starting to see the same answer to each question. Throw money at it.
Bid presentation Nothing can convince me that the Qataris didn't bribe Excon members, but does anyone else think the USSF's presentation was flawed? Now, i didn't watch any of the other ones, but most of the US presentation seemed to focus on how it would help the US and the growth of soccer in the US, not on how USA 2022 would be good for FIFA and the world. I have heard the Qatari one was just trying to address concerns, may be focusing their presentation on the bid helped them
Re: Bid presentation Placed in context with the other presentations, I agree that the U.S. presentation was probably too "inward looking" given the kick FIFA is on to focus emphasis on broadening the sport's reach and taking the tournament to new frontiers. Was that fatal? Probably not given the likelihood that it was never really about the actual capability to host the tournament in a first-class manner and more about visions of grandeur and fantasy. That said, I find it a little troubling that the U.S. bid team seemed to lack a real finger on the pulse of the nature of the argument which FIFA was seeking (notwithstanding the backroom machinations and who knows what else was going on with respect to the trading of votes).
Re: Bid presentation The bid presentations have no real importance in terms of the voting. Meaning they never matter, not just in a "this time corruption trumped everything else" way (eg the FIFA bid evaluations which should have mattered but obviously didn't). The bid presentations are basically just for public / media consumption. We brought celebrities and a former head of state to schmooze, what they said on stage is of no real significance. If you doubt that, see England. They had by far the best bid presentation. And they brought their current PM, future king, and most famous football player. And for all that, they got one vote besides their own and were out in the first round. The US losing the 2022 bid is sort of like a reverse 9/11 (not trying to be offensive: the sports equivalent without all the death and destruction). A traumatic event that leaves people shocked and searching for answers because they are having a hard time dealing with what they just experienced. Except while "truthers" turn to crazy conspiracy theories, here the conspiracy is real so it's no use trying to find a rational explanation for what just happened. There is nothing we could have done, the fix was in.
Re: Bid presentation Bill Clinton's talk as TOTALLY focused on how the US Bid would help FIFA and the world. Since this was the major USA talk I am not even sure how to respond.
Qatar's bid may well have been to play on an artificial satellite orbiting the planet of Rigel VII. It was probably the farthest thing from the past bid processes that has ever existed...but it is done.
You know, we're all going to wish we never were against Qatar hosting the cup the day we all watch the Millennium Falcon rise from one of the stadiums as it flies off to the stars! Yes, I'm having a hard time believing their magical air conditioned open air soccer stadiums, and the rest of their claims.
Qatar is building or planning to soon build a superfast train line (probably either by Siemens or Alstom), that will connect the peninsula emirates (UAE, Oman, Bahrain, Qatar). Once build, a visiting fan could conceivably stay in any of those nations and just a quick trip to matches. However, mid-tier convertible housing stock is not a difficult proposition.
Because FIFA has a very high ranking delegate from Qatar. I'm sure if they had unlimited money, Jack Warner could have Trinidad and Tobago hang around as a potential World Cup host if he so wanted to play the game that way. Its like being a Senator from a low populated state but sitting as the head of a prominent committee that is responsible for huge sums of govt money (say transportation or ways and means), it is funny how your state gets money in a much more favorable proportion than say California, Texas, New York or Florida. This is FIFA's 'Bridge to Nowhere.'
Honestly, had it been a joint bid with UAE including Dubai and Abu Dhabi, I would have felt better about the whole process.
The problem i see is that The US bid for 94' had to come with promises that actually helped the sport grow. FIFA "supposed" Agenda. The creation of MLS. This Qatar bid is doing nothing like that. Once this happens they are breaking-apart the stadiums. Qatar does not have Millions and Millions of people from other countries living there. Its a decision to keep Blatter in power longer because of Bin Hamman's (A Qatari Native) threat to the Big chair. While 2026 looks like its USA and CONCACAF's no matter what. Nobody trusts FIFA, and in order for Russia and Qatar plan to get support, the 2026 and 2030 WC's might have already been determined.
Well, a bit better, but I kind of started it off a bit on the antagonistic side, but at least no one is advocating pulling out of FIFA here. To wit, some mea culpas. First, perhaps I shouldn't have used the word "best" to describe Qatar's bid (though their presentation certainly was the best). Their bid certainly has to most upside and potential transformational effect. Which is what FIFA has been doing recently. I should have said their bid was the most unique, and had the most upside. And had the best chance of winning. That's what BEST meant for me, not the best technical bid. Second, on human rights. I'm not saying Qatar and Russia have good human rights records. They don't. If you want to say that no nations with poor human rights records can host big events (WC or Olympics) then fine. However, I'd point out that: 1) This has never been the standard (especially for the Olympics) 2) The good ole' USA doesn't rate too highly on the human rights charts these days. Certainly miles higher than reprehensible Qatar with it's treatment of women (in terms of rights), not to mention Russia's Stalinist history. Heck, we've hosted the Olympics with Jim Crow in full effect and the KKK hanging blacks all over the place. Point being, if human rights were a DQ, the USA would have been out as well, and FIFA would have been left with Australia, Japan, and South Korea. And to SFS, if tanks in Afghanistan are a bad thing, it seems an odd time to mention it from the USA perspective. Things aren't as bad in Qatar and Russia and are being made out here. Qatar have made progress lately, with women getting the right to vote in 1995 under the new Amir, and he has generally been more liberal than his predecessor. And people are free to leave, I believe. Now, fully recognizing that rights are not equivalent with abuses, I'd note that the Guardian/Observer's ranking of every nation on Human Rights abuses ranks the USA, South Korea, and Japan (and the UK) all ahead of Qatar. Russia is = with USA. http://www.guardian.co.uk/Tables/4_col_tables/0,,258323,00.html A more balanced approach (ranking human rights abuses and freedoms) and broken down by continent ranks Qatar 5th in Asia (behind only Japan, Singapore, South Korea, and Israel). Russia comes in 34th in a much more rigorous Europe. Point being, if Asia were going to get it, Qatar was about the best choice they could have made short of returning to Korea/Japan again. http://www.mherrera.org/world.htm Yes, there are certainly issues with Qatar getting the bid, and it is a higher risk, that is not in dispute. But it also shouldn't be in dispute that is also has the highest potential for gain and legacy. Korea, Japan, Australia, and the USA are all second tier soccer nations, and will likely remain so after 2022. Again, little global upside. Qatar has huge upside, regionally, and beyond football. After South Africa, FIFA are less concerned about a nation not pulling it off (Colombia 1986). There is a longer lead time for them to get the ball rolling, and if they are in trouble, there are plenty of nations who can step in and do a good job (USA, Germany, France, England, Spain/Portugal, Italy). The upside for Qatar isn't just soccer infrastructure, but the potential to heal some wounds. To show the West (and particularly the Americans) that all middle-eastern, Arab, Islamic nations are not full of Al-Quaeda, and to show the middle-east that people raised in nations where women are treated well doesn't mean the unraveling of society. Again, a risk, but the most upside. Again, I'm not saying FIFA is all about fairness and helping others, it isn't. But you'd be foolish not to realize that even the most greedy like to rationalize, and still have a little angel sitting on their shoulder, even if they listen to the little devil more often. And some folks actually DO believe a little in fairness (no middle-east or Eastern Europe WCs) and building up the sport. If a bid can appeal to both the greed of the individuals on the committee AND their more benevolent instincts, then that is a winning bid. Both the little angel and the little devil on their shoulders agree. That is why Qatar had the "best" bid. Not the best technical bid, but the bid with the best chance of winning, because it appealed to both the baser AND better instincts of everyone on the selection committee.
They do a lot of projects together. I mentioned the superfast (200+ mph) train plans already (there's also a proposition to take it thousands of miles across the North Africa in order to tie all the Arabic speaking region nations and to give them an alternate route in the case of "trouble" in the Straits of Hormuz (AKA a war), which is how their ships deliver gas and oil to the rest of the world). But there's also a major liquefied gas pipe line going across Qatar and into the UAE (built by the Russians, btw) that will power up a huge desalination plant on the coast there, which will then send its water back into Qatar and UAE. PS. Correction. The first Goodwill Games took place in 1986, not 1996. The Soviets indeed were still in Afghanistan at the time. By 1996, the Soviet Union was no more. PPS. Here's the Wikipedia page that lists the major international sporting events hosted by the old USSR. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Sports_festivals_in_the_Soviet_Union
The biggest problem is the process. England, Australia, and the USA should have been told long ago to drop their bids because the Fifa committee wasnt interested. Instead, FIFA allowed these bids to believe they could win up to the last minute. Apparently a handful of members even lied to the England bid that they would vote for it. Really I just want more transparency and more honesty. And yes Qatar is ridiculous. Qatar does not represent the Middle East. It's basically just the al-thani royal family that bought the World Cup in order to increase their prestige. And the games will be held in the great Qatari cities of Doha, Doha, Doha, Doha, Doha, Doha, Doha, and Doha.
May I ask who patrols the Straits of Hormuz? Let's be clear it is not the Black Sea Fleet. I really get tired of people talking about how bad the US is. Ask South Korea when times are tough. Who do they call?
My thoughts: I think Qatar is going to end up feeling like a dog that finally caught one of the cars it's been chasing every day. You caught it. Now wtf are you going to do? I think their going soon realize there is a ********load difference between the penny ante millions they threw into their bid and the billions upon billions their going to have to spend to pull off an event that brings almost as many visitors as they have people.
This post is so off base on so many points that's it almost impossible to respond to. Qatar's bid had nothing to do with them winning. Both Russia and Qatar along with FIFA are simply corrupt, nothinbg more nothing less. Qatar ties to Al- Qaeda alone should have made it impossible for them to be considered. Are we to think that SA or the middle east hosting the WC is going to have the same effect in those places as it it did for the US in 1994? I think not. The WC should have continued on a rotational basis and given to the countries who truly serve the best interest of the game.
100% agree, corruption knows no boundries. The Qatar WC has the potential to be a huge disaster. The influence of Al-Qaeda alone is scary, never mind that they don't have the infrasture or anything else that makes sense.
The Barents Sea Fleet? Anyhow, I have found this on Yahoo. I guess it's a topic de jour there. Or not. http://travel.yahoo.com/p-interests-36899212
Can't say that I agree with the human rights comparisons, but I concur that on the basis of potential impact beyond the field of play, that Qatar's bid checked all the right boxes. But this raises another point that has been largely ignored...what is the World Cup really all about? Is it a tournament designed to crown the best football playing nation? Or a tournament masquerading as some broader social experiment? To say that FIFA has lost its way given the blatant examples of corruption is to state the obvious, but how about losing its way relative to the principal thrust of this tournament? It's all well and good if as an ancillary benefit the tournament bridges divides and promotes greater understanding among the people of the world, but that should not be the principal consideration with respect to choosing the host countries.
I think you made a lot of good points just two things i have to be a smart a** about Geographically and by population you are right Russia is the biggest country in Europe but the biggest economy in Europe is still Germany and if you count Germany as Western Europe you can hardly call Switzerland which is located south-west of Germany Central Europe
I understand the argument that is being put forth in favor of Qatar. I'm all for transformative World Cups. But it doesn't make sense to compromise on so many important issues just to have a chance at legacy. I'd even go so far as to call it irresponsible. First of all, let me openly state where I'm coming from. If I could have voted, I would have done so for England and Australia. Personally, I think those bids were the most logical choices. I don't think that any of the 2018 bids were bad, and I think Russia is an acceptable choice and will pull everything off without significant problems. In contrast, I think that all the 2022 bids were ludicrous except for Australia, and to a lesser extent the US. For me, Japan and Korea hosted far too recently to be worthy of consideration. This is my main gripe about the US bid as well, though I would have loved it if the US had won because I'm an American. The Qatar bid, however, was the worst of the whole bunch, for the reasons that I outline below. One of the biggest issues is the heat. I mention this not because the fans will be uncomfortable, but because I care about the quality of play. This is the World Cup, the pinnacle of soccer. Those of you who have watched MLS games at temperatures of only 90+ degrees will know how lethargic the play gets. Playing in even higher temperatures will negatively impact the quality of soccer and will likely pose health risks for the players. I know Qatar has promised air conditioning, but no such technology has been demonstrated yet, and I don't believe that a stadium open to air will be sufficiently cooled. Equally problematic is the fact that Qatar is tiny. It's not just that it violates FIFA's own rules for host nations. That alone should have been enough to disqualify the bid. But even for those who say the small size is a benefit (I don't buy it), a country so small can't support the influx of tourists that are bound to descent upon it. The infrastructure is simply inadequate. Too few airports, insufficient roads and public transportation, not enough hotels or restaurants. I don't care how close Qatar is to other nations, this wasn't a joint bid. If Qatar wanted to lean on them, it should have included them in the bid. We already saw the tremendous price gouging that went on in South Africa, which prevented tons of fans from attending. South Africa is a huge nation compared to Qatar, and already had plenty of experience hosting large international sporting events. Scarcity issues will assuredly be far worse in Qatar. Each of the above two reasons alone should have been enough to disqualify Qatar's bid. But the list of problems goes on. The problems discussed below wouldn't be so bad if they were the only issues. Combined with everything else though, they weigh down the bid even further. Qatar has no soccer history. I know the US had no professional league when it was awarded the 1994 World Cup, and that it hadn't qualified for decades. But it had qualified before. It did once have a professional league. The history of Qatari soccer, quite frankly, isn't remotely comparable. As I say, this alone shouldn't disqualify the bid, but I'm not looking forward to Qatar getting one of 32 spots in the WC. South Africa was bad enough in that regard. Qatar is not ideal from a social perspective either. Intolerance of gay people and a lack of rights for women are problematic. This is a country that doesn't even recognize the state of Israel. I know there are examples of countries who have hosted major international sporting events with equally terrible social records. That doesn't mean that it shouldn't count negatively against the bid. For all these reasons, awarding the World Cup to Qatar was a terrible decision. It is clear to me that bribery and/or collusion were involved, and we're all worse off because of it. I understand that FIFA wants to spread its gospel. Australia would have done just that. I'm also all for a World Cup in the Middle East. Qatar is simply the wrong choice at the wrong time because its negatives far outweigh the potential benefits. This post and (most of) the arguments put forth by others aren't sour grapes because the US lost. I'm just disappointed that the World Cup experience won't live up to its potential in 2022.