World Cups And Euro Championships In Disapointing Countries 4 Years To Come

Discussion in 'FIFA and Tournaments' started by blackpool fc mark, Oct 1, 2003.

  1. Crowdie

    Crowdie New Member

    Jan 23, 2003
    Auckland, New Zealand
    I would go for a tournament in:

    Sydney AUS
    Newcastle AUS
    Brisbane AUS
    Melbourne AUS
    Auckland NZ

    This would have all the games on the eastern side of Australia. Perth, on Australia's west coast, would miss out because of its location.

    This could certainly be done.

    Crowdie
     
  2. Crowdie

    Crowdie New Member

    Jan 23, 2003
    Auckland, New Zealand
    What I believe would fix all the problems would be to have a second tier World tournament, like the UEFA Cup in Europe. This tournament could happen between the World Cup (2008, 2012, etc) and would:

    i) Allow the smaller confederations/countries to develop by giving them a tournament where they have a more realistic chance of success

    ii) Would allow FIFA, if it so wanted, to lower the number of countries playing in the World Cup (as a number of threads have discussed)

    Any thoughts?

    Crowdie
     
  3. Mustang2000

    Mustang2000 New Member

    Sep 2, 2000
    Kent, England
    Just a few points about South Africa and their readiness to host a world cup. Having lived there for a while and been to top rugby games, I feel I'm in a good position to say that they have some fantastic all seater stadiums which would be great venues for a world cup game.

    The public would also love to host a world cup and would really get behind the national team and provide great support for the tournament as proud hosts. Not just the black football loving majority but the whole of their country. Also the weather wouldn't be a problem as it will be winter there and it can actually get quite cold in certain places such as Joberg which is on a high plateau.

    While it is a third world country, it is very developed and very western with quite a high standard of living and is unlike any other country in Africa. Yes they do have problems with a very high crime rate, lots of people living in townships and maybe their public transport isn't quite ready just yet(they still have time), I think they'll make everyone who goes there feel welcome and will put on a World cup to remember.

    Whilst I would love to have the World cup back home here in England or at least in Europe, if it's going to go somewhere else then I think it should be South Africa.
     
  4. comme

    comme Moderator
    Staff Member

    Feb 21, 2003
    I wouldn't have any problems with that, as long as New Zealand were not automatic entrants. The main problem with dual hosting is that it often lets countries who couldn't qualify into the tournament.
     
  5. Crowdie

    Crowdie New Member

    Jan 23, 2003
    Auckland, New Zealand
    An interesting report came out overnight by the a group called Transparency International. It rates the level of corruption in each country (http://www.transparency.org./pressreleases_archive/2003/2003.10.07.cpi.en.html). This makes interesting when you look at who is hosting future World Cups or bidding for future World Cups.

    The scores are out of 10:

    9+ - "very low levels of perceived corruption"
    4,5 - "reflects perceived levels of corruption among politicians and public officials"
    1-3 - "a high level of corruption"

    The top five countries were:

    1 Finland (9.7)
    2 Iceland (9.6)
    3 Denmark (9.5) & New Zealand (9.5)
    5 Singapore (9.4)

    Some soccer powers (from different confederations):

    Australia 8th (8.8)
    Argentina 92nd (2.5)
    Brazil 54th (3.9) - bidding for 2014 WC
    France 23rd (6.9) - 1998 WC Hosts
    Germany 16th (7.7) - 2006 WC Hosts
    Italy 35th (5.3)
    Japan 21st (7.0) - 2002 WC Co-Hosts
    Mexico 64th (3.6)
    Morocco 70th (3.3) - bidding for 2010 WC
    South Africa 48th (4.4) - bidding for 2010 WC
    South Korea 50th (4.3) - 2002 WC Co-Hosts
    United Kingdom 11th (8.7)
    United States 18th (7.5) - 1994 WC Hosts


    Makes interesting reading. Posters seem to be happy with Brazil (54th) possibly hosting the 2014 WC but not happy with South Africa (48th) possibly hosting the 2010 World Cup.

    Crowdie
     
  6. onefineesq

    onefineesq Member+

    Sep 16, 2003
    Laurel, MD
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    why don't we put this all to rest and have it in the country that would ALWAYS be most capable of hosting it ........... USA! I'm tired of all the Europeans whining about having to travel. Take the bib off from around your necks and start being men about it! Because South Africa isn't Europe, doesn't mean they shouldn't have it. Because Japan is far away, doesn't mean they shouldn't have it. I sat here and read the last 6 pages of this thread and was appalled at how many european snobs seem to have a problem with WC's anywhere other than Europe because their "facilities" are superior. Remember, if you want to go on pure facility strength and numbers attending, the WC in the USA in '94 was BY FAR the most successful one. Made more money, was loved by the players, and broke by a LARGE MARGIN all attendance records. So for all the European snobs, if we go by that logic ........... let's have it in the USA EVERY year. Good idea??? I didn't think you would agree.

    p.s. I don't have a problem with Europe .......... just those people there who think that they own the sport of football.
     
  7. Roehl Sybing

    Roehl Sybing Guest

    Yeah, I got some thoughts.

    i) Elitist crap. This is not about helping smaller countries, it is about keeping smaller countries from the real prize for sake of "let's be realistic" diatribe.

    ii) Arguing for decreasing the number of WC berths is making an issue out of something that is not an issue.

    I swear, I would be so much more happier if some of you guys just admitted that you would be content if the trophy just rotated between England, Brazil, Argentina, Italy, Germany and France without a single game being played.
     
  8. Crowdie

    Crowdie New Member

    Jan 23, 2003
    Auckland, New Zealand
    Have a look at what country I am from. You are aiming your comment at the wrong person. I am just trying to be a realist. Under the current system the OFC will never get automatic entry to the World Cup as UEFA and South America will block us every step of the way. With a second tier tournament the smaller soccer nations, like New Zealand, will have a tournament to play in.

    Crowdie
     
  9. DanRod78

    DanRod78 New Member

    Mar 30, 2003
    Kansas City, KS
    For the people that don't know, the 2014 WC has pretty much been decided, unanimously everybody in Conmebol believes that Brazil should host it (not an actually vote).
    I'm very proud of this display of respect, especially since Africa still hasn't elected their host for 2010.

    There's no question that Brazil deserves it.

    - Argentina hosted the WC in 1978
    - Brazil hosted the WC in 1950 and the final game had a record attendance of 190,000 people.
    - Brazil has won more WC than any other country in the World.
    - Brazil has 26 stadiums with capacity for more than 50000 people. http://www.worldstadiums.com
    - Brazil has been considered the best country in soccer for decades (not continously, of course).
     
  10. soccerfreak #1

    soccerfreak #1 New Member

    Oct 6, 2003
    Cologne
    you only listed five cities, but you must have something like 12 stadium, or so, if not even more!!!!!

    so you proved youreself, that the oceanics are NOT abled to host a world cup!!!!!!!
     
  11. Crowdie

    Crowdie New Member

    Jan 23, 2003
    Auckland, New Zealand
    Well in Auckland we have:

    i) North Harbour Stadium (my home ground) - 25,000
    ii) Ericsson Stadium (home to Vodafone Warriors (League) and the Football Kingz (Soccer)) - 30,000
    iii) Eden Park (home to Auckland Rugby) - 50,000

    In Sydney:

    i) Telstra Stadium - 80,000
    ii) Sydney Cricket Ground - 44,000
    iii) Aussie Stadium - 42,000
    iv) Henson Park - 30,000
    iv) Belmore Sports Ground - 22,000
    v) Toyota Park - 21,500
    vi) Sydney Showground - 21,000

    In Newcastle:

    i) EnergyAustralia Stadium - 28,000

    In Brisbane:

    i) ANZ Stadium - 55,000
    ii) Suncorp Stadium - 52,000
    iii) QCA Ground - 37,600
    iv) Ballymore Stadium - 27,000
    v) Carrara Oval - 25,000

    and so on....


    Crowdie
     
  12. fatmaradona

    fatmaradona New Member

    Dec 15, 2002
    the Anschutz ranch
    good argument for USA 2014
     
  13. Crowdie

    Crowdie New Member

    Jan 23, 2003
    Auckland, New Zealand
    Arguments against:

    i) US has just had it (94)
    ii) UEFA wouldn't allow it
    iii) Every international group that hates the US (and there are a number of them) will want tickets

    Crowdie
     
  14. soccerfreak #1

    soccerfreak #1 New Member

    Oct 6, 2003
    Cologne
    unfortunatly i can´t remember any world cup, to be hosted in more than 2 stadiums per city, and those times they had 2per city were complete exceptions( i think there was paris with parc de prince and stade de france ).

    It´s not about the number of stadiums,
    it´s about the number of cities.
     
  15. Crowdie

    Crowdie New Member

    Jan 23, 2003
    Auckland, New Zealand
    There are firsts for everything and we never follow the rules down here. We just get it done.

    Crowdie
     
  16. fatmaradona

    fatmaradona New Member

    Dec 15, 2002
    the Anschutz ranch
    gosh, if only the USA could manage what Europe and South America can do in a drop of a hat....maybe someday investment will come here, and we will be able to compete the economic giants of Europe and South America.
     
  17. Crowdie

    Crowdie New Member

    Jan 23, 2003
    Auckland, New Zealand
    Bollocks. You need to get out more.

    Crowdie
     
  18. Brownswan

    Brownswan New Member

    Jun 30, 1999
    Port St. Lucie, FL
    How about this: Rename the UEFA Cup the World Cup. Rename the World Cup the Rest Of the World Cup.

    Stage the World (UEFA) Cup as usual. Stage the Rest Of the World Cup as usual -- minus Europe --
    with continental rotations among the Americas, Africa, Asia, and Oceania.

    Now, all those deserving European nations that often fail to qualify, will finally get to a World Cup.
    No more groaning that Honduras gets to go, but football-rich Albania has to stay home.

    I'm not deceiving myself: the new World Cup would make FIFA a lot of money; the Rest Of the World Cup would probably lose millions, even when staged in the US, since all those faboulous players from England, spain , Italy, Portugal, Holland, Germany, et. al. would be absent from the show.

    But it's clear that, in spite of Brasil being the only country to win more than 3 cups, and Argentina and Uruguay each netting two, the World Cup is still considered a European property, especially by Europeans. They send more teams to the Cup than any other confederation.

    I think the realistic approach would be to have Europe host every other Cup, with the off-Cups going in rotation to the other confederations. This may not seem fair, but it does seem to make economic sense. The bottom line should be, what is in the best interest of the World Cup now and in the probable future -- say the next 24 years.
     
  19. fatmaradona

    fatmaradona New Member

    Dec 15, 2002
    the Anschutz ranch
    (iii) is the big problem, but hopefully by 2014, things will have improved, maybe we'll have a Dem in the White House, and the world will (generally) love us, just like under Billy boy.

    I think FIFA will keep the US on speed dial should something go wrong with Africa or South America. Just like the WWC, which has had decent attendence, even though its a womens sport.
    Americans love big things, and nothing is bigger than the WC, another one here would be a huge success.
     
  20. soccerfreak #1

    soccerfreak #1 New Member

    Oct 6, 2003
    Cologne
    your completly wrong with that, because it´s part of the fifa-philosophy to host a world cup in as many cities and regions of the hosting nation as possible!

    that philosophie caused a lot of rivalery in germany because there were 6 cities in the same region, that bidded for becoming host of the world cup´06, but in the end only 3 of them became hosting cities (dortmund, gelsenkirchen(schalke) and cologne), while moenchengladbach, duesseldorf, and leverkusen were denied.
     
  21. skyboy

    skyboy New Member

    Jul 16, 2003
    New York City
    you are well proving that WC shouldn't be held dowm there...

    you only have 5 stadia above 40,000 capacity!!!
    they will never hold a game that sits 25,000...

    footballers...they don't dig intimacy too much, ya know?
     
  22. Crowdie

    Crowdie New Member

    Jan 23, 2003
    Auckland, New Zealand
    These are the standard capacities. For the Bledisloe Cup they had well over 115,000 in the Telstra Stadium. Our stadiums are designed for flexibility.

    Crowdie
     
  23. blackpool fc mark

    blackpool fc mark New Member

    Oct 1, 2003
    BLACKPOOL
    yeah that makes sense, take the world cup bak 2 the US after a whooping 16 year absense *SARCASIM ALERT* US citizens didnt even no the world cup had been held there, such was the intrest levels. I think portugual, spain, england, italy and many more would get the nod as last minute replacements ahead of a country that continues to miss spell football! U dont spell it S-O-C-C-E-R!
     
  24. Crowdie

    Crowdie New Member

    Jan 23, 2003
    Auckland, New Zealand
    So which form of football are we talking about?

    American Football?
    Association Football?
    Australian Rules Football?
    Gaelic Football?
    Rugby Football?
    Rugby League Football?

    Crowdie
     
  25. fatmaradona

    fatmaradona New Member

    Dec 15, 2002
    the Anschutz ranch
    I assume you meant "know"
    --and that's untrue, it was a big event here. Most matches were sold out. Plus the game has gotten bigger here, and it being a big event, would generate a ton of interest.
    The soccer vs football thing is getting old.
     

Share This Page