Potential 2026 WC Hosts (Update: Morocco Sole Challenger to CONCACAF Bid)

Lets get things straight here (yeah, unfortunately, this is political).

Chile has no issues with any of them. For us, the past is in the past, and we pretend to leave it there.

It's them (specially Bolivia), the ones whom still believe that they have issues with us.

About reaching some sort of agreement, this specific year.
First, elephants will colonize the moon.

 

@Rickdog thanks for your input, it's more or less what I expected. And it's not just reaching agreement this year, but the 3 countries would need to come to agreement in the next few weeks as they'd need a least a few additional weeks to at least put together a high level proposal to present to FIFA before the early August deadline.

So the next question I have is, why is the Chile federation president Arturo Salah stating that Chile "is considering a bid to host the cup with some of its South American neighbors"? To get his own name in the news? To take a poke at the rumored Uruguay-Argentina bid or maybe to get Chile a place in that bid?

Or maybe this journalist just took something innocuous that Salah said and turned it into this story. It wouldn't be the first time. Looking back at the title of his article, "USA's World Cup bid to host in 2026 could soon face stiff competition", it's difficult to see how this, or any other bid, could be thought of as "stiff competition".

 

Ask Salah yourself

How do you expect me to know what is going on in his mind ?


Besides, if it helps you for anything, our FA is currently almost broke. And most of our politicians are more worried in getting money into their own pockets, not in spending it.

 

http://www.ussoccer.com/stories/201...nited-states-official-for-2026-fifa-world-cup

 

The 2026 bid director for Mexico is Yon De Luisa, vicepresident of Televisa. That's some heavyweight.

 

Morocco bid rumors not going away:
http://www.insideworldfootball.com/2017/07/27/morocco-set-bid-2026-world-cup-100-support-africa/

 

Morocco would be a fantastic country to host and probably the only other country that could in Africa. However I don't think they will get the chance going up against all of North America. One day hopefully.

 

At least they don't have a blonde "duck" as president, whom likes to extend bans to traveling citizens "to or from" some specific countries .....

 

Oh wow thank for your political opinion, I care so much.

Even if he gets re-elected somehow he will have been out of office for 2 years by the time the World Cup is held so it doesn't matter.

 

Probably so, but the ones whom elected him, might get their next candidate with his same ideas or even worse (if possible), to become the next president, as his replacement for the office.

If it already happened once, nothing can save you from happening again.

 

As I said plenty of times Tickets for Iran would be sold out in minutes with all the locals from Persia in California or New York so it is kind of a moot point,

Keep politics out of this.

 

Having a historical election that elected a black president did not help the US bid even gain one vote. Meanwhile Putin had no issues winning 2018. I think Trump is not a factor.

 

The ability to fill a stadium with "Iran fans" (where a large number can no longer read or speak Farsi fluently) is not the same as rewarding Iran's core fans, those that have been supporting Iran every step of the qualifying phase, with an opportunity of witnessing their team in the World Cup. Travel bans are a fact of life around the world (and not a deal-breaker in my opinion) but let's not pretend that apples are oranges.

Fully agree.

@Rickdog - there was no need to bring up Trump at this point.

 

I don't agree, as it will be during Trump's term as president of one of the bidding countries, that FIFA will finally decide whom will get to host for the 2026 WC.

As you might perfectly know, one of FIFA's main requirements for any potential host, is to have full government support which also includes the figure of whom is the president, and with a man as such, anything can happen. Specially considering how fast the man changes his mind over diferent issues. At some point he might give his full support, but the next day, he might take it back.

As long as he is in office, he is going to be a factor over deciding the potential host for 2026, if his country pretends to host the WC.

Oh and btw, @deejay , skin color isn't what really gets you FIFA votes. Most of the times, the best for that is "green paper" in the pockets of those taking those votes (not a beautiful thing maybe, but that's how most of the hosts from past WC's, including among them the one played for 1994, got the votes to be elected as such)

 

Fair enough about the government support, in particular any financial guarantees. As for the travel ban, there are many years to go and there is no point in getting overly excited about it now from a football perspective. Just like there isn't much purpose in discussing a "Israel in Qatar" scenario at this stage.

Blanket travel bans are unfortunate but not a deal-breaker as long as the players and delegation are let in and it doesn't affect more than a couple of participants. At least in my opinion. I imagine FIFA would take a similar stance.

 

And as I have alluded to before there is no evidence that Iran's core fans would be denied travel in the USA due to special circumstances that were written in the first bill. It does not get any bigger or special than the World Cup.
Since that discussion the legislation has been to court and adjustments have been made.
The main point is with tickets being sold and with special exceptions it will all be moot and a meaningless argument.

 

I saw the USA-Iran game in the 98 World Cup, and the whole city of Lyon, France was full of Iranian immigrants who lived in Europe and were totally psyched to support their team. Interestingly, they were also banned from having a certain type of flag that represented the Iranian resistance, those flags were confiscated at the stadium entrance, and, it was, said, it public places in the city. The point, though, is that immigrants can be the most vocal supporters because they have less opportunities to celebrate their heritage. See the Mexican support in the USA as another example.

I agree that if the WC were held today in the USA, there would be a vocal immigrant community supporting Iran. Also, I agree, Trump won't be president in 2026. A fair question, though unanswerable, will be if in 2026 the USA is still the sort of country where expatriots from Iran (and other places) feel safe celebrating their heritage at a public event. This is assuming we don't have to consider (an admittedly unlikely) darker scenerio, is if people of Iranian heritage (and others) still reside in the USA in large numbers.

 

I meant to say executive order not legislation and bill by the way.
Whatever.

 

We'll I know that. You were the one to go that route. But you were also never the one to admit you are wrong so this is as good as it gets.

Talking about green, I'll tell you right now why the US bid has this in the bag.

First:
FIFA finances show loss of $369 million US last year

Then:
US Soccer Has $100M Budget Surplus, Made Profit Of $46M Off 2016 Copa

 

I simply don't see a country like the US changing its national security policies in any way for a sports event but we are going in circles in a very hypothetical argument. Let's see how Russia treats Ukrainian fans next year should 1) Ukraine qualify and 2) decide to participate instead of boycott.

I don't doubt the passion of the diaspora. But they don't represent a "moral fix" for a travel ban. That is my point.

 

And you think that FIFA cares about the US finances ?

For FIFA the only ones that matter is for FIFA itself. If the hosts win or loses money, or end with huge debts, they don't give a damn about it. And this is not only about FIFA, but also about those who hold high positions in FIFA, whom also want to have their share of the profits (a share that of course must not have them imprisioned or prosecuted a few years later).

 

Shouldn't that issue related to Russia or bettter yet related to the 2018 WC, be an issue for another thread ?

I thought this thread was about potential hosts for 2026.....

 

There's always exceptions and loopholes.
And Hosting the biggest tournament in the World as long as a proper vetting process is applied.

Politics over.
Let's talk Bids.

 

I think his point is a host likely to make loads of money off the tournament would bid higher for it, thus enriching FIFA.

 

This also applied for the 2022 tournament, but they went for the country that made suited the FIFA execs better than FIFA itself.