1. Infantino 2. It's all under: "FIFA considers...." 3. ad.1 4. Also during 45 minutes with Infantino, he was talking up the prospect again of a Women's World Cup every 2 years, something first floated by the French FA head during this year's tournament— Rob Harris (@RobHarris) December 20, 2019
I am 100% sure such an idea will be voted down, like they voted down merging the U17 and the U20 tournaments into one at U19 evel,
Yeah that's just dumb. There's no time in the calendar for doubling the speed of the WC cycle. Not to mention it would massively devalue each tournament. Also: GROW THE CLUB GAME, YOU COWARDS
Gerard Houiller during the Reign/OL announcement yesterday said the 2021 FIFA Women Club World Cup will happen.
Funny thing is that U-17 and 20s do have World cups every 2 years. I thought they do every 4 and correlate with Women’s senior team in the same year. Like before or after the Women’s World Cup.
Youth teams don't have the professional scheduling issues that the senior teams do. Also, the u20 is used as a warm-up for the senior WWC hosts, just the year before - trying to stage both in the same summer would be a bit too much of an ask for host countries.
What is this idea for a Club World Cup (champions league): This would be another tournament in separate from and in addition to the existing Champions League--or would it eliminate the existing Champions League? Hard for me to imagine how they're going to start another separate comprehensive tournament. As for holding the World Cup every two years, I'm curious to know how the proponents think qualifying would be organized. Qualifying for both the WC and Euros are already prolonged now--lasting at least 18 months if not longer, no? Teams would be in a constant qualifying mode--qualifying WC, qualifying Euros, Champions League, World Club Cup, friendlies, club matches: Not enough days in the year for all this proposed soccer! I'm curious to know why the France federation likes the idea of a bi-annual World Cup.
The FFF president is an old man with bad idea simple as . On the Club world cup FIFA want to do the same as the men's one. We saw the disruption it does to the calendar for UEFA sides with Liverpool playing one game in England and the nect day in Qatar.
Don’t know if they would get rid of the current Champions League to be replaced by something that’s pretty similar but more global. You have champion clubs from Australia, Asia, South and Central America as well as in the states going against the clubs from Europe. Unless we want to see Lyon win again.
The Champions League is a UEFA product. Club World Cup is Fifa's. These are two very different competitions. UEFA Champions League is the best soccer (quality of players) and the richest competition on the planet, significantly better than the world cup. FIFA is trying to challenge UEFA. Women's game is headed for the same direction. Big investment from established European clubs could.
Sometimes, how you say things is as important as what you want to say: Conmebol bids continue to undermine themselves. Brazil’s football association came to Uefa to pitch for the right to host the 2023 FIFA Women’s World Cup. Their delegation was short of one important person: a woman.— tariq panja (@tariqpanja) March 2, 2020 To be honest Japan the only bidder to come out with any credit. Its 3 person delegation included 2 women.Australia/NZ showed up with 2 men and a woman.Colombia saw fit to send one delegate: a chap called Andres— tariq panja (@tariqpanja) March 2, 2020 From reports in 2019, FIFA will make its 2023 WWC decision after a vote among its 37-member board. UEFA is the largest block within that board: 9 out of 37. Followed by AFC and CAF blocks, with 7 members each. Infantino's vote counts separately from confederations' votes. https://www.fifa.com/who-we-are/fifa-council/
Okay, 37 total votes, 4 candidates, how might this play out...? I'd imagine that the UEFA votes probably split between AUS/NZL and JPN, maybe slightly favoring AUS/NZL. So maybe 5 AUS/NZL and 4 JPN. The AFC votes will also probably split between AUS/NZL and JPN, probably favoring JPN - but IDK if the JPN member on the council will be allowed to vote. So maybe 4 JPN and 2 AUS/NZL CAF is interesting, especially since RSA was a previous bidder for 2023. I'm guessing they lean toward the C'BOL bids, unless they're planning ahead to woo the AFC contingent for 2027. No clue which way the five C'CAF votes will go The five C'BOL votes will probably stay in C'BOL, but again, IDK if the BRA or COL members will be allowed to vote. I bet they'd try to unify their voting, though, so 3 BRA or 3 COL. The OFC votes will almost certainly go to AUS/NZL, so with an NZL rep in the council, that's leaving 2 AUZ/NZL votes. Summed up, that's 9 AUS/NZL votes, 8 JPN votes, 3 C'BOL votes, 4 potential host "votes", and 13 undetermined votes in the first round including Infantino's. I believe 19 votes are ultimately needed to win, so unless the undetermined votes all pool behind a C'BOL host, it'll come down to AUS/NZL vs JPN in later rounds of voting. IDK who has the edge there, but I kiiiiinda want AUS/NZL just to see if a second OFC team either gets in directly or at least goes to a playoff.
FIFA Council is to meet online on June 25 to decide the host for the 2023 WWC (Link also has links to the bid books): https://www.fifa.com/who-we-are/new...23tm-council-to-select-host-s-on-25-june-2020
Better late than never but I really dislike how the hosts have gotten progressively shorter and shorter time between selection and event start... Yeah FIFA, you're really respecting the women's game. We should be selecting the 2027 hosts around now, not the 2023 hosts.
yeah, the three-year notice is odd since the men get 5-8 years, especially since the WWC is at 32 teams now.
Rumour has it that UEFA will change WWC qualifiers model in Europe. Consultations are now under way in various FA's about the new proposal which has qualifiers played as two simultaneous tourneys - A and B. Tourney A will be held for high ranking UEFA teams while B for the lower ranked teams. Europe will have 11 WWC tickets all - distributed unequally between both tourneys. My guess is tourney A will be held for top 32 UEFA teams with the prize of 9 or10 tickets and tourney B for lower ranked 16 teams (with prequalifiers for the lowest ranked teams below 48th) with the prize of 1 or 2 WWC tickets. or it will be leagues, where weakest 2 teams from A are dropping to B and 2 winners of B moving to A
UEFA was keen on introduction of League of Nations in women's football from some time now. Annual league of nations A and B would rise not only quality but more importantly profile of women's football in Europe, especially in less developed WoSo-wise FA's.
Part of this is probably due to the women's game being so unstable world wide. That is that teams that are practically nonexistent today can have a real chance at going far in a WWC in the near future. To climb from obscurity into the top 10 or 12 still does not take much of an effort and it is sometime unpredictable which teams will improve dramatically. On the other end of the spectrum it is easy for a team that is seeming to climb rapidly to stumble or lose part of its funding or just be badly mismanaged and fall out of favor or become an unattractive candidate to host a WWC. By shortening the time the possibility of a horrid choice is reduced quite a bit. It is quite possible that FIFA and even the regions involved do not want to make too bad a choice for hosts. Also the bribe money is smaller for a WWC so that makes good choices in the short term easier for the women than for the men. I actually prefer a shorter timespan for selection of the hosts for the reasons above and because if a terrible choice is made, like putting the men in Qatar, we only have to think about it for a quite short time.
...first, you're wrong about ranking speed, and second, you're massively conflating two largely separate issues. A team's strength an a nation's ability to host a Cup are wildly different logistics. Wow this was a bad post.
I would rather suspect interest from big FIFA sponsors. If those sponsors asked FIFA to come up with a WWC calendar for the next 8-10 years, then FIFA would oblige. Regarding corruption in the bidding process, it is difficult to name countries interested on bribing FIFA to host a WWC. Unlike the rights to host Olympic Games or MWC, there is no political gain from hosting a WWC. How will that change? It might start by curtailing subsidies in top football leagues. Sponsors are not impressed with tournaments where ticket revenue is distorted by subsidies. A sponsor will not spend lots of money, when stadiums are packed by fans not willing to pay market price on tickets.
Yep that post was not well thought out. But the idea of wanting to avoid a horrible choice by not making the choice too far in the future is what I really wanted to say. I think that is really one of the strong reasons for the short window. You are also right about a team's strength not being a good pointer to which countries will make a good host. But I think that the idea of money impacting the choice still holds up. While the WWC has not historically been immensely profitable it is becoming more so and the WWCs in France and Canada show that at least decent money can be made by a well run WWC. It does not take huge profits to make the target attractive but just decent profits and exposure for the women's side of soccer. The really unfortunate thing is that profits and exposure at WWCs has not really, yet, translated directly into profitable leagues for the women.
I bow to you. Why? This: if you know these boards as much as I know them, you know how unfrequent it is that a poster take it on himself to have written something wrong or not well thought out; it's much more normal that he/she starts a petty argument to defend his original opinion at all costs. Now, I know you enough to be aware that for sure you're not that kind of person, but it's anyway quite rare to read an honest acknowledgement like yours here on this forum.