World Cup 2018 & 2022 bids

MTF

Full Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2009
Messages
5,243
Location
New York City
Thanks for the clarifying Sir Matt.

Its an asymmetric system, resulting from a desire to be too democratic. Its okay to imagine that 100 million people can each have a vote for their politicians, and just one vote. But even democracies are usually designed to protect a minority from overpower of majorities. When you have a situation where England, US, Germany, France, Brazil, etc. are individually the same as San Marino... it doesn't work.

What's happened at FIFA is that if you're an FA trying to behave decently, you're the minority, and there's no protection offered. And it just happens that the countries in this situation right now are some of the largest footballing nations. I don't see how it isn't in their best interest to at least threaten a breakaway, and maybe even go through with it.

Right now they're letting themselves be subject to a bunch of thugs, not realizing the power they really have.
 

Sir Matt

Blue Devil
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
18,341
Location
LUHG
Montserrat has a population of less than 5,000. It is on the same level that the US with 300m, China 1.3bn, India 1.2bn. The latter don't matter in international football at the moment, but Brazil has 190m people and carries the same weight as Montserrat. Really?

How is that fair? Yes, they should get some money from FIFA to benefit their football team, but they will never make the World Cup. They don't even make it to the serious qualification rounds for it in Concacaf or the Gold Cup. It looks nice and makes you feel all warm and fuzzy, but all it does is ensure that people like Blatter will stay in power.
 

Rood

nostradamus like gloater
Scout
Joined
Jun 21, 2008
Messages
21,409
Location
@United_Hour
Ok so to the people who think that giving 1 vote to each country is not a fair system, what do you propose?
 

Sir Matt

Blue Devil
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
18,341
Location
LUHG
One way to start would be never to have simultaneous votes again. Most of the shadiness surrounding 2018 and 2022 was a direct result of having two campaigns at the same time. That allowed collusion(despite what FIFA may tell you) and corruption to run rampant.

Holding individual campaigns for World Cups would be a start, but FIFA needs fundamental changes in terms of policing and anti-corruption mechanisms. As it stands, if you're in Blatter's good graces, you'll never have to worry about anything. If there were adequate measures to prevent collusion and corruption, votes for World Cups and officials would be much more transparent and democratic. The ExCo wouldn't be so bad if it weren't so corrupt. I'll have to think more about the process to come up with a better voting format though. You could have a combination of the ExCo and the Congress so that proper footballing nations wouldn't be underrepresented and tiny hamlets wouldn't wield unreasonable power.
 

Cal?

CR7 fan
Joined
Mar 18, 2002
Messages
34,976
Ok so to the people who think that giving 1 vote to each country is not a fair system, what do you propose?
A voting system where what a country has done for football counts:

Every WC worth 100pts, every continenal championship worth 50pts, professional league 50pts, etc...
 

Rood

nostradamus like gloater
Scout
Joined
Jun 21, 2008
Messages
21,409
Location
@United_Hour
so basically Brazil (with a bit of help from Italy and Germany) get to choose who hosts the WC everytime?
 

njred

HALA MADRID!
Joined
Nov 3, 2001
Messages
7,281
Supports
Liverpool
Ok so to the people who think that giving 1 vote to each country is not a fair system, what do you propose?
How about giving more votes to countries that have qualified the most, or teams that have made the top four in the tournament get more votes.
Kinda like the US electoral vote where states with a higher population count more in the polls but in this case countries with a history of at least getting somewhere in the tournament have more votes.
Imagine if some top countries boycotted just one of these world cups right before qualifyers? Granted Blatter would be thrilled with England out,but add a Brazil and they would cave.
 

phelans shorts

Full Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2009
Messages
27,217
Location
Gaz. Is a Mewling Quim.
How about giving more votes to countries that have qualified the most, or teams that have made the top four in the tournament get more votes.
Kinda like the US electoral vote where states with a higher population count more in the polls but in this case countries with a history of at least getting somewhere in the tournament have more votes.
Imagine if some top countries boycotted just one of these world cups right before qualifyers? Granted Blatter would be thrilled with England out,but add a Brazil and they would cave.
You can't compare what you're saying with the US electoral system, as one is muuuuuuch fairer!

For starters it's pure elitism. Second of all who gets the prestige from Yugoslavias illustrious history? How about the recent Serbia and Montenegro split, are they both dropped to having less say than North Korea who have qualified more?

Basing a democratic election on population centres is fair enough in determining national leaders, basing sporting leadership on who keeps most of the big boys happy is hugely unfair.
 

njred

HALA MADRID!
Joined
Nov 3, 2001
Messages
7,281
Supports
Liverpool
It reminds me of Bush Gore in 2000. Just a bad taste.
 

Rood

nostradamus like gloater
Scout
Joined
Jun 21, 2008
Messages
21,409
Location
@United_Hour
How about giving more votes to countries that have qualified the most, or teams that have made the top four in the tournament get more votes.
Kinda like the US electoral vote where states with a higher population count more in the polls but in this case countries with a history of at least getting somewhere in the tournament have more votes.
Imagine if some top countries boycotted just one of these world cups right before qualifyers? Granted Blatter would be thrilled with England out,but add a Brazil and they would cave.
Nice in theory but a nightmare to work out in practice and get all countries to agree on it.
The vote yesterday showed that there is very little will to go against FIFA, many countries are too scared of what they might lose and England stand on their own in chucking stones at Blatter (and it has been like that for sometime now as well).



Better than Blatter & his cronnis getting to choose.
Not really - especially since one of the Blatter's cronies is the top guy in Brazil - you would be putting the power into the hands of even fewer people which is actually worse than what we have at the moment!
 

Peasplease

Full Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
2,162
Location
Melbourne, Oz
The one vote per country thing sounds pretty good to me. Makes it harder for corruption for a couple reasons. Firstly you'd have to bribe more people and bribing more people = more money. Secondly (and more importantly imo) the more people you approach the more likely to be caught out you are.
 

phelans shorts

Full Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2009
Messages
27,217
Location
Gaz. Is a Mewling Quim.
The one vote per country thing sounds pretty good to me. Makes it harder for corruption for a couple reasons. Firstly you'd have to bribe more people and bribing more people = more money. Secondly (and more importantly imo) the more people you approach the more likely to be caught out you are.
In theory, not reality.

More people who don't require as much money as the ExCo are used too means less money for more power.
 

Zarlak

my face causes global warming
Joined
Apr 30, 2010
Messages
45,407
Location
Truth like rain don't give a feck who it falls on.
Don't know if this has already been posted or not but there is a quote today in the press from the head of the Argentinian(?) FA Julio Grondona which goes "with the English bid I said: 'Let us be brief. If you give us back the Falkland Islands, which belong to us, you will get my vote'. They then became sad and left."

I mean wtf? What's the point of the bids if the members voting are voting purely with their own bias. That's fecking disgraceful, why are these egits serving.
 

lynchie

Full Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2006
Messages
7,068
The one vote per country thing sounds pretty good to me. Makes it harder for corruption for a couple reasons. Firstly you'd have to bribe more people and bribing more people = more money. Secondly (and more importantly imo) the more people you approach the more likely to be caught out you are.
Problem is you'll probably get countries being whipped into line by their regional association in return for future concessions, getting to host regional tournaments etc, so for example most of the CONCACAF votes end up controlled by Jack Warner.
 

davisjw

Full Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
5,288
The one vote per country thing sounds pretty good to me. Makes it harder for corruption for a couple reasons. Firstly you'd have to bribe more people and bribing more people = more money. Secondly (and more importantly imo) the more people you approach the more likely to be caught out you are.
Don't be ignorant. It would cost pennies to convince a tiny country to vote for you. All you need to do is focus on all the small countries who'd happily take 50,000 pounds. Get them and you win. Whereas bribing a larger country would cost you ten times as much.

Added to that, it's the poor countries who are more willing to act in a corrupt way - look at Africa's footballing problems.

On top of that, sociology has proved that rarely do individuals work independently. They gather together and look out for each other. No risk for you when you know if one member of the group rats you out because you have just as much ammo to rat him out.

The fairest system is one built on how much a FA puts into FIFA. if you are earning the organization money, if you are offering to host events, if you are helping other countries, etc than you deserve more of the pie.

It has to be a weighted vote or votes based on federations. Power should reside in the Federations, not FIFA. much like debate in the US - power to the nation or states?
 

Rood

nostradamus like gloater
Scout
Joined
Jun 21, 2008
Messages
21,409
Location
@United_Hour
so a lot of people have assumed that England's bid lost because of corruption etc but our own internal investigations shows that we made major mistakes with the bid.
Unsuprisingly the blame is mostly on the FA:

BBC Sport - Report criticises 2018 bid team's campaign groundwork

A report by MPs into England's failed bid to host the 2018 World Cup says the Football Association has failed to learn lessons from previous attempts.

The England bid received only two votes as the finals were awarded to Russia.

The report says: "England's bid team appears to have lacked a number of the components of a successful bid."​
 

rcoobc

Not as crap as eferyone thinks
Joined
Jul 28, 2010
Messages
41,733
Location
C-137
Australia spent 10 million Aussie dollars, twice as much as England did on their bid. Article

Australia, have lost out big time by what happened. Under current rules nations can't host a world cup within 2 world cups of the last time it was held in that confederation, (10 years to make it clear). Many thought that China where going to get 2026, but they cannot now host a world cup until 2034 under current rules. So if Chine win 2034 Australia won't be able to host a world cup until 2046.

America have a big chance here, no one from UEFA of AFC (Europe or Asia) will be able to bid for the next world cup in all likelihood. I'd be amazed if it doesn't return there. Meanwhile the clock for the world cup to return to Western Europe keeps ticking. It will have been 24 years if Western Europe get it in 2030, yet before 2006 they had held the world cup every 8 years since 1954, and then they got 2 in a row.

This all assumes that there is no 2014 revolution.
 

kietotheworld

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Sep 10, 2006
Messages
12,638
Australia spent 10 million Aussie dollars, twice as much as England did on their bid. Article

Australia, have lost out big time by what happened. Under current rules nations can't host a world cup within 2 world cups of the last time it was held in that confederation, (10 years to make it clear). Many thought that China where going to get 2026, but they cannot now host a world cup until 2034 under current rules. So if Chine win 2034 Australia won't be able to host a world cup until 2046.

America have a big chance here, no one from UEFA of AFC (Europe or Asia) will be able to bid for the next world cup in all likelihood. I'd be amazed if it doesn't return there. Meanwhile the clock for the world cup to return to Western Europe keeps ticking. It will have been 24 years if Western Europe get it in 2030, yet before 2006 they had held the world cup every 8 years since 1954, and then they got 2 in a row.

This all assumes that there is no 2014 revolution.
2030 will be the centenary World Cup, from what I've heard, there's an expectation that it will go back to Uruguay, with Argentina co-hosting it. I wouldn't bank on this rotation system lasting that long though, FIFA will change it in accordance with their needs. The previous rotation system only lasted for 4 World Cups and missed out two Confederations.
 

rcoobc

Not as crap as eferyone thinks
Joined
Jul 28, 2010
Messages
41,733
Location
C-137
2030 will be the centenary World Cup, from what I've heard, there's an expectation that it will go back to Uruguay, with Argentina co-hosting it. I wouldn't bank on this rotation system lasting that long though, FIFA will change it in accordance with their needs. The previous rotation system only lasted for 4 World Cups and missed out two Confederations.
That would make a lot of sense, I don't know if that will happen though even without all the corruption stuff. The World Cup is too big to just give out to a nation based on a semblance of history.
 

Cal?

CR7 fan
Joined
Mar 18, 2002
Messages
34,976
2030 will be the centenary World Cup, from what I've heard, there's an expectation that it will go back to Uruguay, with Argentina co-hosting it. I wouldn't bank on this rotation system lasting that long though, FIFA will change it in accordance with their needs. The previous rotation system only lasted for 4 World Cups and missed out two Confederations.e
Either Fifa change the rules of there will be a AFC split with China wanting the World Cup before 2034. Also, with the East Asian becoming increasingly upset with the Middle Eastern countries, there will be enough support from Japan & Korea to make it happen.

There is still every chance that China will go head to head with USA for 2026.
 

rcoobc

Not as crap as eferyone thinks
Joined
Jul 28, 2010
Messages
41,733
Location
C-137
Either Fifa change the rules of there will be a AFC split with China wanting the World Cup before 2034. Also, with the East Asian becoming increasingly upset with the Middle Eastern countries, there will be enough support from Japan & Korea to make it happen.

There is still every chance that China will go head to head with USA for 2026.
Only if the rules are changed.
 

Cal?

CR7 fan
Joined
Mar 18, 2002
Messages
34,976
I cannot see why any of the leagues would go along with it, or their sponsors or broadcasters.
No chance the Premier League, La Liga & co will take this lying down. Unless Fifa agree to something big (getting rid of friendlies or something), it won't happen.
 

Sir A1ex

Full Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2002
Messages
27,949
Location
Where the goals come from.

pauldyson1uk

Full Member
Joined
May 20, 2008
Messages
55,513
Location
Wythenshawe watching Crappy Fims
This is from an interview with Plattini.

Platini, who has been head of Europe's football governing body for six years, says he "will fight" for the 2022 World Cup in Qatar to be held in winter.
"We have to play the World Cup at the best moment to stage the World Cup," he said.
"It's 50C in the summer in Qatar. If we do not change the date, there are countries that will never receive the World Cup."


I dont know about others but for me the World Cup is a summer thing, holdings it in the winter is just wrong.
If there are countries that cant hold the World Cup because it is too hot, so what !

Here is the rest of the interview

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21135626
 

barros

Correctly predicted Portugal to win Euro 2016
Joined
Mar 8, 2004
Messages
8,640
Location
Where liberty dwells, there is my country
This is from an interview with Plattini.

Platini, who has been head of Europe's football governing body for six years, says he "will fight" for the 2022 World Cup in Qatar to be held in winter.
"We have to play the World Cup at the best moment to stage the World Cup," he said.
"It's 50C in the summer in Qatar. If we do not change the date, there are countries that will never receive the World Cup."


I dont know about others but for me the World Cup is a summer thing, holdings it in the winter is just wrong.
If there are countries that cant hold the World Cup because it is too hot, so what !

Here is the rest of the interview



http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21135626
Then the league games would be played at night over the summer in Portugal, Spain and Italy when the temperatures reach the 40's? About the CL games? Platini is part of that corrupt system called FIFA.
 

ha_rooney

Correctly predicted France to win World Cup 2018
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
38,933
French magazine questions Qatar World Cup award

France Football magazine has raised questions about FIFA's awarding of the 2022 World Cup to Qatar, alleging it was tainted by corruption and collusion involving top figures in the game.

The weekly publication said in its latest edition published on Tuesday that the awarding of football's most prestigious tournament had "a whiff of scandal that begs the only question worth asking: should the vote be declared null and void?".

To back up its claims, the magazine, which dubbed the affair "Qatargate", quoted what it said was an internal email in which FIFA secretary-general Jerome Valcke allegedly said that the tiny Gulf state had "bought the 2022 World Cup".

Valcke subsquently claimed a misunderstanding and insisted that the tone of the email was "light-hearted".

France Football also quoted former FIFA media chief Guido Tognoni, who was kicked out of the organisation in 2003, as saying he believed there were "strong suspicions" that members were compromised over the 33.75-million-euro ($25 million) Qatari bid.

Key figures in making Qatar's case included the now-banned former Asian football chief Mohammed Bin Hammam, FIFA vice-president Julio Grondona of Argentina and Ricardo Teixeira, who quit Brazil's football federation and FIFA over graft claims.

The magazine also said there was a "secret meeting" at the French presidential palace in Paris on November 23, 2010 -- some 10 days before the crucial vote to decide the 2022 competition venue.

Attending were then-president Nicolas Sarkozy, Qatari prince Tamin bin Hamad al-Thani, UEFA president Michel Platini and Sebastien Bazin, representing Paris Saint-Germain owners Colony Capital, who at the time were in financial difficulty.

"During this meeting, the question repeatedly came up of a buy-out of Paris Saint-Germain by the Qataris, an increase in their shareholding of the Lagardere group, the creation of a sports (television) channel to challenge Canal+ -- which Sarkozy wanted to weaken -- all in exchange for a promise: that Platini did not give his vote to the United States, as he intended to, but to Qatar."

PSG were eventually bought by Qatar Sports Investment in June 2011. BeIn Sport, a subsidiary of Doha-based satellite channel Al-Jazeera, launched last year and took the television rights to show live French football from Canal+.


According to France Football, "the Americans would be odds-on favourites to be handed the 2022 World Cup in the event that Qatar's designation was withdrawn or sidelined".

Competition organisers were quoted as saying: "We won the World Cup 2022 bid by respecting from beginning to end the highest ethical and moral standards, such as they were defined in the rules and regulations."

FIFA told AFP it had no comment to make on the subject.

But a spokesman pointed out that its ethical commission, headed by former US prosecutor Michael Garcia, said last Thursday that he was to conduct a "wide-ranging inquiry" into the awarding of the 2018 edition to Russia and 2022 to Qatar.

UEFA were not immediately available for comment when contacted by AFP.
I would be shocked if these allegations were true :wenger:
 

Sir Matt

Blue Devil
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
18,341
Location
LUHG
Platini said that it was all "speculation" and that he'd sue people for questioning his integrity in the vote.

It's probably something lost in translation, but saying "this is only speculation" isn't exactly a denial. It's basically just saying "they're speculating, but I won't say I did or didn't."
 

senorgregster

Last Newbie Standing
Joined
Jun 29, 2008
Messages
10,343
Location
Anywhere but Liverpool
the votes were cast on the understanding it would be played in the summer. It should be played then or they should drop qatar and re-vote. Change the rules first (allow winters) and dates become part of the submission process. Qatar can even submit. Honestly twatini/bladder its not difficult.