Discussion in 'FIFA and Tournaments' started by Nico Limmat, Jun 4, 2017.
Is it corruption or is it forming alliances in a collaborative way?
Concacaf might already paid them with booze for their latest collaboration agreement.
FIFA 2026 WC vote results (June 2018) showed BRA voting against Concacaf hosting it. Apparently, Brazilian FA is still pouting at US requesting extradition of their former execs.
It might take more time for Concacaf to forget about that.
I dunno, kinda hard to keep a grudge about Brazil's incredible clumsiness - they really thought no one would find out Besides, Concacaf would've gotten it out of their system when it came to the 2023 WWC vote (Conmebol execs were none to pleased at not a single Concacaf vote for Colombia's bid).
I imagine the conversations that led to the announcement included some sort of borrón y cuenta nueva, with Conmebol telling Concacaf: "You forget about Brazil backstabbing United '26 and we'll forget about you trying to steal the Copa América trademark"
the whole thing with ukraine joining the bid is nothing but a harmless political gimmick, noone should worry about that. if they can play a couple of games there in 2030 great (actually more than great since it would mean the war is over), and if not they will leave them out and all will be fine. that simple, zero impact on the world cup itself, if awarded to iberia.
If you catch my drift… (had to spell phonetically for it to make sense lol)
it's not zero impact if your team ends up being the unlucky one to draw into the Ukraine group. From what I read one of the groups would have all their group stage games in Ukraine.
So for example me as a USA supporter, if USA get drawn into the Ukraine group I can either spend the whole group stage in Ukraine and only see that 1 group play, or do expensive and time wasting trips back and forth between Ukraine and Spain/Portugal.
If my team were to not draw into Ukraine, I doubt I'd leave Spain/Portugal to go to Ukraine even for a big match. Maybe once, but it would be inconvenient and expensive so not zero impact.
I did not talk about the fans
I meant for the world cup itself. if ukraine is safe and the war is over they get a group or two, if not it is played in iberia only. not an issue, fullstop!
of course, long distances are always an issue for the fans, no question about that. already 2026 will be a challenge!
My hunch is that they would stage 2 groups in Ukraine. Especially if the 16*3 format is used because 1 group would be just 3 matches. Even if 12*4 format is used that means there are 104 matches in total, so logically 12 could go to Ukraine and Iberia would still have a ton of matches to host themselves (although 1 stadium in Ukraine would not be enough).
Also, high-speed train between BCN & Madrid: 2.5 hours, $114 to $160 one way
Flight between Madrid and Bucharest*: 3.5 hours, $147 one way.
[* using Bucharest to get a sense since there are no flights to Kiev right now]
I know the train offers more flexibility and comfort but when comparing to the distances involved in the 2026 WC (or any WC in the future that's not in Europe), the travel in 2030 is quite manageable.
ok that's cool. You did say in your original post "no one should worry about that" but I'm someone and I am worrying already!
2026 will be a BIG challenge in that regard. To the point where we will need to make big comprimises.
With what will be a huge ticket demand though at least it'll spread demand out.
i think we all hope it won't be a 16x3 format, but yeah if it is then I suppose it may be 2 groups. If it's 12x4 then maybe 1 group. The issue is if it's your team in Ukraine, for example for myself if USA draws that group. That would really suck.
Thanks for the research. 3.5 hours isn't terrible, but when you add in the time to check out of hotel, transit to airport, do check-in/security, wait to board, then deplane, pass immigrations/customs, transit to hotel and check-in, unpack. It's a very long exhausting day that wastes an entire day. It's not something to really do often, but you are right 2026 a lot of us will be doing just that. But domestic flying is always somewhat easier than international. But LAX to NYC or TOR to MEX isn't easy.
Even though adding Morocco would also be a pain in the ass logistically, my desire to visit there would make me happy if it was added.
Morocco would be much better cohost nation than Ukraine. While one can't take a train across the straight of Gibraltar, a ferry or short flight can make up for it. Lisbon and Porto aren't exactly easy to access vai train from Spain either so it's not much different.
And the Argentine president has proposed to add Bolivia...
Bolivia has 3 potential venues - all built in the 1930s. So, even if they would only have 1 venue, it might require building a new stadium from scratch (or I imagine a pretty significant renovation given that all existing stadiums would be closing in on their 100th birthday).
I guess Santa Cruz would be the most logical host city.
At any rate, it's moot:
Unidos* 2030 has officially thrown its hat in the ring!
* CHUPAR 2030 for the cultured among us
What a waste of money and energy that bid is.
Saudi has it in the bag. It's very evident when you do the numbers and that without taking into account the massive bribes they will send to random micronations.
And the fact that the games might be played at an altitude of 12,000 feet won't be much of a problem (yeah, I know I use the metric system but 12,000 feet just sounds so much more awesome than 3,600 meters). That's an unboliviable decision...
They should just keep it as it is - Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay, Chile. Three countries that have already hosted one WC, with a new country in Paraguay. And the added advantage is that it'll be the century World Cup played in its founding city.
I think Santa Cruz would be more likely than LA Paz, and it's not at high altitude (1500 feet, I think).
But yeah, 4 co-hosts is plenty already.
Whether it's Iberia or southern South America, I will be pumped for this WC. Especially after 3 WCs in a row played where soccer isn't so popular.
Unfortunately, I agree. The Saudi bid has too much power behind it
Russia and Qatar don't have good leagues or national teams, but soccer is definitely the most popular in those countries by miles.
Then you have USA & Canada where you're right, soccer is not really popular there, but you also have Mexico
World Cup games when it is 110 degrees in Saudi Arabia with more legalistic rules and regulations than Qatar?
I don't think so.
Ok, perhaps I should have phrased it better like "the previous 3 WC hosts (2018, 2022, 2026) don't have deep cultural roots in soccer". Its one of the reasons FIFA chose them as hosts in the first place, and I get the objective of expanding the sport's flagship event to new corners of the globe, but for selfish reasons it will still be good to see an end to that "streak" of 3 in a row.
The Saudis have the money (even more so than Qatar) and political will needed to pull off a successful bid. Winning the vote would be a nice cherry on top of Saudi Vision 2030.
You'd think they can get a lot of Asian votes. With Egypt co-hosting they can attract plenty from Africa as well. Morocco could split those votes; then again they could withdraw/get eliminated before the final voting round (with votes being recast, mainly to the bid co-hosted by Egypt). If Morocco wants to avoid yet another failed bid they'd most likely have better chances joining forces with the Saudi-led bid or Iberian one. Besides hoovering up the bulk of Asian and African votes, which would already be enough to become (one of) the frontrunners a Saudi Arabia-Egypt-Greece bid can add even more votes from other UEFA members than Greece, especially if the Iberian bid comes up short. Plus the Saudis definitely have the means to sway quite a few Concacaf and OFC votes. If it's even needed the Saudis can always call on their close friend, Infantino, to curry support amongst voters. He has been giving them the warm and fuzzies; steering it their way in 2030 would also prevent a Saudi Arabia vs. China clash during a future bid.
With half of all Conmebol members ineligible to vote for their own joint bid they can't even find much support within the home confed; only 5 votes left if Bolivia joins that bid. It's dead in the water in case Saudi Arabia-Egypt-Greece put in a bid. Where would the 100 or more votes come from?
trust me, for all three there have been ONLY one reason … money! first two were money in the pockets of ExCo members and some huge companies, and for the third one FIFA itself. everything else was irrelevant
You're probably right. Anyway, whatever FIFA's motives are, I am looking forward to the 2030 WC as long as its not in Saudi Arabia.