Qatar 2022: News and Analysis Only!

I've never believed in that argument myself. It was a strawman created by those opposing US in '94, Japan/S Korea in '02 and South Africa in '10. All were perfectly reasonable world cups although not all time great events. This argument should be dead by now.

 

In fairness to all of these countries, all of them had qualified through the standard process before they were awarded hosting rights - South Korea on five occasions (1954, 1986, 1990, 1994, 1998) South Africa twice (1998, 2002) and Japan once (1998). I think the sole argument against the US was that commercialism would hammer itself into the fabric of the event - and while USA '94 did see a significant increase in this when compared to previous events, the arguments didn't have much to do with the American attitudes towards football (soccer), which although in the minority had always been fairly solid. It is also worth remembering that the US had also qualified for the finals four times previously, including the inaugural tournament in 1930 where they finished 3rd.

Apart from the rather silly example of them being "one match away" in 1998, Qatar haven't even come close - and what's even worse is that in order to become competitive in time for 2022 they will probably "buy" players from other countries as they have done in other sports (numerous East Africans in athletics and usually drug-tarnished Bulgarians in weightlifting). All they do is just give them an Arabic name and away you go. I can see a motley crew of Spaniards, Argentinians, Brazilians and perhaps the odd disgruntled Frenchman all sporting names like Al-Jabaar Al-Jazeera and turning out for Qatar - and driving home home after they have had their fun in a Bentley or Lamborghini donated by a moneyed friend.

I can give an example of this sort of silliness. I don't know how much you guys know about cricket, but back in 1999 the UAE qualified for the World Cup. They were an absolute shambles, but what really got me was the composition of the side: of their fourteen-man squad, twelve were expats: eight Pakistanis, two Sri Lankans, and two Indians, one of whom was born in the United States. There were two Emiratis, one of whom only played one match (against fellow minnows the Netherlands) and their rather comical captain Sultan Zarawani, who couldn't actually bat, bowl or field.

In fact, Qatar 2022 could spell the end of the World Cup as we know it, with sheer greed become the guiding factor as opposed to just one of them. Everyone and everything can be bought off, and these guys - a country that I choose to describe as an oil company with a seat at the United Nations - have plenty of money to burn. The fact that they even won the vote at all is telling, and I believe that there is a lot that we still do not know about the bargaining process.

The argument that FIFA want to spread the game to "new countries" is facile in the extreme: it has sweet Francine Adams to do with "development", and everything to do with officials wanting to draw up new contracts and line their own bulging pockets by making deals with people to whom money can be thrown around like confetti. If FIFA really cared about the game, they'd have chosen an Asian country where it is popular - such as Thailand.

But ah, no fat sheikhs with big bags of cash there.

 

FBI investigate computer hacking of US and England bids....

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/.../football/rss+(Football)&utm_content=My+Yahoo

 

So what if they do ?

The WC is not about measuring a country or its residents, by the results in a given tournament of choice. The WC is about National teams or National representatives team. Once a player decides to cap for any given team, he is bonded to that team forever and therefore you will not see that player playing for his country of origin afterwards or even before it. You`ll only see that player playing for his new adopted countries team. Many teams have a foreign coach, and to it no one says nothing about it as well. In fact some coaches have had diferent NT`s under their tutelage as well.

This is almost the same thing, as when you have foreign residents in your country and your team uses the children of those foreigners to conform part of your National team, as most of them despite of living most of their life in the adopted country, never reallly abandon their culture of origin, and therefore many of them feel themselves as if they will always be uninvited guests to their new adopted country. Sounds familiar ? (very common issue in some western europe countries), some countries even cap foreign players who have formed themselves entirely in their country of origin and only have played for some years in the new adopted country. Anyhow it doesn`t matter, they already capped for a NT, and will never play for another country diferent than the one originally decided for. This is not the same thing as if, Qatar decides to buy for their use in their NT, Mesi, Neymar or whoever else has already played before for another diferent NT, to play for them, as they can`t. If Qatar decides to "buy" or "convince" foreign players, which are willing to give up their countries, well good for them, and in the bottom line, we will all have a better team to confront in that WC, and of course in the next ones to come as long as those players keep on playing at high level afterwards.

Specifically Brazilian players, for example, are found all over the world playing in their new adopted countries. Why would it be considered as wrong, if Qatar finally decides to do the same thing ?

 

It's the thought of these mickey mouse countries buying players from overseas that sticks in my craw. Many of these players are unlikely to extend their careers beyond the major showpiece itself, which is actually more detrimental to any plans the country may have for grass-roots development.

I'm not really a fan of foreign coaches, to be honest - I am often left wondering where their loyalties lie. All of this mercenary behaviour, to me at least, devalues the tournament as a festival of nations - otherwise we might as well let budgets dictate issues.

This is not quite the same thing, as many of these young players are born in the country and are often schooled and educated there. as for those who might be "adopted" in later life, I think the issue for me is the idea of money changing hands - for example I have no argument with someone like Cacau wanting to play for Germany as he has quite unequivocally thrown in his lot with his new country. He wants to be German, not just play for the German NT. And nobody has paid him for it.

It just takes one country to do this, and all of them will be at it. I can then guarantee you that the rules will be bent to allow people to change nationality as they please - countries will become little more than clubs wearing national crests. The amount of money floating about will make the whole thing a completely different compexion.

It would be fine if these players as part of this had a genuine desire to become Qatari - but I fear that they wouldn't do much more than play the games, take their bumper prize and bugger off back to Brazil.

 

Isn't the German NT full of non-Germans? Don't they have Poles, Ghanians, Turks, and Brazilians in their team? All the new found flair of the German NT is due to non-Germans wearing the German colors.

Nothing wrong with it. Its just a byproduct of globalization and mass immigration.

 

Are you saying there isn't a difference between that and a country's federation offering large amounts of cash to come and play for them?

 

So "mickey mouse" nations shouldn`t, but "jumbo" nations can.
Sounds a bit arrogant, but most of all, unfair.

It`s fair, but football/soccer is not about ethics or morals. Leave that to relligion, laws or politics. Football/soccer is about a game, a sport and nothing more than that. Enjoy it, only for what it is, and nothing more. The same as the WC.

Now morally what got those people to choose living in a diferent country was hopes of better conditions of life, so one way or the other, it still is an issue about money. The same as for Cacau. If he would have never left Brazil, in the first place, he wouldn`t have ever capped for Germany and very likely that he wouldn`t have capped for Brazil either.

That`s why FIFA, put the one nation cap-tie rule in the first place, back in the sixties. Because back then there was a big amount of players who were playing for whomever paid more, and the WC was begining to transform itself into a show of whom had the biggest wallet. Some of the most talented players even played for more than two diferent NT, being the cases of Puskas and Disteffano maybe the most "odd" of them all. If the cap-tie rule didn`t exist nowdays, even Mesi or Neymar could be playing for whomever they wished for, in diferent WC tournaments, as long as they get paid well.

One way or the other, to the end it`s exactly the same thing, call it loyalties, or money, or whatever....... The fact remains the same, both parts get what they want from their contractual agreement.

As long as the people involved (players), knowing the existence of the cap-tie rule, choose by their own right to play for whomever they want to play and not by an imposed criteria, to me there there is no problem at all. It`s free will.
(sounding a bit as RUSH,)

 

This Qatari world cup is going to be an unmitigated disaster! Sorry, but nobody thinks of luxury vacationing when they think of the Middle East.

 

For a start it will be much hotter. Maybe they wont lock fans with tickets out of the stadium because the head of state is there either. The Asian Cup may have been a couple of months after the World Cup bid was won, but they did have over 4 years to prepare for it. Apart from ticketing stuff ups, I suppose it went well. The playing surfaces and stadia seemed fine based on what I saw on TV.

 

With the exception of Cacau - previously mentioned - all of the guys in the German team were either born in Germany or arrived as small children. They were not purchased by the DFB.

Exactly, couldn't have put it better myself.

 

Not at all, unless you are making a direct comparison between what are essentially business transactions and the fielding of players born in the country.

Sport remains pure when it has an ethical or moral base; the moment this disappears is the moment when the politicians, financial fiddlers and drug cheats can shoehorn themselves into the act. What, for instance, would be your take on something like financial fair play? What would you have to say about the corruption that can be found in the offices of FIFA? Would you simply turn a blind eye?

I think each case should be based on its own merits, as there are some very fine lines. In Cacau's case he arrived in Germany as a fairly ordinary player, and worked his way up. In addition to this he has become well known for the effort he has made in being accepted as a German citizen. Nobody paid him for it, and that is the point here. Looking at the way he belts out the national anthem when many remain tight-lipped also says a lot.

Cacau is a far cry from the sort of paid-for mercenaries that are likely to turn out for countries like Qatar.

 

People have been migrating to other countries for economic reason for several centuries. I don't see why Brazilians migrating to Qatar is any different from Turks migrating to Germany. Each group is migrating because the host country needs some service, and the group migrating gets some economic benefit from it.

 

The thing is that those foreigners who would play for Qatar aren't actually migrating. As if you really think some samba-loving Brazilian will want to settle down in a country where they women are made to dress up in sackcloths.

We are not talking about migrants, but mercenaries.

 

Bingo.

 

Sports have no nation, my friend. Its just about achievements through a game. Don`t confuse it with politics as sports are completely free from them. People are the ones who give concerns to politics, not the Sport in itself.
Soccer as a sport is pure, but FIFA as it is formed by people, who are corruptable, isn`t. They are not the same thing. Or do you believe that when some small kids, decide to kick around a ball emulating their sport heroes, care at least a small bit, on what FIFA thinks over the issue or how much money they are earning.. All they care about is playing, as it is pure.

You give too much importance to nationalistic pride, and you tend to mix it with sports, which is completely irrelevant. A good player has no nationality, as he is above all, a great footballer.

You think people in Thailand (as an example of a country without any WC participation in the past, but full of soccer/football lovers) care, if WC players are from any country at all?
When they look at the WC, above all they watch "football/soccer", not flags...

Everybody around the world (99.99 % at least), one way or the other is a mercenary. We all work for money and usually for the highest bidder. Why should it be diferent for players of a game, specially considering that it is a professional game.

Up to FIFA, they created the cap-tie rule, which means that once a player has decided to play for a country, can`t play afterwards for another country. For me, it`s a good rule and as long as it exists, it`s OK to me for any player to play for whomever they wish for.

When the United Nations take control of world soccer/football, totally independent from FIFA, and they start organizing a new WC replacing the actual one, only then national pride may become important regarding football/soccer and nationalities of the players. Till its run by FIFA, nationality, walks through a very thin line.

 

Unfortunately politics tends to shape sport, and sport in the international arena has always been used to drive a sense of nationhood. This can manifest itself in many ways, of course: more often than not, politics and governments do get involved.

In the case of Qatar I believe that this has happened to a massive extent. They have won the right to host the 2022 tournament not through any great relationship with the sport, but simple manipulation by those who do little more than hand over money and secure business contracts. In fact the 2022 World Cup is the first tournament - in my opinion at least - is the first one where the host nation has been selected purely as a result of political concerns rather than pure sporting ones.

Unfortunately, the world game and FIFA are inseperable - and the power of the organisation has grown massively in the last thirty or so years following the rampant rise in commercialism. Small kids will always want to emulate their heroes, but will never be able to take this into a professional career with the same youthful enthusiasm. Once they enter that world, they simply fall into line and become part of the network: they are not simply players any more, but representatives and brand ambassadors.

"Nationalistic pride" is perhaps taking it too far; what I would say however is that the world game - international football as we see it - is defined by what it purports to be - a game between nations. if we start tinkering with these mechanisms and encourage the purchasing of mercenearies, we might as well just scrap it all and throw our weight behind a World Club Championship.

Call me old fashioned, but a team of people who probably don't even speak the language spoken by their supporters is just a little bit odd to me.

Of course, it is a professional game. But international football - and international sport in general - should transcend that. I have always believed in the value of the international shirt, and the idea that it should never be used as a vehicle for financial gain or personal advantage. If somebody has fostered and built a genuine tie to a country (a la Cacau) I have no problem with it all - but to drop in, play a few games and flit away again is really taking the soul out of the international game and reducing it to a farcical series of business transactions. I look in much the same way at the "plastic Brits" who have been drafted into the GB athletics team in time for the 2012 Olympics.

These people spend only a fraction of their lives here and don't have any real connection to the country - in my view they devalue the British vest. It also insults the many ordinary people who have a genuine desire to be British and have to watch some American or Nigerian athlete who doesn't give a tinker's damn about the country getting a fast-tracked British passport. To achieve this, governments often have to facilitate things, and the whole process becomes enmeshed in politics.

One cannot even begin to imagine what these processes would be like in a country like Qatar, where those that run the football association are members of the ruling sheikhdom.

I just hope that these rule is enough to ensure that things don't become comical, and that there are no attempts to start watering it down. All it would take is one massive case wrapped up under the argument of "human rights" - for example a young Brazilian playing for Qatar who is then later seen as good enough to play for the land of his birth. By the letter of the cap-tie rule he is no long eligible to play for Brazil, but given that he was born there and has a Brazilian passport he could rightly claim that his human right to pursue his professional career for his home country is being prevented by some non-governmental body.

Cue a massive set-to between the Brazilian and Qatari FAs, the player's expensive lawyers, FIFA and even the governments of both countries - and we have the makings of a right legal disaster. Before it actually happened we could never believe that the Bosman ruling could ever take place; were something similar be used in a case of a player wanting to switch national allegiances a real nasty can of worms would be opened - and it would spell doom for the international game as we know it.

Maybe we are digressing from the original topic a little here!

Agreed. This is becasue FIFA is a business. We might as well have Coca-Cola and McDonald's run the show. But hey... They do!

 

Great post, although we still have some diferent opinions regarding the issue, but indeed, a very good post.
positively repped,

 

Cheers Rickdog. Given some of the discussions I have seen on here, it's nice to see that differing opinions can be voiced and shared without things dropping into the dark pit of silliness!

 

Several new hotels have been opened in Qatar:
http://www.ameinfo.com/qatars-preparations-world-cup-2022-gather-299948
Unfortunately there still appears to be no prospect of there being accommodation for travelling fans.

 

If the World Cup goes ahead in Qatar 2022 it will be the worst thing that has happened to football for a long time. Still helpful to the FIFA delegates with affording that new car they have always wanted. The very fact they were half considering changing the dates to winter after they had been awarded the tournament says it all.

 

Any reason why you feel like this? Worst thing in a long time, yet you say this 10 years before, seems you aren't aware of anything else in that period.

 

I have not gone through all the threads so this might be old ground but you only have to look at teh FIFA committee and what has come out since to see that itt was clearly chosen for personal gain. So with that hanging over the competition for 11 years I would have thought that was pretty bad for the game.

Looking at the environment which like it or not is important and presumably being treated as such. How helpful is buying x number of air conditioned stadia, hotels etc.

So much of the atmosphere at the competitions is obviously created by teh fans but few will go to this one. I have been to all bar one since 1982 and I won't even consider it.

I have no problem with new countries getting the tournament but it does need to be suitable for what is the flag ship of the World Game and I can see no positives at all with it being there.

 

Thank's for your response Ric_Braz, it is much appreicated as many people do post and then never expand on their thoughts, so i'm glad you've come back to do it.

Now, I know the tournament kicks off in 2022, but I don't really expect too much attention to it now like it was after the announcement until after the Russian world cup is hosted. That's when all the flak will come out again.

I was a supporter for Qatar getting the hosting rights, but can see it was all done in a way that the democratic world doesn't work. It's kind of soured it for me. I also think a succesful Qatari/Arab world cup has to be played in the winter part of that country. So December/January it is. I think this will eventually happen, and boy that will be a strange feeling watching at midday in my thermals a bunch of players running around in 30 degree temperature, that on it's own would be a reality that i don't think my mind would accept and after the tournament was said and done I would still feel like i've not seen the world cup yet.

As for the fans and environment, I think it will sell, people will go. It's the biggest show on earth, it will sell, but the difference being, whereas there would have been a rush to the bars afterwards, it would be a rush to the airport to get back to neighbouring Abu Dhabi/Dubai to get the accomdation/refreshing drink. Same for the teams, as I think this will be a world cup where teams will base themseleves in neighbouring countries.

I do see some positives in the game being hosted in Doha (Qatar!), but would have preferred dual hosts or even in this respect 4 hosts (Qatar, Bahrian, UAE, Saudi).

 

In terms of demand I don't think that fans will do anything for a World Cup. It was very noticeable that the shortfall in umbers in South Africa due to worries about security, the utter greed of the airlines and the truly disgraceful way FIFA dealt with the accommodation issue. One thing most fans love is seeing a new country and exploring. Seemingly there is nothing to explore in this country the size of manchester and the very fact you suggest teh fans and teams will have to escape by plane after each match sums up in a nutshell why theis bid is only slightly more suitable than the South Pole.