Why England? That would be two in a row in Europe. Australia has everything England has, except the "more convenient for TV" time zone, but if that's a disqualifier than the WC can never be held in East Asia/Australia.
England? Pfff... They already had their chance... and couldn't come up with the dough to bribe enough delegates
Not very kind for the Americas, we will be well asleep : 11 PM, 2AM, 5AM (UTC-5). But yes, it's just a matter of time for Australia to get it
yes if you want to play the world cup in the cricket ovals. you are underestimating FIFA requirements. It could be done, no question about that, but only in a certain compromise mode, and I do not think that‘s what FIFA is after. there are only six countries in the world who could do that on short notice: last three world cup hosts, plus usa, france and england/uk guess you‘re right
I'll leave it to the Australians on this thread to provide a more detailed answer, but my understanding is that most venues in Australia already meet FIFA standards, and the ones that don't just need minor upgrades.
No offense but FIFA does not really put Australian television money and sponsors high on the priority list. Europe and North America are more important when it comes to television revenue and Sponsors. So just based on that I think Australia will probably not be an option.
based on that, probably the only place where revenues get affected somehow, is in the United states (deep down, for yanks, football/soccer is not their favourite sport as they sure have other soprts that get that priority). Where ever else in North America (Mexico and central America) and in Europe, most football fans are already "captive" consumers that will still watch the WC, not giving much importance to the sheduled hours for the matches to be played at the WC. And for FIFA, the Australian market, together with all the countries whom share their time zones (southeast Asia) can be equally, as important, as the one from the USA.
The money that is generated from English and Spanish television Networks within the USA plus the European Networks combined are more important than anything else. Australia is a couple of hours ahead of the South East Asia market which is gaining and growing but still pale's in comparison. I could see China getting it because the money they could generate in sponsors. Australia not so much. The USA is also another place that could host and would gladly schedule games that align with the television Network slots in Europe (Which would make a lot of people affiliated with FIFA happy.).
If FIFA's real concern were really "only" those zones, the rest of the world wouldn't be getting an expanded WC with lots more teams from diferent places to those of Europe and North america (just think about it, a little more).
I don't think they are only concerned with those zones. But just like any business the ones that provide the most revenue get preferential treatment. Using the context of this instance Qatar's Kickoffs correlated very well with Europe and their Television Networks/ Sponsors. Sending it out to Australia instead would not make their priority stake holders too happy.
You are simply asuming your position to be the same as those you are talking about. And you also forget the most important part of it : that FIFA's sponsors stakeholders have interests worldwide and not restricted to just one zone The other issue, you forget is that Qatar WC matches, were originally going to be sheduled at night to avoid high temperatures during the day, in which case would be about the same thing as if those matches are sheduled to kick-off during daytime in Australia. The other thing, not least important is that the 2022 WC is sheduled to be played in the middle of the NFL regular season. Go figure out how US network broadcasters (and their stakeholders as well) will deal with that...
England and Russia are on separate sides of Europe, culturally and physically, thus I don't think England should be excluded from consideration for 2022 or, especially, 2026 (if the USA - with or without Canada and Mexico - moves up to take 2022). At this point though, I don't think a little diplomatic excitement five years beforehand will cause this to move from the Middle East. Australia will get it one day, I hope it does; but the TV networks will be forewarned 8 or 10 years in advance. Same for China, or anywhere actually. I think that is why you will see more advance bidding in the future. South Africa probably has a better chance than Australia at this point.
Time zones and stadiums. South Africa similar time zone, I think TV rights will no longer be bidded without knowing the game times. Don't get me wrong, I'd love a cup in Australia, and it might happen one day, but TV companies are going to want to know ahead of time.
I am just looking at it from the most realistic perspective possible. There is little to no up side to having Australia host it instead of Qatar. The USA or China would be more along the lines of where it would go. I am not restricting it to one zone if the USA gets awarded it because North America, Europe, Africa, the Middle East would all benefit with having the games start times correlate with the European Network schedule when compared to Australia.
I think that is pretty accurate. Many people were saying years ago that the Middle East would benefit from this World Cup but they turned out to be wrong with egg all over their face as many Countries in the region are now protesting and politically against Qatar hosting now.
You're the first person I've ever seen to make the "separate sides of Europe" argument. Where does Russia's part of Europe stop? At the gates of Vienna? The white cliffs of Dover? Russia and England are both in UEFA. For hosting considerations, that is all that matters. As for 8 to 10 years advance notice, where are you coming up with that? The TV networks had 6 years notice for Japan/Korea, and seemed to do just fine with it. Incidentally, if your reasoning for Australia is correct, Japan/Korea would never have gotten the World Cup as well. But they did.
The barrier between Russia and Western Europe? Somewhere between authoritarianism and democracy, infrastructure and vast distances. So yeah, the gates of Vienna; why does it matter? As an emergency fill in, I think it's possible. Just because they are both in UEFA doesn't mean they are allied politically. And FIFA could dump its rule dictating a World Cup can't held in the same confederation for 8 years in an emergency situation- they dumped the Confederation rotation system for lesser reasons. As to the Australia thing, TV networks have come to realize is that they want to know what they are bidding on. It makes a big difference to a US network if the games are played in the middle of the night, likewise for a Chinese or east Asian network. There will be world cups in east Asia again, but, no matter where a world cup is help I think the bidding process will continue to be pushed forward so TV networks, whereever they are, can value them accordingly before bidding. We might continue to see World Cups awarded two at a time for similar reasons. Anyway, I have no issue with Australia, I just think as a replacement for Qatar the time zone thing is a big issue. But perhaps the move back to summer would be suitable compensation. Nonetheless, I don't think it going to move from Qatar.
If the World Cup is held in Qatar, will the home side be the worst team to ever feature in a World Cup? Lost 1 - 2 at home to Liechtenstein (!) today...