Not with the money that will go to the winners they won't. Just like ManUre sent their best squad while dropping out of the "sacred" FA Cup in 2000...
I think Man U was forced by the English FA to go to Brazil just to promote England's 2006 World Cup bid. And that WCC was held in January (season) not July (vacation/pre-season). Man U wouldn't make that mistake all over again. There were no people attending that "World Cup" anyway. It was a complete fiasco from the organizing point of view. All games not involving Brazilian teams were played in empty stadiums. It won't be that much money involved anyway. The World Club Cup will be just as 'prestigious' for the club game as the Confederation Cup is for the national team game. A tournament marked in paranthesis on every fixture list. A show-up tournament just to please the governing body or a nice pre-season work-out.
Yeah. On the heels of the Champions Tour, folks can see that there's lot's 'o money to be had in the USA. calling it a "World Chamiponship" makes it all the more attractive/lucrative.
For those of you who have been following this thread, the Club World Championship is back in the hopper: http://www.fifa.com/en/display/mrel,72516.html FIFA Club World Championship - Organising Committee puts the ball in play "The Organising Committee for the FIFA Club World Championship today proposed that the next championship be played in one of the associations from the Confederation of North, Central American and Caribbean Association Football (CONCACAF) on 17-31 July 2005, dates that are protected within the Coordinated International Match Calendar. Furthermore, the committee also confirmed the championship as a biennial FIFA event and proposed that Asia host the competition in 2007. In terms of the framework for the championship, the committee proposed a 16-team format." (Note that this now makes 3 active CWC threads, maybe they can be merged, but I think this one was first.)
4 (or 5) tourneys in 4 years? OK, another question. If the CWC happens every two years, doesn't Fifa end up with too many tournaments in a 4-year span? (even year 0) World Cup (odd year 1) Club Championship, Women's World Cup (even year 2) Olympics (basically the U-23 Champ) (odd year 3) Club Championship Since the Olympics aren't directly run by Fifa (but the qualifying goes through them), wouldn't it make sense to move the Women's Cup to the even year? That way, Fifa would run one world championship every year. (And if you really want to get nerdy, it would satisfy one of Fifa's internal goals: to spread out both their incomes and outlays more evenly over the four-year cycle.) I guess I could include the Confederations Cup in this mix, since I read that Fifa is contractually obligated to hold two more of them, but I think the Confed Cup will go away after the Club Cup is entrenched. One more thing (as Jackie Chan's uncle says in the cartoon): If Fifa is really gang-busters over women's ball, they would run a Women's Club World Championship (WCWC?) co-incident with the CWC, maybe with eight teams. The final could then be a women's-men's doubleheader. (unless that would be a sixth tournament every four years...)
Why was the 1st World Club Championship horrible??? Because the British Press wanted everyone to dislike it from the start because it interfered with the FA Cup??? Big deal. Stop following what the media says like a mindless baboon. That was an excellent tournament played with real teams, and had exciting results. With a few local teams as well per group it can work to boost attendance in a big way as we saw in Brazil.
Re: Why? I think it's only in its second year, but seems to be doing quite well, and the teams are taking it seriously. And all the top teams are eligible, so it is not like the UEFA Cup. I would be in favor of seeing this competition be represented in the WCC.
The big issue is that UEFA want the Champions League to be the biggest tournament in the soccer world so they can keep charging television stations obscene amounts of money to show the games. UEFA will railroad any threat to the revenue generating potential of their tournaments and a successful World Cup Championship is a threat. Crowdie
Agree with this. Raise your hand if you where there...I was; and I had a blast. Saw three games live, and the feeling in the stadium was electric. What was nice, and unlike the WC games I've attended, was that there were actually local, everyday fans in attendance (something that would probably be lost with a mega event). I've got nothing against the corporate set - as I could be labled as one of them - but the atomosphere of the "povo" was something else. However, agree with Spartak general thought that, whatever the format, it should be yearly, and should only include each continental champion (maybe the defending champions well as long as elapsed time is no more than two weekends). No need for a bloated affair.
Doesn't really make any sense. It wouldn't be a rival tournament as such, so there's no reason at all that TV companies would find CL matches less attractive. No more than the world cup makes it harder to sell the rights for the Euro Championships. If the European clubs wanted to take part there wouldn't be much UEFA could do about it anyway - the bigs clubs are too powerful. The problem is they don't want to take part. Maybe if the tournament got established then things might change, but currently the ambitions of European clubs are totally satisfied by the champions league. The Toyota cup is just a glorified friendly that's tolerated as it's only a minor intrusion. A 16 club pre-season tournament is something else altogether.
that was a series of friendlies. A series of practice matches played at half-pace with managers experimenting with their line-ups. You can't compare that with playing in a major tournament, where players would need to have an earlier pre-season just to get fit for it. A contest involving a load of semi-fit ring-rusty teams would be a farce.
In countries like England it will not be a problem as soccer is the number one sport so pay television channels will pay large amounts for soccer tournament coverage. The issue happens when UEFA tries to sell the television rights to countries where soccer is not the number one sport. In these countries there is only a certain amount of money allowed to the "lesser" sports, like soccer. These budgets are done years ahead and if you have two major tournaments, the Champions League and the World Cup Championship, then the amount of money that pay television channel will pay for each tournament has to be less. How does this affect UEFA and FIFA you ask? In a country like New Zealand Sky TV (our pay television company) buys the rights to European soccer from BSkyB in Britain and BSkyB pays UEFA for the rights to sell coverage in New Zealand. If you have two tournaments and Sky TV only has xxx dollars for soccer coverage then the amount Sky TV pays to BSkyB (for the Champions League coverage) will be less as Sky TV is also budgeting to pay FIFA for coverage of the World Cup Championship. Crowdie
that is certainly true, but the overseas (in this case outside Europe) rights rarely go for any more that pocket-money anyway, because the ratings are very poor. Overall, overseas TV rights probably account for no more than 5% of TV revenue generated by the Champions League. An additional tournament might drop that figure to 3%, for example, but a tiny drop like that is hardly going to get UEFA executives reaching for the revolver.
The best format for this tournement is for it to never ever happen again. Its the biggest pile of 5hit the world has ever seen. Talk about totally meaningless.
Re: 4 (or 5) tourneys in 4 years? Jackie Chan's Uncle says this in a cartoon? And as per original question - crap idea, crap tournament, won't succeed for similar reasons the Confed Cup doesn't. No-one really gives a toss about it and comparing Man Utd or Liverpool going over there on pre-season freindly tours - to what would need to happen if they were to play properly, is wrong. If it does go ahead, then expect a bunch of youngsters in the teams that play - or at least on the teams who've got other more meaningful trophies to win.
Re: Re: 4 (or 5) tourneys in 4 years? Not following you here. Big European teams take their preseason tour to the States and play in this tournament, as part of their preparation for domestic and European campaigns. Nobody's going to make a big deal about winning the trophy, it's just a money-spinning tournament that allows fans here to see some great clubs and some decent friendly matches for TV audiences. What is so awful about that? Liverpool otherwise stays home and plays friendlies with Burnley and Glentoran. Some of the clubs can even schedule additional friendlies against MLS and A-League sides for their squad players.
Now, I can´t be speaking for the South American teams, but every sane European team will probably not be taking part in this stupid cup. I for one don´t have much of an interest in this... The Toyota Cup is nice, but the worth of it ranks somewhere with the European Super Cup... meaningless to win it besides the money. Same goes for the future Club World Championship.
And that still generates more interest and attention than the FIFA 'Officially feeling the pinch' World Club Circus. Get over it.
"Get over it." Matt- why do you almost always go caustic when making your points? All I'm saying is a bunch of clubs could get together in their preseasons, play some matches, hand out a trophy and it can be a nice draw, especially if it's played over here, or maybe in Oz or Asia. Not saying English clubs or fans should care as much about it as the League Cup, but if a couple of English clubs go on a five-six match tour of the States in July, along with some other high profile clubs (and some never heardofs) why does that bother you?
It doesn't. As long as everyone understands it's just pre-season, we're all here to make money, no getting all over excited and taking it seriously because you finally get to share the field with a Europan "great" and, in the case of South American sides, no indulging that consequent MASSIVE chip on your shoulder. This is just for fun and profits, then we go home and start the season and get on with the proper stuff. On those terms, I'm all for it. But those terms are unlikely to be ones that will satisfy FIFA, now are they?
So you're saying that smaller clubs and their followers the world over shouldn't have the right to get "excited" about "sharing the field" with a "great"? I thought that was part of the beauty of the game. Even in a friendly.
No, not exactly. It's all very cute and I am all for that. But what we don't want is 2/3rds of the teams taking it seriously because it is a "chance to prove who's best" and the other 1/3rd trying to use it for a warm-up and to bed in new players. That is a recipe for injuries, arguments and general discontentment. Let's not pussyfoot around this. FIFA want a big World Club Championship because it counteracts the strength and importance of the Champions League. They are insanely jealous of UEFA's preponderance in all things football and this is their eminently transparent means of acting against that. The fact that the first one was a complete joke and the second one didn't even get off the ground because that shower of nobodies is so corrupt and incompetent is surely reason enough to have a rethink. This is NOT about the "good of the game" or some such other nauseating, patronising nonsense. Smaller confederations should concentrate on getting their club championships sorted in the manner that UEFA have because then they wouldn't have to rely on FIFA and that, in the long run, will be far better for them. Genuine growth in the game will never occur through FIFA. They don't give a s hit about the little guy.
What a tool you are. You get over it & get a clue. That lame tournament will be done away with in a few years, just wait. And the Club World Championship, will be an annual & highly rated and respected tournament in the years to come. You are acting like all the other closeminded folk that didn't think the WORLD CUP served a purpose. Of course when it gets popular you will jump on the bandwagon.