As it was reported to me by contemporary witnesses: with a lot of people cheering when goalies would carry out a goal kick. I wouldnt call a marketing stunt like 94 a success.
Subjective reasons instead of objective, measurable ones? That's all? In Bolivia the most annoying thing about the national team games was sitting next to the people that knew nothing about soccer but came to that type of event. Mostly women, of course. Always getting excited and nervous about the wrong things. That those types appear in a game is hardly a marketing failure.
I heard from a cousin's uncle's long lost step brother that people cheered Hitler during the Olympics. That logically means that Germany should never be able to host a Sporting event ever again.
Do you watch any matches from Latin American nations? Fans for many nations/clubs will offer a roar for all goal kicks. Much like Arsenal fans do when David Ospina takes a goal kick. FIFA and their sponsors do, as does every European club that now tours the states to sell merchandise or bolster their international media contracts. As does MLS and every soccer team in the US born after 1995. The very concept of stepping outside of Europe and South America for the event and seeing it succeed is what has propelled football to the level of global support you see today. Just because the fans were different and not all locals doesn't mean the event didn't succeed. In fact, it's most telling that the event produced the numbers it did BECAUSE of all the unconventional fans that came out in support. If anything, if it was just a marketing stunt then it may well go down as one of the most successful such stunts ever.
It's not a marketing stunt, among the hoopla it gets ignored that WC94 and to a greater extent MLS succeeded because of the support from the big Latin American and Eastern European base that was very willing to embrace American soccer.
And yet the spectators in 36 knew Jesse Owens was a decent runner and not a ice skater Oh that is common here as well. But thats not what happened in 94 in the US. People thought the guy in a different shirt scored a field goal.
You honestly believe the majority of the crowds in the USA were ignorant as to what sport they were watching? Really?
No, I think it is impossible to call 94 the most successful WC ever when a "certain part" of spectators had no clue at all about what happened infront of them. But that doesnt mean you shouldnt be allowed to show this has changed after 30 years.
That's an extremely vague answer. What's authentic? I'd argue 15K more a game provides a better atmosphere
I would venture to say that with the way people get drunk and the way just anyone can get tickets nowadays there's a "certain part" of spectators in the stands that don't have a clue as to what is going on at all Major Sporting events.
2026 should go back to Europe. Enough with this "spreading the Cup around the world" nonsense. Hopefully it's Spain-Portugal 2026.
I went to nine game during the 94 World Cup (Pasadina and Palo Alto) and I never saw anything like this. The fan 'quality' was pretty high; most were soccer-knowledgeable. There were a few newbies but that's true with any big event. As for comparing the World Cup crowds to Arsenal or Bayern, crowds for World Cup games are never at that level. I went to several World Cup games in France in 1998, and the environment was never the same as the top-club games I've been to (e.g., Barcelona). Club games mostly have the hard-core supporters. WC games have a mix of team supporters, local soccer fans, and more casual fans. That's true no matter what country hold the World Cup.
I mentioned those very clubs for the big crowds they draw but dont have a good atmosphere. Thats why my point still stands. WCs should go to football crazy countries for the atmosphere. Not just in the stadiums but overall. USA 94, Japan/Korea 02 and South Africa 10 were all disappointing in this apartment.
While I understand your point, I think a 2026 World Cup in the United States would have a great atmosphere. The game has grown immensely in the past 20 years, and figures to grow even more over the next 10. Also since the United States has such a diverse population, one nice thing is that no matter which teams are playing, there will probably be a substantial rooting interest for both sides, even before international tourism is factored in.
Were you at any of the tournaments you have derided for lacking "atmosphere". I've only been to one World Cup (Germany 2006) but the atmosphere in the stadiums I was at was no better than the atmosphere in the Asian Cup final I attended in Sydney last year. Whilst the atmosphere outside of the venues was good in Germany, I would rate it behind what I experienced in the Sydney Olympics.
Ah, this argument again. Let's all simply root for the biggest teams in the biggest leagues, because any developing league or less-than great club/nation doesn't deserve our respect. How 19th century.
And his argument just does not make any sense. Do people know which Country's (non host) patrons purchased the most tickets to the Brazilian World Cup in 2014? Let me give you a clue... ...it Starts with a United and ends with a States. So a majority of those great atmospheres down in Samba land had a good percentage of people who either live in the USA or are citizens of the USA.