http://www.fifa.com/Service/MR_A/43881_E.html Four venues in France, Stade de France (Saint-Denis), Parc des Princes (Paris), Stade Gerland (Lyons) and Geoffrey-Guichard (Saint-Etienne), will host the 2003 Confederations Cup. It'll take place from June 18th-29th.
At the risk of sounding ignorant, just what is the point of the confederations cup? It seems to be a new thing that started without any fanfare or announcement. I think when I first heard of it I thought it was some friendly tournament, but here it is being fully backed by FIFA.
The point is to pit the champions of each confederation against each other (along with the World Cup champions). So, it's an only an eight-team tournament. For the first two (in '92 and '95 in Saudi Arabia) it was the "Intercontinental Championship for the King Fahd Cup" (and had less participants). They had only four teams in the first one and six in the second. Then, it turned into the "FIFA Confederations Cup" and has been around for three cycles now (Saudi Arabia in '97, Mexico in '99, Korea/Japan in '01) and will exist for at least two more (France '03, Germany '05), although UEFA is wanting to pull the plug on it after that. Winners: FIFA Confederations Cup '01 - France (def. Japan in final) '99 - Mexico (def. Brazil in final) '97 - Brazil (def. Australia in final) Intercontinental Championship '95 - Denmark (def. Argentina in final) '92 - Argentina (def. Saudi Arabia in final)
Very well said,Atouk. BTW is your name from the movie "Caveman" with Ringo Starr?Just curious.Not trying to be an ass.
Apparently all of those writers who implied that France had already won the bid back in August had some inside info after all...
...............well, I might go to see my beloved Brazilians (and France in June is not that bad you know)
So its Brazil, France, Colombia, Cameroon, USA, Japan and New Zealand and another invitee. My choice would be Spain. They're ranked second on the FIFA listing and they placed fifth at the WC, not losing a game in the tournament.
The other invitee is Italy; because France is hosting, the UEFA spot goes to the runner-up of Euro 2000.
Elninho is most likely correct. Haven't seen official word on the FIFA web site. My choice of Spain was just wishful thinking.
...which is Germany. kicker-article excerpt on the FIFA-Executive-Comitee: "From the German perspective MV [Gerhard Mayer-Vorfelder, DFB-President] had good and bad news. Good: after the ticketing scandals regarding this WC the intention now is to fully transfer the ticketing procedure to the German organisation comitee. Bad: the German national team shall take place in the Confederations Cup 2003 in France from June 18 to 29, which brings DFB [German FA] and DFL [Bundesliga administration] in a tricky situation. Considering that the next Confederation Cup 2005 will be held in Germany as tryout for the WC 2006, MV sees a participation in this Confederation Cup as necessary. German team boss Rudi Völler and DFL are against this plan: "This is a very big problem at this moment, the players need to recover from the season in June". Horst R. Schmidt adds: "We are in a situation, in which we can't deny to take part. But realistically I see no chance regarding the date to take part in France".
"The powers that be" are only UEFA. Haven't heard anyone else say they want it to end. It's a good (and rare)chance for the top national teams from the different confederations to get to play one another.
True enough, but there's no reason it has to be that way. I just read this quote (about format changes in the Champions league) on soccernet: "...its addition further diluted a competition that had been largely discredited in many's eyes after the admittance of second-placed teams from leading UEFA member countries ahead of the 1997-8 season. " The Confederations Cup, as far as I can tell, is roughly the equivalent of the old European championship format (champions only), a system that many saw as more valid than the current CL format. So why isn't it the CC seen as a valid tournament, then? It's totally subjective. If teams and fans cared, it would be interesting, and vice versa. I like the CC, mostly because (like Atouk said) it gives teams from different confederations a chance to play each other in non-friendlies, which doesn't happen much. Maybe what FIFA should do is allocate only 31 of the 32 World Cup slots to confederations, and then award an additional 1/2 slot each to the confeds whose team won the Confederations Cups preceding the World Cup. That would make for a very worthwhile tournament.
It's not only subjective. In my previous post you see that Germany shall take part, but basically the timing is so bad that it's impossible. And this surely is the same in at least the other big European countries as well. The season finishes in May and in July the pre-season starts and the players need to recover. Either they get no break at all or they are forced to return from their vacation in June (and of course in bad physical shape). Big tournaments every two years are enough and if not then WC or EC should be more often and no third competition.
There is a third option and that is for countries to send players that otherwise would never see international play. If FIFA persists in continuing with this farcical cup, that's what will have to happen. Sachin
I am very curious as to how those 4 venues were chosen. St.Entienne has a rich football history but the folks there haven't seen a high level of football played in a long time. I don't think they should ve been picked. I don't think you need Paris AND St.Denis because their so close you need to spread things out a bit. If I was picking the cities and venues for this tournament I would have chosen St.Denis,Lyon,Bordeaux and Nantes to be home to the matches.
Who'd watch these games? This cup makes sense at least for one nation: the host of the next WC as test. That's what Germany is doing in 2005. But with empty stadiums you can't have a real test. Don't want to play the Eurosnob, but the American leagues are in the middle of their season in June and for them it's hardly a problem to have a two weeks break. The situations is just bad for those who are between two seasons. In 2005 Germany of course will take part - add Brazil, USA, Australia, Argentina, Japan, South Korea and Norway (play through summer) and this would be an excellent friendly tournament. I just don't see why Spain or France should be forced to take part if they don't want to.