FIFA only really looks after international teams though, so comparing size of leagues and number of teams in the country isn't the solution. I follow Thai football, they have hundreds of teams, probably more than South Korea, but you would say Thailand get more respect in voting over South Korea in this instance? Kuwait, who made a world cup have less than 20 teams, so in cycles it all changes. I would agree that nations get more voting power, and maybe this is where the FIFA rankings come into play.
No. I want voting on matters pertaining to the World Cup to be limited to nations actually affected by the consequences of said votes, i.e. those who actually play in the World Cup. That's why my proposed reform is to only allow nations who have qualified for the World Cup in the past twenty years to vote on matters pertaining to the World Cup. There's absolutely no logical reason why nations such as San Marino, Madagascar, Nepal, Tahiti, and Bermuda should be allowed to vote on matters pertaining to the World Cup given that they will never play in the World Cup.
That's not exactly an unrealistic expectation. Australia is gone, and New Zealand still barely has that many professionals. It's really not that surprising to see them go to the Confed Cup. I guess since Tahiti beat New Zealand to get to the Confed Cup they could theoretically beat New Zealand to get that .5 WC berth in the future. But I sure don't see them beating the playoff team from any other confederation.
I watched all their con fed cup games....Tahiti didn't 'play' in that tournament....yes they were on the field.....
Haha, so funny... such good reason for wanting to change the voting system. Talk to Togo, North Korea. Your mate would be refering to these nations not long ago, even refering to the likes of Bahrain who got to a playoff, telling them they shouldn't be at the ball. What this means is that you can't really give more votes to bigger footballing nations when the lesser nations do actually make it. And if you do want to use your system, then you need to have the same number of nations from each zone qualifying otherwise it's completely lopsided in UEFA's favour on every occasion - you could have the best 5 nations from South America always being outvoted by crap nations from UEFA.
chances are it is much easier for the bribers...to bribe the 3rd worlders (there's a ton of 'em) to keep the status quo (Blatter) and his totally corrupt organization in power.....F'in Qatar getting the world cup is the most blatant example of the total thievery going on all the time....just a joke.
One vote per member will mean that South America will have fewer votes than any other confederation: CAF 54 UEFA 53 AFC 46 CONCACAF 35 OFC 11 CONMEBOL 10 That's just idiotic.
I know, that's what i pointed out. But some appear to favour that over the current system of 24 odd FIFA guys who represent each of the footballing world failry evenly. I'm happy with how the voting is done. It works except for closed ballot, should be open. Back in voting for 2006 England were unhappy about all that happened behind the scenes. Issues always happen. People want bigger footballing nations to have even more power, so little nations might aswell drop out altogether, there's just no respect for smaller footballing nations even if they have already shown they can make the world stage, Togo, Kuwait, North Korea, Trinidad and Tobago, UAE from the footballing 3rd world have made world cups - people forget that.
I don't have a problem with way the system is set up. Most decisions are made by ExCo which has a decent composition of small and big countries. Some decisions are taken to the federations. Sounds like a balance is maintained. My problem is with the way the system is RUN and the culture of corruption that is tolerated.
Where? Not when you were talking about "your system" to england66, I hope. Who does? (Apart from Blather, of course.) To be honest, I thought the only person round here who did was you, based on the fact you said: But apparently not. And when you say: ...who are you talking about now??
Here are two quotes that I will use to illustrate a point about voting theory. From the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: "The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government." From the USA's Declaration of Independence: "Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed." My point has to do with the practical meaning of these excerpts, rather than with the ideals that they embody, however noble they may be. In practice, the reason that FIFA has power is because all of the soccer-playing countries have allowed FIFA to have that power. Understanding that FIFA's power derives solely from soccer-playing countries leads us to a further realization. Suppose, hypothetically, that Brazil, Italy, Germany, Argentina, France, Spain, England, Uruguay, and so forth express the opinion to FIFA that the 2022 World Cup simply cannot be held in Qatar. FIFA then has two choices. FIFA can move the 2022 FIFA World Cup to a sane location, such as Australia, on some pretense. Then FIFA retains its power. Alternatively, FIFA can "stand up" to Brazil, Italy, Germany, etc. Then those countries withdraw from FIFA and form SIFAF, the Sane International Federation of Association Football. SIFAF announces that the 2022 SIFAF World Championship will be held in Australia. The 2022 SIFAF World Championship includes Brazil, Italy, Germany, etc. The 2022 FIFA World Cup includes Qatar and whatever other countries they can convince to go there. Ask yourself: Which competition would earn more money for broadcasting rights? Which competition would sell more tickets? Which competition would sponsors support? Qatar should not labor under the illusion that they are guaranteed to host the most important soccer world championship in 2022 just because they managed to rig one vote in 2010.
Failry evenly ? freudian slip..?......of those '24 odd fifa guys' who sold their souls to Qatarie $$$ for their vote...haven't about 8 of them been discredited/kicked off the exco since that 'vote'..?? 'Failry evenly' yes.....fairly evenly no chance...
Look at my post again. I said 5 nations from South America always being outvoted by crap nations from UEFA IF THEY WERE TO USE THE SYSTEM OF ONLY WORLD CUP TEAMS VOTING. Just like you, I don't agree with it AS IT WOULD BE RUN BY EUROPE ALL THE TIME UNLESS THEY HAD THE SAME NUMBER OF TEAMS FROM EACH REGION COMPETING!! Ha, of course, so Deejay didn't say the same thing directly above your post then. Bore... You obviously have the perfect system in your mind that you don't wish to share. mfw13 only wants big footballing nations to vote, so he doesn't want the like of the nations I described to have a say.
You don't understand how FIFA runs do you. Learn the voting process. Learn how guys get onto the FIFA Ex-co board and then come back.
Voted for by members from 1st world countries!! Bloody first world always thieving and then blaming it on 3rd world countries - which countries you getting at here? You want to name the 3rd world countries that voted Qatar?
Well, that's exactly how I read it in the first place, which was why I was surprised that you thought you'd pointed out what would happen under one member one vote. Nope, I was talking about something else: the system we'll get if Blather has his way. deejay was talking about something else entirely. mfw13 has quite clearly stated: ...which includes most of the teams you mentioned, and your claim that he's forgotten them is baseless.
Actually, more than half of the representatives of those same nations you mentioned, voted positively on the Qatar bid. (very few of them, actually voted for the alternative bids)
I guess you can fix it democraticly and elitely. President of FIFA: dear (209) member of FIFA, do you agree on "Every next WC or big event host gonna get elected by 70 positive votes by the 120 best ranked FIFA members"? Current 120 best ranked member: yea that is great Current 89 worst ranked member: NO, that is evil. President of FIFA: the motion is approved. There is very dificult that 70 soccer-football-lover-nations agree of send the WC to a wrong place and none can bribe so many. Is like we democratly choose to avoid under18yearold vote rights.
My point is that only the teams which actually play in the World Cup have to deal with the consequences of where it is held. A nation which has no hope of qualifying for the World Cup can vote to hold it in Greenland, for example, knowing that they will not have to deal with the consequences of their vote. That's why I think only countries which have qualified for a World Cup during the past twenty years should be able to vote on matters pertaining to the World Cup....because they know that they will likely have to deal with the consequences of their decision.
If only few nations are allowed to vote, then it wouldn`t be a "WORLD" Cup. If it is suposed to be a "whole world" category tournament, it must include everyones opinions and likewise their decissions concerning it, even if they don`t take part in it, actively (although they actually "are", participating actively, as each WC starts with the respective qualifiers, where they do participate the same way, as every other nation does). More so, if any country doesn`t want to go, they are free to not sign-in their suscription to it and of course not play in it, if they wish to do so (no one participates in a WC, with a gun pointed at their back, if they don`t do so, ).
I also wrote in earlier posts, Kuwait, UAE... etc so he's forgotten them then. Read my posts more clearly please.
What about the financial consequences for everyone? This is FIFA's main money-maker and the annual payout to each association heavily depends on it. I don't think the small associations will do anything to upset the traditional powers if it affects their bottom line. Let's see how it goes with the hosting decisions taken by FIFA Congress. I don't expect another Qatar and it is certainly better than a few old men sitting in the ExCo.
Most not equal to all, right? Of the five teams you mentioned, three would currently be voting on hosts using mfw's scheme. Had that scheme already been in force, UAE would have voted on hosts until 2010 (and thus may have voted on the 18/22 hosts depending on how the cutoff was handled) and Kuwait would have voted until 2002. If anyone needs to read posts more clearly, it's you. Although widening the voters on hosts is preferable, I would probably widen the mandate through the FIFA rankings. That seems a little less arbitrary than using qualification, given the large disparities in regional strength. Of course, some will then complain about European "domination". Well, the reality is that that is where the largest cluster of stronger teams is. Having hosting decisions taken by the entire Congress... well, that means two thirds of the voters will be voting on something they have never participated in:- a WC finals competition. Although some of that number may participate in a future finals, the reality is that most will never do so.
Blatter defeated Havalange (what a choice match-up that was..there is no 'lesser' of two evils there) to get the fifa presidency in the first place by bribing the third world countries (well documented in Andrew Jennings book 'FOUL') more than the other crook did....fact is that many of the exco ********s who voted for Qatar have since been discredited....like they give a rat's rear...they've probably stashed upwards of $5m a piece for their 'vote'. ...setting aside the heat factor of a (as bid on) summer world cup in Qatar, to even contemplate having the tournament there is just idiotic.