Soccer World Cup bid

[Benotti69]

Well. Im relieved the world cup isnt coming here. Russia, meh i can take that.

Dont know what Quatar will look like. You have for 18 the biggest country in the world and for 2022 a very small country. Looking at quatars sporting history (paying african runners to change citizenship) we might have a "rest of the world" representing the hosts in 2022



He has a far better chance at being at the world cup in Quatar, then he would, had Russia not recieved the 2018 world cup

Also, is it optimistic to think that there might be a doping scandal in football by Quatar

So maybe Blatter will be retired before then, whether he wants to or not and Russian running fifa

 

[auscyclefan94]

What's race got to do with anything?

Once again your thoughts are misguided.

When the World Cup was last held in our time zone, it was the 2nd highest rating program of the year, and the highest rating sports program:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Australian_television_ratings_for_2002

To give you some perspective, the Rugby World Cup dominated ratings, and received great crowds at all the big games when it was hosted here. This is despite overall lackluster (by your standards) support for Rugby both at provincial and international level. No one watches the Rugby or Cricket world cups when they are held outside Australia/NZ, hardly anyone supports local professional teams, yet we have supported these events well before, and we will support them well again when they next return to our shores.

Likewise, the Commonwealth Games were massive in Melbourne 2006, yet according to the TV ratings their support is rather poor when held offshore.

I'm still yet to see you devise an argument that suggests it would be a bad idea, from Australia's point of view to host the Football World Cup.

well when you get 1 vote i think it was a bad idea. Wasting $46 million when we had no chance at all. Epic fail! I hardly think your right when you say noboady supports our cricket teams. People don't watch it when it is overseas because it is always on pay tv.

People watched the world cup not because they love soccer but because of the prestige of the event.

I am talking about locally people watching it. You still fail to answer my fact the only 8.8 thousand people turn out to the A League games. That shows how much support their is.

As for the bids. I think they will go England and Qatar. A blend of old style, tradition with modern day asia. And theres no doubt qatar would put on an amazing show.

My concern would be that most of englands stadia are terribly out of date. Man city, sunderland, arsenal have great modern stadiums and also of course wembley. But beyond that some major upgrading would be in order.

Qatar? Have you ever been there? It is too hot! They need 50-60 police to their matches to keep the crowd intact. Bunch of animals. Just like over here especially at the live sites at Fed Square. Always ends up in fights with flares going everywhere and people always get hurt.

did you pay attention to how many people turned out to watch Australia v Uruguay?? Aust v Iran even more years ago?

Did you notice the thousands that watched the world cup at venues such as Fed Square? or other venues around the country during the last two world cups??

You obviously have no idea about what's going on regarding the interest in football. While the A-league struggles for being the sunday park comp that it is, there are far more folk heading to pubs that are tuning into the european leagues on saturday and sunday nights...

Just like over here especially at the live sites at Fed Square. Always ends up in fights with flares going everywhere and people always get hurt.

Far more? Like how much? Probably the same people who go to the game watch the european league events in the pubs.

As much as you want to spin that Aussies love soccer, the fact is Australians don't. We aren't soccer lovers and until this gets through your heads the better as you are living in denial.

Ferminal analysis of what australian kids do and do not like mwould be more accurate than your claims especially as I was teenager not that long ago anyway.

 

[Anonymous]

I must admit the first thing I thought of both of those bids was the dodgy oil money backing both of them!

America dissapointed at missing out, but spotting the opportunity are putting forward their oil rich state of iraq as host for 2026

 

[The Hitch]

I guess Quatar will be a bit of a different world cup.

It is illegal to be drunk in public.

England might as well not turn up

 

[la.margna]

the Swiss government should really be embarrassed by Switzerland being the home of dirty money.

while I agree with you that the FIFA is disgustingly corrupt, even worse than UCI, you're completely wrong with your assumption that Switzerland is the home of dirty money.

This was true until fifteen and twenty years ago. Today, the dirty money has better places to hide such as Channel Island trusts or Delaware companies and loads of other offshore loopholes. And were not talking about certain eastern european countries, commodity business, arts and football, where also really large amounts of money are being laundered.

In terms of anti-money-laundering procedures, Switzerland has substantially tougher laws and regulations today than many other countries in particular the US and the UK. And the pressure by EU will probably also drill some large holes into the banking secrecy for EU nationals.

But maybe you meant with your dirty money remark that the two winners Russia and Qatar are countries with a well-established bribe & schmear culture who bought these FIFA delegates gathering in Switzerland. There's probably more than a pinch of salt truth in this thesis.

Money has been destroying everything, it hasn't stopped in front of cycling nor football. Sad.

 

[Cobblestones]

I guess Quatar will be a bit of a different world cup.

It is illegal to be drunk in public.

England might as well not turn up

What makes you think they qualify in the first place?

 

[The Hitch]

What makes you think they qualify in the first place?

I personaly enjoy England not making a world cup (ive never experienced it, but them missing Euro 2008 was fun )

But lets be honest, they are a very good country football wise, who take it very very very seriously, and get seeded 1 for the qualifying rounds, meaning often they just have to beat the likes of Azerbajan and Northen Ireland to qualify.

But even if they didnt, i envisage problems with this being drunk in public ban, for the Dutch fans, the german fans and the irish fans.

 

[Siriuscat]

I personaly enjoy England not making a world cup (ive never experienced it, but them missing Euro 2008 was fun )

But lets be honest, they are a very good country football wise, who take it very very very seriously, and get seeded 1 for the qualifying rounds, meaning often they just have to beat the likes of Azerbajan and Northen Ireland to qualify.

But even if they didnt, i envisage problems with this being drunk in public ban, for the Dutch fans, the german fans and the irish fans.

+100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 etc etc etc

I hate football, hate it with a loathing I'd be happy if it was banned forever. My own national team are crap (Scotland) and I get fed up with having the England/three lions/footballs coming home crap rammed down our throats every couple of years whether it be Euro champs or the World Cup. grumpy rant over!!

 

[Ferminal]

well when you get 1 vote i think it was a bad idea. Wasting $46 million when we had no chance at all. Epic fail! I hardly think your right when you say noboady supports our cricket teams. People don't watch it when it is overseas because it is always on pay tv.

Wow, which Football games have been on Free To Air TV in the past 4 years?

Again, tell me what the average attendance in the A-League has anything to do with it? Cricket and Rugby also get very poor crowds at that level. For most people I know, they refuse to attend A-League fixtures on most occasions due to the mediocre standard, in comparison to what you can see on TV. Which World Cup fixtures do you think will be similar to the poor standard of the A-League and thus, attract poor crowds? Why do you think Australians would not turn out and support the much bigger event (Football) with over 20 high quality teams, like they did with Rugby (with <10 decent teams) in 2003? Please don't tell me that Rugby Union is more widely supported than Football

Can you please use your points to form some sort of cogent argument?

How did you expect us to win the nomination if we did not submit a bid, and spend money on it? You can't win it every time, of course Melbourne knows this from 1989.

 

[la.margna]

wow. great. qatar. 1 million people. 11 stadiums.

female fans covered with coal bags
no beer
air conditioned stadium (what a waste of energy)

corrupt. more corrupt. UCI. FIFA.

 

[Mambo95]

wow. great. qatar. 1 million people. 11 stadiums.

female fans covered with coal bags
no beer
air conditioned stadium (what a waste of energy)

corrupt. more corrupt. UCI. FIFA.

But it's a hotbed of football. 113th in the World Rankings and an average attendance of 8000 for home games (about the same as Swindon Town)

 

[Ferminal]

But it's a hotbed of football. 113th in the World Rankings and an average attendance of 8000 for home games (about the same as Swindon Town)

And the noise from the stadiums is far worse than the Vuvuz.

 

[auscyclefan94]

Wow, which Football games have been on Free To Air TV in the past 4 years?

Again, tell me what the average attendance in the A-League has anything to do with it? Cricket and Rugby also get very poor crowds at that level. For most people I know, they refuse to attend A-League fixtures on most occasions due to the mediocre standard, in comparison to what you can see on TV. Which World Cup fixtures do you think will be similar to the poor standard of the A-League and thus, attract poor crowds? Why do you think Australians would not turn out and support the much bigger event (Football) with over 20 high quality teams, like they did with Rugby (with <10 decent teams) in 2003? Please don't tell me that Rugby Union is more widely supported than Football

Can you please use your points to form some sort of cogent argument?

How did you expect us to win the nomination if we did not submit a bid, and spend money on it? You can't win it every time, of course Melbourne knows this from 1989.

Rugby gets better crowds than soccer if you a reffering to NRL. Far more matches of cricket in Australia anyway of an international level that are on so why would you bother watching the state cricket. With cricket and soccer, it is like comparing apples and oranges. We have very little amount of international matches of Soccer in Australia so when we do have one everyone goes out and watches it. Again read my comment about the cultures and you will understand why soccer seems the most popular sport for participation.

45.6 million dollars was the official figure. Far too much money put into it. And a lot of people are ****ed. A lot more important things $46 million could be put to. You can tolerate when it is an olympics because it is the biggest event in the world. Soccer is not supported in Australia and you need to get that through your head. The areas that host the event must only have Soccer world cup advertising and FIFa also said that we can't have any of the other sporting codes playing during the event. The time leading up to the event, all other events must have minimal advertising to not take away attention away from the World Cup. It is like FIFA are trying to run a dictatorship.

I would ask you to have a look at the herald Sun site and some of the articles about the World Cup. A lot of people would be on my side.

Another erason why we would not want it, most world cups LOSE money for the country hosting it.

The lack of attendances to the main and only soccer league in australia says people don't support soccer.

btw, in Australia, we call AFL or NRL football not soccer.

 

[Ferminal]

I've read Thursday's Hun, quite moderate if you ask me...

Rugby is Rugby Union - we held a small event for it in 2003.

We have very little amount of international matches of Soccer in Australia so when we do have one everyone goes out and watches it.

Yes exactly, because Australians are willing to support and watch a world class match of Football - as all 64 are during the world cup. Finally we can agree on something.

gain read my comment about the cultures and you will understand why soccer seems the most popular sport for participation.

No I don't understand - what I do understand is that Football is enjoyed and embraced by all parts of our quasi-multicultural society, moreso than any other sport. As much as you enjoy your White Australia view of this country, we should promote cultural events which appeal to all demographics. Regardless of their origin, race, religion.

You can tolerate when it is an olympics because it is the biggest event in the world.

Olympic Games are no bigger than the Football World Cup. The two are unrivalled amongst other major sporting events but little separates them.

45.6 million dollars was the official figure. Far too much money put into it. And a lot of people are ****ed. A lot more important things $46 million could be put t

Really? The oportunity cost of that money is the level of interest, hardly significant. The money came from nowhere, and would not have been used elsewhere if not for the bid.

FIFa also said that we can't have any of the other sporting codes playing during the event.

Do you have a reference from the Australian bid saying this would be the case? I know what FIFA say but would think of this as being unlikely to happen.

Another erason why we would not want it, most world cups LOSE money for the country hosting it.

Yes, every major event comes with a cost, including the Tour Down Under, the Road World Championships, Olympics, Commonwealth Games etc etc. The question is whether the benefits justify the fiscal commitment.

The lack of attendances to the main and only soccer league in australia says people don't support soccer.

That's some brilliant logic. What I think it says is that people don't support the A-League. I think massive TV audiences (2002 World Cup, 2005 Qualifier), large attendances (take your pick of many games in the last decade in Sydney, Melbourne or Brisbane) suggest that Australia does support international, world class football.

A-League attendances reflect on the standard of the national competition and peaks and troughs. Perth used to get 15k every home game and 40k at finals (in a competition where many teams were only semi-pro), now it gets poor crowds due to a dull competition and poor performances. Do you feel that Australia-wide support for Football has decreased since the late 90s/early 00s? Of course all evidence would suggest otherwise due to the success of the national side 2005 onwards. I "support" football and go to 1-2 A-League games per year. Likewise, I play football, and naturally people I play with and against "support" it, yet go to few A-League fixtures. The same people who you sit around watching EPL with on a saturday night would laugh at you if you suggested getting an A-League membership.

Could you please quantify the level of support for a World Cup in Australia, and what level of support would be necessary in order for you to agree to Australia hosting a World Cup? Why is this level of support insufficient to host a World Cup?

btw, in Australia, we call AFL or NRL football not soccer.

I'm sorry?

The governing body of the sport is the Football Federation of Australia. It doesn't just do that for fun, the official name of the the world game in this country is Football (as you clearly would have seen on the government report I linked to earlier).

So, if I can try and summarise your argument for you:

Australia should not bid for the World Cup because...

-No support (cites A-League attendances as the sole indicator of societies' invovlement in Football)
-All White Australians don't support Football
-Costs too much

As opposed to some of the benefits one may see of hosting a world cup...

-Positive infrastructure legacy
-Positive tourism legacy
-Positive cultural legacy
-Projects Australia positively to the international stage
-Society is happy as it gets to see a major event, positive externalities etc
-Greatly enhances the development of football and sport in general (bringing in a whole new wave of social benefits).

Or are you fundamentally opposed to spending money on sport? No government spending on development programs, stadiums, events etc? All these things are done because the social benefits warrant the expenditure.

 

[Buffalo Soldier]

Russia & Qatar. Gas & Oil.

 

[Anonymous]

Qatar? Have you ever been there? It is too hot! They need 50-60 police to their matches to keep the crowd intact. Bunch of animals. Just like over here especially at the live sites at Fed Square. Always ends up in fights with flares going everywhere and people always get hurt.

I bow to your better judgement, ive never been to a football match in qatar unlike yourself. I stand corrected.

I was purely going on previous sporting events, moto gp etc, and their ability to build hi tech, state of the art facilities (like the new qatar shopping mall which i watched a documentary about).

 

[movingtarget]

This is a very painful day for me as I despise the roll the soccer world cup has in the modern world. Claims that football is the main weapon against poverty and war.
The millions diverted from much needed healthcare in south Africa ( and people that died as a result) so that the gods of football can live in 7 star hotels.
Blatters claims that he should be given a nobel peace prize (this despite the fact that he had brought the world cup to a continenet ridden with slavery, and then proceeded to complain that $500 000 a week starlet C Ronaldo was a SLAVE, because he couldn’t get out of a contract he had signed) . I could go on.

The main aim is obviously for England not to under any circumstances get the bid. I don’t want to be paying higher taxes for this. Football is already reported ad nauseum here. The England manager is known as the other prime minister. If England wins this, we might actually have a coup de ta, and switch the prestige of the 2 positions around. Also England is hosting the Olympics. I already have heard crap about how the Olympics will be a minor warm up for the main course in 2018. As a sporting fan, the Olympics where ALL athletes go through years of far more work and dedication than footballers, for one shot at Olympic gold, is more important than a media orchestrated fenzy where only specific athletes are allowed to enter, and their enterance is based on their nationality. If they lose the bid, I think England might be content with the Olympics, rather than see it as the warm up.

I hope Spain get it. Spain because they are, even more loco in a bad way on the subject of football. They see winning the world cup, not as a sporting success but as a geopolitical event. According to them, it single handidly united spain, got Catalans and Basques to aknowledge they are Spanish. They still go on about it 5 months later on the radio, on tv, in the papers.

The country is currently in recession, but apparently its all right because the world cup made everyone happy and forget that they couldnt pay the bills. Spain is in a recession, with extreme hardship and huge unemployment and yet Mondays “El clasico” where the average footballer earns more a day than the average Spaniard does in a year, was all over the front pages. If Spain thinks football is more important than life, let their extremely poor economy fund a world cup. They clearly want it.

Unfortunately, I think England are heavy favourites. Even Russia would be better than this.

As for 2022 I just hope the US don’t get it. Its good to have at least one major major country, see other sports as more important.

Oh and the fact that Putin NOT being present at the Russia bid is seen as a MASSIVE BLOW to Russias bid, shows just how FALSE, Fifas claims to be a force for good in the world, really are.

The only thing missing at the announcement was a halo around Blatter's head and Bono standing behind him. I agree with your thoughts. How many South African lives were changed ? Football changes lives ? Well maybe for Ronaldo and co. It's more than a game ? No it isn't and it does not solve the world's problems, it just makes people even more cynical about sport and politics. It teaches us how to lose ? Being on unemployment benefits for a year might be superior for learning that lesson.

 

[auscyclefan94]

I bow to your better judgement, ive never been to a football match in qatar unlike yourself. I stand corrected.

I was purely going on previous sporting events, moto gp etc, and their ability to build hi tech, state of the art facilities (like the new qatar shopping mall which i watched a documentary about).

I have not been but a friend of mine has. he showed me pics of the match he went to and the brawls. It is also well known that they have 60 police to a game that gets about 8000 people to it which has ended up into pandemonium (sp) many times.

I've read Thursday's Hun, quite moderate if you ask me...

Rugby is Rugby Union - we held a small event for it in 2003.



Yes exactly, because Australians are willing to support and watch a world class match of Football - as all 64 are during the world cup. Finally we can agree on something.



No I don't understand - what I do understand is that Football is enjoyed and embraced by all parts of our quasi-multicultural society, moreso than any other sport. As much as you enjoy your White Australia view of this country, we should promote cultural events which appeal to all demographics. Regardless of their origin, race, religion.



Olympic Games are no bigger than the Football World Cup. The two are unrivalled amongst other major sporting events but little separates them.



Really? The oportunity cost of that money is the level of interest, hardly significant. The money came from nowhere, and would not have been used elsewhere if not for the bid.



Do you have a reference from the Australian bid saying this would be the case? I know what FIFA say but would think of this as being unlikely to happen.



Yes, every major event comes with a cost, including the Tour Down Under, the Road World Championships, Olympics, Commonwealth Games etc etc. The question is whether the benefits justify the fiscal commitment.



That's some brilliant logic. What I think it says is that people don't support the A-League. I think massive TV audiences (2002 World Cup, 2005 Qualifier), large attendances (take your pick of many games in the last decade in Sydney, Melbourne or Brisbane) suggest that Australia does support international, world class football.

A-League attendances reflect on the standard of the national competition and peaks and troughs. Perth used to get 15k every home game and 40k at finals (in a competition where many teams were only semi-pro), now it gets poor crowds due to a dull competition and poor performances. Do you feel that Australia-wide support for Football has decreased since the late 90s/early 00s? Of course all evidence would suggest otherwise due to the success of the national side 2005 onwards. I "support" football and go to 1-2 A-League games per year. Likewise, I play football, and naturally people I play with and against "support" it, yet go to few A-League fixtures. The same people who you sit around watching EPL with on a saturday night would laugh at you if you suggested getting an A-League membership.

Could you please quantify the level of support for a World Cup in Australia, and what level of support would be necessary in order for you to agree to Australia hosting a World Cup? Why is this level of support insufficient to host a World Cup?



I'm sorry?

The governing body of the sport is the Football Federation of Australia. It doesn't just do that for fun, the official name of the the world game in this country is Football (as you clearly would have seen on the government report I linked to earlier).

So, if I can try and summarise your argument for you:

Australia should not bid for the World Cup because...

-No support (cites A-League attendances as the sole indicator of societies' invovlement in Football)
-All White Australians don't support Football
-Costs too much

As opposed to some of the benefits one may see of hosting a world cup...

-Positive infrastructure legacy
-Positive tourism legacy
-Positive cultural legacy
-Projects Australia positively to the international stage
-Society is happy as it gets to see a major event, positive externalities etc
-Greatly enhances the development of football and sport in general (bringing in a whole new wave of social benefits).

Or are you fundamentally opposed to spending money on sport? No government spending on development programs, stadiums, events etc? All these things are done because the social benefits warrant the expenditure.

I am saying that there are other places who embrace the sport much more than we do and in comparison to the rest of the world people do not care about this sport. I agree there are a lot of beneifts of holding the event but Andrew Demetriou said he would not support the bid especially because FIFa did not want any other sporting events going against it during that time and the AFL has a lot of power in Australia.They are not going to reschedule the season.

Some of my points you are taking out of context. I feel this thread is going around in circles. But the Olympics are the biggest sporting event on the planet. No doubt about it. People from ethnic backgrounds such as greeks and italinas play soccer and soccer only. Aussies overall do support sport and would support the WC but I think that we are a country that does not embrace soccer overall and until we start to really embrace it and our national competition improves (which it is on the decline) we should not bid for the world cup.

I think that there would be a strong crossover of people who went to A League games and people who watched EPL in the pubs.

I am against governments support of bids for events like the olympic games or world cups when our health, law & order, education and transport systems need drastic improvements. Melbourne is a one of the best cities in the world but I feel that we need to take care of our own backyard before we start pouring money into events such as the world cup.

The tour down under actually brings in a financial return. I am surprised it did not go the states because it would be one country that would make a profit from the world cup. I personally see qatar losing money from this

 

[simo1733]

Russia & Qatar. Gas & Oil.

Some estimates say that the Qatar world cup will cost 40Billion dollars. That is absolutely obscene.

 

[pmcg76]

Rugby gets better crowds than soccer if you a reffering to NRL. Far more matches of cricket in Australia anyway of an international level that are on so why would you bother watching the state cricket. With cricket and soccer, it is like comparing apples and oranges. We have very little amount of international matches of Soccer in Australia so when we do have one everyone goes out and watches it. Again read my comment about the cultures and you will understand why soccer seems the most popular sport for participation.

45.6 million dollars was the official figure. Far too much money put into it. And a lot of people are ****ed. A lot more important things $46 million could be put to. You can tolerate when it is an olympics because it is the biggest event in the world. Soccer is not supported in Australia and you need to get that through your head. The areas that host the event must only have Soccer world cup advertising and FIFa also said that we can't have any of the other sporting codes playing during the event. The time leading up to the event, all other events must have minimal advertising to not take away attention away from the World Cup. It is like FIFA are trying to run a dictatorship.

I would ask you to have a look at the herald Sun site and some of the articles about the World Cup. A lot of people would be on my side.

Another erason why we would not want it, most world cups LOSE money for the country hosting it.

The lack of attendances to the main and only soccer league in australia says people don't support soccer.

btw, in Australia, we call AFL or NRL football not soccer.

A few points you need to take into consideration, lots of other countries who are soccer mad do not have big attendances in their local leagues. Here in Ireland, everyone is crazy for the English Premier League but out own League of Ireland is a semi-professional joke where an attendance above 2-3000 is amazing. Yet if one of the big English teams sends a crap team over for a friendly, attendances will jump 5-10 times. Everyone goes crazy for World Cups etc especially if Ireland make it.

Look around many European leagues like France or Portugal, look outside of the handful of big clubs and look at attendances at other games, very often they struggle to get above 10,000. France is a major footballing nation but interest in the French league is poor in comparison to Germany, England, Spain. In Italy the game is going downhill rapidly. World Cup grabs everyones attnention, its when the population whom never watch football suddenly become interested.

Olympics are not bigger than World Cup, maybe in certain countries but I gurantee World Cup draws bigger viewing figures in places like South America, Africa most of Europe etc. Undoubtedly Olympics are bigger in Oz as its one of the few countries whom still care about the Olympics. Personally I believe the Olympics has been a non-entitiy since the onset of professionalism, only athletcis, swimming and a few other minor sports are of any interest.

Having lived in Australia, I was amazed at how little people cared about Rugby Union as Australia has been one of the top countries internationally. I had always been under the impression Rugby Union was big in Oz. Soccer may still lag behind AFL, NRL , Cricket in terms of team sports in Oz but in global terms those sports are a joke played only in the UK and a handful of its former colonies. If you want the world spotlight on Australia, only events like the Olympics or World Cup will provide that focus. Besides, soccer was bigger in Oz than I expected when I went there. The fact I could watch highlights from the European legues with Les Murray on free to view TV every Sunday is more than we get in Ireland without satellite TV.

FIFA are looking to push the game into newer zones which is why they chose Russia/Quatar. I personally felt Engalnd was by far the best candidate for 2018 and I would have preferred for Australia to get 2022 as I am sure they would have done an excellent job of hosting but FIFA want to promote the game where it is less popular. The 1994 World Cup took place in the US when soccer was nothing, most Americans didnt know it was happening but stadiums were still full and overall it was a success. Soccer is still lame in comparison to other US sports but when World Cup arrives, its amazing how many non-soccer fans now follow it compared to 20 years ago. Japan/Korea are harldy major Soccer nations either and their populations went crazy in 02 for the World Cup.

As for financial profit, I think the World Cup usually makes a tidy profit, even in South Africa.

Most of your points are invalid and I have no doubt that Australia would have organised and held a very successful World Cup with full stadiums everywhere, and I am saying all this as someone for whom you Aussies are not one of my favourite nations on Earth.

 

[Anonymous]

One of the arguments is also that the world cup helps raise the profile of football (soccer) in the host countries. So going to a nation not normally known for fanatical support is a good thing. So if youre argument is that australia arent into football, theres the counter argument.

 

[L'arriviste]

Some estimates say that the Qatar world cup will cost 40Billion dollars. That is absolutely obscene.

I wonder if this figure is for what the event will cost or what Qatar will spend on it.

This is the future though, no doubt about it. By the time the event does finally roll out, what sort of world will we be living in by then?

 

[The Hitch]

One of the arguments is also that the world cup helps raise the profile of football (soccer) in the host countries. So going to a nation not normally known for fanatical support is a good thing. So if youre argument is that australia arent into football, theres the counter argument.

I disagree. Look at your teams parent companies, sport chanel.

"Sky SPORTS News".

At this stage is not much of a sports channel though is it?
The Programmes are usually called "Football today" or, "Live with (insert footballers name here)" or "football saturday". 99% of the coverage is football.

So as a sports fan I like the fact that in America the biggest event is the superbowl, that in Australia its AFL, in India cricket.

Having football be the number 1 Sport in EVERY country in the world would be very sad.

Diversity is good.

 

[roundabout]

I wonder if this figure is for what the event will cost or what Qatar will spend on it.

This is the future though, no doubt about it. By the time the event does finally roll out, what sort of world will we be living in by then?

How much different is the world today compared to what it was in 1998?

As for Blatter, he's in collect the money while he still can mode, hardly a surprise that countries with the least controllable spending won the rights.

 

[Mellow Velo]

I want a spot on FIFA.
Qatar's brown envelopes must make Lance's look like chump change.
Glad I don't give a toss about soccer/football.
2022 should be a real fun event.

Had a smirk and Willie's glum mug. Maybe next time "England" will think about making it a "UK" bid, seeing that Iberia managed a combined bid.
Still "England" (well that means London, doesnt it?) have the Olympics to look forward to.