Anyone worried about the WC at all?

"The show will go on" unless the United States does something so egregious (internally, or in its international policy) that it alienates world opinion enough that other national teams start to act on their own. Basically, an action has to come from the bottom up and not the top down, and this would likely have to start with UEFA national teams.

The comparable scenario would be how UEFA national teams started refusing to play Russia after Russia attacked Ukraine in February 2022, trapping FIFA and UEFA into an action that they did not want to take against Russia. Even with this, there was a lot of contingency, as Russia was literally scheduled for a World Cup qualifying playoff at that exact moment against three national teams whose countries take Russian aggression very seriously in Poland, the Czech Republic, and Sweden. Imagine if Russia had been scheduled at that moment instead to face a country like Serbia in a World Cup qualification playoff; I'm not sure we would have seen an immediate ban if Serbia shrugs its shoulders and gives FIFA and UEFA an out.

Because on their own, FIFA and UEFA never would have banned Russia in a million years, as FIFA and UEFA leadership got along far too well with their good friend Vladimir Putin. Just like how FIFA leadership gets along too well with Donald Trump.

 

When I look at the world situation over the last 30 years or so I find I wonder why terrorists and their ilk seem to target sporting events so seldom. I actually investigated, to the limited extent i can, and discovered one possible reason and that is that sporting events do not involve the political polarizing influences that business, military or political events do. There is also the part where a lot of terrorists like sports and do not want to disrupt the possibly one thing they actually enjoy.

But I really think that attacks on sporting events would alienate the people they would like to get support from. Also what the main aim of terrorism is is the disruption of normal daily live and make people afraid to do their ordinary things so targets like market places or business centers are more usual targets.

I am actually more concerned about the first part of your post. In these times I can believe anything may happen, or nothing.
I believe everything will go well for the WC but I would not bet huge sums that nothing will go wrong.
Remember it could be worse, we could politicize the whole thing and make every match about the politics involved. See the German Olympics just prior to WWII.
But I do see the possibility of one or another country refusing to play another because of politics and i think, in that case, it is just something that will have to be dealt with if it happens.
The executive orders that bar people from entering the USA specifically exclude sports teams and officials but they do NOT strongly exclude fans so many fans might or might not be actually prevented from entry.

The concerns you voice are legitimate but I believe they will be avoided.
It seems that we are living in "interesting times" as defined by the old curse: "May you live in interesting times."

 

Damn, I thought this was gonna be about the performance on the pitch...

Already have some airbnbs booked for multiple matches. So yes, I'm worried.

 

He’ll TACO on Iran coming

 

I thought about it, too, and figured that if it gets bad enough, I can just sell my tickets and go fishing.

 

A year is a long time in the world of geopolitics. And maybe I’m wrong, but I don’t think the current situation is all that different from the various barbs exchanged over the years between the US and Iran, all of which were to no great effect. This (as of now) isn’t some all-out war between the countries.

 

A year certainly is a long time, especially with this administration…. But my research (which could be wrong, but I’m fairly certain it isn’t) says the us hasn’t done this type of direct attack since the drone assassination of soleimani. And that was 2020, pretty isolated. This is uncharted territory with a lot of folks worried it could escalate. And fast

 

I have no idea about the calculus, but many Iranians worship footie more than just about anything else out there, so my guess is that absent all-out "boots on the ground" Iraq style conflict (which seems unlikely at this point) or more tit-for-tat next spring, Iran and the US will figure out a way for them to play (although non-US/Canada based Iranian fans getting visas to US might be a bridge too far for all but the most connected/cashed.)

There's a wonderful Abbas Kiarostami psuedo-documentary out there someplace called And Life Goes On shot in Iran in the aftermath of the devastating 1990 earthquake, while the World Cup is being broadcast, that gives an amazing sense of rural Iranian life in the late 80's as well as the obsession with footie.

So, my guess is - bad for Iranian fans unless they're already in NA - but they'll figure out a way for the team to play unless things get quite a bit hotter.

 

What the US did over the weekend in no way, shape or form is comparable to Russia invading Ukraine.

 

Until we escalate.
We attacked a country while refusing to provide proof of why, and did not go through congress, and then said to that country: 'If you retaliate, we'll escalate'; paraphrasing of course. Sounds like they are doing everything in their power to bring this to the next level.

Either way, we are actively supporting a country which is constantly targeting people going to food aid stations while they are facing starvation. Is it comparable to Russia invading Ukraine on a 1:1? No, but while we are playing 'world police', we can't have it both ways - i.e. supporting active genocide and cooperating in foreign invasion.

 

I fully agree
But not to the same ends of “so it won’t be war” that I think you’re suggesting. At best, this is a preemptive strike to dissuade a hostile country from going down a path of having the means to inflict nuclear catastrophe. Expecting a country and people believed to harbor that kind of hatred to react to being attacked in a descaling manner is a very bold risk.

 

Hopefully all this fear mongering effects ticket prices so I can get into the stadiums much cheaper.

 

Yeah, man. We’re all sissies for worrying about the consequences of launching an unprovoked attack on another country.

 

I bet you still wear a mask everywhere too.

 

Mods are going to shut this one down quickly.

 

Barack Obama attacked Libya without Congressional approval. Bill Clinton attacked the Sudan without Congressional approval. Was there a declaration of war when we fought in Vietnam? Nope. No declaration for Korea either. Actually that war continues to this day. We have had some 125 military actions declaring war eleven times.

So if Iran was not enriching uranium they could have proved that by inviting US and Israeli inspectors to tour said sites. They didn’t.

so one of two things were happening. Either they were enriching and didn’t want to get caught, or they weren’t and didn’t want everyone to know they weren’t. That they were playing the role of the big bully in the Middle East.

 

I think the original question by the op is interesting. I will try to keep politics out of some of my thoughts the best I can.

1. do I think everything going on in Mideast can "complicate" wc? Yes. How exactly, I am not completely sure. I suspect that overall danger from terrorism due to Iran attacks may actually be lower than attacks due to US's support of Israeli attacks on Gaza and beyond.

2. I agree with everything else you said but with a caveat. Technically, they couldn't be "caught" in the way most people use that word. Iran wasn't under any agreement to restrict the enrichment of uranium. While technically I suppose it can be used to indicate being observed doing anything (good or bad), the way I use "caught" to indicate doing something you are not supposed to do and being "caught"; caught with your hands in the cookie jar, caught red handed etc.

3. All that being said, I don't think there are many in the west (and likely Mideast and beyond) that actually want Iran to have nuclear capabilities. My guess is that even most, if not all our stated and implied adversaries do not trust Iran either and, behind closed doors, some may actually be applauding our actions and hoping that we really were successful.

 

We played Yugoslavia in the 1998 World Cup while we were actively engaged in supporting Kosovo separatists and just a couple years earlier had engaged in a bombing campaign of several months (not a single hit and run) against them

 

I am assuming their assertion is that they (Iran) are not enriching uranium. So while not under any legal obligation to not enrich uranium - it would prove if they are telling the truth or not.

Sunshine is the best disinfectant.

 

@bungadiri @dark knight

Before this thread gets out of hand, I suggest you move it to the politics forum.

 

I’m not blaming you

Do you have a link for that? Seems like pretty big news, unlikely that both The Athletic and ESPNFC would miss it

 

We bombed Yugoslavia to support Kosovo in the spring of '99 which was after we played them in the World Cup. We bombed Bosnian Serbs in '95 but we did not bomb Serbia or Montenegro themselves (which was Yugoslavia in '98). And in fall of '95 the Dayton accords were signed ending the war in Bosnia. So in the summer of '98 the US and Yugoslavia had broadly supported different sides three years earlier but were not actively at war and while every Serbian would have been aware of a place called Kosovo, 99% of Americans wouldn't have. Very few if any Americans would have seen Serbia as an enemy and most Serbs would have felt the same. Basically this is a way of saying the current situation and that one are not comparable.

In terms of the original post, the show must and will go on. FIFA have a history of trying to "Ignore politics" and host it in the country that will give them the best deal. See '18 in Russia, '78 in Argentina, '34 in Italy. Hell '42 was scheduled to be in Germany. So while I think there will be groups asking if the US is the right host I'd be shocked if it gains any momentum.