I thought this was more of a Brazil WC 2014 question than a question for the Politics forum, but that thread got locked, so I'll try here. Anyway, just throwing the question out there. I know of a few precedents of countries being banned from tournaments for political reasons: Spain WC 1938, Germany WC 1950, and more recently, Yugoslavia at the 1992 Euros. (Denmark took their place and won the trophy). Also, in the event that Russia does get kicked out, who would replace them? I assume it would be the next team in line in their qualifying group, which would be Israel. Talk about trading one controversial situation for another!
A lot of people are calling for the strictest possible sanctions against Russia. That would certainly seem to qualify as one of those sanctions.
I dunno. We just had one big international sporting organization interested in maximizing profits allow the Olympics to be held in Russia. Do we think the other big international sporting organization interested in maximizing profits would take a stand against Russia?
No, definitely not. This should be resolved diplomatically..banning their team from the WC wouldn't do shit.
A ban doesn't make sense…but we should switch all of their games to Manaus, and allow the US to play in Rio
The fact that the US had put together a "coalition" of alleged allies to take part in the invasion made it hard to kick the US out without also banning other nations in the coalition. The timing was also bad, as the invasion commenced in March, 2003. The 2002 WC was long gone, and the '06 Cup was years away. By the time qualifying began in the fall of 2004, the occupation of Iraq was off the front pages in most of the world. However, even if the timing had been different, it is doubtful that there would have been the political will to stand up to the US on this. It is a slightly different case with the Russian invasion of Ukraine, particularly if the conflict becomes more widespread. A full-scale invasion of Ukraine, including the western provinces, and there may be intense pressure to say Do svidania to the Russian NT.
The US should, for condoning Nazism. http://www.businessinsider.com/john-mccain-meets-oleh-tyahnybok-in-ukraine-2013-12
If this is bigger than the wants/needs of a nation's athletes, than it is. If it isn't, it isn't. Sports don't need a free pass from real life when they affect so much of real life.
If the US doesn't want to compete in the '18 finals, then it can simply withdraw from its qualifying competition. Other than that, there is no way it's going to happen absent UN sanctions, which of course won't happen.
We're not so bad at that unilateral invadin thing ourselves. Which WC & olympics were we banned from?
If no one wanted to try banning the US from a WC or Games, it could mean fear of retribution, or concluding that there wouldn't be adequate support, probably other reasons I haven't listed. But none of them would indicate that it's off the table, period, for everyone. People get to decide what they can look at themselves in the mirror for doing or not. I haven't opined on whether this is worth sanctions of any sort. I've simply said that sports has no business being a safe haven from real life if targeting sports is effective in helping bring about change in real life. While we're on the subtopic of punishing athletes... I don't know that athletic sanctions against Apartheid-era South Africa were a big help or not, but seeing South Africa represented at a Games during that time would have brought real life to sports in living color --would have tainted whatever purity is left in sport-- much more than the bans did. You know, you're looking at the screen thinking, "they're from... that place, where people are treated that way... why are they here, at a celebration of goodwill thru athletic competition?"
Fine. We should have been kicked out of the '90 cup for invading Panama. It's virtually the same situation.