I like your confidence in Brazil's near-invincibility at home, and if the tournament is held, I do hope Brazil wins it. But as always, games have to be played. And will they be played at all? That is the question the answer for which we all await.
Don't expect Messi to be like Maradona, at least off the field. There was only one Diego - and only one Chilavert as well. Having said that, there has been a negative reaction from the Argentine players about Conmebol's decision, at least according to this article by Ole. (In Spanish) https://www.ole.com.ar/seleccion/seleccion-sedebrasil-copaamerica_0_xD_pJatJw.html
They have played through waves of COVID in Europe, why would they change tune now ? You're not making any sense.
If the tournament is to be called off, it would be best for this to happen as soon as possible. It's not even for the avoidance of any negative perceptions about President Bolsonaro's administration; he's already got plenty of enemies. There are contracts, and there are TV rights. These interests are not minor, and if there are going to be breaches of contract, then it's best for the signers to come to agreements on how to handle that rather than waiting until days before kickoff. Again, as others said: if Brazilian soccer, with state tournaments and Libertadores fixtures and the newly started 2021 Campeonato Brasileiro are deemed same enough to happen as long as protocols are strictly followed, why would an international match held under likewise rigorous rules be any more dangerous?
True. And you could make the same argument about Argentina. We had the league semifinals yesterday, and we are having the eliminatorias. You can have a very safe tournament, especially if it's done without fans in the stadium. However, it's the politics that are the problem. Holding the tournament now it's an unpopular position. Plus, it provides a good excuse for civil disobedience. People will argue that if the soccer stadium is open, then their store should also be open, their kids school should also be open, and so on. And why should we stay stuck at home when Copa America is being played? It's an argument that leads people to defy the government. That's why Argentina withdrew, and I suspect that's why some Brazilian states don't want to do it either.
I get what you're saying, and while this doesn't necessarily apply to you, I speculate a lot of people outside Brazil don't know what the on-the-ground situation is. Yes, there are cases of Covid-19, but as I wrote here over the weekend, authorities in the U.S. have mislabeled deaths as due to Covid-19 when there were co-morbidities. If that can happen in the U.S., it can happen anywhere. Perhaps in your native country, all the more due to the 9-day full lockdown, the citizenry is likely to think as you described. But in many Brazilian cities, there's no full lockdown in place at the moment. Precautions such as social distancing and wearing masks remain in place, but bars and restaurants are open (at the least as far as I know in the city of São Paulo). There have been no massive waves of sudden mass deaths since establishments reopened there. And given viruses like Sars-Cov-2 act the same whether it's located in the U.S. or Brazil or Argentina, it may be noted that the CDC said nearly 2 months ago the odds of catching it via surface contact is 1 in 10,000. Not that people should rub their eyes or lick their fingers after taking a dump in a public restroom, but you get my point. Here is the CDC's own URL. So perhaps over where you were born, people might react that way. The situation is a bit different in Brazil; you may or may not have known that. I would ask people who think people in Brazil are dying as if there was an extermination campaign happening to reflect and think a bit, given that a case/infection does not necessarily signify a guaranteed death. People DO recover from catching Covid-19.
To what do you attribute the fact that some states in Brazil do not want to host Copa America, including Rio Grande do Sul, which would have been a logical site for Argentina snd Uruguay to use as a base?
Politics. Governor of Rio Grande do Sul for example .... is from Social Democratic Party. Same for Sao Paulo.
As Celito said, there's a political factor. In all countries, opposition politicians will do what they can to weak the sitting officials to get out of office in the next election or through impeachment. President Bolsonaro is being vilified the way Trump was here, and his opponents have started a probe in the senate to investigate his handling of the Covid-19 situation. This is all to weaken him because many of his opponents want leftist Lula back in power starting next year. Trump for example was accused of mass murder here. Yet even your own state of California - Gavin Newsom is on the record stating that the Trump administration followed through on everything Trump said he would do early in the pandemic. Did you even know this? If not, why not? I do not ask this out of hostility, but to make a point: politicians lie and there is always, at least now in our time, an element within the media which works against one side and for another. The media all but hid that. Yet had those who paid attention looked, at Trump rallies last fall, videos were played of footage showing Democrat-led states' governors speaking of how Trump helped their states. Yet Trump is a mass murderer? If they were out to nail 500k deaths on Trump, they'll do whatever they can do nail 460k deaths on Bolsonaro. You don't know Brazilian politics well (not that you should), but believe me, they're doing there - trying to at least - what they did to Trump. As for RS, to hold it there would have forced the competition to opt for Curitiba, which only has one stadium big and modern enough for something like this tournament, as Santa Catarina doesn't have FIFA-standard stadiums. If the goal is to ensure safety and to make sure players travel little, then Porto Alegre would not have been the most pragmatic choice; that's why they picked cities in the center of the country that are near each other. Uruguay and Argentina may be close to RS, but there are many other variables to be analyzed from the perspectives of the event's planners.
Its a good call by those southern states since the seasonality pattern of COVID would suggest that that region is about to get hit hard again in June-July. Very few are vaccinated, any many who are got the Chinese vaccine.
Well, the opposition will oppose, that is their role. In Argentina we have a leftist government (Fernandez) and the opposition from the right (Macri) was the first to vocally oppose holding the tournament. At first the government defended the decision to hold the tournament. In fact they told Conmebol just two days prior to the cancellation that everything was ready and it would be done without problems, they were even talking about the new sites to cover the games that originally would have been played in Colombia. But, they saw the polls, and they decided at the last possible moment that it was in their best interest to cancel. My biggest gripe is not necessarily that it was cancelled, there are legitimate arguments for cancelling. But I'm upset that they cancelled it very late, and for the wrong reasons. Everything was in place to hold the tournament in Argentina, but the government made a last minute decision that they didn't want to pay the political price.
Everyone knows how to do CYA, and governments especially. In any case, while I did see a lot of people in your home country opposed the tournament being held there, I did also see complaints about how the mere change of venue makes Brazil the favorite (home field does matter, but without fans, it's a different factor). Some of your compatriots said your country's government "gifted" Brazil not only the 2021 tournament but also the title itself. A bit pessimistic, but everyone has his opinion. If CONMEBOL had called the whole thing off, it wouldn't have broken my heart, but now that Brazil is going to host and that venues have been chosen, then I hope Brazil does the best possible job. And if, as I said, Libertadores and local matches can happen (and they're also happening in other CONMEBOL member countries), then if the exact same standards are applied, why would it be somehow more dangerous to hold the tournament there? In any case, in less than 2 weeks, we'll see whether the prophets of doom are right. I don't think it'll be the disaster they predict it will be, and not just because I do lean in favor of President Bolsonaro. As per the posts I've written here over the past few days, I have motives aplenty to consider it realistic and science-based that the tournament being held in Brazil will not be akin to a death sentence.
Is there a chance they cancelled it as late as possible with the hope that the whole thing got cancelled and moved to next year when they can host it ? I'd imagine anything is possible.
The schedule is out with the venues. It's bizarre that there are teams traveling to 3 venues in the group stage. Seem unnecessary if there are no fans in stadiums. 2 groups / 4 venues ... make each group play in 2 venues only with minimal travel.
Indeed, yet you wrote this earlier: It is done. Let us hope for a good tournament and a safe one at that. I don't think it'll be the tragedy many are foreseeing.
Nobody is predicting a tragedy. They are saying it's irresponsible specially because it's a "problem" that we didn't have to have. We didn't have to bail CONMEBOL out. It obviously won't be a tragedy.
But listen/read to what the sports media pundits in both Brazil and elsewhere are saying. They're ridiculing Brazil's leadership. They're saying it's not safe. They're saying it's a mockery of human life. If this pathogen is so damn deadly, then: 1. Why are Campeonato Brasileiro, state tournaments, and Copa Libertadores allowed to happen? 2. River Plate recently had its roster depleted by the virus in a Libertadores fixture on home ground. Those players ALL recovered; none is dead. In the past, in any sport, a very bad flu was enough to bench a player. 3. In Europe this past weekend, Chelsea and Manchester City decided the Champions' League in Portugal. Did the match - with fans - result in a mass wave of infections and deaths in the Portuguese locality? Did fans from England suddenly get all sick and then die? Does Sars-Cov-2 only kill in South America? 4. In the state of Texas - the largest contiguous U.S. state - a full opening has been underway for more than 2 months. Infections and deaths are DOWN. Texas sports franchises have been holding games with fans in the stadiums. Why isn't Sars-Cov-2 killing Texans the way Democrats said it would? And finally: if Sars-Cov-2 is that dangerous to the extent the planet went on lockdown and millions of jobs in many countries as well as thousands of businesses were shut down for good, why are we even allowed partial reopenings? Why are even NY and NJ now allowing indoor dining and why have they dropped the mask mandate (although many businesses still strongly recommend its use)? If this virus is so terribly deadly like for example the Marburg virus, why are we even allowed a partial return to pre-pandemic life? Of the the Marburg, the WHO says: "The Marburg virus causes severe viral haemorrhagic fever in humans. The average MVD case fatality rate is around 50%. Case fatality rates have varied from 24% to 88% in past outbreaks depending on virus strain and case management." The CDC says: "The case-fatality rate for Marburg hemorrhagic fever is between 23-90%." Sars-Cov-2 is nowhere near that; Fauci has admitted that; and, the CDC admitted the majority of Covid-19 deaths had co-morbidities. Do the authorities know this? If so why are they doing this to the people they serve? None of this is aimed personally at you Celito; I'm just presenting another view. Finally - EVERYBODY - if you care about Covid-19 and especially if you reside in the United States, have you seen the Fauci emails from early 2021 which are now publicly available thanks to the Freedom of Information Act? The man lied through his teeth!
I doubt it. At least publicly they never advocated for a cancellation, they just told Conmebol that they weren't going to do it. I think that they wanted to do it because they thought it would benefit them politically, and only when they realized that it was a politically liability - after Macri spoke out - they made the decision not to host.
I was arguing following the logic of the people that didn't want Argentina to host for the sanitary risk, like, if that is a concern it makes no sense to change Argentina for Brazil. However, my personal POV is that the tournament isn't a risk to any country.
Many of them that I've heard said they were against domestic football as well. But alas, it's not up to them. They are not going to quit working to make a statement. Probably only a few could do that financially (Galvao). That has been my point in another thread. If it's good for domestic football and Libertadores, CA is not that much different. So you're either for all football or against all football. You're trying to prove to me that COVID isn't bad or it isn't bad for athletes ? Point about sports hasn't been about it being bad for athletes, just the fact that it can help spread it from them to non-athletes. These places are supposedly not in as bad of shape right now as Brazil, Argentina. Becaue we have in the US ample access to vaccines and numbers have been going down ? Hospitals not in danger of being overwhelmed ? I don't think you've tried to understand what the problem with COVID19 is. This is just terrible superficial analysis. So because a part of the population may have be overweight, have an underlying condition or over 60 it means it's not a problem ? Everything in the beginning was an estimate from early data we had from China and Italy. As the situation developed our conclusions change. That is normal and not anything malicious. Finally, I will tackle your comments about Trump (i don't follow Bolsonaro much). To say that he is somehow a victim of the media is simply mind boggling for the simple fact that he has been the source of a lot of fake information himself. Does the media distort ? Yes, they always have. The greatest trick Trump played is that he was indignant with the MSM when in fact it was his tactic to use them to convince voters he was a victim. I don't have to listen to the news to think he is an egomaniac and a sociopath. I mean, who the fuk says "people should thank me for the vaccine". I don't blame 500k deaths on him, I think a lot of it would have happened regardless. But at the very least he could have incentivized people to wear a mask which could help the spread of the virus. And if you want lying through their teeth, look no further than him telling people the virus was nothing to be worried about initially when he told Woodward it was a nasty virus. The audio is there. And FFS , Tucker Carlosn ? Any of these late night pundits are trash ... left and right.
We will agree to disagree. You may, as a U.S. resident, want to look up what's been happening with the FOIA-released Fauci emails. The guy is going to do a major CYA. As for Tucker Carlson, whatever your thoughts on late-night TV, if Carlson has the facts (and with this, he definitely does - he has screenshots of Fauci emails saying masks are ineffective in February 2020, in an email he wrote to a former high-ranking Obama official who emailed him about masks). If whatever you use as news doesn't tell you this, that tells me all I need to know.
Friendly Reminder from the Moderator— The topic of this thread is “Copa America 2021.” I suppose that the political situation in Brasil might be relevant, but US politics definitely is not. There are other places on BigSoccer for those discussions. So let’s all stay on topic here.